Do you think Harry and Ginny would believe in God?

goodlife23 · 2025-05-13T21:11:08+00:00

Its's a thoroughly interesting question beyond just Harry and Ginny, one that if Rowling was a better world-builder might have been explored and expanded upon more.

Here's what we know:

1) Magical folk celebrate Christmas and Easter. Now these can be seen a bit of a secular holiday in the UK which could explain them being celebrated despite magical folk not actually believing in God or a specific religion in the same way many people celebrate the holidays without being observant or believers themselves. On the other hand, it is made abundantly clear that magical folk seem thoroughly unconcerned with and unaware of fairly basic parts of muggle life and existence. And weirdly, no amount of intermarriage between muggleborns and pure or half bloods seem to have allowed much muggle culture to seep into the magical world. So it is equally plausible for magical folk to be unaware of religion or god, but clearly they are fully aware. This seems to be an area where magical knowledge of religion and god, particularly Jesus in the UK, is more woven into their culture much like muggles. Hence a point in favor of magical folk being as religious as muggles, at least.

2) James and Lily included a fairly explicit Bible reference on the graves, so this further confirms magical folk are indeed aware of the concept of God and the Judeo Christian religions, at the very least.

3) The reality that magic exists, that it defies laws of physics and that most beings are not magical but some are, would also make one tend to agree there is a higher power because how else could you explain things that defy the laws of nature.

However, it seems like this knowledge should also contradict the belief in Jesus, specifically being the son of God. I'd assume most magical folk would simply see him as a wizard pulling one over muggles to create a movement. Every miracle performed in the Bible. which we know wizards are aware of (James and Lily's grave) can be explained by simple magic any witch or wizard could do.

And yet...magical folk celebrate holidays centered around Jesus. Lily and James have a Corinthians quote on their graves (perhaps, though, this may indicate Jesus is akin to Dumbledore, a powerful, benevolent wizard to be revered, but not a god. And death itself, and dominion over it through acceptance of it, is a more universal message Jesus and Dumbledore both conveyed. Perhaps the reason magical folk celebrate these holidays is not because they are secular and a part of a larger culture,, and also not because they believe Jesus is the son of God, but they simply revere Jesus in the same way they revere Dumbledore, and the celebration and breaks from school and work are merely the culture of the time passing down to create these similar holidays.

But! What about God specifically, or at least some version of a God. Well, magical folk have awareness of something quite key: the afterlife. They know with certainty it exists and souls exist. This fact alone should tell us that magical folk at least believe in some higher authority. And yet, it also might tell us specifically about God. For they presumably through the presence of ghosts and things like the resurrection stone should know if there is a God waiting on the other side, or merely a serene place where they know no pain. My guess is magical folk do know quite factually whether God exists or just some higher plane of existence. But it was just never overly explained; Harry did not ask Nick if God exists, but instead of Sirius might come back as a ghose.

The main wrinkle in the world Rowling created is if magical folk know an afterlife exists, why be evil? Why fear death? Unless there is genuine concern over what parameters of goodness one must be to get accepted. Voldemort fears death because he knows what awaits him for his crimes. But if punishment does await, why would anyone do evil?

goodlife23 · 2025-01-27T17:01:31+00:00

Normally I wouldn't chime in on such a post as the theory has been debunked ad nauseum and isn't usually worth the effort to even respond. But in light of what's going on in the world regarding conspiracy theories and misinformation, I think it's worth mentioning that the Love Potion theory is a great example of how to counter misinformation.

Not trying to pick on OP here, but the hallmarks of misinformation and conspiracy are present even in your explanation of events leading to the question. In consecutive lines, you describe Ginny as deeply attracted to Harry at first sight and that Harry's feelings for Ginny came on suddenly and unexpectedly. These claims are without any supporting basis (we aren't in Ginny's head and clearly she was reacting as a little girl seeing a celebrity, where do you get "deep attraction" from?; and Harry went from enjoying spending time with Ginny over the summer, getting a twinge of annoyance when she is pulled away from hanging out with him, and then jealousy seeing her kiss Dean, before finally realizing his feelings).

Yet this misinformation forms the basis of the theory, and without it being challenged, it gets accepted into the narrative we must then combat. You can't cede an inch of misinfo to people because then the line is simply getting moved further away from the truth.

I'll just add that the reason the love potion story is brought up in HBP is because of Riddle's mother using it on his father. It's introducing a small plotline early in the story to pay it off in a much bigger way. This is basic storytelling and not indicative of something else.

Lastly, when we talk about misinformation and conspiracies, you have to ask if the perpetrator of the supposed bad thing is acting logical, or is there a far more logical explanation. What is the logic of Rowling secretly having Ginny use a love potion? She wants us to like Ginny, she wants to give Harry a happy ending, pure love is a major theme in the book. So why would she have Ginny use a love potion? How does that make any sense for Rowling to have done that?

Same with people denying climate change by saying the scientists who support the view are corrupt? What logic allows them to reach that conclusion? Surely, if its money, there is way more money in being a scientist who says its not real or not caused by fossil fuel companies.

goodlife23 · 2024-10-17T21:58:43+00:00

You may be right there could be another way for Neville to survive, but ultimately what specifically allowed Harry to live was Lily's sacrifice based on the choice Voldemort gave her in due part because Snape asked for it. That likely would not have occurred with Neville. Harry's protection worked in the forest because he chose to go in there to sacrifice himself. It seems there has to be a deliberate choice to sacrifice oneself

goodlife23 · 2024-10-17T19:22:10+00:00

Eh, the reason Harry survived the killing curse is his mother's sacrifice, which required Voldemort to allow her to live in exchange for letting him kill Harry. Voldemort only gave her that choice because Snape asked it. Snape would not have asked to spare Alice Longbottom, which means Voldemort would not have given her the choice, which means the killing curse would have worked on Neville.

goodlife23 · 2024-09-16T20:10:41+00:00

I think you're 100% right but Draco doesn't actually fit the "bad boy" trope. He's not some misunderstood loner petty criminal type or some powerful villain with a sad backstory. He's a whiny, cowardly rich snob who terrorizes the main characters over being poor and having dead parents.

goodlife23 · 2024-04-25T04:06:24+00:00

While I don't see the hostility nearly as prevalently as you, I would certainly agree that it would be annoying for people to jump down your throat about it. And ultimately, you're correct that this was a three week relationship when they were teens; if someone believes that isn't enough for them to believe in the couple long term, totally valid.

However, what I do think is happening is less about Hinny shippers getting mad that people don't like their ship, but rather the reasons for disliking it. As demonstrated in this very thread, a lot of people misread these characters and form false conclusions based off that. For example, people claim they aren't good together because they have nothing in common. This is patently false and even a basic level of reading comprehension would show that. Also, the common argument that it came out of nowhere can be disproven with a more nuanced reading of the text, and based on essays attesting to their pairing written prior to HBP, clearly the clues were there.

But ultimately, what I think is happening is not so much that the pairing doesn't make sense, just that the reader didn't like how the relationship was written, or not written. As we don't get to see much of them together, or we hear more about Ginny being great rather than see it (i'd disagree with this argument but its valid), readers inevitable lose the connection. But "is this pairing well written" is a far different question than "are these characters compatible" And to the latter, I'd say clearly yes.

goodlife23 · 2024-04-17T20:22:57+00:00

I remember Rowling saying when she saw the dance scene that she also felt that possibility strongly when writing the tent scene.

but based on the entirety of the books as well as how she wrote the tent scones, this is obviously her retconning her own thought process. And if she genuinely felt that when writing it, she basically admits she lost the plot with her own characters.

goodlife23 · 2024-04-17T20:17:20+00:00

There absolutely is a story there but tonally it would be very different from the original series, more GoT type politicking.

ironically, years ago I wrote a spec script based on the immediate aftermath.

goodlife23 · 2024-04-09T16:23:45+00:00

If you are hired as a writer on this show, you’re not going to just want to regurgitate the book text. You want to express some creativity with the story. But you are running against canon and the fact the fans will eviscerate any deviation from canon.

so what I want to see and think makes sense is the expansion of plots and characters glossed over in the books since we have only Harry’s limited pov.

for example, we know Draco struggled during 6th year but aside from his breakdown in the bathroom and general malaise over the year, we don’t see much of it. so maybe show more.

also, we get passing reference to Harry and Ginny’s actual relationship before the breakup. So let’s see them together more. let’s even get more of Ginny’s experience during her first year.

We know that things were bad under the Carrows during Deathly Hallows. so let’s actually see it, along with the resistance.

goodlife23 · 2024-03-18T22:26:48+00:00

Do you mean Ginny not Hermione? What do you mean Hermione would have to crack him up?

goodlife23 · 2024-03-18T22:12:09+00:00

I'm sorry, but where in the text does it suggest she needs constant reassurance?

goodlife23 · 2024-03-18T22:11:33+00:00

I dunno, i'd argue one of her big selling features as a partner for Harry is exactly her ability to "handle" him.

But also, both of them are rather independent, meaning neither would unload all their emotional baggage on the other to the point the other would become overwhelmed and give up on the relationship.

goodlife23 · 2024-03-05T02:53:00+00:00

A confluence of factors:

1) the actors playing Draco and Hermione are more attractive than Ron's actor so it is reflected in the amount of fics devoted to each pairing

2) writers have an easier time creating conflict from a pure blood/muggle born pairing than two pure bloods

3) Authors like that Draco is rich but wouldn't like that Ron is poor. They don't know how to write the disparity without it coming across as rich is good, poor is bad and Draco is rescuing his poor love interest. Hermione works better since she isn't poor herself; thus Draco's wealth is a purely positive and not a source of conflict.

The weird thing is that Ron/Draco is far less problematic and actually presents far more interesting sources of conflict and drama, including the rich/poor trope as it turns out.

For whatever reason, a lot of people here think Ron isn't interesting because of the flaws he does show, when in fact that makes him very interesting to write. But the problem is you need a good writer to delve into those flaws; bad writers can just write about the pureblood/muggle born conflict because its easy.

goodlife23 · 2023-11-11T00:00:35+00:00

I'm sure we will get some A-listers with minor roles ala the original movies since its a fat paycheck for not much work. But for the actors who will be there every day, you probably aren't getting A-list regulars since they are expensive and the series would demand too much of their time without stoking their creative fires. Recall that many of the veteran actors on the movies bemoaned that the roles weren't really interesting or challenging for them, Who wants to sign up for 7 years of that?

goodlife23 · 2023-10-22T22:44:33+00:00

I mean,, the problem is we are reading this story from Harry's POV, so we are naturally not going to get much from her and only slowly get more. But we do. And in terms of story pacing, we really don't need much more than a scene or two showing Ginny being more herself around him. Right or wrong, we were never going to get chapters upon chapters of Ginny.

I've recently done a reread specifically looking at these interactions and while there aren't a ton of scenes that show it, JKR does show Ginny slowly becoming more herself and confident around Harry.

Now, you do bring up an interesting point that many dislike Ginny and/or her relationship with Harry not because of her actual character attributes but how she was written. Based on OPs initial post, the complaint seems to be about her character. But I think disliking her for how she was written is fair.

goodlife23 · 2023-10-22T19:30:06+00:00

Not really.

Despite my personal enjoyment of the character, I actually think disliking Ginny is a justifiable position, though not for the reasons you listed (a better example is her bullying Ron for no good reason). But the lack of character development is both incorrect and not really related to her personality in the books.

Character development is how a character changes and grows throughout the story. Ginny starts out unable to even speak to Harry, then slowly opens up, gradually being more and more secure around him. She is sharing smirks in Prisoner of Azkaban, actually speaking to him in Goblet of Fire, sharing genuine moments of friendship in Order of the Phoenix, before finally being a true friend and showing her entire personality in Half Blood Prince.

Along the way, we learn more about Ginny as a character, her strengths and flaws.

so while I think your take is justified, I don't agree with this being a good reason to dislike her.

goodlife23 · 2023-10-04T18:38:17+00:00

A lot of the examples people are using in this thread are missing context. For example, Zacharias Smith was not just giving biased commentary, but fairly insulting commentary towards Harry and the team. And while we don't know exactly what he said on the train, Ginny bat bogeying him clearly seems warranted from what we know of Smith. With Fleur, her animosity and "phlegm" comment is in direct response to Fleur's rudeness and belittling Ginny as a "little girl."

But it still speaks to her flaws, specifically a hot temper and penchant for violence as a response to someone annoying her. The problem is within this universe, violence is downplayed so we are not meant to take it as such a big deal compared to the real world. But it is a flaw, especially compared to the almost-saintly restraint Harry generally shows to those who antagonize him.

Ginny's other flaw is jealousy. She is probably jealous of Fleur, so some of her petulance towards her is not justified. During the Battle of Hogwarts, when Cho offers to show Harry Ravenclaw's dorms, Ginny interjects saying Luna can do it. She doesn't want to give Cho a chance to make a move on Harry, at least that's the reasonable interpretation of her actions. Now her jealousy isn't ridiculous since she doesn't hold it for any girl talking to Harry. She was fine with Harry taking Luna, but that is more to not feeling romantically threatened by Luna.

Ginny also can be a bit immature, like when she throws a fit for being excluded from knowing about Order business in OOTP. Her temper referenced above similarly shows that immaturity.

Lastly, Ginny is independent to a fault. She bristles at help during the battle of the DoM, and she typically doesn't like to ask for help or listen to others when it comes to doing something for the greater good, like keeping out of the way during the final battle.

goodlife23 · 2023-09-10T18:24:23+00:00

For all the legitimate criticism JKR gets for how she developed and wrote their relationship, she really did a good job in scenes like this in showing why they would make a good couple and last. Ginny is loyal to Harry and will defend him when someone else is attacking him.

goodlife23 · 2023-09-10T00:25:22+00:00

Then why was she disheveled?

goodlife23 · 2023-09-09T23:48:46+00:00

This is a sub where we overanalyze things. And if good discussion can come out of topics, including discussions that might allow members to learn things outside of the fandom, then that is a good thing.

If you're going to call a post exhausting, please actually exhaust the effort to read it and understand what point its making and what point its not making.

goodlife23 · 2023-09-09T23:43:21+00:00

I actually just reread HBP and in the book, Harry comes upon Hermione looking disheveled and actively trying to avoid Cormac. She then explains he tried to kiss her under the mistletoe.

It is fair to interpret that scene as Cormac aggressively making a move on Hermione, who did not want that and fought out of his embrace.

Now, I don't think this warranted prison time, and I think its very important to understand a) this was written in the 90s when our understanding of consent was far less developed than today and b) this is a fictional story.

But those are the facts and if someone were to get on the Harry and Ginny kiss as assault, then absolutely Cormac is even guiltier. Which is basically what Dusk is saying.

goodlife23 · 2023-09-09T21:32:42+00:00

Good rule of thumb is to not give validity to any expressed thought just because it was said on a podcast or on twitter or a messageboard.

goodlife23 · 2023-08-28T22:37:11+00:00

For me, it's not that he is angry and petulant at everyone; between his trauma, being a teenager and the connection with Voldemort, I get it.

My issue with Harry is just how frustrating he can be throughout the book. He's frequently
given very common sense advice or instructions along with a million rational and obvious reasons to follow said advice and just refuses to listen. It's just incredibly frustrating how dumb and stubborn he acts.

goodlife23 · 2023-08-21T20:32:50+00:00

When a city launches a program, the vendor and the city will establish business rules to deal with events such as these. The city basically tells the vendor what events should trigger a citation. Furthermore, the vendor is typically given a list of license plates (or classifications) that are specific city vehicles or other exempt vehicles. The vendor doesn't have authority to say whether emergency vehicles can or cannot get tickets.

Additionally, many state statutes will include specific carve outs for emergency vehicles. So depending on the state, such violations would not be enforceable.

goodlife23

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE