I Can't Believe It's Not An Index CCXXXIII - Jasdoif's Random Banter #233

[Tvtyrant]

Respectfully disagree. More like its drab and altogether dumb setting that is too silly and poorly built. It clearly is only built to support one story and can't do anything else, and immediately falls apart like a house of cards when you notice even one logical inconsistency, of which there are many. Every other urban fantasy setting I've read is better than it in my opinion. the only reason it persists is because its the star wars of urban fantasy: incredibly popular for no reason, shallow and not really indicative of anything normal about its genre but memed so that any wizard or magical school is labeled as Hogwarts or whatever whenever someone is too lazy to remember names or thinks they're being funny, when they aren't, like we get it, Harry Potter was a thing, a dumb cheesy stupid thing that everyone and literal mothers liked as a child, can we move on please?

I think this kind of critique largely misses the point. Harry Potter isn't a fantasy story, it's a bargain basement coming of age story with paint. It compares well in that category to Divergent, Hunger Games, Mean Girls, or Heathers.

Group/civilization divided into high school cliques, to which the main character is an outsider. They never feel like they fit into a clique, but instead have a small circle of close friends and an extended network of acquaintances. This is to any outsider exactly how a clique works, and being teenagers the main characters see themselves as distinct while everyone else fits in. The main character's clique is made up of a combination of personalities and traits that are especially great while someone making them outsiders. So Ron is poor but old blood, Hermione is the super talented ethnic minority character, and Harry is both rich and a talented athlete but an outsider. They are all relatable because they are perfectly normal in any high school, as are the side characters.

The main character is also Special, which is the lead up to them becoming an adult and taking on adult responsibilities which transcend the cliquey nature of public school. These problems slowly creep into their banal school lives until they totally overshadow them, and then they go on a fetch quest and come back adults.

It's generic, but it is popular because every teenager feels like they are singled out by teachers and bullies, misunderstood by their cliquey society, and bad at romance. If you remove the wizard elements HP is the school jock, Hermione is the valedictorian and Ron is the blue blood. They could be the Plastics or Heathers or whatever popular group you like from another story. It's probably the best of the Coming of Age School Stories, which is why it has lasting appeal despite being bad fantasy.

[Beeftank]

This Harry Potter talk kind of reminds me of my AP Chem class from Junior year. The teacher used to do Jeopardy to help us learn/memorize concepts in class, and for bonus questions she would occasionally throw in Harry Potter trivia. I had basically read those books on repeat between 4th-8th grade, so even at age 17 I had a borderline encyclopedic knowledge of the events in the book. Despite her best efforts to trip me up with increasingly obscure questions, I don’t think I got a single one wrong all year.

That was honestly a really good class. After we took the AP exam we just spent the rest of the semester doing cool demos in class and baking cookies and stuff.

[Anonymouswizard]

As a writer yes. I do enjoy the books but as an author as a person, no. I already mention this in the past Random Banter Thread my reason why I don't like J.K. Rowling today which I still stand by my reason for disliking her.

To summarise my position on her, I'm in a quad with no cis members.

That should make my position clear.

[Lord Raziere]

I think this kind of critique largely misses the point. Harry Potter isn't a fantasy story, it's a bargain basement coming of age story with paint. It compares well in that category to Divergent, Hunger Games, Mean Girls, or Heathers.

So your response is "well yeah its bad fantasy, but thats only because its actually a bad paint by numbers coming of age story".

bad is bad. doesn't matter what form it takes. shuffle the categories around anyway you want, a rose by any other name is still a rose.

the very concept of Hunger Games repels me from ever reading it and the other three you list I've only heard the names in passing or haven't heard of at all, but they don't exactly encourage me to try them.

[Tvtyrant]

So your response is "well yeah its bad fantasy, but thats only because its actually a bad paint by numbers coming of age story".

bad is bad. doesn't matter what form it takes. shuffle the categories around anyway you want, a rose by any other name is still a rose.

the very concept of Hunger Games repels me from ever reading it and the other three you list I've only heard the names in passing or haven't heard of at all, but they don't exactly encourage me to try them.

That's one opinion. I don't think worldbuilding and a good story are related to each other. The story of Harry Potter is that the choices of the weak matter. The setting is built to make it so Harry and friends are weak and told to stay out of it by authority figures, and save the day by caring enough to meddle. The genre is coming of age. It fulfills all of its objectives, making the audience care and getting the story across. They are well written books, they just don't care about the paint.

I also didn't say its a bad coming of age story, just a very paint by numbers one. So is Star Wars. A Series of Unfortunate Events has the worst world building basically ever and was also a good coming of age story. I don't know any current ones because I came of age a long time ago, but disliking the genre doesn't make them bad stories.

The closest thing to a direct across the board between writing and worldbuilding is Talion Revenant. It's a coming of age story set in a fantasy world, fulfills a lot of the same beats in a shorter book.

[Beeftank]

I’m with TVTyrant here, the world building is obviously suspect, but I think the story is at the very least a step above the standard YA fare.

And don’t get me started on a Series or Unfortunate Events. I liked those books but ending with what was basically a giant shrug and “it’s kind of complicated lol” rubbed me the wrong way as a kid reading those.

[LaZodiac]

I’m with TVTyrant here, the world building is obviously suspect, but I think the story is at the very least a step above the standard YA fare.

And don’t get me started on a Series or Unfortunate Events. I liked those books but ending with what was basically a giant shrug and “it’s kind of complicated lol” rubbed me the wrong way as a kid reading those.

In the case of Series of Unfortunate Events, that was literally the entire point though; this isn't some nice and tidy world with black and white morality, a story where the heroes are good people and the villains are bad, and the children will win the day because they are very clever and while yes the villains are also quite clever, they are never quite clever enough. Unfortunate Events is the story of how the world is actually far more callous and cruel and, well, unfortunate than stories tend to make it seem... and that you should still try to be a better person over not.

Not saying they're great by any stretch, but the messages they have in it are pretty clear on why it ends the way it does.

Also; Heathers's is absolutely insane, but rules. Mean Girls is... also insane but in a completely different way and ALSO rules. Hunger Games gets a bad rap for "Battle Royale clone lol" while the actual crux of it is basically just a huge riff on child abuse through stage moms and capitalist **** (though the author eventually ends up smelling her own farts, to coin a phrase, and forgets what she is doing).

[Bartmanhomer]

To summarise my position on her, I'm in a quad with no cis members.

That should make my position clear.

What do you mean by quad?

[Rater202]

Family: Makes Tacos.

Also family: Knows Im seeping at weird times, still eats all the cheese and then puts the grater in the sink where it gets cross contaminated with other crap.

Im kind of assuming youre referring to Harry Potter here, but its not entirely clear.

Yeah, I'm also a little unclear, and don't know Harry Potter well enough to know if it's exact or not.

A Horcrux is the HP series take on the "put your essence into an object and hide it away to live forever" trope that has existed for centuries.

The act of committing a pointless premeditated murder causes damage to your soul that can only be healed by experiencing genuine remorse for the crime.

(Not all killings will split your sol: Neither Harry accidentally killing Quirrel in self-defense, nor Snape mercy killing Dumbledore at Dumbledore's own request are considered to damage the soul.)

If you're a cold-blooded narcissistic sociopath, you can perform a dark magic ritual to take a shard of your damaged soul and hide it into an object or creature, creating a Horcrux.

As long as Horcrux exists, the person who made it cannot die, even if their body is destroyed.

There are two ways that a Horcrux can be destroyed: If the person who created it begins to feel genuine remorse for the murder that allowed for it' creation(which we never see, but are told that this can kill the person in question) or by destroying the object utterly beyond its ability to repair.

For say an animal horcrux, this is as simple as killing the animal, but for an object it will resist mos harm and repair from most things it can't resist.

As far as we know, the only things that can properly destroy a Horcrx are the venom of a basilisk—which is both the deadliest magical poison in the world and highty corrosive, and Fiendfyre, a destructive spell that conjures beasts made of... Well, basically Hellfire that will then destroy anything they come in contact with... But are difficult to control. The one-time ti's cast in th series the guy who cast it ends up being killed by his own spell and then they have to lock the room so the fire doesn't get out.

Both Fiendfyre and BAsalisk venom are super potent dark magic. This actually proves a problem, because Basilisks are illegal to breed and Harry killed th only Basilisk in all of the UK several years before and Fiendfyre is, as noted, very difficult to control.

What else is super bad dark magic? The Killing Curse. One of the three unforgivable curses, so-called because being fond to have cast one on a fellow human being is an automatic life sentence in Azkaban(though, granted, turns out a lot of things will get you thrown in Azkaban for life...)

the only prerequisite for the Killing Curse is that you're strong enough to cast it. The spell can be blocked if there's a study physical object in the way, but otherwise, there is no defense, no shield charm, no counter curse, nothing. If it hits you, you die*

And Harry uses the other two unforgivable curses. There's really no reason given why they don't try using the Killing Curse on a Horcrux just to see if it'll work.

*with the exception of "True Love protection," obscure ancient magic wherein if you make someone promise to kill you but spare someone else in exchange, they physically cannot harm the person tey promised to spare without suffering harm in return, and a Twin Wand Core: If two wands have a core made from the same animal, they can't fight each other under normal circumstances. Any such conflict will eventually devolve into a battle of will and raw power. This is able to save Harry from Tom's killing curse a second time and when Harry, by wanting it more, overpowers Tom, he becomes effectively immune to any sell Tom casts, even after Tom ditches his Phoenix Wand for another, for as Long as Harry has his own phoenix wand. In the last book, he Phoenix wand actually starts casting spells on it's own to protect Harry, spells that Harry doesn't know how to cast.

[Keltest]

The killing curse is A: specifically defined as not being destructive, as opposed to Basilisk venom or fiendfyre, and B: requires a pure cold-blooded willingness to kill. Harry probably couldnt have used it.

[Beeftank]

In the case of Series of Unfortunate Events, that was literally the entire point though; this isn't some nice and tidy world with black and white morality, a story where the heroes are good people and the villains are bad, and the children will win the day because they are very clever and while yes the villains are also quite clever, they are never quite clever enough. Unfortunate Events is the story of how the world is actually far more callous and cruel and, well, unfortunate than stories tend to make it seem... and that you should still try to be a better person over not.

Not saying they're great by any stretch, but the messages they have in it are pretty clear on why it ends the way it does. doing).

I get that, I meant more how after book 7 it brings up lots of questions and introduces story elements that it never really follows up on and it’s excuse for not doing it is basically saying it’s kind of a long story so I’m not going to bother.
At least that’s how I felt reading it.

[Rater202]

The killing curse is A: specifically defined as not being destructive, as opposed to Basilisk venom or fiendfyre, and B: requires a pure cold-blooded willingness to kill. Harry probably couldnt have used it.

You're confusing the Killing Curse with the Torture Curse.

The torture curse requires you to want to inflict unbearable agony on someone and won't work properly if you don't, but the killing curse has no such prerequisites.

It is not a spell where intent matters, if you are strong enough to cast it and you cast it on someone, they will die whether you actually want them dead or not.

Explicitly.

[DataNinja]

I disrespectfully disagree, a lot of the actual story structure of the wizarding world is utter nonce and while a lot of the surface level stuff is cool and rad, as had been described by others and they're certainly allowed to feel that, it really doesn't stand up to scrutiny.

Anyway, I'm actually rather ****ing pissed today. The prescription for all my diabetes stuff expired after two months, which means I cannot get refills of all the things I need. As I'm sure you're all aware, that's bad. And the clinic is being a right ole piss of **** and very unhelpful. So yeah, mad.

Oh, geez, Zodi. That's... oh no. I really, really hope you're able to get those refills. I don't want you back in the hospital...

What do you mean by quad?

Presumably a polyamorous relationship with 4 members dating each other.

[Peelee]

As far as we know, the only things that can properly destroy a Horcrx are the venom of a basilisk—which is both the deadliest magical poison in the world and highty corrosive, and Fiendfyre

Again, I am by no means well-versed on Harry Potter lore, but doesn't that bit mean that the killing curse will not destroy a horcrux?

[Beeftank]

It doesn’t specifically have to be either of those two things, the object just needs to be “beyond magical repair” and because both of those things are incredibly destructive dark magic, they do the trick.

The argument is that the killing curse, which could be described as “removing a soul from the body” logically might do the trick on a horcrux, which is an interesting theory, but I’m on the side of it wouldn’t necessarily work within the logic of the world because something had to be alive to kill it. despite having a soul encased inside of them, the horcrux is still a non living, inanimate object, therefore a killing curse would have no effect.

It would have worked on Nangini though.

[Rater202]

Again, I am by no means well-versed on Harry Potter lore, but doesn't that bit mean that the killing curse will not destroy a horcrux?

Note the qualifier "as far as we know." That's not a definitive list, that's just the things we're told or shown will work.

My problem is that no one ever tries the Killing Curse and nor are we told that it won't work or given a reason for why no one tries.

The argument is that the killing curse, which could be described as “removing a soul from the body” logically might do the trick on a horcrux, which is an interesting theory, but I’m on the side of it wouldn’t necessarily work within the logic of the world because something had to be alive to kill it. despite having a soul encased inside of them, the horcrux is still a non living, inanimate object, therefore a killing curse would have no effect.

Tom Riddle's diary and Slytherin's locket say otherwise on Horcruxs's being on-living and inanimate: They're both able to affect the world around them, influence other people, the dirty bleeds when Harry drives the basilisk fang into it, and the locket, once opened, has a human eye in it and is able to cast illusions to try and protect itself.

[Beeftank]

Ok, you are right, I was off the mark saying inanimate, but I would still argue they are not alive.

[Qwertystop]

That's one opinion. I don't think worldbuilding and a good story are related to each other. The story of Harry Potter is that the choices of the weak matter. The setting is built to make it so Harry and friends are weak and told to stay out of it by authority figures, and save the day by caring enough to meddle. The genre is coming of age. It fulfills all of its objectives, making the audience care and getting the story across. They are well written books, they just don't care about the paint.

I also didn't say its a bad coming of age story, just a very paint by numbers one. So is Star Wars. A Series of Unfortunate Events has the worst world building basically ever and was also a good coming of age story. I don't know any current ones because I came of age a long time ago, but disliking the genre doesn't make them bad stories.

The closest thing to a direct across the board between writing and worldbuilding is Talion Revenant. It's a coming of age story set in a fantasy world, fulfills a lot of the same beats in a shorter book.

But at the same time, it's a world where bloodline and inheritance are made more-important by both sides of the core conflict – constant reminders that Harry is so much like his parents, his protection from his mother's spell making it necessary to stick with his only remaining family even though they're horrible people, he got his money from an inheritance, the Hallows thing at the end only worked because he inherited the cloak, and on and on. There was every opportunity to repudiate the whole thing about lineage being important, to say that only the villains believe that, but when it comes time to commit to what actually works in the setting... blood will out.

(and then he becomes a cop by the epilogue)

[Rater202]

But at the same time, it's a world where bloodline and inheritance are made more-important by both sides of the core conflict – constant reminders that Harry is so much like his parents, his protection from his mother's spell making it necessary to stick with his only remaining family even though they're horrible people, he got his money from an inheritance, the Hallows thing at the end only worked because he inherited the cloak, and on and on. There was every opportunity to repudiate the whole thing about lineage being important, to say that only the villains believe that, but when it comes time to commit to what actually works in the setting... blood will out.

(and then he becomes a cop by the epilogue)

The hallows thing was immaterial to the conflict. The Cloak and the stone ware useful tools, but only the Elder Wand was material to the final conflict and Harry didn't inherit the Elder Wand, he gained ownership of it due to freak chance and the Wands own fickle nature.

Also, the protection on Harry from his mother an the protection on Privet Drive were separate spells. The protection on the house was a spell Dumbledore cast.

Otherwise, there would have been no point in keeping him there after Tom stole his blood to create a new body because that negated his mother's protection.

It's also important to note that Voldemort and Harry's choices are given more narrative weight than their blood.

Tom chose to be a murderer. To chose to split his soul into seven pieces. Tom chose to use Harry's blood to resurrect himself when literally anyone's blood would do. Harry chose to sacrifice himself to stop Tom and protect everyone else.

Those choices are what allowed Harry to come back to life after Tom killed him, not any special property of Harry's respective bloodline, and that was what allowed Harry to destroy the final Horcrux and defeat Tom.

[Peelee]

Note the qualifier "as far as we know." That's not a definitive list, that's just the things we're told or shown will work.

And? Would you be willing to risk life imprisonment and torture on a complete unknown? That's a bad bet.

[Tvtyrant]

But at the same time, it's a world where bloodline and inheritance are made more-important by both sides of the core conflict – constant reminders that Harry is so much like his parents, his protection from his mother's spell making it necessary to stick with his only remaining family even though they're horrible people, he got his money from an inheritance, the Hallows thing at the end only worked because he inherited the cloak, and on and on. There was every opportunity to repudiate the whole thing about lineage being important, to say that only the villains believe that, but when it comes time to commit to what actually works in the setting... blood will out.

(and then he becomes a cop by the epilogue)

Sounds like an entirely different set of beefs with the story, and I'm not really interested in spending the rest of my life defending Harry Potter. I will point out that the same criticism is true of Star Wars and any number of other Coming of Age Stories (in fantasy Wheel of Time, Memory, Sorrow and Thorn, A Song of Ice and Fire and nearly every other coming of age story comes to mind.) Whether it is a good message or not is up to you, but I don't think it is bad writing.

[Rater202]

And? Would you be willing to risk life imprisonment and torture on a complete unknown? That's a bad bet.

It's only illegal to use the spells on a human being. It's perfectly legal to use it on something that isn't human, assuming that there are no other laws preventing its slaying or destruction.

And there are no laws against destroying a Horcux. Partly because their existence isn't common knowledge and partly because almost everyone who knows they exist consider them an abomination tha t must be destroyed at all costs.

And Harry had already used the other two curses on human beings so honestly, it's a moot point.

[Fyraltari]

Harry Potter isn't a fantasy story, it's a bargain basement coming of age story with paint.

It's definitely a fantasy story, those two things aren't incompatible.

But at the same time, it's a world where bloodline and inheritance are made more-important by both sides of the core conflict – constant reminders that Harry is so much like his parents, his protection from his mother's spell making it necessary to stick with his only remaining family even though they're horrible people, he got his money from an inheritance, the Hallows thing at the end only worked because he inherited the cloak, and on and on. There was every opportunity to repudiate the whole thing about lineage being important, to say that only the villains believe that, but when it comes time to commit to what actually works in the setting... blood will out.

(and then he becomes a cop by the epilogue)

If you're going to criticize the worldbuilding don't forget the goblins and the house elves.

Coming of Age Stories (A Song of Ice and Fire)

I really don't think you can call ASOIAF a coming of age story.

Edit:

And? Would you be willing to risk life imprisonment and torture on a complete unknown? That's a bad bet.

If memory serve they only really embark on a quest to destroy the Horcruxes once the Ministry of Magic is taken over by Voldemort and they already are fugitives anyway, so...

[Jasdoif]

Note the qualifier "as far as we know." That's not a definitive list, that's just the things we're told or shown will work.

My problem is that no one ever tries the Killing Curse and nor are we told that it won't work or given a reason for why no one tries.

Sounds like the more general question of how/where to draw the line between "this needs to be adequately explained because it'd be too convenient to overlook" and "this isn't worth wrecking the pacing by interjecting an adequate explanation of why something isn't going to happen in the middle of a scene".

[Rater202]

If you're going to criticize the worldbuilding don't forget the goblins and the house elves.

I mean, "sapient non-human has different pov and cultural values to humans" is good world-building.

It's a bit clunky, but with House Elves the overwhelming implication seems to be that the bond of servitude is to a house, not a person or family and that it's something they do to themselves.

The typical House Elf likes serving, they like cleaning, they like cooking. The typical house-elf is also powerful enough to bypass spells that prevent teleporting, can fool spells meant to track wizards, and can easily kick a wizards ass in magical combat.

And while Dobby was constantly punishing himself in the Malfoy's care, Kreacher was able to try and feed Harry Maggots and was able to arrange for Sirius Black's death because he didn't like them as masters, heavily implying that Dobby's situation was the result of the Malfoy's being utter asshats than anything inherent to the House Elf condition... And again, he kicked Lucius's ass the second he was no longer bound to serve the Malfoy family.

The whole thing is honestly really complicated and I don't think we have enough information to make a judgment...

However, if you pay attention to the SPEW subplot, you'll note that Hermione is insisting on helping elves that don't want to be helped, without ever once asking them what they want, and insists that they must be stupid or brainwashed to not want her help, all because she was upset about one wizard being a **** to one House elf.

Her attempt to help them(knitting clothes and leaving them in places in the mistaken belief that she can trick them into being free) makes her feel better but all it does is piss off the Hogwarts elves...

She insists on getting House Elves wands... Completly ignorant to the fact that Elves don't want wands and don't need wands, being that they can do everything a wizard can without them, meaning that getting house-elves the use of wands would be an entirely symbolic victory.

She's the kind of "ally" who makes the entire crusade about themselves and does things that are of no help to anyone who needs it.

On Goblins... honestly, the only goblin we see in canon in any real respect is kind of a jackass, but even he has a point: As far as Griphook knows, the Sword of Griffindor is a goblin artifact that was stolen from its rightful owner. Objectively, this is not true*, but Griphook doesn't know that as the actual history of the incident has been lost to time.

Unfortunately, the exact details of the incident are only given in supplementary sources. Basically, the blacksmith who forged Gorick Griffindor commissioned the sword from was the actual King of the Goblins.. Which says interesting things about Goblin culture that aren't really elaborated on. The King had sellers remorse and lie, claiming that Griffindor had stolen ehs word without pay and demanded it back, Griffindor denied it, and it escalates to war because diplomacy and truth potions apparently did not exist back then. Afterward, all evidence of th goblin King's lie was destroyed and goblins began a tradition of only ever renting or lending Goblin-made metalworks to others, while the original creator or their descendants would always be the "true" owners..

And that's the culture Griphook grw up in and the stories he was told. He doesn't know that his cultural beliefs are based on a lie.

[Fyraltari]

Rater, having species that have different worldview than humans is usually good world building but the how and the what do matters. And if you end up reusing racist talking points, that's not good.

Edit because I clicked submit by accident:
The goblins: it's a race of greedy bankers with long noses and fingers.

The house elves: Hey look, it's an entire species of people who feel better when they're enslaved, the people who want to free them are goodie-two-shoes who don't know what they're talking about and the only actual issue with their enslaving is bad masters. It's all fine, don't question it.

I mean, really?

[Anonymouswizard]

Yes, a quad is four people who all have naked snuggles with each other. Uh, I mean are all dating each other.

Look, looksdown's been hard and none of my partners have been living in London.


As for Harry Potter, sadly the goblins are probably the best bit of worldbuilding in the books. Sadly, many people have pointed out how they're problematic and so I won't do so here. Rowling sadly lets her prejudices impact her writing.

Side note: why couldn't Dumbledore have had a boyfriend living in Hogsmead? Nice confirmation of his sexuality in the books, doesn't imply he's closeted because students have no need to know of his love life, and the books come off as less of an exercise in cisnormativity.

It's the last one isn't it?

[Fyraltari]

Yes, a quad is four people who all have naked snuggles with each other. Uh, I mean are all dating each other.

Look, looksdown's been hard and none of my partners have been living in London.

I can't decide whether I am envious of you.

Side note: why couldn't Dumbledore have had a boyfriend living in Hogsmead? Nice confirmation of his sexuality in the books, doesn't imply he's closeted because students have no need to know of his love life, and the books come off as less of an exercise in cisnormativity.

It's the last one isn't it?

I don't think the cisnormativity was negotiable. And let's not kid ourselves, had Dumbledore had a boyfriend he'd have been described as a "special friend" or something like that.

[Rater202]

Becuase Dumbledore was about 150 when he died... And he died in 1997, canonically. He just barely lived to see homosexuality start to be kinda sorta accepted in the mainstream in western cultures.

For context, Dumbledore died the same year that John Waters had to explain to the writers of the Simpsons that the F word was a slur and that they probably shouldn't have Homer Simspon use it unironically, even if he's meant to be in the wrong, in an episode about how homophobia and toxic masculinity are stupid.

[Lacco]

Rater, having species that have different worldview than humans is usually good world building but the how and the what do matters. And if you end up reusing racist talking points, that's not good.

Edit because I clicked submit by accident:
The goblins: it's a race of greedy bankers with long noses and fingers.

The house elves: Hey look, it's an entire species of people who feel better when they're enslaved, the people who want to free them are goodie-two-shoes who don't know what they're talking about and the only actual issue with their enslaving is bad masters. It's all fine, don't question it.

I mean, really?

And here I was, going to ask you to elaborate.

I won't touch the greedy bankers.

As for the house elves: the idea itself is rather interesting and I think it could make for a great source of conflicts and social commentary, but unfortunately, it was handled as it was handled.

Which is understandable in its own way: it would take too much space to cover it sufficiently and it could be a separate book (Harry Potter and Elven Revolution?). Wouldn't be as popular with the kids, maybe...

Side note: why couldn't Dumbledore have had a boyfriend living in Hogsmead? Nice confirmation of his sexuality in the books, doesn't imply he's closeted because students have no need to know of his love life, and the books come off as less of an exercise in cisnormativity.

It's the last one isn't it?

Never actually thought about it - but mostly because based on what he stated several times, he had some romantic experiences behind him and I considered him to be already burnt enough by the relationships to be interested in further ones.

After all, knowing what he knows and what he has to do (especially expecting to be dead in certain time), I'd also decide to steer clear of anyone who could keep me away from the decision.

Also: if we consider Dumby to be attracted to intelligence, ambition and ability, where could you find a suitable match for him?

...which leads me to an idea. He was in a relationship, but the other person could not live in Hogsmeade... prison, somewhere in Bulgaria?

I can't decide whether I am envious of you.

Insert a mother-in-law joke.