Oh, TV Tropes...!
Oct. 5th, 2011 10:42 pm![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
sweettalkeress.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockQuite honestly, the Harry Potter stuff on that site has gotten to the point where I can't read it because just about everything is fawning over how great and super-special-awesome the series is, oh, and how Snape is an evil douchebag who wanted to get Harry and James killed so he could keep Lily. But this... this makes me want to scream:
"Hermione... [is] one of the smartest and more pro-active females in the whole Harry Potter canon and English literature in general"
WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!
How could they make such a claim?! Hermione is a better heroine than, say, Tiffany Aching?! How about Eliza Doolittle?! And I'm sure you could come up with other examples.
No, no, in Harry Potter it seems fairly obvious that the most powerful women in the series are antagonists. Sure, Hermione's perfectly independent and capable, but in the last several books it's like she becomes Harry's servant because he's too lazy to do anything himself!
God damn it, Harry Potter wouldn't bother me so much if everyone didn't insist it was the greatest thing since sliced bread!
"Hermione... [is] one of the smartest and more pro-active females in the whole Harry Potter canon and English literature in general"
WHAT THE FUCK?!?!?!
How could they make such a claim?! Hermione is a better heroine than, say, Tiffany Aching?! How about Eliza Doolittle?! And I'm sure you could come up with other examples.
No, no, in Harry Potter it seems fairly obvious that the most powerful women in the series are antagonists. Sure, Hermione's perfectly independent and capable, but in the last several books it's like she becomes Harry's servant because he's too lazy to do anything himself!
God damn it, Harry Potter wouldn't bother me so much if everyone didn't insist it was the greatest thing since sliced bread!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: The madwoman in the attic
Date: 2011-10-10 09:32 pm (UTC)Just curious, but what was your nitpick?
Re: The madwoman in the attic
Date: 2011-10-11 04:49 am (UTC)I'm afraid Hermione's Aramaic is as bad as Rowling's Latin. But if dog-Latin works for spells so should its Aramaic equivalent. I'm actually fluent in modern Hebrew and can read archaic Hebrew. It's been a while since I did anything with any form of Aramaic. However the Hebrew for 'thought' would be 'machshava' in one word and the Aramaic would be a single word as well (because of the way semitic languages work). The Hebrew for 'my wrath' is 'chamati', not 'anichemah'.
I'm afraid the author translated individual words without considering grammar or syntax. But then Potterverse 'Latin' isn't better.
Re: The madwoman in the attic
Date: 2011-10-11 01:15 pm (UTC)You know, I took several years of Latin in high school and early college and I remember trying in vain to translate some of the spells. At the time, my reasoning was that my Latin wasn't good enough, not that she was making up crap that sounded vaguely Latin. The things that I gave her a pass on! I really should have known better.
As a side note, does it bother anyone else how some fantasy authors exoticize Latin? I mean, yes, it's a dead language now, but there was a time that everyone in the Mediterranean spoke it. Even in the last century it was a part of the schooling of a large number of students. Latin isn't really mysterious or esoteric, guys. Lots of people still study it! Maybe I am just picky, but I feel like it can trivialize a lot of people's perceptions of the language. Of course, I also really like Latin so I am probably biased.