Harry Potter was your childhood.
Even now, 15 years after the series ended, J.K. Rowling’s wizarding universe still feels like home.
But behind the veil of nostalgia there are some elements that simply don’t add up — and with each rewatch, I seem to notice another.
1. Houses are an awful institution
Students are grouped with others who demonstrate similar personality traits. What a terrible arrangement.
Everyone knows the saying: opposites attract. Too many proud or impulsive heads can be sickening to coexist with.
Identity is formed during adolescence. You’re meant to have your opinions challenged when you encounter people different from yourself. Houses limit self-growth.
It also just creates violent rivalries. Slytherin in the series is effectively a training ground for future Death Eaters, Gryffindor for heroes.
2. Speaking of, Dumbledore isn’t a hero
Dumbledore may act in the interest of the greater good, but Harry is given little to no agency about whether or not he wants to die for the greater good.
Dumbledore grooms Harry as a pig for slaughter without Harry’s consent. A bit cruel, no?
3. Voldemort picked the worst Horcruxes
For someone whose obsession with eternal life drives them to commit familicide, Voldemort sure picked the worst Horcruxes ever.
I understand the narcissism that drove him to choose significant objects. But given that he cared so much about immortality, you would think that this would outweigh any kind of vanity he felt.
Next time, a grain of sand might be a better choice than your snake.
Sure, it might be needed for plot purposes, but Rowling could have just built in some clever clue that the protagonists discover with some resistance.
4. Avada Kedavra makes the series worse
A killing spell makes sense. I just think it wastes some of the potential for more enticing wizarding duels.
Instead of being able to easily one-shot other wizards, wizards would have to resort to wearing their opponents down through multiple ‘Stupefies’ or ‘Expelliarmuses’.
Just try to imagine a new and revamped version of Harry’s final duel with Voldemort. Instead of winning purely on technicality, we’d get to see multiple scintillating exchanges of spells.
Similarly, just think of the opportunity cost. If Snape can invent ‘Sectumsempra’ out of his own accord, I’m sure Voldemort would have spent his time inventing hundreds of novel and devastating spells in the absence of ‘Avada Kedavra’.
5. Dragons were underused
There are so many features in the Harry Potter series where it just seems like J.K. Rowling was trying to make the world as fantasy as possible.
Dragons serve three purposes. Wands, the Triwizard Tournament, and protecting the Gringotts Bank.
Surely there are more creative uses for massive, flying, flame-breathing creatures? I would have loved to see Dragons in the Wizarding War, but as it is, they seemingly exist for the sake of existing.
6. What on earth was J.K. Rowling thinking when building her fringe characters?
You literally couldn’t write this. The one Chinese character is called Cho Chang. The one significant black character has the surname Shacklebolt. An Irish character? Rowling’s got the perfect name: Seamus Finnigan.
It’s especially ironic, given the amount of effort Rowling has poured into the series’ fantastical elements. Could perhaps some of that effort have been spared in making the names of her characters less tone-deaf?
The Gringotts Goblins are another example of this lazy reliance on stereotypes. They echo so many antisemitic tropes: their noses are hooked, beards are pointed, and… you guessed it, they operate the Central Bank.
Even though it’s been 15 years, each time I watch the Potter films I get something different — new realisations, takeaways and theories.
Like the Room of Requirement, the magic of the films is that they keep on giving, and the buzz around them hasn’t stopped — for better or for worse.