Diseased Rowling Derangement Syndrome - "TERF/Woke Author Bad!!1"

They also, in every case, display the underlying resentment of the author, which degrades the experience and makes them rather negative to read.
I always get irritated at people who get pissed off at Lewis for CoN being an allegory for Christianity because I read it as a child (and yeah I was a Catholic at the time) and it was really blindly obviously an allegory for Christianity. It's not like he was subtle about it. Anyone of normal intelligence should have been able to see that, he wasn't "tricking" anyone.
Harry Potter is a space opera
The best anime of all time was Cory in the House.
Harry Potter ate my hamster
Harry Pooter anal vored my hamster and then had to have it removed in the ER.
 
Narnia, according to Wiki, is a portal story. I will try not to discuss this further, pls someone post tweets or something lol
 

Attachments

  • 1729988345057.png
    1729988345057.png
    62.4 KB · Views: 51
You're all forgetting the great grandaddy of isekai.

I was ging to make a joke about the whole western media thing only to discover was co-worked on by Toei when I brought up that page so still counts wither way
If we're trying to figure out where the 'protagonist is whisked to another world, especially one where they somehow have special powers' started, then I'd throw out A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court.
 
Harry Potter is more of a boarding-school story that has magic than a fantasy story set in a school.
It's a peculiarly British story when you think about it, and it's laced with allegories about social class and the British education system. The biggest mystery to me is what drew the danger hair crowd to Harry Potter in the first place, because taken at face value, divorced from it's fantasy elements, Harry Potter is quite clearly a story which appeals not to comfy notions of social justice, but instead to middle-class aspiration and wish fulfillment; a fact which becomes more obvious when you look at the kind of school Rowling sent her own children to once she'd made a ton of money.

The fact that it took Rowling's opinions on transgender people to finally turn this group against her will forever be amusing to me.
 
"If she had taken up a seat in the House of Lords, the author would most likely have been given the title of Baroness Rowling - and if she found the time to attend sessions, she would have a say in the work of Parliament's second chamber, considering draft laws and potentially participating in select committees"

So it sounds like the Evil Kween TERF actually has had the opportunity to wield power, and change the law, and actually really could have been fucking things up for trans people this whole time, but chose not to.

Which means she can't be called out for abuse of power. She knew exactly what she was doing when she turned down those offers.
It's also harder to dunk on troons on social media during the middle of Parliament meetings but I'm sure she would have made up for it during her lunch breaks.
I think Rowling has hinted that her sales actually tend to spike a bit whenever she tweets anything that triggers a massive meltdown. Part of the thing with a situation where many people feel silenced is that they look for small ways to rebel, and I would not be surprised if buying a HP book or Lego set or pair of socks, isn't something that brings slight catharsis to pissed off terfs.
I bought a bunch of Harry Potter candy to pass out during Halloween the other day. Money well spent, in my opinion.
 
The first Harry Potter book is actually a bit of a pastiche of classic "poor orphan from an abusive adoptive family/circumstances turns out to be secretly rich/highborn and meets actually kind people, either strangers or some relatives, whose life he/she also improves" trope that was so popular in 19th century literature, see Jane Eyre, Oliver Twist (and other Dickens books), Little Lord Fauntleroy, Polyanna, etc. This is actually why the latter HP books struggle a bit with the severity of Dursleys' treatment of Harry, since in the first book it kinda teteered on black comedy territory, while later volumes became more serious in tone.

Harry Potter is a harem anime, Harry just didn't get the memo.
Fear not, plenty of godawful fanfic writers did.
 
I always get irritated at people who get pissed off at Lewis for CoN being an allegory for Christianity because I read it as a child (and yeah I was a Catholic at the time) and it was really blindly obviously an allegory for Christianity. It's not like he was subtle about it. Anyone of normal intelligence should have been able to see that, he wasn't "tricking" anyone.
I've never, EVER heard that before. No way are there people walking around saying that CS Lewis tried to trick everyone into reading about Christianity. I'm not being sarcastic, I just honestly don't undertand how someone could try to use that as a valid criticism.
 
I've never, EVER heard that before. No way are there people walking around saying that CS Lewis tried to trick everyone into reading about Christianity. I'm not being sarcastic, I just honestly don't undertand how someone could try to use that as a valid criticism.

Me neither, never heard anyone get angry at CS Lewis for trying to trick people into reading about Christianity, though I have heard people criticize him for writing fantasy Christian allegories at all, or being blatant about it.
 
The first Harry Potter book is actually a bit of a pastiche of classic "poor orphan from an abusive adoptive family/circumstances turns out to be secretly rich/highborn and meets actually kind people, either strangers or some relatives, whose life he/she also improves" trope that was so popular in 19th century literature, see Jane Eyre, Oliver Twist (and other Dickens books), Little Lord Fauntleroy, Polyanna, etc. This is actually why the latter HP books struggle a bit with the severity of Dursleys' treatment of Harry, since in the first book it kinda teteered on black comedy territory, while later volumes became more serious in tone.


Fear not, plenty of godawful fanfic writers did.
Yea i think a lot of modern critique of the Potter books come from Americans, specifically in the transitional period of millenial to zoomer. so people born between 1996-2001 and are also American tend to critisize the books the most in the context of video essays, twitter posts, reevaulations etc. for being meanspririted or otherwise weird because they were born into a world where Harry Potter is sort of an outligher. Harry Potter is influential in YA tropes, but it carries a lot of the edgier influences Rowling had from '90s era mainstays. now this edgier comparatively, but Harry Potter's early books definitely had a Roald Dahl-like style to them with elements of that 90s grossout and pre-Doctor Who british cynicism. Harry Potter would adapt to the times and become, as it became darker, in turn less cynical and more light in its reading. You watch and read stuff at the time of the orignal harry potter books: The Office, Stressed Eric, even other childrens books like Tracey Beaker and Horrid henry, they are meaner than stuff that britain puts out now. So Americans of course dont get it, but even younger brits dont get it
 
Back