"The Harry Potter series has the misfortune to be children's literature that has been subject to critical review as serious literature" -- paraphrase from a comment I read in a forum some time ago (author and forum forgotten).

The Harry Potter series has some great characters, but poor plot and consistency. Many of the plot and consistency problems come from the use of unrealistic cliches and exaggerations, but there are also elements of poor plotting. Many of these issues raise questions about Dumbledore's ethics and competence.

Leaving 15mo old Harry on the door step is an unrealistic cliche. No responsible adult would do this, yet supposedly wise, caring, grandfatherly Dumbledore does so.

Dumbledore never checks on Harry himself, but he has Arabella Figg living two blocks away. Arabella sometimes babysits, but later admits to Harry that she couldn't be too nice to Harry when he was younger or she won't be allowed to babysit. So, Dumbledore knows Harry is not loved and is not well treated. The books describe the Dursley's treatment of him as emotionally abusive. Its not clear or not his aunt and uncle physically abuse him or if that is limited to Dudley and his gang. The signs of abuse are clear: ill-fitting clothes, shy, no friends, bullied by cousin, and under-performing. If Harry was anywhere near as ill-treated as the books describe and suggest, then his Muggle school teachers should have noticed the effects on Harry and reported the abuse to the appropriate authorities. After all, Arabella had noticed and modified her behaviour accordingly. So the books exaggerate the extent of his mistreatment, assume incompetence on the part of all his teachers (as none recognize the signs of abuse), or someone (who must be Dumbledore) interferes to prevent the abuse being noticed. What about Madame Pomfrey? In PS, she has trouble repairing Harry's arm because of prior injuries. Shouldn't that have caused her to investigate further and discover other signs of abuse?

Of course, there is evidence in the books that the descriptions of Harry's ill-treatment must be exaggerated. Development of language skills requires an infant to be taught to make the correct sounds, words, and phrases. Development of motor skills requires that an infant have toys or other objects to play with. If Harry lacked adequate skills at age 5, he would have required special schooling.

Horrid teachers (Snape in Potions and a ghost, Binns, in History) are unrealistic exaggerations. Children tell their parents about their teachers and parents complain if they don't think their children are being well educated. They complain to the headmaster and if he ignores their complaints they complain to the board of governors about both the teachers and the headmaster. (As an aside, how does Binns collect and mark essays?)

These exaggerated instances of poor teaching conflict with the presentation of Dumbledore as a great headmaster. If the exaggerations are taken at face value, he fails to ensure a quality education. He allows a ghost to teach an incredibly boring History of Magic class. He allows Snape to teach Potions without providing actual instruction on the art. He allows Snape to undermine the competition for the House Cup by blatantly biased awarding and removal of house points. He allows the teaching of Divination to be a joke. Is the teaching of these subjects really as awful as it is portrayed or is the telling exaggerated?

Potions is an important subject. It is required for people aspiring to a position as a healer or an auror. Does Dumbledore really allow it to be incompetently taught? The books say few students outside of Slytherin pursue it at the NEWT level. That would significantly reduce the number of candidates for positions in healing or as aurors. One might say that by permitting potions to be incompetently taught Dumbledore has done greater harm to wizarding society than any person other than Voldemort or his marked Death Eaters.

The OWLs and NEWTs appear to be independently administered. If History of Magic and Potions scores were too bad, the OWL and NEWT results would show this. So, perhaps the books exaggerate the students' perception of their teachers. Otherwise, the tests must have been adjusted to the level of teaching. Who would be responsible for that?

Hogwarts' educational experience is extremely narrow, focused exclusively on magic. There are no classes on English literature, languages, social studies, etc. How are students supposed to learn society's philosophical values and standards? The only sport is Quidditch and that is played by perhaps 1 in 10 students. What about magical contests? How about two people standing at opposite ends of a room (behind goal lines) using magic to try and move a ball across the opposing goal line?

Hogwarts is supposed to be safe. Its supposed to have great wards and Dumbledore is supposed to be a big factor in in making Hogwarts safe. However, in PS he lets QQ in with Voldemort possessing him and fails to detect the possession. In CoS he fails to detect the presence of a horribly dark object (the diary) or that one of his students has been possessed. He also fails to figure out (for the second time) that Slytherin's monster is most likely a snake and of the possible snakes the most likely is a Basilisk. In PoA, Hogwart's famed wards fail to keep Dementors off the grounds, allow them to accompany the Minister of Magic into the castle itself (to kiss Sirius if he hadn't escaped and to actually kiss Barty Crouch Jr.), and fail to detect the presence or entry of animagus' (PP or Sirius) into the castle itself. Note that the Marauder's map is able to locate and identify everyone within the castle, including Animagi, so the castle wards should also be able to do so. Several tunnels leading off of the castle grounds are revealed, the use of which by the twins, Harry, and (animagus) Sirius is undetected. In GoF, a Death Eater is admitted to Hogwarts and impersonates Dumbledore's good friend for the entire school year without being detected. Then Dumbledore fails to detect the powerful dark magic required to fool the goblet into thinking Harry had submitted his name and accepting the submission of Harry's name for an unnamed fourth school. Why exactly is Hogwarts considered safe? What exactly do its wards protect against? Why is Dumbledore respected?

Dumbledore is also revealed as a failure as chief warlock, by allowing Sirius to be imprisoned with out a trial received a trial he abrogated his responsibility to ensure the right to a fair trial. For the ministry to be able to imprison anyone without a trial should be a very big deal. The right to a trial is a fundamental principle on which a free society depends. As chief warlock Dumbledore should have ensured Sirius got a trial as a matter of principle. That he failed to do so raises the question of his competence or his motive - did he deliberately allow (or encourage) Sirius' imprisonment without a trial in order to remove Sirius' claim to custody of Harry?

Notwithstanding Dumbledore's apparent failings, the books hold that he is a great, wise and caring wizard. Yet, if one tries to make Dumbledore truly deserving of his reputation, then the books plots fall apart. Voldemort's possession of QQ is detected. Percy is unable to bring Scabbers to Hogwarts (or if Percy didn't bring him, Ron has trouble in his first year). The diary (or at least Ginny's possession) is detected. Etc. There is a contradiction between the wise, caring Dumbledore and the plot situations that he should have been able to prevent and should have done so. This is a fundamental flaw in the story line.

Dumbledore's absence from Hogwarts at the end of PS due to a forged message is a classic cliche, but the forged message is hardly needed. Dumbledore is the chief warlock of Britain's Wizengamot and supreme mugwump of the ICW. He has to be absent from Hogwarts on a regular basis to attend to those duties. There is no need to forge a message to get him out of the school. Of course, Dumbledore flying from Hogwarts, in Scotland, to the Ministry, in London, is nothing short of ridiculous - he would apparate, flu or portkey and discover the deception within an hour. Perhaps he flew from the castle to the edge of the wards, but that does not explain the length of his absence. The flu was not introduced in PS, but in the first chapter Dumbledore arrived and departed Privet drive by either apparition or portkey. On a similar note, when Harry's home was attacked by Voldemort Dumbledore dispatched Hagrid and he arrived promptly, presumably by portkey, however, he accepted Sirius' flying motor cycle for the return trip. Why? Is a portkey unsafe for a 15m old child?

Dumbledore is an experienced member of the wizarding government, yet he apparently fails to do anything substantial to force Fudge to acknowledge Voldemort's return or to counter the slander leveled against Harry and himself, even allowing himself to be removed from the office of Chief Warlock. A simple pensive memory of Harry's experiences at the end of the third task would have gone a long way to mobilize the forces of light. If Dumbledore is the great, wise, experienced wizard he is supposed to be, it is ridiculous for Fudge to be able to walk over Harry and Dumbledore unless Dumbledore deliberately allows it. The only reason for Dumbledore to allow it is to set up the plot for Umbridge's placement in Hogwarts; a case of expediency over consistency and reason.

Although the "happily ever after, married couples with children" ending may have been planned from the start, the details of the magical world and story plots do not appear to have been planned in advance. As the books progress, new elements are introduced that undo the plots of earlier books. The marauders map is introduced fairly early in PoA and we are told the twins have had it since their first year. However, Peter is not detected until the end of Harry's third year. The twins used the map to plan pranks. One of their prime targets was their brother Percy. Even if they weren't planning to prank Percy, they would have searched the map for secret rooms in Gryffindor tower and would have noticed Peter. If Percy didn't bring Scabbers to Hogwarts (after all, only toads, cats, and owls are allowed) then they should have noticed when Ron brought him, because the twins would have used the map to check up on their little brother. If for some reason the twins didn't check up on Ron, then when Harry got the map early in third year he would have looked at his dorm room on the map and seen Peter. One way or another, Peter should have been discovered long before the end of third year.

Its not just the limited use of the map by the twins and Harry that is at issue. If four students can provide the map with this capability, then the castle's highly touted wards should include this ability. One theory is that the map must get its information from the castle wards, because if it was easy to setup it would be used by the ministry (or others) in other areas, such as Diagon Alley. Its a simple step to automatically identify students and staff and issue an alert when anyone else enters the castle or record past movements. So, why wasn't Peter identified as soon as he was brought into the castle by Percy or Ron? Why wasn't Barty Crouch Jr. identified? This is a plot hole, a magical device introduced to fill a specific purpose without considering wider application of the magic.

The romantic relationships presented in the last books, HG and RHr, are poorly developed. Ginny starts with a crush on the boy-who-lived and supposedly grows out of it or shifts to a crush on Harry the boy, but there is no development of a relationship with Harry. They go from Harry noticing she is cute to kissing and snogging to them being in love. The first part of that is ok, but love is more than snogging and there was no development of that level of relationship in the books. Similarly, there is no transition of Ron and Hermione from argumentative friends (only brought and held together by Harry) into a couple. Ron is lazy and only interested in Quidditch, chess, and other games. Hermione is driven, academically inclined, and ambitious. Moreover, their arguments often aren't friendly. They don't just leave Hermione frustrated, they drive her to tears. They are often on matters core to Hermione's character rather than subjects that are open to friendly conjecture like sports, politics, or religion. The canon couplings are far from obvious and there are good arguments against them. This is not to say that the canon pairs (or many others pairings) could not work, just that they are not well presented in the books. Relationships develop. That development may be before two people become a couple or afterward, but it is required and is not present in the books.

The loyalty or rather the disloyalty of certain Death Eaters is a problematic. With truth serums, wizards oaths, legilimency, and the dark mark tattoo, there should be no possibility of a Death Eater betraying Voldemort (at least, not for long). This problem is due to the exaggerated cliche nature of these elements. Voldemort is power hungry and (for all his huff and puff) insecure. Before Voldemort makes anyone a Death Eater, he's going to read the person's mind. Then the ceremony probably includes a wizard's oath pledging "loyalty", if not actual "obedience". Then there's the dark mark itself, which we know is powerful magic. It can be used to call DEs and is impossible to remove. What's the chance it doesn't have a compulsion to ensure loyalty or obedience? How then can Snape be a spy?

Azkaban prison and its dementor guards are further elements of controversy. On one hand, imprisoning a convict to Azkaban appears to be equivalent to imposing mental torture and eventual insanity. It is repeatedly said that Sirius only retained his sanity by transforming into his animagus form. However, Voldemort freed several long term prisoners who were functional after their release. Remus tells Harry that dementors can only be controlled with the Patronis charm, which seems only to chases them away, and that is all Dumbledore is seen to use to control them. However, they accompany the Minister into Hogwarts presumably under much greater control than the patronis charm provides.

Another issue relating to Azkaban is whether its wards block house elf magic, specifically their ability to "pop" from place to place. House elves can "pop" from place to place within and to and from Hogwarts which is supposedly the best warded location in Britain. Are they then able to "pop" in and out of Azkaban? What's to stop prisoners calling their elves for assistance?

House elves and there magic are poorly defined and inconsistently presented feature of the Potter universe. From their name and their apparent duties at Hogwarts, one expects them to perform house hold chores of household maids, kitchen workers and possibly grounds staff. However, in CoS Dobby accompanies Malfoy to Hogwarts; what services would he perform in that capacity? Why are there no other references to wizards being accompanied by their house elves? How were house elves enslaved? Why don't house elves (except Dobby) want freedom? Why d oesn't Harry think to call Dobby to Privet drive (e.g., to get food)? Why doesn't Dobby do so on his own or volunteer? The summer after third year, Harry might worry about Dobby's magic being mistaken for his own, but surely he would check that out and be able to call on Dobby in later summers. Why does Hogwarts require a caretaker to clean its halls when it has so many house elves? It is only revealled in DH that Dobby can take people with him when he "pops", why isn't that ability used in earlier books, say to take injured students to the hospital wing at Hogwarts? Why weren't elves enlisted to help Harry leave Privet drive instead of flying away on brooms with polijuiced decoys?

The ministry's ability to detect magic (both underage and otherwise) is scary -- in a '1984' way. Add in wizards oaths, truth serum, legilimency, and imprisonment without trial the wizarding society of Harry Potter begins to sound very unpleasant. To complete the 1984 scenario, give the ministry the equivalent of the marauder's map for major wizarding areas, tie the maps into the magic detectors and add a thirty day recording and playback feature. Of course, with these types of magic it aught to be possible to keep better track of dark wizards.

The protection provided by Lily's sacrifice sound nice, but what protection is actually provided? It is implied that Privet Drive and Harry personally are protected. Its true that Privet Drive is not attacked while the wards are in place, however Dobby, Ron and the twins, and Sirius were all able to locate him there without Dumbledore's approval, however, he wasn't swamped by well wishing witches and wizards or their owls. Its also true that QQ is burnt by Harry's touch, however, that seems to be the limit of Harry's personal protection. QQ was able to successfully cast spells on Harry prior to their physical confrontation. Tom Riddle was able to cast spells on Harry in the CoS (Harry didn't try to touch him). Harry was not protected from the effects of Dementors in PoA. Wormtail (a marked death eater with hostile intent) was able to successfully cast spells on him in the graveyard in GoF. After Harry's blood was used to create Voldemort's new body, Voldemort was able to touch Harry without being burned and to successfully cast spells on Harry. Did the blood wards still protect Pivet Drive or were there other secondary wards? Why did Harry have to return there after GoF? Finally, if Harry's touch burned QQ because he was possessed by Voldemort, how could one of Voldemort's Horcruxes be lodged in Harry? For such an important plot element, this is really not presented very well.

Why was Harry isolated at Privet Drive? Although owls might have been intercepted or tracked, the house was guarded by members of the Order of the Phoenix who could have hand delivered messages either to Harry or deposited them in the mail slot (with charms to ensure they reached Harry). Alternately house elves could have delivered messages (or better, messages and food).

There are many issues that are not clear. Why take a train to Hogwarts? Why is Hogwarts a boarding school instead of having students commute by flu or portkey? Why doesn't Harry get special training? Why doesn't Harry use magic to resize and repair his hand-me-downclothes while at Hogwarts so they fit? Where does Olivander get enough phoenix feathers to use as one of the apparently few wand cores? The only phoenix we know of is Dumbledore's familiar which is described as very rare. Is Hogwarts the only school of Magic in Britain? How large is the magical population? An incoming Hogwarts class of 40 and an average life expectancy between 100 and 200 years suggests a population of 4000-8000, a rather small breading pool.

The heavy use of exaggeration and cliches clearly have not been an impediment and may have contributed to the commercial success of the Harry Potter books. However, they (together with plot problems and poor development of romantic relationships) provide challenges for fan fiction authors trying to provide greater depth to the Harry Potter stories and create many opportunities for divergent or alternate universe story lines in which exaggerated situations bring appropriate responses. They create a tapestry that is so flawed that it screams out to critical readers and begs fan fiction authors to write the stories showing the way it should have been.

My greatest disappointment with the HP books is the Deathly Hallows. What happened to "the power he knows not"? What happened to the room in the Department of Mysteries where the greatest power in the universe is studied? DH has Voldemort defeated by a fluke of wand ownership. Bah.