J.K. Rowling’s Fantastic Subliminal Con Job.




OK, now. I saw a movie this weekend.


But do not get any ideas.






Ordinarily, I don’t go for this type of thing. I don’t like make-believe worlds, especially when they are pitched as vehicles of so-called entertainment.


There are three extremely popular fantasy franchises which I have zero interest in and which I resist the act of enriching out of my own pocketbook as much as I can possibly resist: Star Wars, Harry Potter and Lord Of The Rings. That stuff bores me silly. The amount of cognitive suppression required to enjoy such crud would drive me insane, so in order for me to remotely indulge in anything approaching “enjoyment of” when it comes to Fantastic Beasts implies there is an element of appeasement to explain it away, ie, she watches my crap so I owed it to her. Appeasement.


You watch my crap, so I watch yours.


And as tends to happen when I splurge on mass entertainment of the pop cultural sort, I lapse into over-thinking/over-analysis mode in order to overcome the mind-numbing boredom.


Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them, a novel, from what I’ve learned, is a “book within a book” in the Harry Potter series.


Beasts involves much of the same hocus-pocus wizard mythology witnessed in Potterland (and is equally intolerable). Unfortunately, reality is what I enjoy and how I derive satisfaction; reality is what I rely on to shape my opinions and mold perspectives. Prior to watching the movie, I could not avoid the incontrovertible fact that author, J.K.Rowling, is one of those intolerable socially crusading lefties who is immeasurably bothersome, virtue of her monetary success. The world watches Harry Potter raptly, and I yawn. Rowling uses her pulpit of literary acclaim to spout all manners of left-wing tripe, and like so many proper, self-adoring liberals, egotistically expects that the world should run according to her bland liberal ideals simply because her vapid sorcerer stories strike a chord in the minds of a world that proclaims the sanctity of such overblown figures as Hillary Clinton and Angela Merkel.


Keeping the predictable Rowling story presence in mind, I found myself inserting divergent story narratives into a metaphorical framework that Rowling, leftist and social justice warrior extraordinaire, would approvingly author with smug leftist contentment splashed across her face. Fantastic Beasts teems with leftist motifs, many sly and insidiously disguised within the ornate fantastical story line where they disguise as entertainment instead of subliminal brainwashing, which they truly represent, the sort that is most dangerous because of the ubiquitous extent to which it suffuses pop culture with a steady stream of unspoken dialogue and paradigm insertion into the minds of the young and the vulnerable (and many not-so-young and intellectually vulnerable).


The most blatant example of Rowling’s liberal brainwash hypnotism in Fantastic Beasts occurred near the end of the movie during the obligatory action-packed denouement in which “good” triumphs over “evil,” in overblown Hollywood-style, when Percival Graves (Collin Farrell), the darkened, bad-guy warlock, is left no choice but to articulate his evil motives before a hostile crowd of “good guys” who are ready to spear him down (including a few people of color and scripted strong females). His revelation to this virtuous group is what made the Rowling connection click in my head.


Graves is a warlock/witch, one of a select group who occupy this mortal world of “lesser” (non-magical types) in a sort of restrained co-existence in which the superior warlocks voluntarily remain hidden, in the background, in order to allow the mortal humans to prosper and live happily while toiling away in their insignificant existence. The witches and wizards are quite capable of asserting their powers and dominating the world, but it’s only because of their restrained benevolence that they are content remaining unseen and unknown in a state where their powers are willfully not allowed to interfere with the day-to-day functions of mankind.  So nice and thoughtful of them!


(Let me preface by saying that I’m merely relaying what I’ve learned of the historical facts of Harry Potter secondhand…I knew nothing of the context of wizards and transfiguration and obliviation…and so on). The wizards possess this civilized strength, the byproduct of immense powers that endow them with the wisdom to shun the ego and malice necessary to reign over the weaker through tyranny. Very sensible, very mannerly, Rowling-level stuff. Do we need such common sense drivel disguised as “story?”




Every preachy Hollywood script must be extended, teased out infinitely into threadbare form, like cotton candy, and Fantastic Beasts is no exception.


Graves is pushed and prodded and standing alone in front of the self-righteous masses, he is finally left no choice, no room, but to express his reluctance to join his fellow wizards in submission to the weaker humans. Graves makes his last stand. He demands loudly, pointedly, which is the worst sort of doubt someone can have when it comes to the lefty wall of culturally sanctioned behavior.


Why can’t the wizards and witches simply assert their powers without shame or self-doubt, Graves wonders.


Why the need to control themselves, Graves muses.


Why can’t the secret society of witches and wizards allow themselves to reign freely and openly and happily rule the world? Why the charade, why must they hide in the shadows when the world beckons to be steered by powerful beings? Hiding does them no favors and only rewards the weaker.  For what?


Essentially, Graves pleads with his fellow wizards to free themselves of the self-imposed mask of civility in order to free themselves to express a ruthless utilitarian existence devoid of bothersome pretty lies which only protects the weak. He is not evil but he is a pragmatist. And as we know quite well, pragmatism is toxic to the delusional liberal SJW. Pragmatism is unpleasant and deflects their virtuous mission to paint life in the platitudes of comfort and inoffensiveness.


In 2016, by various means, the elites are entrusted to nurture and enable the weaknesses of the less privileged while disregarding that large group of people who are neither the wretched nor the noble. Now if I were only speaking of Graves’ fellow wizards, the plot might betray my point a bit – after all, the wizards are his peers and represent less a symbol of the downtrodden and meek than I would be able to argue otherwise. But you see, Rowling was diligent about framing a character who is in fact emblematic of the weaker underclass and thus, is the sincerest essence of all those mortal humans whom Graves has so little “regard” for: it is Jacob Kowalski, a sloppily obese, feeble-minded baker who finds himself sucked into the unlikely movie plot’s magic. Kowalski is the human who needs to be coddled and cared for by the superior wizard class and who is the fortunate recipient of elitist guilt.






What might very well turn into a battle between titans instead turns into a battle between the strong and the weak and thus represents the perfect vehicle for a contrived Rowling liberal counter-evolutionary treatise on the unquestioned obligation of the elites to use all their precious resources to sustain the poor at the peril of those who rest in between.


The narrative that Rowling and other guilt-ridden cultural elites spin is one that they alone can afford to nurture but which destroys the lives of those who don’t fall into either camp. Unfortunately, when it comes to Hollywood’s insidious brainwashing machine, those left in the middle holding the bag don’t find themselves metaphorically represented in Rowling’s glorification of the undertow.


One last ironic observation.


In the final scenes, Graves makes his final stand, but predictably, is subdued by Rowling’s angelic good guys. After he is physically restrained, we learn that the Graves we knew throughout this film was really a transfigured villain known as Gellert Grindelwald, played by Johnny Depp. The reversion to his true physical form strikes me as vaguely suggestive given the cast of characters witnessed on our current political scene.


From Graves’ facade…






…to the villainous Grindelwald, the puppet master who stole his appearance…






Due to the closely-kept secret/twist in this movie’s final scene, it’s nearly impossible to find a good photo of Johnny Depp as Grindelwald, but this image will show you everything you need to see.


The villain is fair-haired with a distinctly voluminous mane.


Remind you of anyone?