It's not every day one comes across an exceptional protagonist and Kvothe is just that; epic, brilliant but glaringly human at the same time. His enthralling story is a fulfilling concoction of adventure, heart-warming bonds and school life reminiscent of Harry Potter, in the backdrop of a fantastical universe where magic is real. The story is prone to evoke pangs of emotion since it brings out Kvothe's courage and heroism amidst his pain and hardship in an unrelentingly harsh medieval world. His deep bond with Bast is beautiful, similar to that of Holmes and Watson, though we are yet to explore it more in the sequels.
Artistic depiction of Kvothe
I would have given this story a rating of five out of five if it weren't for the fact that the author has failed to bring out an inspirational female character. Auri is an intriguing character, eccentric like Luna Lovegood, but she is not a central figure in the story. Denna, who is supposed to be Kvothe's love interest fails miserably to meet the hype that is built up about her before she is introduced to the reader. She is generally useless, missing in action when Kvothe needs help and mostly just eye candy, though her dialogue is marked with forceful wit and bravado, which just makes her even less likable and almost calculating, in sharp contrast to Kvothe's innocent, caring nature around her. The most strikingly appalling behavior is during the dragon rampage when Kvothe fails to wake her up as she sleeps "exhausted" in the wilderness, so that he sprints off by himself to save the entire town of Trebon, and the following morning, when an injured Kvothe wakes up at the town inn, one would expect Denna to at least be at his bedside tending to his wounds, but that is not the case; to the contrary, Kvothe goes looking for her in worry, carrying food for her too, only to find she has disappeared without so much as bothering to check if he is alive or dead. The final nail in the coffin to her failure as the female lead is the dismissal of her undesirable characteristics such as her disloyalty and flightiness as simply her being a "wild thing", which is supposed to absolve her from taking responsibility for her actions while the hurt she causes is compared to collateral damage caused by a natural disaster like a storm (described as "cruel" but not "wicked", whatever that means). The author would have done well to omit this relationship altogether and focus on the profound bond Kvothe has with Bast instead, who cares deeply about him.
Finally, for an empathetic, intelligent kid who has suffered horrifying cruelty and trauma, Kvothe is surprisingly enmeshed in carnism, displaying its telltale signs of disconnect and contradictions. He recognizes live animals as individuals with feelings, as shown by his kind handling of Keth-Selan, yet displays callous indifference to violence hurled on animals deemed less worthy, particularly apparent when he has a pig killed for him, albeit out of sight. He expresses a hint of remorse about the dragon's predicament but had no qualms about devising the elaborate plans to poison him. While it is true that he has been desensitized to gore and forced himself to kill rabbits to avoid starvation as a child, one would expect him to relate more to innocent victims of violence, not much different from himself.
It's fascinating to read about the past since there is much to learn from it. Making its bloody mark in the annals of history is the singular, mind-numbing atrocity that is the Holocaust.
I have always thought of Hilter as the classic villain and his regime terrorizing everyone into complying with his insane evil. But the book Garden of Beasts by Jeffrey Deaver painted a picture that is a lot more complicated and chilling—chilling because it reminded me of Jeffrey Dahmer; a complex evil beneath a facade of normalcy. It makes sense that the book's protagonist is also a man of questionable morals—a shade of grey, if you will (kind of like Assassin's Creed).
What struck my attention the most initially, is the utter incongruity of the 1936 Olympics being held in Nazi Germany as depicted in the book. At first I thought it is fictitious but I was mind-blown to learn that it did indeed happen. What? Nations extending good will to Hitler's horrifying regime? Olympics amidst a bloodbath? The book went on to show that children were conditioned to Hitler's ideology in schools—all of which got me to read about it more.
Hitler had a sister whom he financially supported until his death and when she got to know about the Holocaust, she did not believe that Hitler would do such a thing. In fact, Hitler and his inner circle seemed normal as opposed to psychotic killers and they even loved their dogs. People went about their business, most of them blissfully unaware or apathetic about the brutality hurled on the Jews.
So what was the mentality behind the massacre of the Jews? To Hitler and his buddies, the Jews were subhuman—they were lesser. They were not worthy of moral consideration. So their extermination was an inevitability. But they would not call it a systematic murder, they used a euphemism instead: "The Final Solution to the Jewish Problem". Of course it's not murder! It's like "culling"!
But surely normal people must've been forced to comply with this madness? That is not the case. The actual massacres were carried out by Nazi army units called Einsatzgruppen who were well, people and they were not threatened or forced to do it. For example, at the massacre at Babi Yar (almost 34,000 Jews brought to the ravine and killed with machine guns, which took 2 days), these soldiers forced the Jews to strip naked, lined them up and shot them, even children and babies. It was very messy. Some people did not just die, some were bloodied but alive, and were shot to death later.
A few of the soldiers were bloodthirsty and enjoyed it. Only a few quit. Most considered it as just them doing their job and besides, Jews were lesser anyways—not like they were shooting their own kind! Since the murders were brutal and bloody, and did have a demoralizing effect on the troops. they devised a more "humane", efficient method of killing: they constructed "slaughterhouses": the "concentration camps" equipped with gas chambers. The Jews who were confined in ghettos out of public sight, were transported in horrific conditions to be killed (some dying on the way), but their oppressors did not let on that they will be murdered, so more "humane".
The Nazis also experimented on the Jews since they were to be killed anyways and considered lesser than true humans. Besides, it's for science so deemed a valid justification. Hence, horrific mutilation and testing were done on the Jews in the name of science.
After all of that was over and looking back did most people really got to understand the shocking cruelty and suffering the Jews underwent, ponder over the death toll and acknowledge that the hate, slavery and killing of Jews were fundamentally wrong.
Ring any bells?
What I read gave me an insight into the juxtaposition of the Holocaust with the plight of nonhuman animals. I've come across news of Holocaust survivors championing the cause of animal rights.
Holocaust survivor, Dr. Alex Hershaft compares Nazi led treatment of
Jews to the treatment of animals in slaughterhouses.
It was ages ago that I read Plead Mercy by Anne Ranasinghe who is again a victim of the Holocaust speaking up about a bull being exploited and evoking his pain. Her poem Vivere in Pace is a brilliant work that first gave me a glimpse of the real horror of the Holocaust (next being Anne Frank's story) though it is now that I've come to appreciate it the most. In fact, the meteoric rise of veganism in Israel is being alluded to "the Jews, having been subjected to relentless persecution and hostility over the ages, have an easier time empathizing with the plight of other oppressed minorities" (Vegan Strategist).
Maybe it's time to cultivate some empathy for the horrific suffering that goes on behind closed walls, which we fund with our own wallets. Better to change now than say mea culpa later over the bodies of billions.
First and foremost, it was thrilling to be able to read an actual Harry Potter story that is canon after over a decade-long hiatus (I thought that was that, forget hiatus). And as expected, the nostalgia, the joy, the feels of delving into this amazing world and meeting the people in it is overwhelming. This new installment, though very different from the seven main books, does not disappoint at all in some aspects and the story overall is engrossing.
I will start off by talking about what I have seen of the actual play which must be quite the feat judging by the script. Harry's actor looks somewhat like Harry and the same can be said about Scorpius. Not so for the rest. However, the most outrageous depiction is that of Hermione since the actress looks nothing like her and is also black when we all know that Hermione is a white person. I will leave it at that since further comment can only be made the day I actually see the play.
Story-wise, I would like to direct one to the very interesting two videos on what is wrong with the story and how to fix it by Austin McConnell.
Let's Fix Harry Potter and the Cursed Child
McConnell makes a very good case here about the flaws and what could have made the story better. I would agree with many of these points. McConnell is right in saying that there should have been more conflict and opportunity for the characters to grow. The story is heavily based on time travel and does not have the masterful storytelling and character development of the seven main books. In fact, time travel and the ensuing alternate timeline elements jarringly sets this book apart from what came before since those had never been a main feature of the saga, especially the latter which does not even fit in with what the story established before as how time travel works. What I understood of time travel in the Harry Potter universe is that nothing could change what had already taken place and it is a closed loop so that there is no space for alternate timelines or parallel universes. On top of this, a Time-Turner just so happened to be made that enabled one to travel years into the past with a limitation of five-minutes in any particular instance, and conveniently yet a second Time-Turner without this limitation appears as a deus ex machina nearing the climax of the story. This makes the very premise of the story somewhat shaky. One could say that this relatively mediocre story may be partly due to the limitations of a play, and this is not meant to be on par with the seven main books. However, as McConnell points out, they do seem to have intended it to be the eighth book, crazily enough, since it is stated on the back cover itself: "The eighth story. Nineteen years later." Once one dismisses this and considers it a sort of side-story, as well as overlooking that rather questionable employment of time travel and alternate timelines, one can pass off it off as an enjoyable read; much like how one would regard Back to Before in the Animorphs series, though its alternate timeline elements are not in conflict with the laws of its universe.
On the positive side, I enjoyed the artistic unity in the story, when everything fell into place such as the clever utilization of Lily's blanket at the end; though again, it is nothing like the intricate webs of complexity in the previous books. The villain, while very intriguing as the progeny of the Dark Lord, is not strong simply because, as McConnell points out, does not have her own ambition and seems more like a stronger and more interesting version of Peter Pettigrew, with the sole objective of resurrecting Voldemort. She is merely a tool to relive the threat of an old villain rather than a villain in her own right. Although there is space for her to be developed more in terms of her insecurities, back story and her direction upon defeat, especially since she's quite young, the story only presents her as a single-faceted, rigid villain. Delphi does however seem to possess Voldemort's powers of wit and persuasion since she manipulates others, charms Albus and goes about her business undetected for what she really is. Another aspect of the story that is not quite believable is the smooth execution of the last plan to stop Delphi. It is curious that it did not occur at least to Hermione that Delphi might be watching when they sneaked into the church and if the church is the best vantage point, Delphi might be hiding there herself. Delphi does see Harry quickly enough and comes to him after he goes out as Voldemort to lure her in.
While the alternate timelines are incongruous with the Harry Potter universe and they downplay the suspense by lessening the stakes and the severity of the consequences of actions taken by characters (they simply go back in time to fix mistakes so there is no finality in loss and tragedy), it does have the redeeming feature of transporting us to the events of the past and bringing about invaluable encounters with poignant characters such as Snape, even if it is simply a parallel universe. The timeline where we meet Snape however is less believable given that the characters are surprisingly collected about the sudden appearance of a different Scorpius from another timeline possessing a Time-Turner that can go back years into the past, and being offered a chance to save Harry and bring down Voldemort's regime. It would also have been more effective if the focus of resurrection was a stronger character than Cedric which would make it more important as well was making it more intriguing a prospect for the reader.
When directing one's attention to the Golden Trio, McConnell is right in saying that the story has not done them justice. The only positive aspects in this regard would be Hermione being the Minister for Magic which suits her perfectly and Harry being his kind and noble self. However, the depiction of Harry is far from adequate given that although he is meant to be the protagonist ("Harry Potter and the Cursed Child") as in the previous books, we hardly see him working his awesomeness. He is now the head Auror, which is the best of the best, and yet we do not see any sleuthing or impressive fighting or any of his expertise as a great wizard. In fact, he is easily disarmed in the final showdown with Delphi, when she is a young witch in her twenties though supposedly very powerful. Not only that, but Delphi has to be outnumbered six to one in order to bring her down which is quite disappointing. Clues come to Harry in dreams rather than him actively finding anything. As for Hermione, she gives out a feminist message now that she is the Minister for Magic and has thereby dissipated from our minds any remaining doubts of her being Harry's sidekick. However, at the end of the book, it is far from feminist to see that females are forgotten in the family trees, since quite a few appear with one name or simply as "unknown", while male names are properly listed and their surnames passed down the generations. Last but not least, Ron is nothing like himself and is used as comic relief. He runs a joke shop and cracks lame jokes when that is Fred and George's domain, not his (George is not featured at all and to this day, I think Fred should also have been there with him which would make a better story). Ron should be in the Ministry, maybe in his father's old position, and be a useful part of the team like he used to be. Ron and Hermione have no chemistry together and would have been better off as best friends forever, since the trio have always been like siblings. To make matters somewhat disturbing, there is a scene in which Albus passes off as Ron and talks of babies and kisses his aunt Hermione. Ron with his carefree manner would, in my imagination, be into casual dating and have no interest in kids. Hermione with her ambition, social standing and strong sense of doing good (recall her S.P.E.W) would be more likely to adopt an unfortunate child, such as one orphaned from the turmoil of the past, as a single parent. McConnell, in his video, speaks of adding in a secret affair between Harry and Hermione to generate sensation and conflict, which is one idea of his version of the story that many find disagreeable. Harry and Hermione behaving in such a way would be very much out of character, since not only have they always regarded each other as siblings, but both have high principles of morality.
The story however, has done well with the characterization of Albus, who is depicted as quite different from Harry and actually ends up in Slytherin with Malfoy's son as his best friend (though in the end, Albus finds himself to be like his dad in his bravery and sense of justice, not to mention he finally understands Harry after experiencing past events and alternate timelines). It has enabled a complex and believable bond between them as well as spurring conflict and character development. Harry who grew up as an orphan, has little idea about playing a parent role while Albus has to live in the shadow of his illustrious father. Albus is regarded as a disappointment since he is not a Gryffindor and not into Quidditch, let alone engage in any acts of heroism as Harry did. I am reminded of the bond between Boruto and his dad, Naruto in Boruto since it is a somewhat similar situation. It would have been effective story-wise if Harry just had this one child rather than three. McConnell points out in his video that it could have been developed better by having Harry talk to Albus about what happened each year during his time at Hogwarts before Albus sets off, and have expectations which Albus would not be able to meet (even more plausible if Albus was his only child so he expects greatness from him). When Albus travels back in time to the Triwizard Tournament, we see several inconsistencies and missed opportunities in storytelling. Albus is remarkably collected in spite of the fact that he has traveled back in time for the first time to an infamous tournament where his dad, the same age as him, is about to fight a dragon. Harry's name is announced by Bagman which is described as eliciting a lesser cheer from the crowd than that for Cedric, when in fact, as McConnell also notes, should be jeers instead, since Harry was very unpopular at the time, even doubted by Ron. No one believed him when he insisted that he did not voluntarily enter the tournament, with the exception of Dumbledore and Hermione, so that in this instance, only Hermione cheered for him. This should be the first moment when Albus gets a reality check; when his image of Harry as the ever-popular, had-it-all-easy cool guy, breaks apart. He would see himself in his dad for the first time; relate to his situation. It would have been even greater to have Albus see Harry complete the first task but given the five-minute limitation of the Time-Turner, it is plausible for Albus to miss it, although he should be expressing disappointment at not being able to stay longer to witness it.
Scorpius is also a character done well. He is different from his dad, Draco, and the uncertainty that he is the son of Voldemort has set the stage for challenges and his growth as he deals with those challenges. He is a geek and a loner, and has much in common with Albus so that they become the best of friends. He is also very likable. As with other instances in the play however, the dialogue and interactions between Scorpius and Albus is not natural on occasion and as McConnell points out, is overdone while bonds and characterizations of some other characters such as Rose are either cliche or highly inadequate. Scorpius and Albus would weirdly state the nature of their relationship (E.g. "you are my best friend") rather than leaving it for the audience to conclude and have open displays of affection for each other as if they are small children. The rather unconvincing and irrelevant appearance of Bane and his statement to Harry about a "dark cloud" is enough to make Harry boss around McGonagall and try to keep Albus away from Scorpius, which is supposed to be the conflict between the two boys. The writers can really use some subtlety and symbolism that are in the previous books and take a leaf out of Naruto's book where Naruto and Sasuke's bromance is a complex concoction of rivalry, machismo, envy, teamwork, fighting, and has little to no uncharacteristic declarations and shows of affection. In fact, Harry and Ron have never acted this way and their bond is also marked with rivalry, falling-outs, jealousies, and so on.
Another glaring plot-hole or two are presented by the existence of the Time-Turners, which begs the question who has made them, and why they cannot be made again even if the two in the story are destroyed. A Time-Turner could have been used to save James and Lily way back in the seven-book saga but the reason that wasn't done is because previously it was implied that one cannot change events that have occurred already (no space for alternate timelines), and also, the old Time-Turners could only go back a few hours in time. But now, ready and available is the more advanced Time-Turner that can go years into the past, but no one thinks of stopping Voldemort back in the past and thereby preventing many tragedies that occurred afterward. Yes, it would be altering history, but in this story, it is possible and Voldemort out of the picture can only mean a better world with many people whose lives were cut short, actually living. Harry would have his parents and he would have a normal childhood. Yet, the utter absurdity of it is that everyone unanimously allows Voldemort to kill Lily and James, and actually watches it happen too.
Yet another plot-hole is that Albus, Scorpius and Delphi use the age-old trick of using Polyjuice Potion to disguise themselves and enter the Ministry of Magic. One would think that surely the Ministry would have defenses against this since anyone, including kids can pull off this simple trick (all you need is someone's fallen hair to transform into them after all). Yet, it is supposed to be believable. Furthermore, they solve the riddle at Hermione's office fairly quickly. One would think that given the disastrous power of a Time-Turner, Hermione would have exerted more effort to hide it (McGonagall chastising her for irresponsibility later still would not make it any less strange; especially since this is Hermione we are talking about, not Ron or Harry).
