J.K. Rowling apologizes for killing Snape


Is the Harry Potter series Veeky Forums?

nice b9

I haven't read all Harry Potters yet thanks for ruining it for me

She is such an attention whore, literally cringe worthy

>>As many a Harry Potter fan may now know, May 2 marks the anniversary of the Battle of Hogwarts

Fucking millennials

Anything to stay relevant huh? No self-respecting author should apologise for their work; if they do they are absolute cowards

>>"Canon: brown eyes, frizzy hair and very clever. White skin was never specified. Rowling loves black Hermione"
She already did this to her work, remember

Is ok, you still have the movies

I personally don't car which actor plays whatever character, its arbitrary. Although that actor looks like shes mid-30s not young enough to play Hermione

Other than that, killing Snape most likely generated an emotional response in many fans, and may be precisely why they love the books so much. To apologise for that, to take that away, its...its fucking stupid

> t. le wrong generation fag born in 1998

>>Celebrating a fictional battle anniversary

Counterpoint: People celebrate Bloomsday every year

If I read the article correctly she has already apologized for killing Fred Weasley and Remus Lupin, so it is a yearly event at this point

I refuse to mention Ulysses on a Potter thread, but yeah, you made your point

I loved Harry Potter because I was 11 or 12 when I read it and it was still new here.

I stopped reading it after Order of the pheonix because I found it was too childish for me (I was 13).

I was given the Lord of the ring after that and stopped following Rowling.

What a fucking mess.

Has anyone here done an Irish Bloomsday walk? Was planning to like a year ago but my gf had other ideas.

Pynchon here

Just dropping by to apologize for killing Slothrop hyuk hyuk

Still waiting for her to apologise for the series as a whole.

but you didn't

>sorry I made each character cis and privileged

When you think about it, the best reason for hating Harry Potter is because of its insufferable author and fanbase. I try to tell people that and they implore me to give the book a shot regardless but I won't because I'm 27 - a point lost on them at the moment of interlocution.

You are so smart and cool, user.

>le *runs for cover*

Harry Potter had pretty decent books 1-3, great books 4-6, and a mediocre book 7. I was 9 years old when the series ended so I still have good memories of it. I went to midnight sales for 5-7 and some fan event for predicting book 7. It was an experience around books that I don't think will ever be replicated. When Book 7 came out my entire family spent the weekend listening to my dad read it. It was nice.

Now I think JK Rowling and WB are just trying to capitalize on the memories people have. Cursed Child and (especially) Fantastic Beasts are not necessary stories at all, but they license them as canon, because they know it keeps the brand relevant

Don't worry, they are terrible, the Harold Bloom critique may be a meme but it's on point.

I cannot fathom the mindset of somebody who dislikes something because the fanbase. It's blatant narcissism and insecurity.

Steven Universe.
Hell we even have a whole containment board based on a shitty fandom.

Agreed. I won't read it because it's simply not to my taste.

Is this supposed to be a refutation?

And that is perfectly fine. But when somebody hops onto an image board vocalizing disdain for something to distance themselves from a fanbase, it's transparent and pathetic. Like for example, who cares more for the idea of a "progression of taste" than actually enjoying something.

disliking something because of its associations with a class of people is something that civilizations have been doing forever, and it's pointless and silly to complain about it now.

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "dead"

Terrible argument. Just because something has been done before doesn't mean it shouldn't be eliminated from your behavior.

Stop trying to intellectualize your insecurity. It's time to grow up.

>Just because something has been done before doesn't mean it shouldn't be eliminated from your behavior.

I meant that doing so seems to be more of a natural part of humans. An uglier part,perhaps, but still. Anyways dimwits like you popping up to complain about people complaining are just as annoying, so you can fuck off.

>people will always be shitty so uhh whats the point of critiquing it?

The whole purpose of existing is to suppress the ugly in favor of the pretty. I'm going to complain when people don't put in the very basic effort in being a decent human being, or at the very least, self aware in their opinions. Go suck a dick.

at least she's self-aware that she will never write anything successful ever again.

you're too old to read them. seriously, if you've read other Veeky Forums stuff, it'll pale in comparison since its largely YA; you're better off just watching the films

While obviously it's not ideal (best would be to actually experience the thing and make a decision as independently as you can) there's an infinite amount of content out there and you have to pair that down somehow. It's not that different from reading reviews- you find a reviewer has tastes similar to your own so you can approximate whether you should invest your limited time in a thing based on their opinion of it.
Because I know that my tastes are very different than the cunty tumblr girls I'm in school with, I can make an educated guess that I won't like The Fault in our Stars, despite never having read it or even knowing what it's about beyond a teenager with cancer. I may not be informed enough to write an intelligent criticism of the book but I do think I'm safe in assuming that it's not just subjectively disagreeable but objectively bad based on my knowledge of the other content its fans like and their general quality/intelligence. Same thing with the other user's steven universe example. I don't know anything about the show but if its fans are adults who watch children's cartoons, browse and contribute to a board as terrible as /co/ is, and like my little pony, which I know is shit, I feel good about assuming that steven universe is both not appealing to me personally and is probably objectively bad.

Apologise for killing Dixon you fuck

Get the fuck out of this board. Leave this fucking place. It's not for you and your kind. Stop posting fucking garbage.

kek, didn't think this was real

Is being a terribly shit but incredibly rich author, still desperately trying to cling on to relevancy by talking like a teenager online while battling severe alcoholism brought on by knowing deep down your entire lifes "work", (if you can call that shit work) is one hundred percent absolute garbage drivel... perhaps the most pathetic thing someone can do ever? I think it might be.

Why do *people* Do These Things *Wipes Arse with book* Why?(masturbates to the thought of her laying on her death bed and realising everything she ever wrote was worthless shit) *laughs*

Jesus, what a fucking cunt.

I never knew that. I always assumed it was in June to coincide with the endings of the rest of the books.

True but its been almost 10 yrs and nothing she has written has been even 'ok'. I dont blame her for clinging to the past so hard.

Y-you too sempai

But I have very good memories from the 1 to the 4th books. I loved them at the times, this is the series that got me into reading.

It's just after the 5th, I grew up and this was not interesting me to read that.

I was not trying to sound edgy or sound like a prententious prick but I don't read child book since a long time. It's not my cup of tea. Like do you still watch cartoon you were watching as a kid?

Hell, I was not aware of the fanbase nor Rowling's Twitter account until recently. I was curious about that thead and I went to check her Twitter account. I couldn't give a fuck since I didn't even bother following her since 2003 or 4.

I was not neither aware of her """scandals""" m8.

lost any credibility when she outed dumbledoore for literally no raisin

>*runs for cover*

Perhaps she should apologize instead for making Harry Potter the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises? Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

You're basically repeating Bloom's criticism. Think for youself user

It's a /tv/ meme

Yes yes well done /tv/ well done /tv/


> there's an entire industry creating click bait """articles""" around this fucking tweet

>*runs for cover*

>*runs for cover*

truly one of the greatest writers of our age

> (whispers)
> *stretches her legs*

>The whole purpose of existing is to suppress the ugly in favor of the pretty.

*teleports behind you*

(whispers) ..."snape"

"nothing personnel, kid"

*runs for cover*

>books 4-6, where the entire story started going to absolute shit
explain yourself user

*blocks your path*
what did you say about snape?

the tweet wasn't meant to be read into

Even if she wanted to escape this harry potter shit, she couldn't

Are people really going to be reading HP a century from now?

How depressing

Rowling is easily my least favourite author. Not even for her books, which aren't bad for teen fiction. Her constant retconning of characters and general attention-seeking on twitter is just so childish and infuriating.

She is a woman, what do you expect? Look at the way she types, it screams "look at me! look at me!". Like a child.

>Are people really going to be reading HP a century from now?
Unlikely. There are plenty of household names from a century ago that are basically unknown today.

You also need to take into account that the UK will be renamed within a century, and will be an Islamic country long before then.

There's also the fact that global warming is supposed to destroy half the planet 100 years from now. But somehow people never take that into account in their other predictions. The future to those people is always exactly like today, only with a different number on the calendar.

I'm not sure the beatles will even have an audience that far into the future, and they were supposed to have the longevity of Shakespeare.

Underrated post

Does anyone have the copypasta of Bloom's criticism of J.K. Rowling's repetitive language adapted to the epithets of the Iliad? One of our finest pastas - I wish I'd saved it when I saw ir.

Holy fuck she's an ugly nigger

she is an exceptionally talented writer but she blew her load with Harry Potter. Casual Vacancy was airport-murder-mystery-book tier so now she's come running back to her cash cow.

Yes, it's good if you maintain a steady drunk throughout the day and wear a decent costume.

>Hurr, I write on a fifth grade reading level and am past my prime even at that mediocre level of insipid literature, so I reserve myself into feeding the hormonal craze that my """books""" flamed inside subhuman untermensch

The only thing I'd read from her is a suicide note.

Isn't she the wealthiest modern author in existence? She doesn't *need* to write anything, much less anything that would qualify as something decent.

journalism has become a meme

4-6 are pretty good books. at least what I like best about HP is the extremely comfy "random events around Hogwarts" scenes and 4-6 have the most of those. I can see what you mean that they laid the groundwork for 7 to be the trainwreck that it was, and I somewhat agree. I think 6 does it more than any of the other two, and only really the Dumbledore plotline in 6.

how many people who claim to have read all of the harry potter books do you think actually have?

i suspect that a significant amount of them just watched the movie and read wiki articles
and i base this assumption on absolutely nothing

fucking pleb tier harry potter. i work in an office of 12 (twelve) and 3 (three) grown women are re-reading harry potter books right now.

>tfw drumpf supporters don't get Harry Potter references because they're all stupid uneducated rednecks

how come americans can't say "harry"? don't they know it doesn't rhyme with "hairy"?

Most of them. You'd have to be a pretty sad case to pretend to have read Harry Potter

people are talking about hp right now, including here
that was the point

grown men and women who have read harry potter while they were grown men and women would be too i suppose
maybe im too cynical

Of course it doesn't rhyme with hairy, the same way there doesn't rhyme with their.

There's a big difference between pretending to read YA and pretending to read actual literature. You'd have to be exceptionally autistic to pretend to read a YA book. Anyone who says they've read harry potter more than likely has.

tfw scottish masterrace

It should be game of thrones instead of star wars

also, i think most people read at least a few as a kid. i certainly did - i was 9 when the first book came out and i really enjoyed it. but i wouldn't re-read them as an adult.

Assuming most people on this board are 18-22 these books would have been huge already in elementary/middle school so they probably really did read them, at least the first few.

I remember telling some girls in my class, who were still reading it the fourth day after release that dumbledore died

Cornelius Fudge is gone! He never believed He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named was a existential threat to wizarding people. Scrimgeour will acknowledge RADICAL DEATH EATER TERRORISM.

desu I'm kind of impressed with my younger self in that I was able to read Half Blood Prince on my own in two days at age 7. Harry Potter definitely inspired me to read

I read them at around the same age, and looked forward to the next book releasing. Nothing wrong with that, since we were at the age where enjoying YA is acceptable. I can't even read one page of them now without feeling physically and mentally violated.

it doesn't really matter. the problem is not the book series, but the cringe of the fandom