People even critique this based on this false memory ("Oh, and house-elves get emancipated in one line in the epilogue without ever really going into details") but they're wrong! They AREN'T in the epilogue, they DON'T EVEN GET ONE LINE
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @Teknogrot and
The most we ever got from her about this plot point was, OUTSIDE the books, her mentioning in interviews based on the barrage of questions people had about the epilogue, that "yes, the trio did all achieve their dreams and find careers making the world a better place"
2 replies 2 retweets 45 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Teknogrot and
"Hermione joined the Ministry and fought successfully for reform in the treatment of house-elves" That's it Just "reform" Some kind of improvement happened, maybe they're citizens and maybe they aren't, I dunno, leave me alone
4 replies 9 retweets 77 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @Teknogrot and
Just the House Elves too apparently. Nothing about Muggles or centaurs or goblins or werewolves...
1 reply 0 retweets 25 likes -
Replying to @Truxillogical @arthur_affect and
Love that when Dumbledore realizes the shit has hit the fan he's ready with suggestions for ending really basic disenfranchisement like "lets actually talk to giants" as a *war strategy.* Like he's always known the oppression was there but now that there's war it's important.
2 replies 2 retweets 36 likes -
Replying to @ShieldingC @Truxillogical and
And then we learn goblins have these really specific longstanding grievances like "give us back our artifacts" and "let us use wands" but they're treated as background for the more important question, "Can Harry suck it up and work with these guys for two seconds?"
2 replies 1 retweet 49 likes -
Replying to @ShieldingC @Truxillogical and
It's treated even worse than that really. The closer you read the text, the uglier it gets. Every dialogue line in the discussion is literally a way to abject Griphook to justify double-crossing him (which of course he does first to "prove" how right they were.)
2 replies 0 retweets 17 likes -
Replying to @Hal_Duncan @ShieldingC and
Even at the time as a fan, I was still furious reading that scene. Did Griphopk even really double cross him? Seemed like Harry wasn’t going to hold up his end of the bargain either iirc.
1 reply 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @Truxillogical @Hal_Duncan and
Would it have really been so hard for Harry and friends to explain that they needed the sword for something and would give it over AFTER?
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @TheBrianMcNatt @Truxillogical and
Why would the Goblins believe him? Probably the same shit wizards have been telling Goblins since Alfred borrowed the title "the Great" from a tall Goblin.
3 replies 0 retweets 14 likes
Yup the whole story of Goblin/Wizard relations is wizards asking to borrow something because they really needed it just for this one thing they swear and then being like "Nope I touched it it's MINE NOW it's my family's ANCESTRAL HEIRLOOM"
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @TheBrianMcNatt and
You think Godric stuck his own name on there or did the Goblins do it for him? The idea that the Goblins would enchant the sword to let it be pulled out of any rando Gryffindor owned container seems... implausible.
1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @Teknogrot @arthur_affect and
I figured that was something Godric did specifically so he could give it back and then get it again. Like Taako trading Garfield the Deals Warlock the Flaming Raging Poisoning Sword of Doom...but only after he’d enchanted it with a return spell.
3 replies 0 retweets 12 likes - Show replies
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.