Why down on all the characters?

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 179335

Magpie:
Were the characters that much more well-loved pre-DH? Because I've
always heard people saying they dislike aspects of the characters. It
seems like the difference now, if anything, is maybe that now people
know this is how they characters are going to stay and what they
ultimately mean. They might have been expecting more of a turnaround.

a_svirn:
Personally, I think it is a false problem. I, for one, do not crack 
down on the *characters*. It is the *books* I feel dissatisfied with, 
or, rather, the book – DH.  Some of my favourite books are full of 
characters I detest, or dislike, or feel indifferent towards, and I 
still enjoy them none the less. What I find objectionable in DH is a) 
a crudely cobbled up plot and b) highly questionable morality which 
we are supposed to accept as "the epitome of goodness" almost Good 
Tidings, in fact. I wouldn't mind Dumbledore being Machiavellian in a 
book about a Machiavellian Dumbledore, but I find it most incongruous 
in a book where he is supposed to be the best of the good. And just 
as I have accepted that he is Machiavellian after all, and not even 
successfully Machiavellian at that, I am supposed to conclude that he 
has all along been Machiavellian for the Greater Good, and is in fact 
the best of the good (albeit not as good as Harry). Well, this is a 
kind of thing I am unable to accept, and to judge by the ongoing 
debate, I am definitely not the only one.