This video analyzing the story of harry potter friggin blew my mind.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlIrmHOfeA8&feature=channel_video_title
what do you guys think about it ?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
Yeah this is what I think. Sometimes it makes me think this is the product of what school has taught me. Craziness.I think he is over analysing it a bit too much.
IBullseye
I want to watch it since I love Harry Potter, but I don't trust videos people tell me to watch on forums.
First, any movie/book/game can be interpreted to mean anything if you can back it up. It's all based on opinion. For example, I once wrote a paper that showed that the character Miranda in shakespeares "the tempest" is an allusion to his creative process and a statement on how the audience views his plays. Second, he's reading someone elses thesis.DocDelicious. I think this kind of negative condescension is kind of annoying. It's like people think their being so smart in saying these things when it's completely obvious. Yes I realize you want to be careful believing what someone is telling you and stories can be interpreted alot of different ways. Again I just found it fascinating and there are alot of paralells.
Complete over-analysis. If there was any truth to his interpretation there would have been more hints or it would have cut back to the "real" world more often or at least at the end.
And the Star Wars interpretation isn't helping his argument...
how much of it did you guys watch ? the parallels are insane. Even if you don't think it's true I found it an absolutely fascinating theory personally. dkdk999I watched a little bit, but frankly there isn't a shred of evidence in the books that suggests the series is alluding to something else. Even if the parallels exist, which I don't doubt because after all the whole series is based on something that doesn't truly exist, you just don't write seven books about a subject matter and never include references by any of the characters that this is all something else entirely.
[QUOTE="dkdk999"]how much of it did you guys watch ? the parallels are insane. Even if you don't think it's true I found it an absolutely fascinating theory personally. Serraph105I watched a little bit, but frankly there isn't a shred of evidence in the books that suggests the series is alluding to something else. Even if the parallels exist, which I don't doubt because after all the whole series is based on something that doesn't truly exist, you just don't write seven books about a subject matter and never include references by any of the characters that this is all something else entirely. I think it had more to do with the unconscious psychological motivations behind the story and so on. Obviously he's not saying that if you were to ask J.K. rowling she would tell you "oh ya harry potter is about a kid who has a mental illness and his mad fantasies". I don't think we're aware of alot of the reasons we're attracted to writing and enjoying certain stories that we like.
[QUOTE="Serraph105"][QUOTE="dkdk999"]how much of it did you guys watch ? the parallels are insane. Even if you don't think it's true I found it an absolutely fascinating theory personally. dkdk999I watched a little bit, but frankly there isn't a shred of evidence in the books that suggests the series is alluding to something else. Even if the parallels exist, which I don't doubt because after all the whole series is based on something that doesn't truly exist, you just don't write seven books about a subject matter and never include references by any of the characters that this is all something else entirely. I think it had more to do with the unconscious psychological motivations behind the story and so on. Obviously he's not saying that if you were to ask J.K. rowling she would tell you "oh ya harry potter is about a kid who has a mental illness and his mad fantasies". I don't think we're aware of alot of the reasons we're attracted to writing and enjoying certain stories that we like.
The great thing about unconscious psychological motivation is that, while you cannot actually prove your theory, you certainly can't have it disproved.
For example I could say that people who over-analysis things do so because they are emotionally crippled (probably due to some sort of extreme childhood trauma that psychology has shown ALL children suffer from, and if they don't then they're blocking out the memory of it) and are incapable of coping with reality so must give things meaning that have no meaning for them just so that they can feel some meaning somewhere as the rest of their life is numb, probably due to blocking out those obligatory childhood traumas.
Conversely those who deny the psychological subtext of these stories do so because they cannot cope with the idea that their own actions are governed by subconscious motivations. Naturally this puts me in a position of superiority: while I still suffered the same childhood traumas and are governed by subconscious motivations, I am at least aware of this fact. I'm one step ahead of everyone else.
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
I've actually thought about a theory like this and it just doesn't work lol. This guy repeats alot of the same nonsense throughout the vid as well.
I think it had more to do with the unconscious psychological motivations behind the story and so on. Obviously he's not saying that if you were to ask J.K. rowling she would tell you "oh ya harry potter is about a kid who has a mental illness and his mad fantasies". I don't think we're aware of alot of the reasons we're attracted to writing and enjoying certain stories that we like.[QUOTE="dkdk999"][QUOTE="Serraph105"] I watched a little bit, but frankly there isn't a shred of evidence in the books that suggests the series is alluding to something else. Even if the parallels exist, which I don't doubt because after all the whole series is based on something that doesn't truly exist, you just don't write seven books about a subject matter and never include references by any of the characters that this is all something else entirely. Foolz3h
The great thing about unconscious psychological motivation is that, while you cannot actually prove your theory, you certainly can't have it disproved.
For example I could say that people who over-analysis things do so because they are emotionally crippled (probably due to some sort of extreme childhood trauma that psychology has shown ALL children suffer from, and if they don't then they're blocking out the memory of it) and are incapable of coping with reality so must give things meaning that have no meaning for them just so that they can feel some meaning somewhere as the rest of their life is numb, probably due to blocking out those obligatory childhood traumas.
Conversely those who deny the psychological subtext of these stories do so because they cannot cope with the idea that their own actions are governed by subconscious motivations. Naturally this puts me in a position of superiority: while I still suffered the same childhood traumas and are governed by subconscious motivations, I am at least aware of this fact. I'm one step ahead of everyone else.
Not that there's anything wrong with that...
I also think most people have suffered from trauma in their childhood and are unaware of it/in denial of it. And that theres significant problems in our society because of it. Just my personal opinion.
But what's wrong with hypothetical BS ? It's just an interesting idea to mess around with. Because like I said, there is absolutely no way that the aforementioned conclusion can be arrived at.[QUOTE="DarthJohnova"]
There is absolutely zero proof for what he says; it's all hypothetical BS.
dkdk999
[QUOTE="dkdk999"]how much of it did you guys watch ? the parallels are insane. Even if you don't think it's true I found it an absolutely fascinating theory personally. Serraph105I watched a little bit, but frankly there isn't a shred of evidence in the books that suggests the series is alluding to something else. Even if the parallels exist, which I don't doubt because after all the whole series is based on something that doesn't truly exist, you just don't write seven books about a subject matter and never include references by any of the characters that this is all something else entirely. Also his theory could be applied to all fiction, the delusion/dream/hallucination conclusion can be used in all fiction.
[QUOTE="dkdk999"]But what's wrong with hypothetical BS ? It's just an interesting idea to mess around with. Because like I said, there is absolutely no way that the aforementioned conclusion can be arrived at. theres no conclusion involved. That's why it's a "theory".[QUOTE="DarthJohnova"]
There is absolutely zero proof for what he says; it's all hypothetical BS.
DarthJohnova
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment