Sure, but ideological blindness shouldn’t equate to other parents not saving their children the same way. Lily Potter didn’t plan to use sacrificial magic, she jumped in front of a bullet. It’s rare, but it happens IRL once in a while. It seems odd that a Wizarding World under siege would not see more noble sacrifices purely as a matter of statistics. (yes, I realize this would make the books a moot point and be no fun and it’s fiction so just ignore it.)
Hence why Lilly triggering some time of ancient ritual or creating a new ritual to counter the killing curse makes sense to me. Mind you Rowling is shit when it comes to in depth world building, but what she does set up even unintentionally is that the wizarding world is on decline possibly in a 40k type way where they are simply losing more and more knowledge after each generation. Having Lilly create or activate an old ritual either intentionally or not doesn’t remove the sacrifice it simply remove Rowlings stupid power of love trite. The power of love is still present but more symbolic in Lilly using her and possibly James as a catalyst to protect Harry.
Also I have accidentally pointed out the flaws of Rowling writing just to nerd out about magic systems. I don’t even dislike soft magic it’s just Rowling did it badly, aight gonna go read Yojou Senki.
Oh, for sure trying to analyze magic in HP canon is a fool’s errand. I always recall in the first book McGonnagal comes out during a rain storm and uses a magic bullhorn to tell kids to stop playing quiddich. Then after that the announcers are just using what amounts to telepathy and the bullhorn never comes back.
I do agree with what you’re saying about the arcane magic part. As they say, the power of love is a curious thing. A friend of mine was always so upset with the wizarding world being “the laziest culture ever to have existed.” Which…yeah. How can the Weasleys be so poor when you just poof food into existence anyway? If it was intended as a critique of modern society, I would appreciate it more, but it’s obviously just the extrapolation of “what’s a quirky daily life thing for Harry to see?”
In the mildest defense of Rowling she actually did put it into the books that you can’t just poof food into existence. Summoned food has no nutritional value and duplicated food has its nutrients halved, the food was cooked by house elves and teleportex to the dining hall. It’s explained somewhat similar to how folks can starve on lean meats, you are physically full but without something in addition you’ll just starve to death, it’s actually an element of the last book that the main cast are slowly starving to death for a bit.
Though none of that stops them from producing food via other magical means such as what amounts to magical automata. Pretty sure the car in book two had animalistic sentience by the point of the spider subplot, so there’s nothing stopping them from making magic farming tools that do that all automatically. They really should be a post scarcity society, but well Rowlings a shit world builder.
Sure, but ideological blindness shouldn’t equate to other parents not saving their children the same way. Lily Potter didn’t plan to use sacrificial magic, she jumped in front of a bullet. It’s rare, but it happens IRL once in a while. It seems odd that a Wizarding World under siege would not see more noble sacrifices purely as a matter of statistics. (yes, I realize this would make the books a moot point and be no fun and it’s fiction so just ignore it.)
Hence why Lilly triggering some time of ancient ritual or creating a new ritual to counter the killing curse makes sense to me. Mind you Rowling is shit when it comes to in depth world building, but what she does set up even unintentionally is that the wizarding world is on decline possibly in a 40k type way where they are simply losing more and more knowledge after each generation. Having Lilly create or activate an old ritual either intentionally or not doesn’t remove the sacrifice it simply remove Rowlings stupid power of love trite. The power of love is still present but more symbolic in Lilly using her and possibly James as a catalyst to protect Harry.
Also I have accidentally pointed out the flaws of Rowling writing just to nerd out about magic systems. I don’t even dislike soft magic it’s just Rowling did it badly, aight gonna go read Yojou Senki.
Oh, for sure trying to analyze magic in HP canon is a fool’s errand. I always recall in the first book McGonnagal comes out during a rain storm and uses a magic bullhorn to tell kids to stop playing quiddich. Then after that the announcers are just using what amounts to telepathy and the bullhorn never comes back.
I do agree with what you’re saying about the arcane magic part. As they say, the power of love is a curious thing. A friend of mine was always so upset with the wizarding world being “the laziest culture ever to have existed.” Which…yeah. How can the Weasleys be so poor when you just poof food into existence anyway? If it was intended as a critique of modern society, I would appreciate it more, but it’s obviously just the extrapolation of “what’s a quirky daily life thing for Harry to see?”
In the mildest defense of Rowling she actually did put it into the books that you can’t just poof food into existence. Summoned food has no nutritional value and duplicated food has its nutrients halved, the food was cooked by house elves and teleportex to the dining hall. It’s explained somewhat similar to how folks can starve on lean meats, you are physically full but without something in addition you’ll just starve to death, it’s actually an element of the last book that the main cast are slowly starving to death for a bit.
Though none of that stops them from producing food via other magical means such as what amounts to magical automata. Pretty sure the car in book two had animalistic sentience by the point of the spider subplot, so there’s nothing stopping them from making magic farming tools that do that all automatically. They really should be a post scarcity society, but well Rowlings a shit world builder.