Where do we stand on Harry Potter?

[Undrave]

Here's my personal stance on the issue:

So, I never liked Harry Potter. It was after my time and, more importantly, I always thought the world building sucked. The whole Wizarding World felt obtuse, inefficient and needlessly convoluted (have you SEEN their money?!). Which, I admit, makes sense if your characters are kids: that’s what the real world feels like to kids. But as the characters mature and grow older, the world remains the same kooky byzantine mess and never evolves beyond its original superficiality. It’s cast grows up, but not the world.

And that was before I learned of the racist caricatures and, more recently, JKR’s TERFidy.

I think it’s fine to enjoy the stuff you already own: watch your old movies, read your books, enjoy the good memories you made. It’s also fine for kids to still enjoy it (if there is still an actual child audience?) because they don’t know any better and I’d rather not burden them with the full might of capitalism’s lack of ethic… But if you’re fully conscious of the problems with the franchise, as a responsible adult, and still want to engage the franchise and buy your house scarf and play your Wizard game… you should accept that some trans people will simply not accept you as an ally. It might not be ALL of them, but it might be one who thought you cared about them and feels mighty betrayed your willing to excuse violence against them because ‘hee hee, Levi-O-sa’ and butterbeer. I will not be coddling that kind of person either.

Wow, I didn't know about the controversy with Hogwarts Legacy!

Since not everyone is on Twitter, etc. I see a benefit to raising awareness around problematic issues that are adjacent to RPGs.

If there's a need to discuss it further beyond flagging the problem, I feel like it's just extra important to be mindful about that.

For Call of Cthulhu specifically, I've noticed that older publications from Chaosim showed an illustration of H.P. Lovecraft at the beginning, and recently I think (but am not certain) they stopped doing so. (Of course, it wouldn't be in their commercial interest to cease publishing anything related to Cthulhu Mythos, so that's probably the most they are going to do, short of some disclaimer about separating the author from the Mythos fiction I suppose, which would help raise awareness to their consumers).

EDIT: For Wagner and Lovecraft, I feel like it's easier for more folks to separate the artist from the art, but not for everyone. For Michael Jackson's songs and Woody Allen films, it's more recent, but doable for some but not for everyone. For Hogwarts Legacy, this thing about the Blood Libel is so recent and fresh and part of what sounds like an ongoing trend, that's probably a taller order to ask?

It’s way easier to separate the author from their art if that author is dead and no longer has a direct hand in politics and culture. Maybe Harry Potter can be revisited and rehabilitated once JKR is no longer amongst the living.

 

[Alzrius]

So, I never liked Harry Potter. It was after my time and, more importantly, I always thought the world building sucked.

You thought right. For me, it was the magic system; years of being a tabletop RPG player means that I can't help but dissect any new magic system I come across in fiction in terms of game-ification, since "if PCs could use this, how would they abuse it?" is, to me, the most stringent level of verisimilitude there is. And unsurprisingly, the Harry Potter magic system doesn't clear that bar.

I mean, if a "secret keeper" can prevent all outside knowledge and magical access to whatever secret is being kept, then why doesn't someone just make a secret about, oh I don't know, horcruxes? Or killing curses? Or freaking Death Eaters? "Hey Lucius, what's that organization we all used to belong to back in the day?" "No idea, MacNair. Someone's keeping it a secret."

Or that "taboo" casually introduced in the last book, which functions that whenever anyone anywhere says a particular word, it alerts the caster to their identity and location, casually shattering all concealment magic? Just make a taboo for the word "the" and you'll know where everyone is all the time! Are you really telling me no one thought of doing this in a way that would weed out potential Death Eaters?

Those are just off the top of my head. The entire damn thing ran on narrative fiat, and in that regard it sucked.

 

[AnotherGuy]

For me, it was the magic system; years of being a tabletop RPG player means that I can't help but dissect any new magic system I come across in fiction in terms of game-ification, since "if PCs could use this, how would they abuse it?" is, to me, the most stringent level of verisimilitude there is. And unsurprisingly, the Harry Potter magic system doesn't clear that bar.
...(snip)...

The entire damn thing ran on narrative fiat, and in that regard it sucked.

You echoed my thoughts!

 

[Undrave]

You thought right. For me, it was the magic system; years of being a tabletop RPG player means that I can't help but dissect any new magic system I come across in fiction in terms of game-ification, since "if PCs could use this, how would they abuse it?" is, to me, the most stringent level of verisimilitude there is. And unsurprisingly, the Harry Potter magic system doesn't clear that bar.

I mean, if a "secret keeper" can prevent all outside knowledge and magical access to whatever secret is being kept, then why doesn't someone just make a secret about, oh I don't know, horcruxes? Or killing curses? Or freaking Death Eaters? "Hey Lucius, what's that organization we all used to belong to back in the day?" "No idea, MacNair. Someone's keeping it a secret."

Or that "taboo" casually introduced in the last book, which functions that whenever anyone anywhere says a particular word, it alerts the caster to their identity and location, casually shattering all concealment magic? Just make a taboo for the word "the" and you'll know where everyone is all the time! Are you really telling me no one thought of doing this in a way that would weed out potential Death Eaters?

Those are just off the top of my head. The entire damn thing ran on narrative fiat, and in that regard it sucked.

Basically! Johanne introduces a problem, then introduces a convenient magical solution without any concern for the implications on the wider world or the rest of the narrative. It’s there, it exist now, and later it won’t matter anymore.

 

[Umbran]

Mod Note:
So, folks, this thread can't be a general discussion of the works and their overall merits. Whether you think HP sucks, or not, is aside the point.

The OP raised the question of how we on EN World would address the problematic issues around the property. Please keep to that topic. Thanks.

 

[Retreater]

I'm currently raising a teenager who is trans. HP and JKR affect him negatively. His mental health is important to me. Ergo, I don't support the franchise.
I won't interact with threads about it, except in this case.
I can say that if he came to these boards to read about D&D (which he is a fan of), he'd feel less welcome.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

There's a lot of problematic stuff in HP and when paired with the author's repugnant views, that makes it easy for me to leave it behind. That being said, for people younger than I am that grew up with it, I get that it can be complicated. There are a lot of disenfranchised and bullied kids that saw themselves in those books, and I can imagine how painful it must be to see Rowling revealed as just another bully.

I am directly affected by the antisemitism, but save for internet discussion, I never would've known how Hogwarts Legacy magnifies what was present in the source material even further. I think it's important to talk through these things, but I also understand that for some the subject matter is too painful.

Now, discussing the game without this context, unequivocally runs the real risk of perpetuating all that harm.

 

[Parmandur]

Honestly, I wouldn't want to see a total lock down on it (like, digging people for making Harry Potter comparisons when discussing Strixhaven qould be absurd), but bringing it up for itself does seem uncouth.

 

[TheSword]

It's probably worth noting that statement is prior to Hogwarts Legacy's release. They may have issued it in response to early press about anti-semitic tropes in the game which started circulating in 2022, but it probably doesn't reflect the full content of the game and its implications.

Okay. But my point was we probably shouldn’t be accusing JK Rowling of being an anti-Semite because it dovetails nicely into criticism of her opinions on Trans issues. She didn’t write the video game.

HP, on the other hand, is Rowling. Every piece of lore runs through her. Every product, every sale of every book, every movie, every dual-chromatic scarf, is a cut that lines her coffers. Every bit of money and influence that she is currently using to campaign to take away the rights of trans people.

View attachment 275534

To be fair to JK, that post was a response to in the context of pretty huge series of personal abuse, death threats, doxing and criticism. The post is arrogant and dismissive but the question she responded to was pretty pointed too. When you see tweets openly suggesting people send her pipe bombs in the post then I think we should be careful of how we evaluate twitter.

I’m been a fan of Eddie Izzard for the last 25 years having bought her first stand up show on video cassette. She’s about as politically astute as you can get and a pretty darn clever person. If she’s of the opinion that Rowling isn’t trans-phobic then I’m certainly not going to take a definite view to the contrary.

 

[Sacrosanct]

One of the points of difference for that helps me differentiate is that if I purchase Call of Cthulhu RPG, Lovecraft doesn't benefit. It makes it easier to separate art and artist, at least for me. When the act of purchasing art is linked to financial gain for the artist, I won't purchase it if I wish to not support the artist.

This is an important distinction for me as well. As well as her comments that she views people buying HP stuff as supporting her views. Everyone has to make their own decision, but mine is that I won't support anything HP*.

So for board policy (of which I have zero influence), I wouldn't be upset if HP threads or topics needed a spoiler or disclaimer on them. I know several folks could be negatively impacted by seeing HP topics, so I would like to avoid hurting good people if possible.


*To be honest, I was already a bit turned off by HP because I viewed it as a rip off of the Troll movie