Harry Potter bad

I was fully on board with agreeing with him until he said that historically science was the Church-approved, Christian means of understanding the world.

Attached: 1553208110674.jpg (1080x1080, 119K)

it got millions into reading

>brings up the safest choice for a "Good Movie" he can think of
you're well programmed, my fellow NPC

Make a case for the book itself and not its impact.

Attached: 12209213.jpg (300x240, 25K)

mjaah maah i liek menes like th NPC

Attached: e7792f26.png (1461x1128, 25K)

>"No!"

There are some good devices here and there, such as that mirror that showed u what u wanted

Yeah, reading nothing but Harry Potter. The people I know who read the HP series in their mid teens ended up reading little else, whilst the people who actually started with other literature still read to this day (me included). The series seems to have an infantilising effect on its readers.

Its a kid's book, lol

>muh anecdotal evidence

it got millions into reading Steven King

The idea that reading Harry Potter gets people to read anything *but* Harry Potter is pure conjecture. We're not having some sort of scientific debate here, user. Why should personal experience not be legitimate?

b-but what about these pictures taken from harry potter fans' social media accounts?!

>baseless statement
>statement based on personal observation
>y-you can't use personal experience as an arguement
Go back to high school you debate club faggot

>he idea that reading Harry Potter gets people to read anything *but* Harry Potter is pure conjecture.
So is the opposite idea. Your personal experience is based on what, 10 people at most? Not nearly enough to draw any conclusion. The other guy who replied isn't me.

Yeah that was a pretty brainlet take. Modern science comes from the occult not from the Church. The great Renaissance and Enlightenment era thinkers were almost all occultists on the side.

Those fucking simpleton pigs keep chanting "HERRY POTTOR IS BARD" every time I step into the subway sandwich parlor and I want to fucking strangle them to death with my big hands

lmao. Me and the lads shout this everytime we go to subway, pisses this fat neckbeard right off every time we do it. I think the fat cunt actually started crying last time

I work as a sandwich artist in a well known chain, and there's a regular group of guys arguing about this in there. They get so into it they forget there's the middle ground of Harry Potter being mediocre and forgettable and fail to notice when I spit in their foot-longs.

>sandwich artist
the fuck is that

I’d rather have a few good readers than many mediocre readers

"No!"

>lots of people reading a book justifies literary merit!
I can tell you're not smart

>not being a sandwich arts major
GTFO

/brainlit/s

What are you even trying to convey here?

i don't even know what that is
give us your big brain take then

They are literally moving some goal posts.

But he's right. Science started out as a means to understand and describe the world that God has created. We know that God is orderly, and we expect His creation to exhibit order too. This notion that the church was against science, or that science and religion are polar opposites, is absurd.

If you EVER prove me wrong on Yea Forums again in front of my friends I will fucking kill you, okay?

No, you won't kill me. Oh rip wrong again

When I was reading fiction like hobbit and Lotr I fould potter boring and couldnt read more than few pages.

where do you live

And that's a bad thing. Teaching the masses the written word was a mistake.

since this is Yea Forums, I'm going to link this book. Your post made me think of it.

goodreads.com/book/show/23011.In_the_Beginning

disclaimer: I haven't read it yet.

In heaven.

Ur Mum's bed

i'm going to come over there and beat the shit out of you

>The series seems to have an infantilising effect on its readers.
definitely.

there are also lazy devices, like the invisibility cloak that was a little too convenient. also, the game design of Quidditch is broken, and exists so Harry can be the MVP. I also disliked the lack of sympathetic characters from Slytherin, and Ravenclaw/Hufflepuff felt very undeveloped.
it certainly has its strong points, but the flaws are undeniable.

based alert

I like the books and they touch on the typical character and literally tropes seen in many other books. The prose is written more for normies but that is not necessarily bad (at least for me). There are literary snobs who expect a popular book like HP to be like Tolkien but I don't understand why they have to be. They are good books due to the number of people it got reading books, its memorable characters, emotional impact, and other things. It is an accessible book for kids and it is good in repeatable readings as an adult. The negatives are the cringy/SJW fans but then again, Star Wars, Marvel, Transformers, anime, and other franchises have their nerds and fandom. Rowling also likes to shit on her legacy and good books by bringing up SJW/woke information that does nothing to the books but is annoying as fuck just to pander to progressives.

Attached: 53607392_394061078074429_6376744171393397058_n.jpg (640x640, 81K)

L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N

No!

That's not moving the goalpost you fucking idiot. He asked you to defend its literary merit, while you gave the asinine response that it inspired readers. Obviously, the reception of a work has nothing to do with its actual quality. We shouldn't judge Catcher in the Rye for its influence over Chapman in shooting Lennon, that would be utterly absurd. We shouldn't judge Nietzsche's works based on its usage by the NSDAP, that would be similarly absurd. And in that same framework, we absolutely shouldn't alleviate Harry Potter from criticism, simply because it "inspired kids to read", you mongoloid.

That frog’s gaze is really disturbing, because that is almost exactly how the vacant stare of an “NPC” looks like in real life.

>We shouldn't judge Catcher in the Rye for its influence over Chapman in shooting Lennon, that would be utterly absurd. We shouldn't judge Nietzsche's works based on its usage by the NSDAP
Actually we should.

Quidditch would actually be a good fantasy sport if it weren't for that dumb golden ball

Attached: n23oj84ea5g11.jpg (1080x698, 114K)

>soundtrack
back to Yea Forums, retard.

it has definite potential, it just needs to be fixed by nerfing the golden snitch. for starters, it should be worth much less, maybe 35 points, and should not end the game. making it 25 or 35 has the extra advantage of making it a tiebreaker. that's another thing, if every point denomination ends in 0, you could just remove the extra digit, but I digress.

oh shit we are going full circle

>not recognizing music as the superior artform
back to /ck/, cunt

>implying that's a good thing

come to think of it: set a time limit, have the first snitch catch be worth 36 points, with subsequent catches (by either team) worth 12 points each.
this would reduce ties even more, and provide better balance and dynamics.

I read Harry Potter as a kid, and I still haven't recovered from the shock she gave me when she proved that she could make magic boring.

all wojakposters must burn