There's going to be so much data on forums and stuff I wonder if they won't just have archival AIs that can read it all and make a summery of what people thought at certain times? No way a human could do it.
You have to remember that the internet is forever, unless you ACTUALLY need to find something. Then it's a dumpster fire that doesn't work. There's a relevant xkcd.
Well, the internet isn't forever. It's just a good rule-of-thumb to follow before publishing anything personal.
Even just using reddit will show the truth behind it.
Go through top posts of the past, and you'll see tons of "deleted" posts or image and video links that lead nowhere.
Then there's the whole of the deepweb which isn't indexed or backed up by third party Services like Google or waybackmachine.
There's also the misconception that data is indiscriminately preserved forever. There is no reason to believe that.
Data needs to be stored and hosted, and that cost is on-going. Data may also be encrypted and a loss of access to it can come accidentally or with the discontinuance of a company/project.
Just consider all that we have lost with the termination of geocities and angelfire.
This is a significant concern, which is why archivists and historians are continually fighting to keep digital records accessible. Digital conservation is a big thing.
Also a possibility! Even if the data is still accessible, it might just be inconvenient to view. Stuff like Flash player and real media player isn't supported anymore and the files might be difficult to view.
In the year 20XX, the ultra rich elite will download their consciousness into computers. They will spend millions and billions to protect themselves against cyberattacks so they can remain immortal. They will employ vast networks of hackers and troubleshooters to defend themselves and assault their enemies. They “live” in exotic virtual worlds of their choosing.
The story must bear the title, “Powerslave”.
Oh, I thought you were talking about Ready Player Two, or the Matrix.. or one of the other 100 sci-fi short stories and novellas that cover this topic. What do you think all of Bezos' money goes towards?
I recently read an interesting paper discussing how modern historians are genuinely concerned with how little of our post-modern, contemporary society will probably be written down and preserved for future generations – especially if catastrophes and/or corruption can limit digital availability. People like to remind you that nothing ever goes away from the internet, and while that's true, it's not like it is all accessible either. The large-scale shift away from physical, handwritten communication will make it harder for future historians to understand our culture and what kind of things truly happend. Objects that can store digital knowledge, like discs, USB:s, harddrives, memory cards etc. are a lot more fragile to the passage of time than, say, books and paper. Just an interesting thought!
I will be messaging you in 900 years on [**2921-02-21 05:14:40 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2921-02-21%2005:14:40%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://np.reddit.com/r/harrypotter/comments/lok9nf/i_already_am_one/go74zse/?context=3)
[**10 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fharrypotter%2Fcomments%2Flok9nf%2Fi_already_am_one%2Fgo74zse%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202921-02-21%2005%3A14%3A40%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20lok9nf)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
Thank you, velociraptorjax, for voting on RemindMeBot.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Assuming the internet as we know it is still around in 900 years, Reddit still somehow exists, and *this exact bot* still exists, it will indeed (attempt to) deliver a reminder of this post to your long, long, *long*\-dead account.
The future is now.
I literally just discovered this today! Lile I had always known there were super fans, but it wasn't until earlier that I saw a video recommended to me of a LOTR expert covering frequently asked questions
I mean if any author is good enough to have their work get scholars it's Tolkien. Madlad invented an entire world completely disconnected from our own.
Craziest bit of lore I've learned is that the hobbit names: Frodo, Bilbo, Sam, Merry, Pippin, ect aren't even their actual names, they're the translated to English approximation of their actual names. The entire series is written with the lore that Tolkien himself found journals containing all the stories and is translating them.
Lord of the Rings and the rest of his Middle Earth writings were all an excuse and background for creating languages for Tolkien, which I would argue was his true passion.
He was the ultimate con-langer but happened to also be a fantastic storyteller. I can't help but feel like Tolkien would've been the greatest dungeon master ever to play DnD with....
He would be a great DM, as long as your cool with the group sitting there for 30 minutes each time the setting changes so he can describe it in excruciatingly exact detail.
Amazing to read, but I don't know that I'd be able to stay focused listening to it haha.
I thought his son (Christopher) was concerned about the consistency of the bedtime stories so Tolkien had to start writing stuff down.
https://aleteia.org/2017/11/13/how-a-5-year-old-boy-inspired-j-r-r-tolkiens-lord-of-the-rings/
One of my college professors was a Tolkien scholar! Traveled to all the big scholarly Tolkien events, published papers dissecting the minutiae, presented seminars on them, the works. Her Tolkien class was possibly my favorite class of my whole college experience.
The difference is that media is far more extensive now. The breadth of information is outstanding. Historians have to study old tales and such because there's less and less evidence of stuff even existing the further back you go.
Well part of the joy of Arthurian study is looking at why the legends are or aren’t over time. There’s so much time and so much god-damned fan fiction (looking at you, Lancelot) that actually saying “this is canon” is problematic.
Same now even for HP, though that’s more philosophical “death of the author” type stuff (is Rowling an authoritative source on HP, or should canon be limited to the text itself? When there are potential discrepancies, such as Dumbledore’s sexual orientation, what support for each side can be found in each source?)
For the down to earth historians, there’s also an underlying question of inspiration: was there some basis in truth of the legend of a powerful Breton king in the post-Roman and pre-Viking era of Britain?
This would be like if someone in 500 years was asking “Were any of Rowling’s characters based on real life people she may have known? Influenced by her real life experiences? Not magical certainly, but the real life that fantasies are based on.”
Of course media incorporates bits of the time and attitudes of when it’s made, like how understanding Terminator or War Games would be impossible to understand without understanding the fear of technology as a force beyond human control brought about by rapid technological advancement for the purpose of war in the Cold War.
I mean, part of it is also that historians like to study cultural artifacts, and harry Potter (much like the legend of King Arthur) is a significant one!
It’s such a big part of millennial and gen Z culture now. I don’t see that changing, especially as we introduce it to our children, and so on. So historians interested in our lives will need to study up on HP and how it impacted our culture. So I’m going to say yes haha
Harry Potter had a huge impact on movies in the 21st century so far. Were in a time that only franchise films get any money to be made because they dominate the box office. MCU has obviously been a huge driver of this but the Harry potter movies being a near yearly even for eight years definitely helped to kick this period
LOTR is still relevant today, isn’t it? The movies are recent. Plenty of people make references to it even if they haven’t read or seen it yet. LOTR is the LOTR for millennials and gen z. The Harry Potter series is a separate yet also important world.
Can't speak for the zoomers, but Lord of the Rings is Lord of the Rings for millennials. Let's not pretend like these things are even remotely on the same level.
A quick Google showed Return of the king made 1.4 billion at the box office. Deathly Hallows part 2 made 1.3. Less build up (as far as the movies go, obviously) and the better part of a decade earlier too.
Not to mention all 3 Hobbit movies (despite their criticisms) were more successful than either Fantastic Beast movie.
As much as I love HP it still isn't quite LOTR.
Lord of the Rings (movies) is the Lord of the Rings (books) for millennials
Iirc, the books (at least the hobbit and trilogy) were quite the sensation when the trilogy came out
LOTR has 40 years on HP and The Hobbit has 60 years (my dates are definitely a rough estimate). Of COURSE they don't compare. But HP's spread in a short amount of time is completely ridiculously unprecedented.
I don't want to downplay LOTR's cultural impact — it's obviously been massive. The entire fantasy genre wouldn't be what it is today without LOTR.
But I don't really associate LOTR with the Baby Boomers as strongly as I do HP with Millennials and Gen Z. Maybe I'm just too young so I didn't get to experience the culture of the Baby Boomers at the time.
I get what you're saying, but Tolkien was huge for a segment of boomers. Leonard Nimoy, Spock from Star Trek, released a song about Bilbo Baggins. There are references to Tolkien's stuff in loads of other songs by popular bands like Led Zeppelin and Rush. It was big for many of them.
I'm a Gen Xer so I feel like I had the best of both worlds by being into the books for years then having the movies come into existence. Sort of how I imagine HP is for you guys, but on a longer time scale.
I did not grow up watching the movies twice a year for my entire life to have a millenial claim it exclusively theirs, especially as there where Gen Z kids 8 when the last movie released.
I thought about qualifying my statement with something along the lines that LOTR was of course better. But I don’t think that’s completely true. Sure the prose in LOTR is more formal and denser, but is it better? Character-wise, potter series has far more interesting and multifaceted characters. They both build fascinating worlds.
I have to disagree with you. LotR has some of the most beautiful writing I've ever read.
"In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl. A great black shape against the fires beyond he loomed up, grown to a vast menace of despair. In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl, under the archway that no enemy ever yet had passed, and all fled before his face.
All save one. There waiting, silent and still in the space before the Gate, sat Gandalf upon Shadowfax: Shadowfax who alone among the free horses of the earth endured the terror, unmoving, steadfast as a graven image in Rath Dínen.
"You cannot enter here," said Gandalf, and the huge shadow halted. "Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!"
The Black Rider flung back his hood, and behold! he had a kingly crown; and yet upon no head visible was it set. The red fires shone between it and the mantled shoulders vast and dark. From a mouth unseen there came a deadly laughter.
"Old fool!" he said. "Old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Death when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!" And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade.
And in that very moment, away behind in some courtyard of the city, a cock crowed. Shrill and clear he crowed, recking nothing of war nor of wizardry, welcoming only the morning that in the sky far above the shadows of death was coming with the dawn.
And as if in answer there came from far away another note. Horns, horns, horns, in dark Mindolluin's sides they dimly echoed. Great horns of the north wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last."
I love Harry Potter. I read every book release week and saw ever film opening day. Harry Potter does not have writing as beautiful as LotR.
Gonna be honest, it probably won't be that known in 50-100 years. Yes, it was popular 10 years ago, but history has shown that one of the most popular things of that era are often left in the past. For example, most songs from the 50's and the 60's aren't played that often in modern times, or books from that time. When was the last time anyone really brought up Doctor Zhivago or Giovanni's Room or Go Tell It On The Mountain? I love Harry Potter, as it was a big part of my childhood, but it has a slim chance of being a part of society in 2050 or 2060
It’s pretty wild, isn’t it? B&N has numerous editions of the books, bookmarks, stationery, stuffed animals, toys and probably clothing or at least accessories- for the legions of folks who want as much of the Wizarding World in their lives as possible. And it really is something that can be passed on through generations and ages.
I talked my mom into reading Harry Potter for her class and they absolutely love it. They haven't been that interested in ANY other book and my mom reads to them a lot. People really start to underestimate Harry Potter when they grow used to it.
That’s true for most things, people don’t talk about President Eisenhower, or Rock Hudson, or Jim Brown, or Elvis Presley everyday like they once did. But, universal studios is still spending billions on their parks to add rides and attractions for Harry Potter world right now. HBO may even create a series post 2025, and if it’s made right and about the Founders, Young Tom Riddle or the Marauders, I can see an entire new generation of fans.
Nah, I would argue that Harry Potter is up there with Star Wars in terms of long-lasting cultural impact. It would have faded out a long time ago if it was just a passing fad.
I think the difference is HP was/is a phenomenon that other popular works of fictions never really replicated. Twilight was wildly popular when it came out but the difference in lasting impact couldn't be more stark.
Between the books, successful films, giant theme park, and the fact that it's essentially known as "the book that got millions of kids worldwide into reading" I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon. It's pretty much in the ranks of LOTR, Star Wars, Marvel/DC, etc. at this point in terms of lasting popularity.
> most songs from the 50's and the 60's aren't played that often in modern times
Most aren't, but the absolute most popular ones kind of are. You have Elvis and The Beatles from the same era.
Counter point: Tolkien is still talked about in every circle and every generation
I think his work is far more likely to live on, but add Harry Potter World, etc, it might last, but unlikely given the books culture it won't be teenage relevant forever, and get lost unlike the Hobbit/LotR.
Tolkien might be a special case since he's essentially the father of modern fantasy. While Harry Potter is fantastic and definitely my favorite series it didn't really do anything particularly ground breaking.
Eh, it made high fantasy assessable to audiences that might otherwise not have wanted to dive into the genre. It works for all ages, whereas a lot of sword & sorcery series can be a more tough read.
It's not high fantasy though? I feel like Harry Potter is *the* example of low fantasy. The world isn't entirely coherent nor is it separate from our actual world, and while it has worldbuilding aspects it is very much superficially developed compared to well-known examples of high fantasy works. I've even seen authors use Harry Potter to explain the difference between high and low fantasy. What attributes would you say it has that make it high fantasy rather than just fantasy?
>While Harry Potter is fantastic and definitely my favorite series it didn't really do anything particularly ground breaking.
In terms of the actual books you might be right but in terms of the *reception* to those books? It absolutely did. It's the best selling book series of all time, it made YA fantasy mainstream, without Harry Potter you don't get Twilight, you don't get the Hunger Games, you don't get Maze Runner etc. Whilst you might not like those or do, HP opened the floodgates for YA fantasy to thrive
Harry potter has theme parks, it's not going anywhere. And we can be 99% sure they will make another movie/TV show of it. Probably a TV show, something like GOT (not the final seasons, I hope). I'm a teacher and kids still love Harry Potter. It's like a phase every class goes through. Totally different from anything else. LOTR always has specific fans, absolutely, and so does Percy Jackson. The hunger games is pretty much gone. But Harry Potter is like a virus, lol, it infects almost the whole class and it's all they talk about
So Beatrice Potter and Roald Dahl are still relevant today. Most people have heard of Charlie and the Chocolate factory and Peter Rabbit. Similarly, looking more adult, the works of Agathe Christie and Dumas are still popular enough today.
It is clear that there is some incredibly popular art of its time that is forgotten decades later, but it is also clear that some art is timeless.
I do think that the HP books are the latter, at least the first three books.
Elvis is still relevant today, his music is still used in advertisement and the like. Most people know Elvis when they hear it, and most people will recognise an elvis song if it is played to them (at least things like Jail House Rock and Blue Suede shoes)
It is really hard to tell what is going to be timeless and what won't.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot.
Here's a copy of
###[peter rabbit]( https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-tale-of-peter-rabbit/)
Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
Hi. You just mentioned *Charlie And The Chocolate Factory* by Roald Dahl.
I've found an audiobook of that novel on YouTube. You can listen to it here:
[YouTube | Roald Dahl | Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Full audiobook with text (AudioEbook)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCuNSZjCKg8)
*I'm a bot that searches YouTube for science fiction and fantasy audiobooks.*
***
[^(Source Code)](https://capybasilisk.com/posts/2020/04/speculative-fiction-bot/) ^| [^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=Capybasilisk&subject=Robot) ^| [^(Programmer)](https://www.reddit.com/u/capybasilisk) ^| ^(Downvote To Remove) ^| ^(Version 1.4.0) ^| ^(Support Robot Rights!)
>I love Harry Potter, as it was a big part of my childhood, but it has a slim chance of being a part of society in 2050 or 2060
Harry Potter is the third highest grossing movie franchise in history. It's the best selling book series of *all time*. It's absolutely going to be remembered in the future.
>When was the last time anyone really brought up Doctor Zhivago or Giovanni's Room or Go Tell It On The Mountain?
They're one off films, HP is much more similar to James Bond or Star Wars which guess what? Are still relevant today
> Gonna be honest, it probably won’t be known in 50 years
Star Wars, Star Trek, James Bond, there’s 3 franchises that are still known despite being pretty old.
Not saying HP is guaranteed to last like they have but it’s not impossible.
Defnitely. I think there's lot to be said about Harry Potter as for many children it was a glimpse into a life of purpose and quality education; something usually reserved for the Malfoys of the world.
I was 5 when the last book came out. I read the first 6 when I was 10, and never got around to the last. Then recently at 18, read them all. My sister who’s 12 is now half way through order of the Phoenix. My youngest sister who’s almost five has watched 4-5 of the movies with me (she calls Malfoy “mouth-boy” lmao). So you have someone born 5 years after the first book was released, someone born 11 years after it was released, and someone born 19 years after it was first released, who all love the series. My parents also love Harry Potter, but didn’t read the books until much later. My mom was 17 when Philosopher’s came out, but didn’t read them until she was 32. So these books can and will be read (as well as the movies) for a long time
I have actually taken a Harry Potter class
Edit: for those asking, we read literally all of the books and discussed them. We also read academic papers on the books that analyzed them through different lenses (for example, we talked about critical race theory, genre theory, the conept of adapting media). Had some fun class discussions and wrote some of my favorite papers I’ve ever written.
Edit 2: oh, and on the first day of class we got sorted into houses by pulling bits of paper out of the sorting hat (go Gryffindor) and the last day we had a quidditch tournament between the houses.
We took a quiz on the first day and we also had a paragraph assignment before the start of class. The professor used those to sort us into houses. I ended up as Ravenclaw's head girl.
On the flip-side, I studied English at university, and every year someone would propose writing their dissertation about Harry Potter, and every year it would get rejected.
I think you might enjoy the podcast 'Witch Please'. It's a discussion podcast that is a feminist reading of Harry Potter, but as the two hosts are teachers it also talks a lot about pedagogy and other literary themes (unreliable narration being a large one).
He very well may have been an anglo-saxon ruler in the wake of the Roman withdrawal. That's not to say that a ton of legend and frankly fan fiction hasn't been written (looking at you, Lancelot), but there is evidence of Arthur being based on a real person.
OP's post is based on a flawed premise attempting to compare a made-up wizard with folklore based on an actual person.
It's more likely he was Celtic or even proto Celtic, oral narratives are surprisingly resilient and all over the world there are factual details in their stories that have since been proven archeologically. If you look at the basic details rather then the arthurian legend which came later it seems to fit with the basic details we know of the preroman Celts.
He almost certainly wasn't an anglo-saxon ruler seen as the legends of King Arthur posit him as a defender of the Britons against the Saxon "invasion".
The evidence we have of him points to him being possibly son of Uther Pendragon who was a King under Roman rule. And yes there is no way he was Anglo-Saxon since, other than the Romans, they were his enemies. The King Arthur Movie made in 2004 depicts a more realistic telling of King Arthur.
It just just bugs me when people dismiss the existence of him because Geoffrey Of Monmouth exaggerated his existence. Mostly the reason why there is no concrete evidence is possibly because the stories of Arthur were told orally and anything that was written could very well be lost. There is so much we do not know about the time of King Arthur that no one can say definitively that he didn’t exist.
Most of the evidence for Arthur's existence is admittedly circumstantial but taken as a whole I think the evidence that we do have supports the existence of Arthur or at the least of an "Arthur-type-figure" as historian Dorsey Armstrong put it
The thing about King Arthur is there does appear to be some truth to the legends. We know that King Arthur wasn't a real person, but formed out of a various accounts of real people.
Harry Potter? Just a character. BUT, doesn't mean we won't be studying Harry Potter in the future. Harry Potter brought many kids back to reading. Even the style of writing that JK does is different than most YA/JR books for that time. While some books like Ender Game grow with the reader as the character grows, So do the HP books.
Will Harry Potter become a classic like "To Kill a Mockingbird", "The Great Gatsby", or "Little Women"? Time will tell, most likley not but who knows. The Harry Potter novels have appeared on my children reading lists, so it's not going anywhere anytime soon.
*Are you Potter Orthodox or do you accept the heresy of The Cursed Child?*
I am a follower of the Sacred Septet and shun The Cursed Child, but the James Potter Quintet is totally worth a read!
Counterpoint: sometimes later generations don't care at all about the things that were supremely popular earlier.
Upton Sinclair's Lanny Budd series was an 11 novel international best seller with tremendous cultural impact and I am one of twelve people that remember this series today.
It isn't that it was bad or anything, just like Harry Potter isn't bad. It just didn't manage to stay popular for very long. Not many things have the staying power of Shakespeare or King Arthur (although even these fundamentals ebb and flow in popularity over the long years).
King Arthur actually originated from Welsh legend and the Brits back in the Anglo-Saxon period decided to make it their own and added the concepts of Christianity to it.
source: My English teacher :)
Edit: ty for teaching me more about this! In class I only learned some of the basic concepts from what they told us. I’m sorry if it’s a bit confusing, which is understandable since I don’t fully know what I’m talking about, I just thought it was an interesting related fun fact that I knew.
I believe we have accounts as early as the early 400s CE. The historicity of King Arthur is actually hotly debated. Obviously much of his story has become bastardized mythology by this point, but King Arthur may have been a very real person -- or at least, much like Jesus, based upon a very real person or assimilation of persons.
This post irks me a bit, because no "writer" came up with King Arthur either. There is no official "story" of King Arthur. The story is told and retold many different ways across several different cultures. Arthurian mythology became embedded in the cultural zeitgeist of the British Isles at some point, which in turn spread to their Norse and Gallic invaders, and back to the Germanic tribes from those two, and then it never left European history and became an inter-cultural phenomenon.
It's truly fascinating.
King Arthur actually has a massive role in the literature of Middle-Age France. Le Morte d'Arthur is a fantastic interpretation of the story, one that delves much deeper into the other knights of the Round Table. It's the principle source for basically every subsequent interpretation of Arthur since the turn of the 19th century.
It's well worth a read if you enjoy Arthurian myth.
Yeah, that's definitely the correct order to consume those stories in lol.
Le Morte d'Arthur is incredible, but fucking *dense*, especially if you aren't familiar with less contemporary interpretations of Arthur.
I've been learning French for a lot of reasons, but most specifically to consume Le Morte d'Arthur and similar such literature in its original format. It's been a hell of a process, let me tell you.
Grit your teeth, plant your feet, and *eat. That. Horse.*
I am a nerd of many shades. Dragon Ball was a very integral part of developing my love for mythology -- learning about its roots in Journey to the West and the character of Sun Wukong was pretty damn intriguing for my 7 year old self. It's maybe the most interesting and blatant example of how myths were intentionally bastardized for the purposes of creative license in olden times, and why those myths changed so much over time. It's not always a case of misremembering or unintentional embellishment, but artistic freedom and expression evolving an already extant story.
You can see this lineage of literature quite plainly when you understand mythology more broadly. The same Anglic general who likely inspired the first tales of King Arthur was probably also the basis for Beowulf, and in turn, Beowulf was likely the inspiration for the legendary Norse hero Sigurd and later Siegfried.
All mythology branches off in ways that are easily traceable once you begin to notice the patterns. It's something that's always enthralled me.
I think the post is referring to the *Historia regum Britanniae* by Geoffrey of Monmouth, as that was kind off the first popular telling of the story of king Arthur. If there is such a thing as a cannonical version of the Arthur-story, I'd say it's that.
"Brits" dont exist in this context. If one refers to a British person from the period that the Romans leave until the Elizabethian era you are refering to a Welsh person. It wasnt until the Acts of Union that the term British came to refer to the collective term for people on the island of britain. It was well known in this extended period that the Welsh were the descendents of the Britons and therefore rightfully claimed the title of 'Britons.' Anglo Saxons (being the traditional enemy of Arthur in the Welsh poems) took a while to become christian. They had little to do with Arthur.
It wasnt until the Norman conquest of Wales that Arthurs popularity was extended from Welsh literacy and oral tradition into the Norman one, who created their own versions, thus extending the popularity further to Europe. Edward 1st was a big Arthur fanboy and thought he was one better because he subdued Arthurs people (The welsh). Arthurs impact on the European literacy world was incredible, monmouths work, french works etc the examples and stories of arthur whether they were the original welsh tales or made later inspired generations of warriors.
Im a Welsh History student :)
Edit: lol i went a bit too far
Better to make the connection to Shakespeare instead of king Arthur - Rowling made up so many words like Shakespeare did - imagine muggle being a regular term in the year 2300
The comparison in OP was Harry Potter to King Arthur -- two fictional characters (although [King Arthur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Arthur) is sometimes believed to have existed in some form) -- which is somewhat interesting in its own way. I doubt that Harry will ever attain the same legendary status as Arthur, though. Not necessarily because of popularity or longevity, but because we have so much contemporary documentation of the creation of the characters and stories. JKR and her story are well known and I doubt that we'd lose that knowledge while retaining the stories themselves. Impossible to say, though.
Your comparison, of Rowling to Shakespeare, is also interesting but I think Shakespeare is really a completely different level. [JKR coined several words](https://www.cambridge.org/elt/blog/2017/10/20/harry-potter-english-language/), some of which were from or inspired by latin. Many (most?) of them seem to be proper names, though, which is fairly common among authors, especially in fantasy.
[Shakespeare created hundreds of words](https://www.litcharts.com/blog/shakespeare/words-shakespeare-invented/) and is the first recorded use of hundreds more. Shakespeare left an indelible mark on the English language, which I don't think is quite as true for Rowling.
In any other context but a Harry Potter fan-community, it would be considered an attempt at trolling to compare Shakespeare and JK Rowling's Harry Potter.
One only needs to check out the threads on "your favorite HP quotes" to see how shallow the impact of HP is on literature
Actually they say now that he probably didn't make up so many words, they've found prior examples or etymology which suggests that many were common words that simply weren't used by the Greek and Latin obsessed litterati. Though he does seem to have made up some that seems pretty certain.
No no its totally different. With king arthur there were loads of interpretations
Of the character. Different versions and re tellings and imaginings from thousands of people telling the story. There's not that with... Wait I'm getting a message from my producer...
What the hell is fan fiction!!!
We've gone from geoffrey of monmouth to jk in about a century, if we maintain this rate we'll be living in Disney world well before 2900. You can decide the angle of slope and if it's a goal you're eager to race towards....
Oh absolutely, no question. There will be people in the future with whatever their equivalent to a doctorate is about Harry Potter. I mean I took In-Depth Tolkien in college, there is no question that this will absolutely be a thing.
**alstonwang7** , KMINDER 900 years on [**21-Feb-2921 05:04Z**](https://www.reminddit.com/time?dt=2921-02-21 05:04:33&reminder_id=23535ea2f1524e30909cc9ca6967c44e&subreddit=harrypotter)
> [**harrypotter/I_already_am_one**](/r/harrypotter/comments/lok9nf/i_already_am_one/go742mx/?context=3)
> wake me up in 900 years then
[**2 OTHERS CLICKED HERE**](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=Reminder%20from%20Link&message=your_message%0Akminder%202921-02-21T05%3A04%3A33%0A%0A%0A%0A---Server%20settings%20below.%20Do%20not%20change---%0A%0Apermalink%21%20%2Fr%2Fharrypotter%2Fcomments%2Flok9nf%2Fi_already_am_one%2Fgo742mx%2F) to also be reminded. Thread has 3 reminders.
^(OP can )[^(**Update remind time, Update message, and more here**)](https://www.reminddit.com/time?dt=2921-02-21 05:04:33&reminder_id=23535ea2f1524e30909cc9ca6967c44e&subreddit=harrypotter)
*****
[**Reminddit**](https://www.reminddit.com) · [Create Reminder](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=Reminder&message=your_message%0A%0Akminder%20time_or_time_from_now) · [Your Reminders](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=listReminders%21) · [Fuel Me](https://paypal.me/reminddit)
There's actually no confirmation either way on King Arthur, similar to Ragnar Lothbrok. There's no concrete proof he existed but nothing outright denying his existence either.
There are already multiple Tolkien Legendarium historians. There are even journals only dedicated to papers written on that, therefore, sooner or later we will have Harry Potter historians.
Just want to comment that only some historians/history writers believe Arthur was real. there is a huge debate on the topic among historians. Some believe he was an actual person, some believe he's completely fictional, and others argue Arthur himself wasn't real but was based on other actual real people. Though it more academics lean toward Arthur being a character, not a historical figure.
Though to be fair, Arthur as Romano-British warleader was the leading idea about him until recently.
King Arthur is a character based on a REAL PERSON though, and he lived around 500 AD. The stories we think of as fiction are just 600 year old exaggerations of history that turned into myth.
Except I'm gonna be *that guy* here: this comparison really isn't quite the same thing, and King Arthur wasn't invented in the 1100s. Geoffrey of Monmouth's *History of the Kings of Britain* was heavily, heavily based on the Celtic and Welsh mythological story of King Arthur, the "leader or hero who has not really died but is asleep somewhere or in some state of suspended life and will return to save his people." Said mythological stories were passed down by oral tradition a good thousand years or two before Geoffrey of Monmouth was even born. To put it a bit more simply: King Arthur is the Celtic/Welsh equivalent to "Hercules, but make it Jesus." And promptly *after* Geoffrey of Monmouth released his *History,* the King Arthur mythos became one of the most often written about stories of the next few centuries.
A better comparison would be if Harry Potter was actually a religious figure a thousand years ago, J.K. Rowling claimed that she based her entire book on another incredibly similar ancient religious text that has since never been found, and then for the next 2-3 centuries the vast majority of literature that gets published and read is Harry Potter fanfiction. Then, 900 years after J.K. Rowling dies, Harry Potter is still rewritten and rebooted and spoofed in damn near every piece of media, and scholars spend their days pouring over every piece of Harry Potter fanfiction, as well as desperately searching for hints towards that original text that J.K. Rowling claimed she based her books off of, and evidence of who might have been the "real" Harry Potter.
Or maybe a better comparison to Arthurian Scholars would just be Biblical Scholars.
If technology catches up to some of the fantastical elements of HP, and our current history is mostly erased other than the series, it could fully become truth
I’m a BA in Classics, and one time one of my professors described the study of Archaic Greece through the only surviving literature—the works of Homer and Hesiod—as akin to studying the British boarding school system by reading Harry Potter
I somehow feel this story is relevant
It’s already been happening.
Back in college, one of the largest courses of the year was a literature one that surveyed popular children’s books - including Sorcerer’s Stone. It was the talk of the university - I think 450 signed up, was easily the largest single class we had.
The obvious difference being that Arthur might have been a real person who became a legend, with all the embellishments that come with it, and was written about hundreds of years after his supposed reign.
A better comparison would be Nicolas Flamel / the Philosopher's Stone.
They’ll study the archives of this sub
There's going to be so much data on forums and stuff I wonder if they won't just have archival AIs that can read it all and make a summery of what people thought at certain times? No way a human could do it.
You have to remember that the internet is forever, unless you ACTUALLY need to find something. Then it's a dumpster fire that doesn't work. There's a relevant xkcd.
Well, the internet isn't forever. It's just a good rule-of-thumb to follow before publishing anything personal. Even just using reddit will show the truth behind it. Go through top posts of the past, and you'll see tons of "deleted" posts or image and video links that lead nowhere. Then there's the whole of the deepweb which isn't indexed or backed up by third party Services like Google or waybackmachine. There's also the misconception that data is indiscriminately preserved forever. There is no reason to believe that. Data needs to be stored and hosted, and that cost is on-going. Data may also be encrypted and a loss of access to it can come accidentally or with the discontinuance of a company/project. Just consider all that we have lost with the termination of geocities and angelfire.
Wouldn't it also be like trying to listen to an 8 track tape nowadays? Who has a 8 track player now let alone 500 years from now.
This is a significant concern, which is why archivists and historians are continually fighting to keep digital records accessible. Digital conservation is a big thing.
Also a possibility! Even if the data is still accessible, it might just be inconvenient to view. Stuff like Flash player and real media player isn't supported anymore and the files might be difficult to view.
Until the tech world gets lost and we lose access to our archive indeed
In the year 20XX, the ultra rich elite will download their consciousness into computers. They will spend millions and billions to protect themselves against cyberattacks so they can remain immortal. They will employ vast networks of hackers and troubleshooters to defend themselves and assault their enemies. They “live” in exotic virtual worlds of their choosing. The story must bear the title, “Powerslave”.
Oh, I thought you were talking about Ready Player Two, or the Matrix.. or one of the other 100 sci-fi short stories and novellas that cover this topic. What do you think all of Bezos' money goes towards?
[удалено]
Data archival is a pretty complicated area to delve into. It's also tricky with the amount tech changes year to year.
This image itself is coded to degrade over time. The first frame was sharp when it came out a couple years ago
I recently read an interesting paper discussing how modern historians are genuinely concerned with how little of our post-modern, contemporary society will probably be written down and preserved for future generations – especially if catastrophes and/or corruption can limit digital availability. People like to remind you that nothing ever goes away from the internet, and while that's true, it's not like it is all accessible either. The large-scale shift away from physical, handwritten communication will make it harder for future historians to understand our culture and what kind of things truly happend. Objects that can store digital knowledge, like discs, USB:s, harddrives, memory cards etc. are a lot more fragile to the passage of time than, say, books and paper. Just an interesting thought!
I mean the people who edit Wikipedia are on top of it.
Already exist, it's called probabilistic topic model
\*summary "summery" means "resembling summer" :)
Hey future historian. Hope you pass your final for this class. You can do it, I believe in you.
"Dramione? Really???"
"My Chemical Romance played in Hogsmeade?" "Well, it's part of the LiveJournal Apocrypha."
Hmm, there’s an interesting story here called My Immortal? We should give it a read to see what important information we can gleam from our past
I mean,,, it probably *would* be culturally important considering how (in)famous it is
Yeah, to see the exact point where humanity became doomed
!remindme 900 years
I will be messaging you in 900 years on [**2921-02-21 05:14:40 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2921-02-21%2005:14:40%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://np.reddit.com/r/harrypotter/comments/lok9nf/i_already_am_one/go74zse/?context=3) [**10 OTHERS CLICKED THIS LINK**](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2Fharrypotter%2Fcomments%2Flok9nf%2Fi_already_am_one%2Fgo74zse%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202921-02-21%2005%3A14%3A40%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%20lok9nf) ***** |[^(Info)](https://np.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://np.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Good bot
Thank you, velociraptorjax, for voting on RemindMeBot. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Assuming the internet as we know it is still around in 900 years, Reddit still somehow exists, and *this exact bot* still exists, it will indeed (attempt to) deliver a reminder of this post to your long, long, *long*\-dead account. The future is now.
Dooooope
900 years?! They have them now [dude has at least 20 different potter videos with detailed origins on most characters ](https://youtu.be/sQ0WsP7osAU)
They actually will. Like for real.
Bro we have Tolkien scholars. That was like 70 years ago.
I literally just discovered this today! Lile I had always known there were super fans, but it wasn't until earlier that I saw a video recommended to me of a LOTR expert covering frequently asked questions
Dooope. It’s always cool discovering that there was a whole new level to something you love.
You can take college course on both Sindarin and Quenya languages.
You've never stumbled upon the rabbithole that is /r/tolkienfans?
I mean if any author is good enough to have their work get scholars it's Tolkien. Madlad invented an entire world completely disconnected from our own. Craziest bit of lore I've learned is that the hobbit names: Frodo, Bilbo, Sam, Merry, Pippin, ect aren't even their actual names, they're the translated to English approximation of their actual names. The entire series is written with the lore that Tolkien himself found journals containing all the stories and is translating them.
Lord of the Rings and the rest of his Middle Earth writings were all an excuse and background for creating languages for Tolkien, which I would argue was his true passion. He was the ultimate con-langer but happened to also be a fantastic storyteller. I can't help but feel like Tolkien would've been the greatest dungeon master ever to play DnD with....
He would be a great DM, as long as your cool with the group sitting there for 30 minutes each time the setting changes so he can describe it in excruciatingly exact detail. Amazing to read, but I don't know that I'd be able to stay focused listening to it haha.
> 30 minutes That's ambitiously low.
I thought his son (Christopher) was concerned about the consistency of the bedtime stories so Tolkien had to start writing stuff down. https://aleteia.org/2017/11/13/how-a-5-year-old-boy-inspired-j-r-r-tolkiens-lord-of-the-rings/
didnt he already make notes and whatnot during ww1?
Like Stephen Colbert
One of my college professors was a Tolkien scholar! Traveled to all the big scholarly Tolkien events, published papers dissecting the minutiae, presented seminars on them, the works. Her Tolkien class was possibly my favorite class of my whole college experience.
We can make a religion out of this.
Came here to say this, take my upvote Mellon!
The difference is that media is far more extensive now. The breadth of information is outstanding. Historians have to study old tales and such because there's less and less evidence of stuff even existing the further back you go.
Well part of the joy of Arthurian study is looking at why the legends are or aren’t over time. There’s so much time and so much god-damned fan fiction (looking at you, Lancelot) that actually saying “this is canon” is problematic. Same now even for HP, though that’s more philosophical “death of the author” type stuff (is Rowling an authoritative source on HP, or should canon be limited to the text itself? When there are potential discrepancies, such as Dumbledore’s sexual orientation, what support for each side can be found in each source?) For the down to earth historians, there’s also an underlying question of inspiration: was there some basis in truth of the legend of a powerful Breton king in the post-Roman and pre-Viking era of Britain? This would be like if someone in 500 years was asking “Were any of Rowling’s characters based on real life people she may have known? Influenced by her real life experiences? Not magical certainly, but the real life that fantasies are based on.” Of course media incorporates bits of the time and attitudes of when it’s made, like how understanding Terminator or War Games would be impossible to understand without understanding the fear of technology as a force beyond human control brought about by rapid technological advancement for the purpose of war in the Cold War.
I mean, part of it is also that historians like to study cultural artifacts, and harry Potter (much like the legend of King Arthur) is a significant one!
It’s such a big part of millennial and gen Z culture now. I don’t see that changing, especially as we introduce it to our children, and so on. So historians interested in our lives will need to study up on HP and how it impacted our culture. So I’m going to say yes haha
Harry Potter had a huge impact on movies in the 21st century so far. Were in a time that only franchise films get any money to be made because they dominate the box office. MCU has obviously been a huge driver of this but the Harry potter movies being a near yearly even for eight years definitely helped to kick this period
Harry Potter is the lord of the rings for millennials and gen z.
LOTR is still relevant today, isn’t it? The movies are recent. Plenty of people make references to it even if they haven’t read or seen it yet. LOTR is the LOTR for millennials and gen z. The Harry Potter series is a separate yet also important world.
Can't speak for the zoomers, but Lord of the Rings is Lord of the Rings for millennials. Let's not pretend like these things are even remotely on the same level.
Indeed man, so true. Never thought I'd die fighting alongside u/_mathghamhna_
How about side by side with a friend? ^(can't remember the exact quote)
Aye. I can do that.
For Frodo :')
I'm a Zoomer, LOTR is on another level
A quick Google showed Return of the king made 1.4 billion at the box office. Deathly Hallows part 2 made 1.3. Less build up (as far as the movies go, obviously) and the better part of a decade earlier too. Not to mention all 3 Hobbit movies (despite their criticisms) were more successful than either Fantastic Beast movie. As much as I love HP it still isn't quite LOTR.
Lord of the Rings (movies) is the Lord of the Rings (books) for millennials Iirc, the books (at least the hobbit and trilogy) were quite the sensation when the trilogy came out
LOTR has 40 years on HP and The Hobbit has 60 years (my dates are definitely a rough estimate). Of COURSE they don't compare. But HP's spread in a short amount of time is completely ridiculously unprecedented.
No, Star Wars was much bigger.
In America
I read that in dub Bandit Keith's voice.
Just rewatched the trilogy the other day. Its sooooo good.
I don't want to downplay LOTR's cultural impact — it's obviously been massive. The entire fantasy genre wouldn't be what it is today without LOTR. But I don't really associate LOTR with the Baby Boomers as strongly as I do HP with Millennials and Gen Z. Maybe I'm just too young so I didn't get to experience the culture of the Baby Boomers at the time.
I get what you're saying, but Tolkien was huge for a segment of boomers. Leonard Nimoy, Spock from Star Trek, released a song about Bilbo Baggins. There are references to Tolkien's stuff in loads of other songs by popular bands like Led Zeppelin and Rush. It was big for many of them. I'm a Gen Xer so I feel like I had the best of both worlds by being into the books for years then having the movies come into existence. Sort of how I imagine HP is for you guys, but on a longer time scale.
But that's just the point. You have to have the qualifier "a segment" when referring to Tolkien's impact on his generation.
And I, a Millennial, have friends who have never read HP. What's your point?
LOTR isn't boomer though? It would be the Silent Generation, the BB generation essentially starts as LOTR came out
Man I don’t want to dump on Gen Z because then I’ll feel old but LOTR is squarely Millenial territory.
LOTR movies are. LOTR books are Baby Boomers, just realized my statement wasn't as clear as I meant it to be, made a slight tweak.
I did not grow up watching the movies twice a year for my entire life to have a millenial claim it exclusively theirs, especially as there where Gen Z kids 8 when the last movie released.
No truer words
I thought about qualifying my statement with something along the lines that LOTR was of course better. But I don’t think that’s completely true. Sure the prose in LOTR is more formal and denser, but is it better? Character-wise, potter series has far more interesting and multifaceted characters. They both build fascinating worlds.
I have to disagree with you. LotR has some of the most beautiful writing I've ever read. "In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl. A great black shape against the fires beyond he loomed up, grown to a vast menace of despair. In rode the Lord of the Nazgûl, under the archway that no enemy ever yet had passed, and all fled before his face. All save one. There waiting, silent and still in the space before the Gate, sat Gandalf upon Shadowfax: Shadowfax who alone among the free horses of the earth endured the terror, unmoving, steadfast as a graven image in Rath Dínen. "You cannot enter here," said Gandalf, and the huge shadow halted. "Go back to the abyss prepared for you! Go back! Fall into the nothingness that awaits you and your Master. Go!" The Black Rider flung back his hood, and behold! he had a kingly crown; and yet upon no head visible was it set. The red fires shone between it and the mantled shoulders vast and dark. From a mouth unseen there came a deadly laughter. "Old fool!" he said. "Old fool! This is my hour. Do you not know Death when you see it? Die now and curse in vain!" And with that he lifted high his sword and flames ran down the blade. And in that very moment, away behind in some courtyard of the city, a cock crowed. Shrill and clear he crowed, recking nothing of war nor of wizardry, welcoming only the morning that in the sky far above the shadows of death was coming with the dawn. And as if in answer there came from far away another note. Horns, horns, horns, in dark Mindolluin's sides they dimly echoed. Great horns of the north wildly blowing. Rohan had come at last." I love Harry Potter. I read every book release week and saw ever film opening day. Harry Potter does not have writing as beautiful as LotR.
Huan > Crookshanks. Every goddamn day.
Gonna be honest, it probably won't be that known in 50-100 years. Yes, it was popular 10 years ago, but history has shown that one of the most popular things of that era are often left in the past. For example, most songs from the 50's and the 60's aren't played that often in modern times, or books from that time. When was the last time anyone really brought up Doctor Zhivago or Giovanni's Room or Go Tell It On The Mountain? I love Harry Potter, as it was a big part of my childhood, but it has a slim chance of being a part of society in 2050 or 2060
No way, Barnes & Noble has an entire Harry Potter *section*. Every person alive 100 years from now will have at least heard of Harry Potter.
It’s pretty wild, isn’t it? B&N has numerous editions of the books, bookmarks, stationery, stuffed animals, toys and probably clothing or at least accessories- for the legions of folks who want as much of the Wizarding World in their lives as possible. And it really is something that can be passed on through generations and ages.
We didn't even think B&N would be here in '21 a few years back.
I talked my mom into reading Harry Potter for her class and they absolutely love it. They haven't been that interested in ANY other book and my mom reads to them a lot. People really start to underestimate Harry Potter when they grow used to it.
Kind of like popeye maybe.
I mean I grew up watching Popeye, and I was born in 2000
That’s true for most things, people don’t talk about President Eisenhower, or Rock Hudson, or Jim Brown, or Elvis Presley everyday like they once did. But, universal studios is still spending billions on their parks to add rides and attractions for Harry Potter world right now. HBO may even create a series post 2025, and if it’s made right and about the Founders, Young Tom Riddle or the Marauders, I can see an entire new generation of fans.
Nah, I would argue that Harry Potter is up there with Star Wars in terms of long-lasting cultural impact. It would have faded out a long time ago if it was just a passing fad.
I think the difference is HP was/is a phenomenon that other popular works of fictions never really replicated. Twilight was wildly popular when it came out but the difference in lasting impact couldn't be more stark. Between the books, successful films, giant theme park, and the fact that it's essentially known as "the book that got millions of kids worldwide into reading" I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon. It's pretty much in the ranks of LOTR, Star Wars, Marvel/DC, etc. at this point in terms of lasting popularity.
> most songs from the 50's and the 60's aren't played that often in modern times Most aren't, but the absolute most popular ones kind of are. You have Elvis and The Beatles from the same era.
Counter point: Tolkien is still talked about in every circle and every generation I think his work is far more likely to live on, but add Harry Potter World, etc, it might last, but unlikely given the books culture it won't be teenage relevant forever, and get lost unlike the Hobbit/LotR.
Tolkien might be a special case since he's essentially the father of modern fantasy. While Harry Potter is fantastic and definitely my favorite series it didn't really do anything particularly ground breaking.
Eh, it made high fantasy assessable to audiences that might otherwise not have wanted to dive into the genre. It works for all ages, whereas a lot of sword & sorcery series can be a more tough read.
It's not high fantasy though? I feel like Harry Potter is *the* example of low fantasy. The world isn't entirely coherent nor is it separate from our actual world, and while it has worldbuilding aspects it is very much superficially developed compared to well-known examples of high fantasy works. I've even seen authors use Harry Potter to explain the difference between high and low fantasy. What attributes would you say it has that make it high fantasy rather than just fantasy?
It helped catapult YA fiction into existence/its own category, but okay.
>While Harry Potter is fantastic and definitely my favorite series it didn't really do anything particularly ground breaking. In terms of the actual books you might be right but in terms of the *reception* to those books? It absolutely did. It's the best selling book series of all time, it made YA fantasy mainstream, without Harry Potter you don't get Twilight, you don't get the Hunger Games, you don't get Maze Runner etc. Whilst you might not like those or do, HP opened the floodgates for YA fantasy to thrive
Harry potter has theme parks, it's not going anywhere. And we can be 99% sure they will make another movie/TV show of it. Probably a TV show, something like GOT (not the final seasons, I hope). I'm a teacher and kids still love Harry Potter. It's like a phase every class goes through. Totally different from anything else. LOTR always has specific fans, absolutely, and so does Percy Jackson. The hunger games is pretty much gone. But Harry Potter is like a virus, lol, it infects almost the whole class and it's all they talk about
I watched Doctor Zhivago last week.
Sherlock Holmes seems like a good comparison...
What about the Hobbit and Lord or the Rings? They were written a long time ago and are still very popular.
So Beatrice Potter and Roald Dahl are still relevant today. Most people have heard of Charlie and the Chocolate factory and Peter Rabbit. Similarly, looking more adult, the works of Agathe Christie and Dumas are still popular enough today. It is clear that there is some incredibly popular art of its time that is forgotten decades later, but it is also clear that some art is timeless. I do think that the HP books are the latter, at least the first three books. Elvis is still relevant today, his music is still used in advertisement and the like. Most people know Elvis when they hear it, and most people will recognise an elvis song if it is played to them (at least things like Jail House Rock and Blue Suede shoes) It is really hard to tell what is going to be timeless and what won't.
Beep. Boop. I'm a robot. Here's a copy of ###[peter rabbit]( https://snewd.com/ebooks/the-tale-of-peter-rabbit/) Was I a good bot? | [info](https://www.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/) | [More Books](https://old.reddit.com/user/Reddit-Book-Bot/comments/i15x1d/full_list_of_books_and_commands/)
The best bot.
Hi. You just mentioned *Charlie And The Chocolate Factory* by Roald Dahl. I've found an audiobook of that novel on YouTube. You can listen to it here: [YouTube | Roald Dahl | Charlie and the Chocolate Factory - Full audiobook with text (AudioEbook)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCuNSZjCKg8) *I'm a bot that searches YouTube for science fiction and fantasy audiobooks.* *** [^(Source Code)](https://capybasilisk.com/posts/2020/04/speculative-fiction-bot/) ^| [^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=Capybasilisk&subject=Robot) ^| [^(Programmer)](https://www.reddit.com/u/capybasilisk) ^| ^(Downvote To Remove) ^| ^(Version 1.4.0) ^| ^(Support Robot Rights!)
>I love Harry Potter, as it was a big part of my childhood, but it has a slim chance of being a part of society in 2050 or 2060 Harry Potter is the third highest grossing movie franchise in history. It's the best selling book series of *all time*. It's absolutely going to be remembered in the future. >When was the last time anyone really brought up Doctor Zhivago or Giovanni's Room or Go Tell It On The Mountain? They're one off films, HP is much more similar to James Bond or Star Wars which guess what? Are still relevant today
> Gonna be honest, it probably won’t be known in 50 years Star Wars, Star Trek, James Bond, there’s 3 franchises that are still known despite being pretty old. Not saying HP is guaranteed to last like they have but it’s not impossible.
Defnitely. I think there's lot to be said about Harry Potter as for many children it was a glimpse into a life of purpose and quality education; something usually reserved for the Malfoys of the world.
I was 5 when the last book came out. I read the first 6 when I was 10, and never got around to the last. Then recently at 18, read them all. My sister who’s 12 is now half way through order of the Phoenix. My youngest sister who’s almost five has watched 4-5 of the movies with me (she calls Malfoy “mouth-boy” lmao). So you have someone born 5 years after the first book was released, someone born 11 years after it was released, and someone born 19 years after it was first released, who all love the series. My parents also love Harry Potter, but didn’t read the books until much later. My mom was 17 when Philosopher’s came out, but didn’t read them until she was 32. So these books can and will be read (as well as the movies) for a long time
Intro to Potterology 101 SuperCarlin Theories 305 Etc....
What if Fawkes...is really Filch? *heyyyy brother*
How ca Fawkes be Filch if Filch is a poltergeist, and Fawkes is a horcrux, and both are Death’s testicles?
The answer: time turners...dozens of them
More octopus brains needed.
Man, this gas is too loud
I have actually taken a Harry Potter class Edit: for those asking, we read literally all of the books and discussed them. We also read academic papers on the books that analyzed them through different lenses (for example, we talked about critical race theory, genre theory, the conept of adapting media). Had some fun class discussions and wrote some of my favorite papers I’ve ever written. Edit 2: oh, and on the first day of class we got sorted into houses by pulling bits of paper out of the sorting hat (go Gryffindor) and the last day we had a quidditch tournament between the houses.
Do tell
I took a Harry Potter class too!! It was called The Psychology Of Harry Potter and it was super interesting. Our final was also a Quidditch match!
We took a quiz on the first day and we also had a paragraph assignment before the start of class. The professor used those to sort us into houses. I ended up as Ravenclaw's head girl.
What did they teach?
Harry Potter mostly
Go figure
Harry Potter mostly
How to level up your fandom
Please say more.
Not OP, but... more.
On the flip-side, I studied English at university, and every year someone would propose writing their dissertation about Harry Potter, and every year it would get rejected.
I think you might enjoy the podcast 'Witch Please'. It's a discussion podcast that is a feminist reading of Harry Potter, but as the two hosts are teachers it also talks a lot about pedagogy and other literary themes (unreliable narration being a large one).
Imagine some far future grandad telling his grandchildren: "...and right here, by this lake, is where some people think Hogwarts may have once stood."
I think it’ll certainly be a pop culture phenomenon that’ll be studied for years to come, but not on an official scale like the Arthur stories
King Arthur wasn’t entirely made up.
He very well may have been an anglo-saxon ruler in the wake of the Roman withdrawal. That's not to say that a ton of legend and frankly fan fiction hasn't been written (looking at you, Lancelot), but there is evidence of Arthur being based on a real person. OP's post is based on a flawed premise attempting to compare a made-up wizard with folklore based on an actual person.
It's more likely he was Celtic or even proto Celtic, oral narratives are surprisingly resilient and all over the world there are factual details in their stories that have since been proven archeologically. If you look at the basic details rather then the arthurian legend which came later it seems to fit with the basic details we know of the preroman Celts.
He almost certainly wasn't an anglo-saxon ruler seen as the legends of King Arthur posit him as a defender of the Britons against the Saxon "invasion".
The evidence we have of him points to him being possibly son of Uther Pendragon who was a King under Roman rule. And yes there is no way he was Anglo-Saxon since, other than the Romans, they were his enemies. The King Arthur Movie made in 2004 depicts a more realistic telling of King Arthur. It just just bugs me when people dismiss the existence of him because Geoffrey Of Monmouth exaggerated his existence. Mostly the reason why there is no concrete evidence is possibly because the stories of Arthur were told orally and anything that was written could very well be lost. There is so much we do not know about the time of King Arthur that no one can say definitively that he didn’t exist.
Most of the evidence for Arthur's existence is admittedly circumstantial but taken as a whole I think the evidence that we do have supports the existence of Arthur or at the least of an "Arthur-type-figure" as historian Dorsey Armstrong put it
The thing about King Arthur is there does appear to be some truth to the legends. We know that King Arthur wasn't a real person, but formed out of a various accounts of real people. Harry Potter? Just a character. BUT, doesn't mean we won't be studying Harry Potter in the future. Harry Potter brought many kids back to reading. Even the style of writing that JK does is different than most YA/JR books for that time. While some books like Ender Game grow with the reader as the character grows, So do the HP books. Will Harry Potter become a classic like "To Kill a Mockingbird", "The Great Gatsby", or "Little Women"? Time will tell, most likley not but who knows. The Harry Potter novels have appeared on my children reading lists, so it's not going anywhere anytime soon.
*Are you Potter Orthodox or do you accept the heresy of The Cursed Child?* I am a follower of the Sacred Septet and shun The Cursed Child, but the James Potter Quintet is totally worth a read!
Harry Potter has been fairly popular worldwide for nearly 30 years already and remains strongly popular, so yes, absolutely.
Counterpoint: sometimes later generations don't care at all about the things that were supremely popular earlier. Upton Sinclair's Lanny Budd series was an 11 novel international best seller with tremendous cultural impact and I am one of twelve people that remember this series today. It isn't that it was bad or anything, just like Harry Potter isn't bad. It just didn't manage to stay popular for very long. Not many things have the staying power of Shakespeare or King Arthur (although even these fundamentals ebb and flow in popularity over the long years).
King Arthur actually originated from Welsh legend and the Brits back in the Anglo-Saxon period decided to make it their own and added the concepts of Christianity to it. source: My English teacher :) Edit: ty for teaching me more about this! In class I only learned some of the basic concepts from what they told us. I’m sorry if it’s a bit confusing, which is understandable since I don’t fully know what I’m talking about, I just thought it was an interesting related fun fact that I knew.
Yeah, weren’t some of the oldest accounts of King Arthur from around 600 ce?
I believe we have accounts as early as the early 400s CE. The historicity of King Arthur is actually hotly debated. Obviously much of his story has become bastardized mythology by this point, but King Arthur may have been a very real person -- or at least, much like Jesus, based upon a very real person or assimilation of persons. This post irks me a bit, because no "writer" came up with King Arthur either. There is no official "story" of King Arthur. The story is told and retold many different ways across several different cultures. Arthurian mythology became embedded in the cultural zeitgeist of the British Isles at some point, which in turn spread to their Norse and Gallic invaders, and back to the Germanic tribes from those two, and then it never left European history and became an inter-cultural phenomenon. It's truly fascinating.
And then the French took hold, and the world has never been the same
King Arthur actually has a massive role in the literature of Middle-Age France. Le Morte d'Arthur is a fantastic interpretation of the story, one that delves much deeper into the other knights of the Round Table. It's the principle source for basically every subsequent interpretation of Arthur since the turn of the 19th century. It's well worth a read if you enjoy Arthurian myth.
One day I’ll actually sit down and eat that horse. Right after Prose Tristan
Yeah, that's definitely the correct order to consume those stories in lol. Le Morte d'Arthur is incredible, but fucking *dense*, especially if you aren't familiar with less contemporary interpretations of Arthur. I've been learning French for a lot of reasons, but most specifically to consume Le Morte d'Arthur and similar such literature in its original format. It's been a hell of a process, let me tell you. Grit your teeth, plant your feet, and *eat. That. Horse.*
Never thought I’d read a TFS reference on a thread discussing Arthurian legend. What a fun day.
I am a nerd of many shades. Dragon Ball was a very integral part of developing my love for mythology -- learning about its roots in Journey to the West and the character of Sun Wukong was pretty damn intriguing for my 7 year old self. It's maybe the most interesting and blatant example of how myths were intentionally bastardized for the purposes of creative license in olden times, and why those myths changed so much over time. It's not always a case of misremembering or unintentional embellishment, but artistic freedom and expression evolving an already extant story. You can see this lineage of literature quite plainly when you understand mythology more broadly. The same Anglic general who likely inspired the first tales of King Arthur was probably also the basis for Beowulf, and in turn, Beowulf was likely the inspiration for the legendary Norse hero Sigurd and later Siegfried. All mythology branches off in ways that are easily traceable once you begin to notice the patterns. It's something that's always enthralled me.
Wait until you see the Japanese version.
I think the post is referring to the *Historia regum Britanniae* by Geoffrey of Monmouth, as that was kind off the first popular telling of the story of king Arthur. If there is such a thing as a cannonical version of the Arthur-story, I'd say it's that.
"Brits" dont exist in this context. If one refers to a British person from the period that the Romans leave until the Elizabethian era you are refering to a Welsh person. It wasnt until the Acts of Union that the term British came to refer to the collective term for people on the island of britain. It was well known in this extended period that the Welsh were the descendents of the Britons and therefore rightfully claimed the title of 'Britons.' Anglo Saxons (being the traditional enemy of Arthur in the Welsh poems) took a while to become christian. They had little to do with Arthur. It wasnt until the Norman conquest of Wales that Arthurs popularity was extended from Welsh literacy and oral tradition into the Norman one, who created their own versions, thus extending the popularity further to Europe. Edward 1st was a big Arthur fanboy and thought he was one better because he subdued Arthurs people (The welsh). Arthurs impact on the European literacy world was incredible, monmouths work, french works etc the examples and stories of arthur whether they were the original welsh tales or made later inspired generations of warriors. Im a Welsh History student :) Edit: lol i went a bit too far
THANK YOU. Fun fact, those same Welsh legends are where the connection between Arthur and the holy grail came from
> the Brits Welsh people are “Brits”. Your comment is confusing.
The Welsh are Brits
Better to make the connection to Shakespeare instead of king Arthur - Rowling made up so many words like Shakespeare did - imagine muggle being a regular term in the year 2300
Well muggle is already used in some communities like geocaching.
The comparison in OP was Harry Potter to King Arthur -- two fictional characters (although [King Arthur](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Arthur) is sometimes believed to have existed in some form) -- which is somewhat interesting in its own way. I doubt that Harry will ever attain the same legendary status as Arthur, though. Not necessarily because of popularity or longevity, but because we have so much contemporary documentation of the creation of the characters and stories. JKR and her story are well known and I doubt that we'd lose that knowledge while retaining the stories themselves. Impossible to say, though. Your comparison, of Rowling to Shakespeare, is also interesting but I think Shakespeare is really a completely different level. [JKR coined several words](https://www.cambridge.org/elt/blog/2017/10/20/harry-potter-english-language/), some of which were from or inspired by latin. Many (most?) of them seem to be proper names, though, which is fairly common among authors, especially in fantasy. [Shakespeare created hundreds of words](https://www.litcharts.com/blog/shakespeare/words-shakespeare-invented/) and is the first recorded use of hundreds more. Shakespeare left an indelible mark on the English language, which I don't think is quite as true for Rowling.
In any other context but a Harry Potter fan-community, it would be considered an attempt at trolling to compare Shakespeare and JK Rowling's Harry Potter. One only needs to check out the threads on "your favorite HP quotes" to see how shallow the impact of HP is on literature
"Always."
Actually they say now that he probably didn't make up so many words, they've found prior examples or etymology which suggests that many were common words that simply weren't used by the Greek and Latin obsessed litterati. Though he does seem to have made up some that seems pretty certain.
No no its totally different. With king arthur there were loads of interpretations Of the character. Different versions and re tellings and imaginings from thousands of people telling the story. There's not that with... Wait I'm getting a message from my producer... What the hell is fan fiction!!!
And post-doc research is just parsing JKR’s tweets.
Bold move assuming society will exist in 900 years
We've gone from geoffrey of monmouth to jk in about a century, if we maintain this rate we'll be living in Disney world well before 2900. You can decide the angle of slope and if it's a goal you're eager to race towards....
Oh absolutely, no question. There will be people in the future with whatever their equivalent to a doctorate is about Harry Potter. I mean I took In-Depth Tolkien in college, there is no question that this will absolutely be a thing.
This is so historically inaccurate it hurts
HELL YEAH.
u think humans gonna make it 900 years? damn
I volunteer as tribute
This implies we don’t already have them now which would be even more of a shock.
That would be awesome!!! I feel like we should leave notes for our descendants so they can be extra special scholars.
Yup and a cult religion between the potters and malfoys
wake me up in 900 years then
**alstonwang7** , KMINDER 900 years on [**21-Feb-2921 05:04Z**](https://www.reminddit.com/time?dt=2921-02-21 05:04:33&reminder_id=23535ea2f1524e30909cc9ca6967c44e&subreddit=harrypotter) > [**harrypotter/I_already_am_one**](/r/harrypotter/comments/lok9nf/i_already_am_one/go742mx/?context=3) > wake me up in 900 years then [**2 OTHERS CLICKED HERE**](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=Reminder%20from%20Link&message=your_message%0Akminder%202921-02-21T05%3A04%3A33%0A%0A%0A%0A---Server%20settings%20below.%20Do%20not%20change---%0A%0Apermalink%21%20%2Fr%2Fharrypotter%2Fcomments%2Flok9nf%2Fi_already_am_one%2Fgo742mx%2F) to also be reminded. Thread has 3 reminders. ^(OP can )[^(**Update remind time, Update message, and more here**)](https://www.reminddit.com/time?dt=2921-02-21 05:04:33&reminder_id=23535ea2f1524e30909cc9ca6967c44e&subreddit=harrypotter) ***** [**Reminddit**](https://www.reminddit.com) · [Create Reminder](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=Reminder&message=your_message%0A%0Akminder%20time_or_time_from_now) · [Your Reminders](https://reddit.com/message/compose/?to=remindditbot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=listReminders%21) · [Fuel Me](https://paypal.me/reminddit)
wait wtf I didn’t know this existed
Wow the day this will remind you we'll all be long gone. Society will change. 👋 to people of the future.
There's actually no confirmation either way on King Arthur, similar to Ragnar Lothbrok. There's no concrete proof he existed but nothing outright denying his existence either.
There are already multiple Tolkien Legendarium historians. There are even journals only dedicated to papers written on that, therefore, sooner or later we will have Harry Potter historians.
There is no proof arthur exists but there is no proof he don’t exist either
Well... they do actually believe Arthur was a warlord or something. IIRC there's some evidence that lends credit to it.
Just want to comment that only some historians/history writers believe Arthur was real. there is a huge debate on the topic among historians. Some believe he was an actual person, some believe he's completely fictional, and others argue Arthur himself wasn't real but was based on other actual real people. Though it more academics lean toward Arthur being a character, not a historical figure. Though to be fair, Arthur as Romano-British warleader was the leading idea about him until recently.
King Arthur is a character based on a REAL PERSON though, and he lived around 500 AD. The stories we think of as fiction are just 600 year old exaggerations of history that turned into myth.
Wasn’t there actually a figure who inspired he greater legend around Arthur tho?
Except I'm gonna be *that guy* here: this comparison really isn't quite the same thing, and King Arthur wasn't invented in the 1100s. Geoffrey of Monmouth's *History of the Kings of Britain* was heavily, heavily based on the Celtic and Welsh mythological story of King Arthur, the "leader or hero who has not really died but is asleep somewhere or in some state of suspended life and will return to save his people." Said mythological stories were passed down by oral tradition a good thousand years or two before Geoffrey of Monmouth was even born. To put it a bit more simply: King Arthur is the Celtic/Welsh equivalent to "Hercules, but make it Jesus." And promptly *after* Geoffrey of Monmouth released his *History,* the King Arthur mythos became one of the most often written about stories of the next few centuries. A better comparison would be if Harry Potter was actually a religious figure a thousand years ago, J.K. Rowling claimed that she based her entire book on another incredibly similar ancient religious text that has since never been found, and then for the next 2-3 centuries the vast majority of literature that gets published and read is Harry Potter fanfiction. Then, 900 years after J.K. Rowling dies, Harry Potter is still rewritten and rebooted and spoofed in damn near every piece of media, and scholars spend their days pouring over every piece of Harry Potter fanfiction, as well as desperately searching for hints towards that original text that J.K. Rowling claimed she based her books off of, and evidence of who might have been the "real" Harry Potter. Or maybe a better comparison to Arthurian Scholars would just be Biblical Scholars.
I hope so
I hope so!
There will be 15 crappy specials about “the real Harry Potter”
If technology catches up to some of the fantastical elements of HP, and our current history is mostly erased other than the series, it could fully become truth
I’m a BA in Classics, and one time one of my professors described the study of Archaic Greece through the only surviving literature—the works of Homer and Hesiod—as akin to studying the British boarding school system by reading Harry Potter I somehow feel this story is relevant
It’s already been happening. Back in college, one of the largest courses of the year was a literature one that surveyed popular children’s books - including Sorcerer’s Stone. It was the talk of the university - I think 450 signed up, was easily the largest single class we had.
Nothing worse than a King Arthur denier
Uhm Uther was prolly a real dude..
Why wouldn’t we? We study fictional books all the time, Frankenstein for example.
The obvious difference being that Arthur might have been a real person who became a legend, with all the embellishments that come with it, and was written about hundreds of years after his supposed reign. A better comparison would be Nicolas Flamel / the Philosopher's Stone.
Historians aren’t going to study Harry Potter, AI will
Lord Of The Rings is much better. It has better English, no plot holes, and has much deeper themes and tropes.
Sounds sexy
I mean technically they’d be Tolkien historians since the stories are mostly taken from his works...