/lit/ - Literature

Actually, we don't often discuss children's fantasy novels on an 18+ board dedicated to literature.

>>1005913

This is true. It's because we're pretentious douchebags.

Nobody on this board hasn't read Harry Potter so feel free to discuss it

>>1005913
That's nice. I'm 20 and this one was aimed mainly at adults.

I thought it was a brilliant conclusion to the series, OP.

I read 1-5. In hinsight they're like the Muse of /lit/erature.

>>1005923
I have never read a Harry Potter book. I thought they were "too escapist" in middle and high school.

>>1005931

Meaning bad, overblown and horribly mediocre; also, conducive to inspiring the likes of Stephenie Meyer.

I never got past the second book in middle school. It was just too damn long for me. Which is weird because I read a lot.

>>1005931
this is very accurate

yes, a lot of it was camping out - but there were flashes of absolute brilliance in this book.

What I think I like most about it is the charactors all are imperfect - normally the deceased father would be the ideal man and husband and the son would struggle to fill his shoes. But James was a just a guy with his own problems... I like that.

I have to say that /mu/ has better taste in books (as evidenced by Stangolee's tier image) than /lit/ does in music, specifically their taste in rock.

How the fuck was Ron able to mimic Parsletongue?

>>1005940
He was a douche.

>>1005940
He was the stereotypical bullying jock.

>my face when we knew James was an asshole in like the 2nd/3rd book

>>1005942

Please don't take Stagolee as a representative of /lit/.

>>1005995
I'm not an idiot. My point was that the image is quite subtle (bar putting The Trial & Ulysses in medium tier) yet it almost always enrages any /mu/tant the first time they see it.

My guess that if I was to do the same for /lit/ they would agree with the troll chart or would have few grimaces.

>>1006015
I think I might actually, in a short while.

Fucking really? It was trash. Especially the epilouge. I mean, these characters married their high-school sweethearts and didn't change one bit in the time between the main story and it? Its bullshit of the highest order.

>>1006015

There is nothing subtle about Stagolee's troll charts, it's just a random assortment of widely-known classics thrown haphazardly onto a "tier list" (which is a stupid idea to categorize books anyway). Not to mention that your "guess" counts for nothing.

>>1006025
There is subtlety as far as I remember. There's like two good books in god-tier, & the same for bad in shit-tier (Wuthering Heights springs to mind). I'll have a look right now though.

>Not to mention that your "guess" counts for nothing
Challenge accepted.

>>1006033
*same for good in shit-tier

damn, that looks horrible.

yes, james was a douche and a bully - but that makes him far more interesting to me than Lily. Some of the charactors are very one dimensional - either all good or all bad (like Lily or Umbridge) which makes them totally uninteresting.

ambiguous charactors like James and dumbledore are what the last book really explores.

I take it back, I guess I thought it was more subtle due to how many times it worked.

I'll still have a go at a /mu/ one though.