Here’s Your Not So Gentle Reminder Harry’s Not Piteously Pathetic At Potions. Here’s A Refresher:

I've always liked the idea of magic working in whimsical and mysterious ways, more than the school of thought that makes magic more 'technical'. The way Harry Potter's story is, I feel like I've been conditioned to enjoy the interplay between "magic" and "luck".

This to say, I'd always imagined Peter as a powerful wizard that few recognized until Voldemort. I imagine Dumbledore never had a clue-- he makes mistakes, he misses things. I like to imagine either James or Lily had a subconscious inkling, but never really thought about it. James just knew Peter was a self-conscious little fool at times, when he didn't need to be, really, see Peter! you became a freakin animagus! idk why you doubt yourself...

Voldemort canonically sought out the Potters at first (the motivations of which, is a whole other topic to whcih I want insight). Peter was a last resort, a means to end, but I imagine Voldemort was clever enough to realize that Peter was meant for the inner circle. Of course, anyone close to his plans for immortality automatically were held close out of necessity. No doubt, Snape initially entered that inner circle not for his Sectumsempra, but because he had been attracted to 'prophecy'/'destiny'. Both Voldie and Harry gradually develop a "sixth sense" for these things.

I personally subscribe to the headcanon of Peter deliberately blasting a nearby gas plant that fateful Nov day. Not only does that theory satisfy my personal belief that Peter was the creative escape-artist of the Marauders (james was most creative at inventing problems, sirius at getting into problems, remus at avoiding problems, peter at getting out of problems), but also allows the Muggles a shred of truth. It's both logical and 'lucky'. (Did Peter set the location of their confrontation deliberately, or was he drawn near to a gas plant through magic?)

Anyway, great Peter meta. Yes to Voldemort negging Peter. GoF Peter is a disgusting pitiful mess. It's fascinating to imagine a 'toxic relationship' there

Voldemort constantly belittling Peter throughout GoF is so interesting because he, Voldemort, is probably the person who best knows Peter's abilities at this point. He expresses surprise at Peter being able to convince Bertha Jorkins to go with him. And like...dude, you of all people KNOW how much of a manipulative snake Peter is, you Know how he convinced Lily and James and Sirius to trust him...why are you acting so surprised? Like Voldemort is the last person who should underestimate Peter. But he does: I think because he knows full well Peter is actually competent but belittles him to keep him loyal. Ohhhh the psychology of these two. It's so fascinating.

(....petermort? someone stop me.)

Gonna get real close to the mic when I say this, but friends that disagree are not suddenly bad friends. It's weird to think that friends have to be on the same page at all times or they become toxic.

We all looked at Draco with Crabbe and Goyle and understood that them blindly following him as his "yes" men wasn't the same type of friendship that Harry had with Hermione and Ron. In fact, it wasn't a friendship at all because surrounding yourself with people who would never disagree with you is cowardly. It's a cop out.

Draco dug himself into a hole so that the only thing that could ever ricochet around in his head was his own thoughts. He wasn't truly confident in what he believed in, so he just settled for regurgitating the shit he heard at the dinner table. Like an echo chamber.

Meanwhile, the Wizarding World tossed little Harry headfirst into the "Chosen One" hole and the only reason he ever escaped that suffocating self-fulfilling prophecy was because Ron and Hermione reached their hands in and yanked his skinny ass out.

So, no, Ron isn't a bad friend because they got into a few petty arguments. And no, Harry doesn't secretly hate Hermione because she can annoy him sometimes. Harry isn't perfect, so don't expect Hermione or Ron to be.

By popular demand (😂) Best Trope Ever rec list is back for Part 2: “Jily from Snape’s POV” *everybody cheered*! (See Part 1 here)

change the prophecy by ninazenikcult

Severus overhears an intimate conversation between Lily and James at the end of Seventh Year that confirms his worst fear; that he has lost Lily Evans forever.

Eavesdropping by @sofargoneao3

Severus watches as Lily falls for James.

Slipping Away by @yallthemwitches

Snape didn't think his life could get much worse---until Lily was falling in love with James Potter right before his eyes. A compilation of 3 particular moments between 6th and 7th year.

Not a Bang, But a Whimper by yallofthemwitches

During their sixth year, Severus Snape goes out after curfew to give information to Lily that he thinks will bring them back together. Unfortunately, he finds her already with someone else. A companion piece to my other oneshot "Slipping Away" for Jily Week 2024, Day 7: Continuation Station

Legilimens by yallofthemwitches

Perhaps the real James was doing it on purpose--using memories of Lily to either drive him insane or to push away the real secrets that hid beyond. If it was true, he was succeeding on all accounts. During a duel, Snape attempts Legilimency on James. Canon compliant. Oneshot

Playing Dirty by yallofthemwitches (big thanks for feeding this trope!)

When Lily won against Potter during dueling practice, Snape couldn't think of a better way to finally rekindle their friendship. But Potter was a sore loser and Lily seemed far too willing to entertain him.

Rumor Has It by @tedwardremus

Severus doesn't believe the rumors that Lily finally agreed to go out with James Potter.

inevitability by peachiekeens

The snotty one tried to trip him on the way out, and Lily stamped on his foot hard enough to elicit a gasp as they emerged into the corridor. “That’s what Gryffindors are like, Lily.” Severus said matter-of-factly as the door closed behind them. Lily nodded, but her eyes were far away. Severus had a sinking feeling in his chest. They didn’t talk about the sorting again. OR The development of James and Lily's relationship, as seen through Severus Snape's eyes.

Basically agree with all of this but damn, a 13 inch height difference is mad!

Canon Couples and the Random Heights I Assigned Them

Just because I recently re-read this post and it's on my mind. Here's what I think these canon couples' final heights came to be and some justifications behind my thought process, as well as some headcanons. Let's start with my OTP -

Harry (6'1") and Ginny (5'0")

I'm kinda obsessed with the idea that 17yo Harry being the same height as his 21yo deceased father would grow just a couple more inches

Ginny being 5ft fits with her being the noticeably "smallest one" in the DoM during OOTP and with Harry being able to easily look over her head during the infamous First Kiss scene in HBP, putting her head at chest height of Harry (as of HBP)

Ginny is the only one who knows about Harry's petty satisfaction when he ran into Draco Malfoy some years after the war and realized he had continued to grow and Malfoy hadn't

James (5'11") and Lily (5'8")

Because they're both tall enough to be considered "tall", but not the kind of tall that is shocking

Lily being 5'8" makes her tall enough to have to look down at 14yo Harry in the graveyard scene of GOF

Ron (6'5") and Hermione (5'8")

In order for Fred and George to be "shorter and stockier" than 14yo Ron, but still slightly over 6ft so as to shrink to 5'11" in DH, I have to assume Ron's final height came to be one that most people would put in the "Holy shit you're tall" category

I know I'm going to get shouted at for Hermione's height, because she's never described as particularly tall in the books HOWEVER she's never described as particularly short either, just shorter than Harry

This 9 inch height difference give Ron & Hermione the perfect height difference for Ron to comfortably rest his chin on her head without having to hunch over awkwardly like Harry does with Ginny, so I'm sticking to it

Arthur (5'11") and Molly (4'11")

I know the movies made Arthur short and round, but he was described as thin in the books and all the Weasley boys wind up being pretty tall, so they had to get that from somewhere.

Molly is consistently described as short and dumpy throughout the series, and while Ginny is often compared to Molly physically, I just like the idea that Ginny managed to grow that extra inch that Molly never did.

Draco (6'0") and Astoria (5'11")

we know in DH Draco was slightly taller than Harry at the Malfoy Manor scene (p.457, U.S. edition of DH), so if we assume the like linked post above that Harry was 5'11" during DH, then I'd put Draco at 6 foot.

we literally know nothing about Astoria (CC doesn't count), but I picked 5'11" because it is the curse of all tall women to wind up with men roughly the same height

Lucius (5'10") and Narcissa (5'10")

we know Harry and Narcissa are the same height in HBP, so I put her at 5'10"

correct me if I'm wrong, but Lucius is never described as particularly tall, while Narcissa is. And of course, tall for a woman is average for a man. I put Lucius to be around around the same height as Narcissa because I just don't see Lucius' personality allowing him to be with a woman taller than himself.

also, see the curse of tall women above

"who radicalized you" ever since i was a child i wanted other people to be treated nicely and fairly because i didnt understand why theyd deserve otherwise and it fills me with disgust seeing how people treat their fellow human beings sometimes

controversial headcanon is that Sirius black didn’t play quidditch while at Hogwarts

this ups the ante quite a bit. a change in perspective

What are your biggest pet peeves in fics

My biggest pet peeve is, hands down, fandom’s portrayal of the first war, which is almost never portrayed as violent and terrible as the details we get about it in canon. Most importantly:

The First War started in 1970.

Not 1975 or 1976. Certainly not 1978. 1970. This means the war was raging the entire time the Marauders were at Hogwarts, and that they entered Hogwarts a year into the war. It lasted 11 whole years. The whole point is that the First War was much worse than the Second War.

I’ve seen people say things like “The Marauders era is boring because nothing really happens until their later years until the war starts and/or heats up” and say it like it’s complete fact and not something fans completely made up. The idea that the war only “heats up” after Snape’s Worst Memory is so universally accepted despite all evidence to the contrary.

(I’ve also seen claims that the only murders/war crimes committed during the first war were the few explicitly named in the text, which is, again… truly embarrassing analysis.)

The reason fandom has come up with this narrative is entirely to fit the Snape vs. Marauders “bullying” angle. It usually goes like this: Sirius and James were bullies for 5 years, until - conveniently and magically - the war started to “heat up” and get more serious 6th year or sometimes 7th year and therefore they matured (especially James, though the idea of Sirius maturing after the Prank is also common in fic). It provides a neat little coming of age arc for the Marauders, one that does not actually exist in canon.

Because, believe it or not, Voldemort was not going to adjust the trajectory of his war to fit this narrative.

On the pro-Marauders side who still see them as bullies, the fandom can’t reconcile the idea of the war being serious and the Marauders not being serious about it and instead spending their time bullying others. But the war was already heated up, and the Marauders were already serious about the war by SWM - because the Marauders attacks on Snape and others was them being serious about the war, because it wasn’t bullying, it was vigilante justice.

On the Snape fan side, to portray Snape as a victim of bullying, they have to pretend that he's the only person capable of being victimized in the whole entire wizarding world, and people actually being murdered and tortured conflicts with that narrative.

I can buy that the war took a few years to heat up, I doubt it went to daily murders and tortures immediately, but I think a war would not take 6-7 years to escalate. I would guess it heated up sometime the Marauders 2nd year or 3rd year, at latest.

(I often see so many Order deaths happening in late war, per Moody, used at evidence that the war only escalated then, but the Order is tiny and doesn’t represent the casualties in the rest of the population)

Evidence towards the fact that the war was very heated up already by the time of SWM is that Lily calls Voldemort “You Know Who” in her conversation with Snape outside the Gryffindor common room - which means that by that time Voldemort has spread enough terror that people are afraid to say his name.

Also, remember this is already a very violent society. The fact that some pureblood families murder Muggles for fun (Muggle hunting) is apparently an open secret, they murder house elves, and I’ve said before that I think pureblood society practices honor killings which are at least somewhat legally sanctioned (i.e. Merope’s situation).

So a few occasional murders is not going to shake them and is not what this society is going to consider a war.

More evidence is how much the violence has escalated at Hogwarts. Death Eater students are regularly and openly torturing students with Dark Magic "for a laugh" and not being expelled, which is something that doesn't even happen in canon era - the closest we get is Draco cursing Katie Bell by accident, during a specific secret mission, and unlike with Mulciber and Mary Macdonald, no one knows who the culprit even is, so they don’t have the option to expel him. Similarly we have Snape using Sectumsempra so often at Hogwarts that it became known as his specialty and not being expelled, despite it being a near-fatal torture curse.

This fic captures what the atmosphere at Hogwarts would’ve been like really well:

"Did that kind of thing happen a lot in Hogwarts?" Hermione asked, tone oddly flat. "In the seventies?"

“Yes," Sirius said after a long moment. "It did. There were times when it was pretty much open warfare in the halls and on the grounds, between the students everyone knew were on Voldemort's side and the ones who opposed him, or whose families did... I was talking to Pomfrey about it the other day, she says you lot get yourself hexed as often in a few months as our generation used to in a week. And people attacked pets or destroyed belongings all the time. It was one reason a lot of students hid being muggleborn."

There’s the inability to extrapolate from canon details, fandom often portraying the First War like it’s just 30 Death Eaters on one side and 20 Order members on the other.

For example, if a mere ~30 Death Eaters are already committing daily murders in HBP during the Second War, how much violence do you think an army of ~500+ DEs (Sirius says the DEs that came back in GoF is literally nothing to how large Voldemort’s armies were in the First War; Remus says the Order was outnumbered 20 to 1) was committing? Similarly, based on the statistics given in HBP (by February Ron says he’s literally lost count of how many students have lost relatives), by SWM a substantial amount of the student body would’ve had families murdered by Death Eaters (and therefore the students cheering James and Sirius on in SWM is obviously because they hate Snape for being a proto-Death Eater and not for being poor 🙄). There may have even been students themselves that were killed over breaks.

This lines up with Sirius's description of the war:

“You’re scared for yourself, and your family, and your friends. Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more torturing... the Ministry of Magic’s in disarray, they don’t know what to do, they’re trying to keep everything hidden from the Muggles, but meanwhile, Muggles are dying too. Terror everywhere... panic... confusion... that’s how it used to be."

There are lots of similar passages about the war, I’m not going to quote all of them, but I suggest people actually pay attention to those details, as well as stuff during the Second War that would apply to the first.

The same thing applies as fandom portraying teenage Death Eaters as only joining once they graduate, when canon indicates they would be Marked at 16, but that’s for another meta.

i love this bit sm in deathly hallows bc they were all so sad and yk scared that seeing hermione being "back to normal" in a way made them both smile at the normality.

ps. a little before this harry points out that hermione was so focused in what was happening in the moment and debating with ron that she forgot she was mad at ron and harry also was relieved by that lmao by boi loves them both sm i wanna cry.

this book has so many tiny moments like this that i love sm.

The Death Eaters: a contradictory anti-State narrative in the HP universe

From Prisoner of Azkaban onward, the Death Eaters (formally introduced in Goblet of Fire) emerge as a violent, prejudiced force; primarily against the Ministry of Magic. However, instead of being an anti-state organization, as initially presented, the Death Eaters are more concerned with maintaining existing power structures, albeit with a more extreme, blood-supremacist agenda (that's basically Deathly Hallows). Indeed, the Ministry of Magic itself is already prejudiced and violent, even before Voldemort.

I will explore key instances that highlight the contradictory nature of the Death Eaters and their relationship with the wizarding state’s power structures.

1. The conflict in DEs’ aims and their misrepresentation through real-world historical parallels

The Death Eaters' role as villans is evident in their modus operandi and in their belief system, particularly blood supremacy. This is why, while their ideology resembles Nazism, they operate as a terrorist organization.

For clarity: terrorist organizations operate outside the framework of a formal state structure, relying on violence, fear; their focus: undermining established power, creating instability, mistrust, etc. This is essentially the First Wizarding War:

"...this wizard, about twenty years ago now, started lookin' fer followers. Got 'em, too — some were afraid, some just wanted a bit o' his power, 'cause he was gettin' himself power, all right. Dark days, Harry. " - Rubeus Hagrid, PS "You don't know who his supporters are, you don't know who's working for him and who isn't; (...) Every week, news comes of more deaths, more disappearances, more torturing... The Ministry of Magic's in disarray, they don't know what to do, (...). Terror everywhere... panic... confusion... that's how it used to be." - Sirius Black, GoF "...You-Know-Who and his followers sent the Dark Mark into the air whenever they killed. The terror it inspired... you have no idea, you're too young. Just picture coming home and finding the Dark Mark hovering over your house, and knowing what you're about to find inside... Everyone's worst fear... the very worst." - Arthur Weasley, GoF

On the contrary, institutionalized authoritarian regimes align more closely with the description we have of the Ministry of Magic (although I don’t believe it is a totalitarian regime in the FWW). However, if one thinks about it, in a completely corrupted Ministry of Magic, power is concentrated in the hands of a small elite (purebloods) that controls state institutions, including the military (Aurors), law enforcement (The Department of Magical Law Enforcement, Hitwizards), and the legal system (Wizengamot), enabling them to enforce their policies (e.g., the Statue of Secrecy), maintain order, etc. Voldemort and the Death Eaters are far more dangerous in such a structure (see DH).

(Had Hitler remained the leader of a violent terrorist group and never risen to power as the dictator of a nation, he could never have been responsible for the deaths of six million people in CC, nor would his expansionist war have led to the deaths of over 30 million.)

That being said, while most authors base their world-building on a singular historical event (e.g., the rise of Fascism in Italy) or comparable historical events (e.g., the rise of totalitarisms), JKR mixes terrorist organizations with institutionalized authoritarian regimes. This blend leads to a disjointed narrative, and it is deeply problematic.

The IRA parallel

i. Historical accuracy (for historical background, check here):

Voldemort’s rise to power in the late 1960s, his decline in the late 1980s, and his resurgence in the 1990s closely parallel the timeline of The Troubles—a complex conflict between factions in the Republic of Ireland and the big island. To put it very, very simply, this period of unrest stemmed from centuries of English colonialism, during which the English conquered and subjugated Northern Ireland. This colonization led to widespread violence, cultural destruction, and systemic repression of the Irish people. As a result of the poverty, exclusion, and repression, a reprehensible terrorist organization rose: the IRA (Irish Republican Army).

Mirroring the timeline of the First Wizarding War, the conflict in the 1970s was marked by street fighting, bombings, kidnappings, and the assassination of both civilians and high-ranking figures. The arguments about the Ministry becoming nearly as vicious as the terrorists they were fighting—using torture and murder (Aurors casting Unforgivable Curses) and internment without trial (as seen with Sirius Black)—parallel real-life arguments about the British security services' brutal response to the IRA.

ii. Contrasting ideologies

The IRA emerged from decades of oppression faced by Irish Catholics, aiming to challenge a discriminatory system, while the Death Eaters seek to reinforce and perpetuate existing power structures. By positioning the Death Eaters as anti-state, it obscures the fact that they are objectively fighting to preserve and enforce the status quo. The parallel with the IRA oversimplifies, and arguably dangerously misrepresents, political movements and conflicts.

The Hitler parallel

i. Convergence in worldview

There are several reasons why many people, JKR included, associate DEs with Nazism, one of which is the unambiguous nature of their ideology. Both Nazism and the DEs' ideology are grounded in notions of racial supremacy and purity, with the premise that a person’s worth is determined by their ancestry. For the Death Eaters, this belief is reflected in their conviction that pure-blood wizards are inherently superior to Muggle-borns and Muggles. But DEs are not terrorists because of their belief system; they are blood supremacists who carry out terrorism to impose their belief system. If you want to impose your belief system, institutions are the answer, as true dominance is easely maintained through ideological control, which is exactly how wizarding society already operates. Here, DEs modus operandi fails.

ii. Historical inaccurancy

A key distinction between the DEs and the Nazis lies in the structural dynamics of their respective rises to power. Hitler's ascent was marked by the systematic institutionalization of mass violence and control. Once in power, Hitler's government passed laws (e.g., Nuremberg Laws) and engaged in legal political moves (e.g., Munich Agreement). The Nazi leadership was public and institutional, with high-ranking officials known to the public (Göring, Himmler, Goebbels, etc.). The DEs never sought or achieved official political power in the same way. They never formed party, they operated in secrecy (using masks) and they kept their membership a secret within their own ranks. As the terrorists they are.

In Deathly Hallows, when the they take formal control of the Ministry of Magic, they maintain this secretive approach. The coup is swift and quiet, with Voldemort not openly declaring himself as Minister. He imperiused key figures (like Pius Thicknesse) to create distrust and prevent some form of rebellion (this doen't make sense btw, rebellion from who, at this point? Only the Order would have continued its resistance activities.... but whatever....).

When, in HBP, Slughorn says, "I confidently expect you to rise to Minister for Magic within twenty years," and Tom Riddle responds, "I don't know that politics would suit me, sir. I don't have the right kind of background, for one thing," it's clear that Riddle has his own agenda (which sometimes conflicts with the DEs' aim, but that's a different discussion). However, this alone doesn’t explain why pure-blood supremacists like Lucius Malfoy don’t leverage their influence to establish a more radicalized and enduring power structure (such as totalitarianism), especially given the entrenchment of their ideology within society. Again, why would Lucius Malfoy act like a terrorist, risking his reputation, life, and endangering his family, when he could already do whatever he pleases? It's still not clear.

KKK paralel (I swear is the last one, here for historical background)

While the DE' ideology echoes Nazism, it also resembles many other supremacist and bigoted ideologies. Our final group (which also inspired the aesthetics of Goblet of Fire) is the violent, white supremacist terrorist group called Ku Klux Klan.

i. Historical context and differences with DE

The KKK expanded into almost every southern state by 1870 and became a vehicle for white southern “resistance” (forgive the word) to the Reconstruction-era policies, which aimed at establishing political and economic equality for Black Americans. While some leaders later attributed KKK violence to poorer southern white people, the group did attract people from across the socioeconomic spectrum.

By comparison, the DEs were not a response to a period of social progress or societal change (but more on that later). It is also arguable that the Death Eaters were not a heterogeneous group. Aside from Snape, who was a half-blood with a working-class background (though he obviously repudiated his origins, that's the bloody point of HBP), the rest were rich purebloods— one might even say the purest of purebloods, as many of them were Sacred 28, (part of what seems to be) an aristocracy akin to feudalism.

The KKK never started a civil war (basically FWW and SWW), and in terms of proportion, it never had the numbers that the Death Eaters did. (However, KKK violence is real and it did contribute to an ongoing racial conflict, so it’s hard for me to say that DEs were “bigger”). One can only imagine what would have happened if it had reached a 50/50, or one could think that a more domesticated version it's currently seated in the White House (see: the point made earlier about institutions...).

2. DEs and the inconsistency of their portrayal as anti-State

The Death Eaters do not fit neatly into any real-world ideological or political framework. They don’t represent a subversive anti-state movement, as they seek to reinforce and uphold the existing power structures within the canon, making them both ideologically and narratively inconsistent with the groups they are meant to represent. Their violence and blood-supremacist ideology do not stem from institutionalised oppression or inequality, nor are they based on misinformation. This mess is rooted in JKR’s limited understanding of politics and discrimination (I will never forgive her for having Hermione shout "I'm proud to be Muggle-born" and stop, as pride is the problem when it comes to discrimination and racism).

3. Adjusting mess with extra-canon

I firmly believe that, unless you delve into supplementary materials, there is little to prevent these lunatics from operating in board daylight. DEs make sense in a political climate where their power feels threatened, even if it's made up. That's why...

What happened when HP ended: Pottermore

...at some point, JKR (or her team) must have realized these inconsistencies. On Pottermore, new information surfaced that contradicted the canon. When woman, gays, Black people and other marginalized groups gain greater social equality, those who have traditionally held power by birthright see their unjust dominance begin to crumble, and suddenly they have to do something. This aligns with Rowling’s portrayal of Muggle persecution, suggesting that historical anti-Muggle sentiment was largely unfounded (Fantastic Beasts movies). Again, by what is implied in the tale of The Wizard and the Hopping Pot, she suggests that wizarding society had little to fear from Muggles, thus minimizing the historical violence and oppression wizards may have faced. Other examples that come from extra-canon are Nobby Leach and hints of progressivenes. In 1962, Leach became the first Muggle-born to be appointed Minister for Magic (in canon, this would be absurd. Is there a Muggle-born working in the Ministry? Is there any Muggle-born working at all?). Then, there were Squib Rights marches in 1968-1969 (a parallel to the Civil Rights marches in the real world).

Conclusion

It's absurd for me to write something like this, but it's obviously NOT pointless to examine the motivations of prejudiced groups that seek power through violence. Take that moment in Order of the Phoenix, where Harry and Sirius talk about Dolores Umbridge:

"I know [Umbridge] by reputation and I’m sure she’s no Death Eater—" "She's foul enough to be one…" "Yes, but the world isn’t split into good people and Death Eaters," said Sirius with a wry smile. "I know she’s a nasty piece of work though."

Someone like Umbridge, though not a literal Death Eater (for now, but it's not the point), exhibits similar traits—prejudice, abuse of power—which can be just as damaging. But Sirius isn't suggesting that she occupies some middle ground between good and evil (I blame the movies for this shit). Rather, he’s acknowledging that Evil takes many forms and expresses itself in different ways. This is the core difference between prejudice and terrorism: the latter is a violent, organized force, whereas the former usually manifests in a less overt, everyday bitch. While racial slurs or internalized discriminatory tendencies are undeniably harmful—the cancer of our society, if you ask me—these groups actively unite to fight. People risk their lives, they believe themselves heroes of a greater cause.

If you oversimplify the rationale behind why a bigoted terrorist group holds such views and acts on them, thinking it's not as complicated as it truly is, you're part of the problem. History repeats itself because we often dismiss the importance of understanding our past. We rely on our moral superiority, believing that others are or were easily manipulated by forces we are too righteous to fall victim to. But this is exactly why they thrive.

Anyway thank you @artemisia-black and @tedwardremus, you'll find some of your words here.

Arguing that James Potter’s death meant nothing is such a fundamental misunderstanding of the narrative that it makes me wonder if people have even read the books.

This is a man who ran headfirst toward his death in a desperate attempt to give his wife and son a chance to escape. A selfless, brave act of love that stands in contrast with Voldemort's personal war against death and Snape's desperate plea to bargain for the life of Lily while not caring if her husband or child dies.

James isn’t just a character who dies early, off-page, before the main character is introduced—he becomes a specter who haunts the entire story.

James’s absence profoundly shapes Harry’s journey as he struggles to define himself. His sense of masculinity and self-worth is deeply tied to the father he never knew but constantly strives to emulate. Sirius and Remus, broken by their shared loss, are mere shadows of their former selves, their lives forever marked by James’s death. Even Voldemort acknowledges James with a twisted form of respect when he taunts Harry in the graveyard.

To say James’s death means nothing disregards the emotional heart of the series. Harry’s story is fundamentally about grief—his desperate longing to connect with the family stolen from him, and his eventual journey toward acceptance. It’s about learning to live fully in the face of loss, choosing life over despair, and understanding death not as an enemy but as an inevitable companion.

James’s death isn’t meaningless—it’s pivotal. It echoes throughout the series.

James’s death means everything.