Snape

A very good book came with a very good quality worth to buy

Did we read the same book? Perhaps not since I gave up after 100 pages of this drivel which painfully recollected (through direct quotes and blocks of dialogue and description) each original Harry Potter in unnecessary detail. In fact, let me be perfectly honest, I gave up once the author decided to dredge up JK Rowling’s falling out with her own community in 2020.I could pretend as if my disdain for this book is limited to mediocre writing and a stunning lack of focus, but it is not. I disagree fundamentally with Rowling’s detractors (of which Lorrie Kim is one) who have chosen to read malice and deception into her most innocuous writing. For instance, Kim paints the scene with Lupin and Neville’s boggart as a “transmysoginistic stereotype”. She asserts that the idea that Snape is “forced”into wearing female attire which emasculates him, making him a vision of derision, is “sexist, cissexist, and ageist” not to mention “transphobic” because it ignores those who find joy in cross-dressing. She then recalls Rowling’s scandal to prove her point about this analysis. What is lost in the process is the question of who Snape is and why he seethes with anger once he finds out about this incident which the Kim chalks up to Lupin’s shameful use of an “unrelated gender dynamic”.Does anything she argues resonate with those of us who grew up reading these books? Or does this sound like the ideological claptrap of a butt-hurt faux fan who was more than willing to turn on her supposed hero while she simultaneously snivelled her way into sharing part of Rowling’s fame?Nothing but contempt for this shameful excuse of a writer and her equally horrendous book. In case this needs further clarification, this is Rita Skeeter in the flesh.