WTFAW: Harry Potter (Pt. 3)

Dave: I have good news!

Really, now? What is it, he asked in a vain attempt disguise the fact he was acutely aware of what it was and how much is was going to hurt.

Dave: I’ve got a new theory about Harry Potter for you!

What a shock. Let me guess. Hagrid was a figment of Harry’s imagination? Voldemort is a Time Lord? Snape is secretely Harry’s father?

Dave: Hey, that last one is pretty good! Can I use that?

No, you can’t! Just tell me the damn theory!

Dave: Fine. Here it it. Harry, Snape and Voldemort all correspond to the brothers in “The Tale of the Three Brothers”, and Dumbledore is Death!

Hm. Interesting. Care to elaborate?

Dave: Well, Voldemort is power hungry, and his obsession with the Elder Wand is what is ultimately his undoing. which corresponds with the first brother. Snape fits the second brother, because both lost their loved ones, and died for their memories.

And Harry fits the third brother, accepting death. And when he sacrifices his life, who does he meet? Dumbledore, his “Old friend”, who owned all three deathly hallows, and manipulated the characters to where they had to be.

Is that all?

Dave: I think so.

Right. I’ll give it this. It is an interesting theory. I’d even go so far as to say it’s one of the most reasonable and well-arranged theories I’ve seen….

Dave: Thanks!

… which, considering the track record for fan theories, is saying practically nothing. Fundamentally, it still doesn’t add up.

Dave: Why not?

Several reasons. See, for the theory to work, all four characters must fit their corresponding character in the fairy tale. After all, you can’t have only one or two of them fit.

Dave: And all of them fit!

No, they don’t. I would be willing to concede that Voldemort would fit, with a bit of generalizing. The argument for Harry is flimsy, seeing as the third brother didn’t “face death” so much as spend his entire life HIDING from death, and while Harry did face death, there is the nagging issue of him not dying, which I would say was kind of necessary, seeing as the fairytale ended with the third brother “departing this life”, whereas Harry had the choice to, but didn’t…

This, of course, is all debatable. However as soon as you include Snape in the theory, it just falls apart.

Dave: What? Why!?

First of all, Snape is supposed to be the second brother. The brother with the resurrection stone.

Wouldn’t that kind of require Snape to, you know, use or at the very least possess the resurrection stone at ANY TIME IN THE STORY!?

At no point in the story does Snape own or use the stone or any of the other Deathly Hallows.

Dave: But he still fits the MO of the second brother!

Does he? Correct me if I’m wrong, but in the tale of the Three Brothers, the second brother was described as arrogant, wanting to humiliate Death by bringing back people from the dead, and ultimately hanged himself when his arrogance backfired.

Snape, meanwhile, lost the love of his life TWICE, once to the man he hated and once to Voldemort Avada Kedavra’ing the shit out of her.

But instead of doing the string jig, he suffered through the pain, and dedicated his life to protect her memory and her child, simultaneously a constant reminder of what he had lost and the one thing he had left of Lily Evans.

I’d say, all things considered, Snape is a very different person to the second brother in the fairy tale, and to it’s a big mistake to equate the two.

Then there’s the idea of Dumbledore as Death.

Dave: Come on! That fits!

Perhaps at first glance, but let’s compare the two characters properly.

Dumbledore is manipulative, and possessed all three deathly hallows at some point, much like Death in the fairy tale.

But UNLIKE Death, he is also kind and caring, and is motivated by a desire to save the world from a cruel and terrible monster, devoid of compassion and love.

He is really nothing like Death, who was petty and stupid, motivated by “I wanted these three people to die and will manipulate matters to accomplish that” in what’s essentially a shorter, more wizard-y Final Destination story.

Dave: But he was the one behind Snapes and Voldemorts deaths!

You say that… First of all, Snape dying was not part of the plan. That was an unfortunate, and hopefully unforeseen side effect. After all, Dumbledore had no reason for wanting Snape dead. And as for Voldemort, his death was due to Harry becoming the master of the Elder Wand. This made Voldemorts killing curse rebound, refusing to kill its master, and instead killed Voldemort.

You follow?

Dave: I guess….

The problem is, THAT was not part of the plan Dumbledore had! His plan for the Elder Wand was for its power to die with him! However, that plan went completely tits up the moment Draco Malfoy disarmed him, and there is no way in hell you can convince me that Dumbledore knew Harry would disarm Draco somewhere down the line!

So you see, Dumbledore as Death doesn’t really work, and Snape as the Second brother doesn’t work either. Therefore, the theory doesn’t work.

Dave: Oh, but I have one more argument in favour for this theory? See, you’re not the only one who can play a trump card!

Oh? And what might that trump card be?

Dave: J.K Rowling herself endorsed this fan theory! Ha!

I see. And that is supposed to prove… what, exactly?

Dave: Well… that makes this theory perfectly valid.

No, it doesn’t. Christopher Paolini liked the Eragon movie. That doesn’t make that a good movie.

J.K Rowling can endorse the theory as much as she wants. That doesn’t mean it makes sense. The arguments I have pointed out against the theory don’t automatically vanish just because she says she likes the theory.

If she rewrites the story to accommodate those arguments, and to where the parallels are more accurate, then I would take that as a valid standpoint.

However, until she does so, I will maintain that this theory does not add up.

So, unless Dave has anything further to add, I think it’s time we wrapped this up…

Dave: Now that you mention it, I have one more theory!

And it is times like these I really wish I would keep my mouth shut… Fine. Let’s make this quick. What is the theory?

Dave: Here it is.

NO!

Dave… What the actual fuck!?

Dave: See, the theory is-

I don’t care!

Dave: But I-

No! We are NOT fucking doing this. I am not even going to let you explain this, because that would make me an accomplice in making the world dumber.

We’re ending this right now, and if you ever suggest this theory to me again, I swear to God I’ll drown you in a deep fryer.

Back to Main Page

Advertisements

Doctor Who

Well, the time has come to write about Doctor Who. Sure, I’ve talked about it briefly in a sort-of entry in “Why The Fans Are Wrong”, but now we’ll discuss things about the show in earnest.

You see, while I’m a fan of Doctor Who, I am not living in the delusion that it’s absolutely flawless. So, to kick off our forray into Doctor Who, let’s talk a little about Jack Harkness.

I don’t know about you, but I find Jack Harkness a bit disturbing.

Now, I know what you think. I’m objecting to his sexuality and I should be more openminded about his lifestyle.

The thing is, though, I’ve no problem with his sexuality. Hell, I’m not exactly sure what his sexuality is, so it’s a bit tricky for me to object to it, even if I wanted to.

No, my issue with Jack Harkness, my reason for finding him slightly uncomfortable to watch, is based on one scene, in one episode.

In the episode “Bad Wolf”, the Doctor, Rose Tyler and Jack Harkness are abducted from the TARDiS by an unknown enemy to a space-station/satellite broadcasting television shows like Big Brother, The Weakest Link and similar television to the dullwitted people populating the Earth.

It’s a good thing I’m not reviewing the episode itself, because if I did, I would point out how that sounds like the writers sitting around thinking of what to write about, couldn’t come up with something original and decided “What if we do Big Brother… IN SPACE?”.

It has a slight “written during a coffee break five minutes before deadline” feeling to it.

Luckily, I’m not here to review the episode. So let’s get back to the issue at hand.

So, Jack is transported to “What not to wear OF THE FUTURE”, where he has to face off against two emotionless monsters programmed to condescendingly question his fashion sense, playing a pair of robots.

Among their arsenal, they keep a machine called the “Defabricator”, the function of which is to remove (and in the process destroy) your clothes. Why? Because just taking the clothes off and putting them on a chair would be time consuming and boring, I suppose…

Anyway, all is well and good, until Jack finds out that not only will they change his wardrobe, but also do horrible things to his body, including but not limited to taking his face off and rearranging his limbs.

Now, how does he escape this tricky situation? Does the Doctor crash the TARDiS through the ceiling? Does Rose smash the robots with a mannequin arm? Does some former constestant with five arms, seven legs and a Kashmir muumuu barge in and attacks the androids for making sure he’ll never play the violin again?

Of course not! Don’t be silly.

No, Jack just pulls an escape plan out of his ass.

Now, why do I find Jack Harkness creepy? Because, you see, I’m not speaking figuratively.

To escape the danger, Jack pulls a compact laser pistol out of his backside and blows the heads off of the two robots.

Now, maybe this is just me, but if I had a gun that could completely destroy something twice the size of a watermelon with one shot, putting it up my ass would be very low on my list of answers to the question “Where should I put this?”.

And while that would be pretty bad in itself, one could make the argument that he was naked and had nowhere else to hide it.

That is, if you ignore the part where he didn’t know that he would become naked. He had no idea what a Defabricator was, so there was no reason or time for him to think “sticking this up my ass is the only option”.

Which means he must have had the gun in his ass before the abduction.

Oh, and a small side note. Here’s the gun in question.

Jack woke up one morning, looked at this JAGGED PIECE OF WEAPONRY and said to himself “Where should I hide this”.

He didn’t put it in a hidden pocket in his greatcoat, not in a decorative novelty belt buckle or a secret compartment in his boot.

No, the logical answer to that question, he decided, was “where the sun doesn’t shine”.

Now, there are other examples in movies and television where people have hidden unusual things in their colons.

In Pulp Fiction, it was a wristwatch. In Pirates of The Caribbean: At World End, Elizabeth Swann hid a big flintlock pistol in an unspecified body-cavity, and you could probably make a long and very comprehensive list of all the cop shows where someone smuggles drugs by way of their ass.

Thing is, these cases are all equally unsavory, but unlike the case of Jack Harkness, they were NECESSARRY! They were to avoid a real and present danger.

Jack didn’t hide the gun to smuggle it into a dangerous area. He didn’t hide it to keep it from falling into the hands of captors.

He put it up his ass, on the OFF CHANCE HE ENDED UP NAKED!

Now, that says to me that, in his mind, being naked in a dangerous situation is a very real prospect. And seeing as the concept of a machine that removes your clothes was seemingly unknown to him, that means he’s likely to be naked by his own volition.

Here’s the thing. If you’re having sex with so many people in so many situations that you need to carry a loaded firearm INSIDE YOUR PERSON at all times, we’re not dealing with “light, humorous promiscuity”. We’re dealing with severe nymphomania. Either you’re having sex with people in situations you really shouldn’t be having sex in, OR you’re sleeping with people likely to attack and/or kill you.

I admit, I’m not an expert on this, but I like to think people tend to separate “People who I should fuck” and “People who are likely to kill me”.

And then there’s the added implication this action suggests about Jack Harkness.

See, the abduction, we’re told, took place soon after the events of the previous episode “Boom Town”.

That means the chances are pretty high that during that entire episode, Jack Harkness had the gun up his ass!

Which suggests to me this is not an uncommon practise for him.

EVERY TIME you see him from then on, be it in episode before or after that, you’re going to think “He’s probably got a gun up his ass right now”.

Not because of anything to do with sexuality, or a promiscuous lifestyle, but because he has shown it’s a very real possibility!

All of these reasons, I think you’ll find, should be enough to justify me finding Jack Harkness slightly disconcerting.

Now, like I said before, I like Doctor Who. Don’t mistake my questioning this one scene as a reason for me to dislike the show or the people involved in making it.

I’m just pointing out that someone, at some point, while writing an episode of Doctor Who, one of the most popular TV-Shows in human history, actually wrote out the words “Jack Harkness pulls a gun out of his ass”.

Not only that, but they SUBMITTED it, someone read it, OK’d it, and the person who wrote it GOT PAID TO WRITE IT!

Then again, I suppose I should not be that surprised…

After all, as the saying goes

Truth is stranger than fiction.