A lot of people point out that it doesn’t make any sense that Harry and Ron didn’t like their schoolwork. Well I figured out why:
It’s because the magic system is just as boring in-universe as out of universe. It doesn’t make any sense in universe either. Harry and Ron realised Rowling’s magic system kinda stinks way before we did, because they spent all day learning it.
If Sanderson had been writing Harry Potter, then Harry and Ron would have liked learning magic as much as Hermione did (Also, Sanderson actually DID write a book about a super-school, it’s called Skyward, it’s good)
Harry Potter has a soft magic system - a system where pretty much everything can be explained by “a wizard did it”, worlds like that are mystical and lawless (see also Lord of the Rings)
it seems you enjoy more hard magic systems like you described above, where the rules are explained, and you can more or less understand why things work the way they do (see also Earthsea by U.K. Le Guin or ATLA)
the hard/soft scale is not perfect, but it gives you a rough gist of what to expect
writers aren’t limited to just one either! Percy Jackson has a soft magic system, a lot of “a
wizardgod did it!”, where Kane Chronicles has a strict magic system bound by understandable rules (with only gods and divine interventions going above the rules)No, I like soft magic systems when they’re good. Take Star Wars. It’s so soft. It’s so soft that when GL introduced midichlorians to try and make it hard, everyone hated it.
The Force is good because it represents a certain philosophy. It’s basically the Tao. Everything the Force can do is thematically appropriate and serves to teach us the philosophies of the Jedi, the Sith, and the other force users. The light side is harmony and believing in yourself. The dark side is domination and corruption. All the force powers support these themes and illustrate the force users embodying their philosophical beliefs in the world. Obi-Wan uses mind tricks because he believes in nonviolent misdirection. Palpatine uses lightning because he believes in ultimate power.
Rowling’s magic system means… Magic. It’s there to convince us that this fantasy world is magic. The Force can break Sanderson’s laws because it means something more than just magic. It’s philosophically consistent, and that’s more important than being internally consistent. Rowling’s magic only relates to Rowling’s magic, so it needs to be internally consistent to work. And it isn’t, so it doesn’t.
yeah that’s fair. don’t get me wrong i wasn’t trying to convince you to like Harry Potter’s magic system, but you quoted “lack of rules” as a something you disliked about it so i gave a short explanation as to why that specific thing isn’t what makes HP’s magic feel shallow
I think Star Wars’ magic system has rules. They’re philosophical rules.
If you’re paying attention to The Force Awakens, you notice that Rey is losing to Kylo, up until she gets angry at him. And then her stance changes, and she starts attacking way faster. Rey used the dark side. You only notice that happening if you understand the rules of the Force. And if you do, in the next movie, you’re rewarded. Luke is teaching Rey, and she goes straight to the dark. Rey is a natural dark side user, way moreso than Anakin and Luke. If you knew the magic system, you saw that coming. Now, what this subplot culminates in is Rey Palpatine, which is bad writing. But that’s not the magic system’s fault. The magic system did its job perfectly. It’s possible to understand how magic works in Star Wars, and that gives you insight into what will happen next. That’s basically a tweak on Sanderson’s first law. Episodes 8 and 9 also expand on the whole dyad thingy instead of adding something new, just like Sanderson says. And The Last Jedi introduces a limitation (You can’t force project this far, the effort would kill you), and then uses it later in the same movie with Luke. The underlying principles of Sanderson’s laws are there. The magic has rules and the rules inform the story.
i wasn’t really thinking of star wars, moreso LOTR if anything, the magic there is the textbook definition of “a wizard did it” and yet despite that it’s a beloved series and very few call for Gandalf’s powers to have an understandable magical system behind them. but that’s a gourmet meal of a book & the trilogy movie series, harry potter is junk food, enjoyable as long as you don’t think too hard about what the ingredients are
We do, at the very least, know why Gandalf’s magic works. The universe was sung into being, and Gandalf is a divine being who can participate in that song. We know where his magic comes from. We know it’s divine in origin.
We don’t know where Harry’s magic comes from. Were wizard blessed by a god? Is it a magic gene? Is it fueled by intelligence, or imagination? There are no answers.
Take horcruxes vs the one ring. One is clearly a second rate copy of the other. But the one ring has a clear limitation for Sauron: It holds most of his power, and if it’s destroyed, he can be defeated. What limitation do horcruxes have for Voldemort? He has to split his soul into parts. What does that mean practically? Nothing. It’s not a limitation, it’s just a reason the good guys don’t use it. From the council of Elrond, we know the rules of the one ring, and we know how to use them to solve a problem. Sanderson’s first law. Its limitation for Sauron is more interesting than its power for Sauron. Its limitation for the Fellowship is more interesting than its power for the Fellowship. Sanderson’s second law.
not to compre whole books to whatever JK Rowling is doing on her tweeter this week (probably transphobia but who knows) but would it be any better if she twote one day “all magic in Harry Potter comes from the divine tree, at the beginning the tree blessed few people with its world bending power of imagination, this is how wizardry began, the tree spoke latin btw.”
Besides, the story is more or less a POV of Harry’s, a pre-teen to young adult boy who is way more excited to play sports than attend his lessons. Which to me is a good enough reason why we end up knowing fuck all about the magic of his world. If the POV was Hermione’s, i’d expect there to be an indepth 3-chapter long research project about her work on a “Origins of Magic” essay for her History of Magic class. But because of the characterisation of Harry and also the tension in the story by the end, it makes sense to me why Harry doesn’t really care about how things work, but how effective they can be. The question wasn’t “wow a horcrux? incredibly rare black magic, i must study it to understand how and why it works to one day maybe be able to undo it”, the question was “horcrux huh? and it makes voldie immortal-ish? alright lads, let’s find a way to smash it”
and to answer your question - horcruxes of all things are pretty well elaborated on. Voldemort splits his soul and attaches it to objects/people. The price? A part of his soul and another person’s life. The purpose? Ability to be recreated from each of those pieces, achieving immortality-ish, as long as he has someone living to do the ritual, and his father’s skeleton still has some bones left ig. The limitation seems to be that he looks evil after being reborn? and i think there was some implication that the process is incredibly painful on the spiritual level
i think a better example would be the sorting hat because wtf is that. is that a person turned into a hat? is it an enchanted object? it can talk in your mind, can read your soul to then sort you into a house, a sword can come out of it when it feels you’re in need and worthy of it? No explanation, no described limitations, a power to read one’s mind in later books is attributed mostly to voldemort & looking at how Harry handles it it’s incredibly emotionally exhausting. how can that hat be more powerful than the most powerful evil wizard?
Looking evil isn’t a limitation, it’s flavour text. It doesn’t affect the story, it just gives us vibes. If there’s one thing Rowling is good at, it’s writing flavour text to convey vibes. But there’s no plot in that limitation. Horcruxes break Sanderson’s second law, and that’s why they’re not as interesting as the One Ring. The One Ring puts challenges in front of every character who interacts with it: Sauron, Isildur, Elrond, Bilbo, Gandalf, Frodo, Gollum, Galadriel, even Samwise. It promises all of them something they want, and takes a price from every one, changing the course of the story many times. Samwise is the least affected, but it still takes away something he loves; his best friend.
Horcruxes do four things: they kill Dumbledore, give Harry a quest, make Ron grumpy, and ex machina the deus. Bringing Voldy back and manifesting Riddle don’t count because those are retcons, and we’re talking about writing processes.
Two of those things they do are just because they’re a macguffin. Literally anything the characters want could have been substituted. Ron grumpy is, again, flavour text. The Deus ex Machina is the one interesting thing they do to change the story.
hm i feel like the distinction comes down to vibes here. if i were to be reductive i could describe the One Ring in a similar way “it corrupts gollum, gives Frodo a quest, makes Boromir crave power and turn on his companions in a moment of weakness, and (from Sauron’s POV) hobbits destroying it is a deus ex machina”. imo horcruxes as an idea were not that bad but,
to me, the main difference here is how they’re used in the story. The One Ring is the driving force from the beginning, it’s already well established in the lore of the world, and the only surprise to the universe’s scholars is how it suddenly found itself in a hobbit’s hands. Where horcruxes appear suddenly in the second to last book (obviously not counting the diary because it’s clearly been deemed a horcrux when JKR came up with them and thought the diary fit the vibe well enough). First 4 Harry Potter books are bascially episodic, an overaching plot only emerges by the end of book 4. And LOTR is one cohesive story with a clear goal from the beginning, which allows it to unravel in a satisfying and effective way