have a biscuit, potter

Me? Books and cleverness. There are more important things: friendship and bravery.

PARALYZED — a playlist dedicated to draco malfoy

he goes by dadfoot or dogfather. bonus based on this exchange:

Y'all up here acting like Snape spent his entire life in Danger because of his spywork? No. He joined the Death Eaters willingly after Hogwarts and only worked as a Spy for about 9 months (probably shorter) during the 1st war and then 3 years during the 2nd war. He had a nice, comfortable life inbetween under Dumbledore’s protection at Hogwarts. He was the only one to blame for any discomfort and unhappiness he experienced in those almost 14 years of safety. He was bitter and decided take it out on the rest of the world.

You know who did brave a horrible life full of loneliness, poverty, negligence and cruelty at the hands of those who wrongly feared and marginalized him? Remus Lupin. Who by the way also worked as a Spy for Dumbledore by living among werewolves (including the man who bit him) who supported Voldemort. Note, he LIVED among these werewolves. Always in danger of being torn apart and murdered on the spot, whereas most of Snape’s spylife involved him sulking around Hogwarts tormenting kids… Safe. And Remus lost EVERYTHING…but he smiled. Always smiled. Always put others first and never took anything for granted. It took tremendous amounts of bravery for Remus to just go about everyday life.

But no Snape’s the bravest of them all. I’m not bitter.

Gender roles in a nutshell: the Beauxbatons and Durmstrang entrances in The Goblet of Fire.

also, to my knowledge neither of those schools were sex-segregated in the books

That bothered me more than the Dumbledore yelling, actually.

Nicolas Flamel was an alum of Beauxbatons.

The first headteacher of Durmstrang was a witch.

Bam.

In the books, it even says that there were boys and girls from each school. Thanks Hollywood for making Durmstrang buff and all athletic men and Beauxbatons all feminine and dainty.

Just imagine what it would have meant for every kid watching, seeing girls walking beside the guys in Durmstrang being “manly” and boys walking with Beuxbaton being flirty and feminine.

It would have shown that girls and boys can be however they want.

It also suggested that the only way a female could have be selected to participate was if she was not up against any male competition. In the books Fleur is chosen as the best candidate for her school from a selection of female AND male students. And she was the best PERSON. Not the best GIRL.

all men are Russian and all Women are French.

Select your gender: 🔳 Russian 🔳 French

The Houses as Studyblrs  [click to enlarge // info ⚡  insp]

it is absolutely, hilariously astonishing to me how often i’m asked to provide a 25 page extensively sourced MLA formatted academic style paper about why i think pansy parkinson is a character worth discussing, but…here we are, i guess.

first thing’s first—

fanon pansy =/= canon pansy.

canon pansy =/= fanon pansy.

canon pansy is a one-dimensional bully with no discernible personality traits beyond “mean” and “myopic”. she’s villainized by the story. her primary function within the narrative is to follow draco malfoy around. she’s background noise. she giggles, and she shrieks, and she makes fun of harry & co. pansy parkinson is also a figurative dumping ground for an alarming number of awful, misogynistic, enormously unflattering stereotypes for female characters—her relationship with draco is depicted as at least partially one-sided, which makes her seem desperate; she has a tendency to mock other students for their physical appearances, which makes her seem insecure; and she’s likened, more than once, to a literal dog. literally. a dog.  

(rowling had a truly terrible habit of peppering the hp books with a lot of these villainous non-characters, who were almost always slytherins, and who were almost always described as either unattractive, unintelligent, or both. see: millicent bulstrode, who is jokingly suspected of being related to a troll. marcus flint, who cheats at quidditch, is held back multiple school years, and has appallingly bad teeth. crabbe & goyle, who are violent, overweight, and implied to need draco’s help with her homework in order to avoid flunking out.)

canon pansy is a poorly constructed caricature of a Mean Girl who readers are meant to find abhorrent. all the ingredients for a spectacularly unlikeable character are there. it’s like rowling had a checklist.

that said, pansy’s role as hermione’s social foil gives her slightly more of a personality than the majority of the other slytherins. pansy is shown to be friendly with blaise zabini, who is, canonically, arrogant and enigmatic and disdainful of draco malfoy. pansy wears a pink dress to the yule ball. she likes unicorns. she possesses leadership qualities—she’s a prefect, she has a “gang” of slytherin girls—and is, by virtue of that, at the very least an above average student. she’s loyal to the people she’s shown to be close to. she cries when draco is hurt. her political affiliations, parentage, and blood status are categorically unknown. we can assume she’s probably a pureblood, and that she chose not to fight against the death eater regime at hogwarts, but she wasn’t a death eater. her dialogue with draco and blaise zabini about the war in HPB was ambiguously supportive, at worst.

(important note—one of the major themes in the books is redemption. see: severus snape. regulus black. the malfoys. rowling’s world building was full of lofty, often convoluted metaphors for racism and homophobia, which had the unfortunate side-effect of humanizing a lot of actively, violently racist characters who would have otherwise been unpalatable to any reasonably self-aware reader. the notion that grand gestures of bravery and self-sacrifice are necessary for redemption—again, see: severus snape, regulus black, the malfoys—is, however, repulsive to me, especially when the argument of worthiness is centered on a teenage girl who has, canonically, spent her formative years hanging around actively, violently racist people. And that’s not even delving into the numerous instances of benign racism perpetrated by characters who aren’t vile slytherin blood supremacists. see: the weasleys. albus dumbledore. rufus scrimgeour. the text goes out of its way to emphasize that combating internalized prejudices is an ongoing battle that has to be consciously fought. it’s a choice. but i digress.)

canon pansy =/= fanon pansy.

fanon pansy =/= canon pansy.

i see a lot of discourse about pansy being an inappropriate “feminist icon"—she’s a bully, she’s mean to other girls, et cetera, et cetera—and the irony of passing that kind of judgment on a female character whose entire narrative existence is predicated on her ability to compare unfavorably to, you know, all the good female characters; it is staggering.

so.

look.

i have loved characters like hermione granger and ginny weasley and fleur delacour since i was a child. they are smart and brave and interesting and Not Like Other Girls. their flaws are considered socially acceptable. hermione is bossy and narrow-minded; but she’s also usually right. ginny is outspoken and reactionary and obstinate; but she’s also pretty and popular and good at sportball. fleur is vain and self-absorbed; but she’s also beautiful and brilliant and fiercely loyal.  

Not. Like. Other. Girls.

not like pansy parkinson, for example, who is, almost unapologetically, exactly the kind of girl no one ever wants to be.  

she likes pink. she giggles. she cries. she chases after a boy who, at best, seems mostly indifferent to her presence. she’s self-conscious enough about her nose that it’s a well-known sore spot for other students to maliciously poke at. i don’t think we ever get a description of what her voice sounds like, but i instinctively associate her with a high-pitched, nasally whine. she’s petty—see: her interview with rita skeeter in GoF—and she’s narcissistic—see: her stint with the inquisitorial squad—and she’s a cliché, of course, just not an especially creative one.

there are obvious, valid criticisms to be made about how people interact with characters like pansy parkinson. and draco malfoy. and severus snape. but there is a huge difference between blindly excusing or romanticizing those characters’ actions and trying to humanize them.  

tl;dr

bad people are not bad characters.

     harry potter moodboards | hufflepuff

every harry potter post on here thats not a super tenuous and ill-advised political metaphor is some exhausting 3-part affair where the first part is the op being like “can you summon a patronus specifically to suck your dick lol” and then some rando comes along and adds onto it like “no this is a very beautiful idea. imagine students in dumbledores army learning to summon customized fleshlight patronuses… imagine summoning a human shaped patronus you could date….. what if hogwarts professors knew fun pop culture references and said them to each other” and then the third part is someone posting an 80k word essay-fanfiction about their heroic slytherin OC being the first wizard ever to pioneer the Dickius Suckicus enchantment and starting the first sex positive wizard kink shoppe that ends up defeating voldemort or whatever the fuck

It is a strange thing, but when you are dreading something, and would give anything to slow down time, it has a disobliging habit of speeding up.

#sassy, unimpressed harry #is my favorite harry

Actually I’m highly logical, which allows me to look past extraneous detail and perceive clearly that which others overlook.

HARRY POTTER MEME » [2/9] characters: Hermione Granger

so we all know that the crowing of a rooster is fatal to a basilisk, so what if when he was in the chamber of secrets, instead of the sword of gryffindor, the sorting hat gave harry a rooster.

cockadoodledoo mother fucker