Why is this so important to Libtards?

This books turned SJW cunt in to over 1.000.000.000 dollar net worth who can now shit all over Trump and anyone because she feels so important.
What's so special about fucking Harry Potter?

Other urls found in this thread:

change.org/p/j-k-rowling-petition-for-j-k-rowling-to-take-in-muslim-refugees-in-her-18-spare-bedrooms/w?source_location=petition_show
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

the idea of getting a letter in the mail telling you that you are a special snowflake who gets to go to a magic school appeals to these libtards

...

>What's so special about fucking Harry Potter?
It made kids from shitty families, autists and betas feel special.

Nothing it's just news to keep the normies distracted from news of real importance

Did anyone here read/watch Harry Potter? For me that's such Normie shit

...

Little children and paganism. Rich faggots are into that.

What's so special about fucking Harry Potter?

Its actually a decent series of books but the author and the fans are cancerous as all. I guess it just appeals to all the fucking special snowflakes out thrre.

>he doesn't have the spanish version

Harry Potter was the most overhyped peace of shit in my generation. 5th grade teacher made us read the series, I couldn't even bother. Gave me The Chronicles of Narnia instead, not much better.

she wasn't a SJW when she was poor writing in cafe napkins, i bet she more important things to worry about

>What's so special about fucking Harry Potter?
Simplistic explanations of world full of magical thinking. Just like Communism.

I read them years ago. They were entertaining but I could not stand the fucking fanbase. Seriously I've met people that make even the most autistic people on this site look like normies. The unbearable fandom combined with the author's constant talking politics has turned me off to the whole series.

>hurrdurr faggot letting other people influence your tastes

Yeah it's dumb but I don't care. And why do authors have to talk politics anyway? If I were as successful as she is I'd have finished the series and fucked off to lounge on my piles of money for the rest of my life.

>Harry Potter was the most overhyped peace of shit in my generation

Same here.The whole Harry Potter worship I never really understand it.

Who has the post about how young boys have fantasies about strength and beoing powerful and little girls have fantasies where they are special and the family they have isn't.

dunno, I liked it as a kid a lot

Have re-read the first few books dozens of times, but as they went and I grew older I was less hyped.

Some of the movies are good too

i thought it was a meme at first but ive been noticing it all the time how they compare everything to it

i thought the books were ok but its just generic magic bullshit

change.org/p/j-k-rowling-petition-for-j-k-rowling-to-take-in-muslim-refugees-in-her-18-spare-bedrooms/w?source_location=petition_show

Quick reminder that we reached 300k, and now it's down to 50k.

You can't make this shit up.

We have the Bible, they have this.

It's the only "real book" liberals read, so they are a bit attached to it.

so basically manipulated?
change.org is joke..

>waah people like things that i don't like waaah

Grow the fuck up.

For starters, the possibility of having intercourse with a fictional character would create a whole world of possibilities, specially for us.

dude Harry Potter is great. If you disagree then I doubt you've even read them.

>We have the Bible
speak for yourself, faggot
>believing in flying people in the sky
>in current year
kek

Why did they have to choose Harry Potter? Why don't they choose an objectively superior fantasy tale like LOTR? I've never heard any libtard LOTR

>what is so special about fucking harry potter
There is no thing special about one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises. each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

thats a cute boat u got there

...

Bolshevik detected

They're a great series of books for kids/young adults. When you're young, they form a fantastic universe and story

The people who are still into Harry Potter as adults are insane

>Brave New World
>Low Tier

That's a very good question, in fact. Left and right, it seems to happen that Harry Potter references are made in college. I hear that every semester; the professors seem to believe that everyone knows what they're talking about when they bring up a semi-mandatory Harry Potter reference. Why not include Lord of the Rings in the conversation? It is the superior series, without a doubt.

>reject Christianity and western values
>suddenly have no ground to stand on
>revert to childhood fantasies in order to find a sense of relativism and stability

those tiers of books. 1984 belongs where it is sure. although Brave New world im not so sure. I think they compliment eachother. No farenheight 451. LOTR in shit tier....

I see Sup Forums has leaked over today.

>Harry potter niggers literally never heard about phylacteries before horcruxes.

Its baby's first fantasy book filled with old fantasy cliches they never heard about and praise it as literary genious

>atlas shrugged
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA

It's popular because it hits a lot of the archetypes found in religious literature, but since society is pulling youth away from religion, they need something to fill that void. That's why they're so fanatic about it. It's the religious equivalent of empty calories.

>baby's first fantasy book
That's exactly it. Do you not realize these are written for kids in elementary school?

>a story featuring a guy and his friends with a magic wand that lives in a world of magic and makebelieve
>why is this so important to libtards
I think you almost answered your own question.

Brave New World should definitely rank higher, as well as Lord of the Rings, which basically molded modern fiction.

great kids books. Not as SJW as people would have you believe - people politicize everything now it's just what we do.

It has the following message.

Literally Hitler assembles his group of fellow nazis and they want to exterminate all (((mudbloods and normies))).

Some teenage kids have to stop literally Hitler so that all people in the world can live together in peace.

The SJW shitters selfinsert and you can probably figure out the rest by yourself.

Yes, and normally people would start reading more mature material as they get older. But they insist on sucking on the teat of juvenile literature.

Could it be that LOTR is a bit too dark for them? Harry Potter is kinda dark too I guess but the worst it gets is casting a forbidden death spell. Whereas LOTR shows a clear parallel of an invading force destroying peaceful races.

I loved the books as a child (finished the last one when I was 13), though I also read more serious literature back then. I have only positive memories of it left, and it's sad to see that leftists and JK herself are turning the innocent book's and HP universe's image into shit by applying it to politics to promote their degenerate interests. We have a good slang word for it in Russian: зaшквapить, originally a prison term meaning "to make someone a faggot" (usually by raping), that now is used to mean "to turn an image of something into a shameful and shit-tier thing". So sadly, the HP books were zashkvareny. Won't let my children read them.

One of the things I really have to give the movie credit for is its amazing atmosphere and soundtrack. I can't think of many films with a better feel to it than the one the harry potter movies set up.

LOTR has too many white people I presume. Humans, Elves, Dwarves, and Hobbits are all almost exclusively represented by white people, meanwhile the black/muslim humans seem to be easily corrupted by morgoth and sauron.

Also this to a degree, but more specifically it revolves around themes that these people can't comprehend. Fellowship, loyalty, the idea of fighting to the bitter end for what you believe in.

LOTR seems to be the antithesis of everything they stand for.

Meanwhile Harry Potter is rather simple with no real deep themes to speak of. It's a simple childrens story, which is fine in its own right, but it feels silly to see these "adults" worship what is essentially a children/young adult series

I read the books when I was younger and liked them, too. I think everybody considering them the GOAT is fucking dumb, they're just comfy kids books that I liked to read. I hate that the leftists, author included, had to twist the message to fit some bullshit political narrative. Rowling polluted her own medium.

>We have a good slang word for it in Russian: зaшквapить, originally a prison term meaning "to make someone a faggot" (usually by raping)
Never change, Russia

There are a lot of college SJWs that love LOTR, but more males like LOTR, and vice versa for Harry Potter. This is due to the differences between LOTR and Harry Potter.

Potter receives a letter in the mail telling him he's special and gets all sorts of cool magical items, and gets to go off an a fun adventure to a wizard school.

Frodo, meanwhile, gets a magic ring inherited from his relative that actually contains the soul of a dark lord that corrupts anyone who wears it and contains within the power to destroy the world, and now he has to travel thousands of miles on foot with the entire armed forces of Mordor hell-bent on capturing him to obtain it, into Mordor itself so that he can find a way to destroy it, all while the ring itself is literally sentient and impeding his efforts at every opportunity.

Which story appeals more to men, and which to women, do you think?

None of them represent enough black people. I look forward to the remakes.

most of the ebony dark raven dementia way-tier fans became SJWs.
they never grew up. though i dont quite understand why its harry potter. there are a million other stories like it, many better written.

Simplistic drivel that doesn't require any critical thinking.

See a lot of college sjws do seem to like LOTR, but in my experience its ONLY LOTR. At least in my experience they barely even know what silmarillion is let alone read it. I think its just a case of LOTR being popular because of the movies and they like it because its popular, not because its good

>What's so special about fucking Harry Potter?
Fits right into the narrative.

the books are fine do
its just that writer with those hilarius political stands

I loved them as a kid too, read them when I was really young and learned a lot of vocab.
They're not even that SJWish per se, and the original books are still good to me, but the consumerism/fans around it now are quite disappointing.

These are good posts. I want to watch the LOTR trilogy now.

>when Sam won't let Frodo continue alone so he risks drowning in order to protect his best friend

I still get feels

>the Bible

Homer is superior. The Bible is the first boring good vs evil story.

fantasy is a shit genre that doesn't try to stay within a realm of possibility.

somewhat unrelated but IMO both star wars and the original DBZ are the modern equivalents of he old stories from Greece.
>everyone knows what they are and who the characters are
>everyone knows how the plot generally goes
>not that many people actually care, but they are stories ingrained into the public knowledge

the books are alot better the movies leave a bunch of shit out

Probably. I'd say it's likely most of em not only haven't read the Silmarillion, but haven't read any other fantasy books in the same vein as LOTR other than maybe Game of Thrones. (Though I hesitate to call that vulgar garbage a fantasy on the same scale as LOTR)

Malazan, Don Quixote, The Blade Itself... they likely haven't even heard of these.

It's escapist fantasy bullshit with a lot of racism actually

They even call non wizards mudbloods and half breeds

>vulgar garbage

I've never watched the series (I refuse the telejew) but the series is pretty good. There is better of course.

I wanna see these Harryfags read a real man's fantasy like REH, would ducking trigger them.

I wouldn't say that either is better than the other desu. the books do a great job telling about the world and the story of course, but like said it has a lot of great moments that just shine better in the movies. It's a rare case where the movie is just as good as the books, even if for different reasons.
They don't care enough to actually go out of their way to find good literature. They want to sit there and pretend that reading LOTR is a big feet because "lol LOTR is so dry and long, its dense and full of information and lore, it makes me so smart for reading it!"

>Great Gatsby is god-tier

That's some freshman high school shit at the absolute most

I'm glad they haven't regardless.

Is there a word filter im not aware of? why the fuck is there a desu in my post?

The first half of the show is better then the books, but Fatman refuses to write and the show has passed the books. It shows becuse the writers can't write oc for shit and it's been crap for 2-3 seasons now.

It is but people latch onto it because it reminds them of the archetypal myths that have existed in every cultural in the world.

r/the_donald fuck off

I don't really get it either. I read the books too and liked them as a teen but there are much better fantasy worlds and books tbqh. It's a retarded Hype

>1.000.000.000 dollar
>1 dollar

>multiple decimal points
>all zeroes anyway

Looks like math isn't your strong suit, is it?

Voldemort is a fascist cant you see? Just like Drumpf

Since the begining, every fucking single Fiction book is filled with politics.
From the utopics futures in Science Fiction, to the Savage world in Conan, to the veiled Christianism And Harry Potter is presented as a Scape-Goat in the last novel, truly Jesus style, against those who resist tin LOTR or the hardcore Christianism in the Narnia saga.

And Harry Potter novels are filled with some despicable things treated as awesome:
-The way Dumbledore manipulates Snape is revolting.
-Snape is an obsessed looser who shouldn't be near kids.
-Ginny is a whore.
-Potter is useless.
-Hermione Marysue.
-Ron with cola.

tl;dr Harry Potter is junkfood for the mind: it's tasty, it fills you, but in the end is full of empty carbs and trans-fats.

And this is also, socially relevant. Because with this meal, you get a generation of fat conformist idiots.

I usually post on 8pol, you misunderstand

What the fuck happened there? kek

*** From the utopics futures in Science Fiction, to the Savage world in Conan, to the veiled Christianismin LOTR or the hardcore Christianism in the Narnia saga.

In the last novel Harry Potter is blatantly presented as a Scape-goat Jesus style. ***

Sorry.

If the books are like the movies LOTR has many homoerotic undertones, the strongest relationships all form between men.

place that against harry potter with a geeky girl who is pretty much disabled in the eyes of most wizards is the most powerful.

The Happy Meal of McLiterature with a globalist toy inside.

It is a lucrative and popular franchise with many merchandising venues.

Harry Potter is a book for children.
When i was a kid, Harry Potter was one of my favourite books. I was 12 years old, so i could not realize how "bad" a book is.

Today i would not be able to read a Harry Potter book, because i would just get upset about J. K. Rowlings terrible writing and repeating phrases.
Rowling tried to write a book for Adults after Harry Potter. And it was terrible and nobody bought it.

I agree. The atmosphere and the soundtrack (especially of the last movies) really were great and i think they saved the movie.
The story itself in Deadly Hallows is pretty bad.

>read the first book when it came out even before all the hype around it started
>I was 9 and really liked it
>read second book, it was good as well
>third book was decent
>fourth one was already incredibly boring and a slog to go through
>fifth book comes out, I'm 15 and it's the same shit all over again
>only book I ever fell asleep with while reading
>put it away after 40 pages

I really don't get how adults can read this stuff and enjoy it.

>I don't get how people can like things I don't like
Wow it's almost like people like different things! What a fucking concept!

You being a failure at life is a pretty realized concept

I'm guessing you were a bully in childhood.

Impressive digits

The problem with GoT, for me, is that it lacks a recurring theme. In LOTR, the theme was fellowship. GoT doesn't really have that, so all the risqué scenes (depraved sex, homosex, and even a shitting scene) just feel vulgar instead of dark and gritty. You can even sense it in that "What is Aragorn's tax plan" comment Martin made. He puts so much into making the series so dark and brutal, that there isn't really anything to take away from the story once read.

Ahahahahahahhah holyshit that's it. Never cared enough to spot that. Good one. I'd read your book.

It's the angry birds of literature. It was the first fantasy book for many that don't really read much books and works as an easy "nerd/bookworm" cred for normies.

i agree lotr movie was a good job adapting from book to screen and very enjoyable the fellowship was comfy as fuck

KEK has spoken. You faggots all need to read the original Conan the Barbarian.

Conan
>hates niggers
>murders people
>has slaves; is OK with slavery
>implied rapist

Literally no fucks given.
The best part

>this is the foundation of all fantasy

Lotr is literally about immigration and the destruction of Europe due to apathetic overlords. We are all frodo and Aragon at the same time so long as you stay redpilled. In a way political incorrect statements are as immortal and recurring under tyranny as gandalf is. Ergo we will all have a sort of gandalf the grey metaphysical death and be reborn as gandalf the White. Think of it as a mentality more than a being you will elevate too. Tolkien was literally our guy.

Since this seems to be becoming a Sup Forums fantasy thread, can someone give me a quick rundown of Michael Moorcock? I'm interested in reading his Elric books and since I've started looking into him I see people calling him a self-loathing turbocuck. What's his deal?

>it seems to happen that Harry Potter references are made in college.
Harry Potter takes place in Hogwarts (most of the time at least)... so basically some "College".
And the Professors in Harry Potter are seen as smart, all-knowing, important and influential people.

So.... why do you think will some college kid and professors reference Harry Potter?

He did say he thought of the dwarves as jews, and the hobbit is literally about a dwarf starting a war because he wanted all the gold from the dragon that he didn't kill and really had no part in killing

There are objective things you can't argue.
For example:
>the horrible writing style
>the lack of background
>the dissapearance of certain IMPORTANT elements in the world or simply in GB where the action take place
>this is a begginer problem: the huge amount of characters later underused or undeveloped

We can go and go...

He had a lot of critics because was a fucking fast writer. That said, his novels are always pesimist as fuck.
Basically all the heroes are One, they are avatars of the same concept: the Eternal Champion.
The gods are divided among Chaos and Law, who cannot be identified in any way as Good/Evil because they are agents of the equilibrium in the multiverse.
And basically is that.

I'd start with the Runestaff/Hawkmoon saga and then jump to Elric or Corum.

Yeah, by pretty good I mean "readable" and "moderately interesting from time to time". I freely admit that it's overrated and pales in comparison to LOTR.

The problem with modern literature is that it's fucking pointless for the most part. Most fantasy is useless. There's no underlying philosophy or timeless themes other than muh good vs ebbil.

I would rather, unironically, read fucking Warhammer or D&D novels than say, SFAF magazine. More original, fun, and never pretends like it's anything more than it is.

Sci-fi is fucking boring also because the white man stopped dreaming.

I must say though, there's nothing outlandishly vulgar in the first GOT book.