Infamous 3rd year “My father will hear about this” Draco refusing to participate in Lupin’s class on boggarts because the whole thing is ridiculous but when it’s his turn he walks up to the wardrobe and Lucius Malfoy steps out
THIS UPSETS ME
no but bi harry deliberately fucking with ron like they’re at christmas dinner or w/e and harry just goes “you know ron i’m in love with your sister and everything but if bill was single…goddamn. i’d go there”
bill winks across the table at harry
'You could've taken anyone!’ said Ron in disbelief over dinner. ‘Anyone! And you chose Loony Lovegood?’
'Don't call her that, Ron,' snapped Ginny, pausing behind Harry on her way to join friends. 'I'm really glad you're taking her, Harry, she's so excited.'
as always, who is sentimental about their friendship? Not me, of course
anotherbothersomeperson said: What are the seven schools policies on pets at school?
Excellent question! Thanks for asking :)
We all know that Hogwarts has standards for pets, though the exact extent of those standards is a little debateable. In book one, McGonagall’s letter says that students may have a cat, frog, or owl, and doesn’t make any allowances for any other sort of pet. Despite that, Ron Weasley shows up later in that same book with a pet “rat” and Lee Jordan shows Fred and George Weasley his pet tarantula. If we’re going to be really precise (and I’d like to think we would be) Crookshanks isn’t really even a full cat. Being half Kneazle definitely makes Crookshanks a magical creature, and beyond the strictures of McGonagall’s original limitations. But, for the sake of argument, lets say that the Weasley’s and Lee Jordan had special permission for their pets, and half-Kneazle is, to wizardkind, more or less enough like a cat not to really matter. That would make toads, cats, and owls the historically the allowed pets at Hogwarts.
American schools, of course, buck those traditions a little bit. Which is not to say that you can bring anything to any school! No student is going to be allowed to a have a thuderbird, mishibizhiw, or a gowrow, but the standards and norms of what each school allows for varies widely, and you may be surprised at the type of pets typically allowed. Some of the more exciting points are as follows:
|Gryffindor:||Do what is right|
|Ravenclaw:||Do what is wise|
|Hufflepuff:||Do what is kind|
|Slytherin:||PUT A FUCKING BASILISK IN THE CASTLE|
Explain plz. In detail and at length.
As you wish!
So two kind of starting points for my musings:
1) The idea of the “mediatization of religion” is pretty much what it sounds like - that religion adapts itself to media techniques. This can be seen with televangelists in the 1980s and with the rise of social media use by churches now. But it also relates to the way religion - shaped by the media - has become more personal, individualized and commercial. You pick and choose what you want to be your religion - from traditional sources like church, from new agey/self helpy type stuff, and I would argue also from popular culture.
2) This theory (the mediatization of religion one) recognizes something called “banal religion,” which is basically superstitions, practices, emotions, etc. that reference the spiritual/supernatural but aren’t formal or institutional in the same way as typical religion. An example might be knocking on wood to avoid jinxing something.
OK SO that was a long starting point sorry. The gist is that religious content gets into and is shaped by the media, that we pick and choose from it because it’s highly individualizable, and that these things can be expressed in sort of day-to-day beliefs, practices, etc. and are still worth calling religious.
So Harry Potter is full of religious themes, right? Resurrection, the redeeming power of love, life after death.
The houses aren’t so religious in that sense, but they’re definitely about morality, and I think it’s FASCINATING that they’ve given us (people who grew up with the books) a whole new language in which to talk about morality. Those endless meta debates about whether slytherins are evil or just misunderstood are debates about the morality of ambition, pride and self-preservation, which is some pretty deep stuff. Same with the debates about Hufflepuff, or scoffing at Gryffindor for being reckless.
But obviously for people who are attached to the books, these debates aren’t purely intellectual - they have to do with our own house affiliations, the set of moral values we’ve taken from this book and sort of claimed as our own. When I say I’m a Hufflepuff, that instantly says quite a lot about me to anyone who knows the books, and it also reflects quite a bit of thought on my part about my identity and morality. This isn’t religious in the same way as the more soul-and-afterlife parts of the series, but I would argue that it could also be seen as a kind of “banal religion” - this random thing out of a book has been absorbed into my own understanding of morality, and can be used to signal that to other people and have conversations about it, even alongside other sources of morality like those from my church.
In the religious content of Harry Potter, the houses are more like the proverbs than the gospels - less miracles, more talk about what is morality and how to do it. It’d be fair to argue that there’s nothing spiritual about the Hogwarts houses, so they don’t count as “banal religion.” I think they do though, for how strongly and sometimes emotionally people identify with them as a way of making sense of their moral universes alongside other sources.
well, i definitely got into it tonight with a person who thought i couldn’t be slytherin because he couldn’t divorce the main traits of a house from the moral standards assigned to them, so this seems familiar to me
Refresh the Fancast For The Love of God: Suraj Sharma as James Potter
“It was as though he was looking at himself but with deliberate mistakes. James’s eyes were hazel, his nose was longer than Harry’s, and there was no scar on his forehead, but they had the same thin face, same mouth, same eyebrows. James’ hair stuck up at the back exactly as Harry’s did, his hands could have been Harry’s and Harry could tell that when James stood up they would be within an inch of each other’s heights.”
Reblogging not just because special effects are cool but because body doubles, stunt doubles, acting doubles, talent doubles — all the people whose faces we’re not supposed to see but whose bodies make movies and tv shows possible — these people need and deserve more recognition. We see their bodies onscreen, delight in the shape and motion of those bodies, but even as we pick apart everything else that goes on both on and behind the screen, I just don’t see the people who are those bodies getting the love and recognition they deserve.
We’re coming to love and recognize actors who work in full-body makeup/costumes, such as Andy Serkis, or actors whose entire performances, or large chunks thereof, are motion captured or digitized (lately sometimes also Andy Serkis!). But people like Leander Deeny play an enormous part in making characters such as Steve Rogers come to life, too. Body language is a huge part of a performance and of characterization. For characters/series with a lot of action, a stunt person can have a huge influence on how we read and interpret a character, such as the influence Heidi Moneymaker has had on the style and choreography of Black Widow’s signature fighting style. Talent doubles breathe believability and discipline-specific nuance into demanding storylines.
Actors are creative people themselves, and incredibly important in building the characters we see onscreen. But if we agree that they’re more than dancing monkeys who just do whatever the directors/writers say, then we have to agree that doubles are more than that, too. Doubles make creative decisions too, and often form strong, mutually supportive relationship with actors.
Image 1: “I would like to thank Kathryn Alexandre, the most generous actor I’ve ever worked opposite.”
Image 2: “Kathryn who’s playing my double who’s incredible.”
I’ve got a relationship that goes back many, many years with Dave. And I would hate for people to just see that image of me and Dave and go, “oh, there’s Dan Radcliffe with a person in a wheelchair.” Because I would never even for a moment want them to assume that Dave was anything except for an incredibly important person in my life.
With modern tv- and film-making techniques, many characters are composite creations. The characters we see onscreen or onstage have always been team efforts, with writers, directors, makeup artists, costume designers, special effects artists, production designers, and many other people all contributing to how a character is ultimately realized in front of us. Many different techniques go into something like the creation of Skinny Steve — he’s no more all Leander Deeny than he is all Chris Evans.
But as fandom dissects the anatomy of scenes in ever-increasing detail to get at microexpressions and the minutiae of body language, let’s recognize the anatomy in the scenes, too. I don’t mean to take away from the work Chris Evans or any other actors do (he is an amazing Steve Rogers and I love him tons), but fandom needs to do better in recognizing the bodies, the other people, who make up the characters we love and some of our very favourite shots of them. Chris Evans has an amazing body, but so does Leander Deeny — that body is beautiful; that body mimicked Chris Evans’s motions with amazing, skilled precision; that body moved Steve Rogers with emotion and grace and character.
Fandom should do better than productions and creators who fail to be transparent about the doubles in their productions. On the screen, suspension of disbelief is key and the goal is to make all the effort that went into the production vanish and leave only the product itself behind. But when the film is over and the episode ends, let’s remember everyone who helped make that happen.
[ Sam Hargrave (stunt double for Chris Evans) and James Young (stunt double for Sebastian Stan, and fight choreographer), seen from behind, exchange a fistbump while in costume on the set of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Image via lifeofkj ]
I applaud these guys as much as the suit actors in my japanese tokusatsu shows. They do just as much work.
Let us not forget voice doubles, but yes to all this, being a double is hard work and you are at your best if no one can tell the difference between you and the actor.
The Harry Potter epilogue takes place in 2017, which means not only have those kids already seen Pacific Rim, but they have been subjected to Pacific Rim 2.
this is probably what “all was well” was referring to.
#harry and hermione both grew up as muggles you know they took their kids to see muggle movies#hermione probably owns an ipad#albus and lily are drift compatible#there are rousing debates about if magic could be used through jaegers#and luna insists that the kaiju were just magical creatures mutated by evil magic#hermione starts caculating the possibility of alternate dimensions#ron and ginny fight over who would be drift compatible with harry#rose and hugo start devising ways a giant jaeger wand could be constructed#james’ crush on idris elba doesnt die down for months#”albus severus you were named after the two bravest men i ever knew. but neither were was brave as mako mori”#”the scar had not pained harry in nineteen years and the bluray version of pacific rim 2 had just come into stores that day. all was well”
now i’m just imagining wizarding kids getting into muggle media and then fandom and writing wizard au fanfiction of their favorite series, trying to imagine people like themselves in the stories they consume. (and then probably they get reviews like “this is good but your magic system makes no sense” “why do they need magic when they have giant robots” “isn’t that too many fantasy things”)