For me it started with Goblet of Fire, when Hermione being appalled at the treatment of house elves was treated as a joke, and it just got worse from there as the characters continued to be unlikable people making bad decisions and never changed. Also:https://twitter.com/AmeliaRoseWrite/status/1280353342560956416?s=20 …
-
-
That's not what I'm arguing, though. It's not about the objects at all. It's about the type of story and how Harry relates to it - as a child playing a game, or as a young adult wearily completing a task he can't refuse. The whole point of the series is this transformation.
-
I suppose It didn't feel like a really developed transformation though Hell in Book 1 it's already remarked upon that Harry doesn't see getting the Philosopher's Stone as something he does for glory but for duty - that's the whole reason the Mirror of Erised gives it to him
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The comparison is never made directly in the text and the Resurrection Stone isn't really a payoff for the Philosopher's Stone It's *less* cool than the Philosopher's Stone, as far as we can tell it doesn't do anything but just rehash the ghostly encouragement circle from Book 4
-
And the fact that he wins on a technicality in both books doesn't help
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.