Anon can't go on a field trip : greentext

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 49 points 3 days ago (2 children)

For the benefit of the many non-Brits complaining about how unrealistic it is: the Leaving School Grounds Unsupervised form is (when I grew up at least) a huge social divider and Big Deal in a lot of British schools. There was a whole micro industry at mine where the ~70% of kids who were allowed out would provide delivery services for sweets and pop for the 30% who weren’t.

JKR didn’t just pull this whole thing out her ass, it was something that most British kids will have instantly related to. (She’s still an awful human mind)

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago

We had something similar, but it was for a specific reason, like going to a job (we had an OJT class) or attending classes at the local college. It was only available in the last two years of high school too.

There wasn't a weird industry or anything, kids would just skip if they wanted to, and nobody policed the lunch hour or anything. But it's kinda similar I guess.

[–] Hyphlosion@lemm.ee 10 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

I mean, in the US we have permission slips from parents to go on field trips. Not sure why people would find it unrealistic.

Also…of all the things from a book about witches and wizards and magic. They’re complaining about permission slips? lolwut

[–] skisnow@lemmy.ca 14 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Yeah, kind of my point was that y'all are viewing it as a "field trip", which is typically a specific event that's infrequent, carefully organized and supervised, which is a whole different beast to the generic standing instructions of "we're not going to supervise your kids if they wander off school grounds" slip.

For the former case it's pretty much understood that everyone in class should be able to join a field trip, but for the latter it's not unusual for parents to decline and therefore teachers would absolutely be expected to enforce the rules.

[–] neatchee@lemmy.world 227 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (9 children)

In all seriousness, this is what happens when you write novels without doing any world-building and just put down whatever seems "fun". The are sooooo many things in that series that make no sense once they are superceded by later plot devices. Rowling didn't think any of it through ahead of time and gave almost no thought to internal consistency with previous content when she wrote new things.

It's honestly a terrible series in most regards and it's kind of disappointing how popular it became.

Also she a trans-hating bigot. Fuck J.K. Rowling. Can't forget that part whenever discussing her or her work.

[–] tyler@programming.dev 98 points 4 days ago (19 children)

Rule of cool supersedes making sense. Yeah there’s a ton of nonsense, but you called it yourself, it’s fun. That’s all that matters.

[–] neatchee@lemmy.world 93 points 4 days ago (17 children)

The issue I have with this line of reasoning is that there are equally whimsical, better written series that just didn't have good fortune to pop off the way HP did.

It's marketing. And cover art. And simple timing of fads. It sucks. And it funded a horrible person through pure happenstance

[–] homoludens@feddit.org 23 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (5 children)

there are equally whimsical, better written series

Which ones can you recommend? I mean, my reading list is already too long but...

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 24 points 3 days ago

If we’re talking ‘young adult’ (which I think is a silly book classification group), the Enchanted Forest Chronicles by Patricia C. Wrede always gets my top pick—shorter, sassy, fun, with well-written female protagonists. (All her books are pretty good, really.)

Another of my top choices in the Fantasy YA category are the Tiffany Aching books by Sir Terry Pratchett. Great fun and Sir Terry’s wonderful brand of biting wisdom.

If you like the ‘kids go to boarding school, have magical adventures, save the world’ formula, Mercedes Lackey did a pretty good series called the Shadow Grail. Although the kids are older (and more sensible) than the Harry Potter protagonists.

The Castle Books by John DeChancie are another fun romp of a series. Younger me loved the idea of a castle filled with 144,000 portals to adventure. Although the technology in it is a bit dated—at this point in time, rather humorously so.

Gail Carriger’s book series are all a good read; my favorite she’s done so far is the Finishing Series. Not as much magic as other books on this list, but still a well-thought-out system. Her books are really more steampunk-fantasy with a sprinkling of magic on top.

China Mievelle doesn’t really write series, per se, but all his books are fun and well-written, with interesting twists and ideas. I’d say they are the very definition of whimsical.

If your requirements are ‘good books by authors as awful as JK Rowling’, well, that’s tougher, but fortunately David and Leigh Eddings decided to throw their hats in the ring! Horrible child abusers, but their writings are genuinely good, way better than what Rowling writes.

[–] goatbeard@lemm.ee 14 points 3 days ago

Discworld

load more comments (3 replies)

load more comments (16 replies)

[–] Ibuthyr@lemmy.wtf 20 points 3 days ago

Fun and atmospheric. Kids love it and that's ok.

load more comments (17 replies)

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 9 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Yeah. There's a fan-fic I read recently (also the only HP fan fic I've read) called "Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality," which is set in an alternate universe in which Harry is raised by perfectly pleasant folks with an understanding of the scientific method, and arrives in the wizarding world and immediately starts deconstructing all the bizarre nonsense going on there. It's very well done, but it's really hard to recommend precisely because it does refer back to a ton of the stuff that's developed in the books, so I had to keep looking up stuff I didn't recall, and I don't really want to devote brain space to that stuff. (Some of the "rationality" stuff has aged a little bit poorly through the replication crisis, too, though I'm a bit more forgiving of that since it talks so much about updating your beliefs.)

But for anyone who did read the books back when and was frustrated at times by the characters behaving so irrationally, it's kinda cathartic in that way. For those who are interested: https://github.com/rrthomas/hpmor

[–] dev_null@lemmy.ml 8 points 3 days ago (2 children)

By an author who is also crazy and problematic, though in a very different way than Rowling.

[–] monotremata@lemmy.ca 8 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago)

Oh, I didn't know about that, but it isn't hugely surprising.

I guess I should have mentioned this, but there's a lot of stuff in the book that kinda seems like coded libertarian stuff, and it even flirts with pro-authoritarian stuff. It's not a book I would recommend to kids or deeply uncritical people. That's part of why this thread seemed like a safer place to mention it.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments (7 replies)

[–] SaharaMaleikuhm@feddit.org 51 points 3 days ago (1 children)

Crappy writing <3

[–] Doxatek@mander.xyz 39 points 3 days ago (3 children)

To be fair (while much of the writing is definitely shitty) they wanted to keep him in the school non-stop at this point because the people out to get him were becoming more prevalent and his enemies more powerful. So the intention to keep him safe.

But she probably could have directly said that. Most of the problems in the book could have been solved or entirely avoided if Harry would have listened to what he was told by Dumbledore and others

[–] Cethin@lemmy.zip 20 points 3 days ago

IIRC McGonagall does say something similar in the book. The movie just leaves it out. Harry asks if she could sign it, and she says something along the lines that she can't, because she's not his guardian, and she also wouldn't anyway because she doesn't think he should leave the grounds.

Honestly, it goes with the poor writing that she says it too. She really hammers in the point that he's supposed to be scared of Black, because she doesn't trust the reader to remember it for the twist I guess.

[–] Aux@feddit.uk 14 points 3 days ago (2 children)

If Harry wasn't a self entitled prick there would be no books.

[–] blockheadjt@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

He's 13 and all of his friends were going on a fun field trip. Wanting to find a way to go sounds pretty normal

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] Doxatek@mander.xyz 9 points 3 days ago

Lmao truly though. I read these books again when I was much older and was just consistently pissed off at him lol. I know he was a kid but holy hell lol. He got a lot of people unnecessarily killed even

load more comments (1 replies)

[–] lessthanluigi@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 days ago

I think the castle is really neat and cool and fun to explore in the video games

[–] Ardycake@lemm.ee 84 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Im pretty sure its because they were trying to keep him on campus to keep him safe and used that as a bs excuse and he didn't realize it until later cause he's a kid. Idgaf about Harry Potter, haven't picked up a book in 20 years, but I remember this.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 30 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Yes, as there was a killer on the loose, suspected to be super crazy and in the area. In which case, would it be safe for the other kids?

It's not logical whichever way you look at it.

[–] vaultdweller013@sh.itjust.works 35 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

It's because they thought Black was going for retribution on Harry so they probably figured that he was largely laser focused on him. Though he did blow up a bunch of folks in their eyes so that logic doesnt really hold water.

TLDR: Rowling dumb and doesn't even think things through within the same book.

load more comments (2 replies)

[–] rojo@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago (4 children)

Spot on. Sirius Black escaped an inescapable prison for the sole purpose, it was widely believed, of murdering Harry. The permission slip was just a convenient excuse to keep Harry protected.

RE: idgaf, you're allowed, you know. You can love the art but dislike the artist. Or like the artist if you wish. I'm personally indifferent to Rowling but consider the Harry Potter series to be clever and highly entertaining. I find it much more engaging than The Silmarillion.

Also, people are too eager to cast judgement on each other, and too often forget that people have layers, like onions. Or a parfait. My dad was a Fox News, AM talk radio, Facebook propaganda cult follower whose politics were buggered beyond repair. He occasionally spouted racist or bigoted or otherwise insensitive bullshit. He was also a model father and husband, selfless, generous, kind, soft spoken, and loved by everyone who had ever met him. To know how eager much of the world would be to cancel him for his political beliefs breaks my heart, and I'm grateful he was horrible with technology, well-shielded from the summary judgement of social justice warriors.

load more comments (4 replies)

[–] MTK@lemmy.world 37 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This implies that the students are insured in some way and that the legal system of the wizard world recognizes the same legal guardians of the muggle world AND that wizardy insurance companies are okay with students learning dangerous spells that can result in serious injury without guardian's explicit permission, but does not approve of field trips to safe villages without explicit permission. Or that the crazy, racist, homophobic and transphobic J. k is also dumb.

[–] hansolo@lemm.ee 10 points 3 days ago

100% this. The Dursleys have zero clue what's happening there, and everyone knows they don't care. These kids get into mortal danger every year and they don't tell the Durselys about that.

Meaning that Rowling probably got screwed out of a field trip when she was 9 because of a lost permission slip, and this is her resentment embodied.

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 63 points 4 days ago (1 children)

He liked a pro trans meme once.

[–] rockerface@lemm.ee 37 points 4 days ago (1 children)

You'd think a woman who can literally transform into an animal would be pro-trans

[–] dumbass@leminal.space 43 points 4 days ago

She would have been if she wasn't written by a massive piece of shit.

[–] LotrOrc@lemmy.world 17 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I know shes a bigot and hates trans people, but i do think people are overlooking the fact that this was a kids series. This wasnt meant to be read and deconstructed and analyzed by adults.

When I read the books as a kid I really enjoyed the world. Some things made me pause or think, but for the most part it was a fun adventure. When I read it again in college, I couldn't get through the first or second book because of how poor I found the writing.

But again, it is a children's book. I dont reread Famous Five or Noddy anymore either. I used to love the Redwall series, but when I went back to read a couple last year I found I couldn't get into it as much as I did when I was 10.

Are they the best books or even the best kids books in the world? Definitely not. Is she a brilliant writer? Definitely not. But were the stories engaging and fun and did they give a lot of children an intro to reading and fantasy? 100%. They became popular because even kids who hated reading enjoyed these stories. She might be a miserable awful person now but that doesnt change what these books did for a lot of good people too.

[–] rumba@lemmy.zip 6 points 3 days ago (5 children)

I'd argue that the series had WAY too much death, war, sexism and slavery to get a pass on being children's books that are beyond scrutiny, that's just my opinion though.

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] Pnut@lemm.ee 18 points 3 days ago

Great teachers are constantly, and exponentially victims of overbearing administration. School administrators tailor to the worst, most immature parents who (I hope) don't realize they are causing a situation where kids can run rampant and completely ignore their education. We do that because the school administrators aren't there because they like kids or see the value of education. They are there because they have a high paid job that they don't really need to work at if they can placate a small handful of very vocal parents and mostly keep up on paperwork and meetings. Those parents are going to figure out just how shitty they've been when their children get to college... College does not have to give a fuck. We've known this for a while. We keep removing rights from the teachers so that administrators don't have to deal with any harsh situations. That might be specific to Ontario but honestly the sheer amount of people working in education here while people in need get denied access to the MANY programs we have makes me think like they're just ignoring us and then bragging about having summers off and going home at 3pm.

I am not being harsh toward teachers. Quite the opposite. It's those involved in education that have little to no experience in it that are clinging to cushy administrative jobs that I take big issue with.

[–] Illbeinthekapuasuite@lemmy.ca 45 points 4 days ago

His legal guardians do not consent to him even attending the school in the first place, to the extent where he needs to be broken out to attend every year. But no field trip.

[–] moopet@sh.itjust.works 17 points 3 days ago

What was her problem? She was badly-written.

[–] UncleGrandPa@lemmy.world 20 points 3 days ago

I did wonder why they needed permission from the people forced to let him go in the first place

[–] someguy3@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago

She didn't want to undermine parental rights for, you know, reasons.

[–] ohwhatfollyisman@lemmy.world 27 points 4 days ago

looks like the magic world's lawyers were just as bad as their muggle counterparts, tbh.

way worse, in fact, when one reads about all the wizengamot proceedings.

Greentext