What makes Harry Potter not so special to readers everywhere?

It's difficult to pinpoint exactly what I disliked about the volumes that followed The Prisoner of Azkaban. I read them, or at least wanted to read them, to find out what occurred. My faults with the book may not be big defects, but I found them to detract from it.

Photo by Artem Maltsev on Unsplash

To begin with, Harry Potter and his companions had to be the most pitiful magic users ever trained. Even Hermoine, who is portrayed as the smartest student in the school, is quite pitiful. Everyone in the previous generation seemed to be considerably more skilled by the time they graduated, or even before they graduated, from Hogwarts.

James and company were skilled/powerful enough to create the Marauder's Map, which I doubt Hermoine (much alone Harry) could do if her life depended on it. Tom Riddle kept a notebook of his memories while he was still in sixth grade. 

Even Snape was a proficient potion maker (to the point of modifying the recipes) and appeared to either know or produce an advanced curse, as evidenced by his recollections and diaries. But what about today's students? They're all flops.

None of them are innovative; they simply learn what has previously been discovered and hope, at most, to reproduce previous accomplishments. None of them enhance anything, and none of them build anything that did not previously exist. Hermoine even utilized a magic she discovered to make the coins for the DA.

Furthermore, in a world where magical artifacts appear to be somewhat essential, Harry Potter and his pals appear to know remarkably little about creating such goods. The most they can do, or rather Hermoine can do, is warm a coin.

Making their own spells is another essential ability that none of them appear to have. Voldemort did not create his horcruxes or the bowl of liquid that kills you with thirst by using a spell created by someone else. He created them. Similarly, Voldemort creates a silver hand for Peter (I'm not sure whether he said anything), the spell that creates the evil mark, and virtually every time Dumbledore performs magic.

Related to this is the torrent of charms that Flitwick was able to use to defend Hogwarts when it was attacked, despite the fact that no one else seemed to be able to do so.

I find it incredible that Harry was able to fight off professional killers nearly entirely using the disarming spell. It is illogical. A spell they learnt in their second year at Hogwarts had remained effective against the most dangerous wizards until it suddenly stopped working. Of course, I'm referring to the time when countering spells was introduced at Hogwarts (this is related to my second complaint, the fact that nothing exists until it has been taught in Hogwarts).

Then, all of a sudden, the same strategies that worked in previous books, such as surprise spells, fail. Why? Because the Professors (and their opponents) have suddenly grown incredibly adept at opposing spells.

In short, Hogwarts appears to be an awful location to learn magic. This is made even more alarming by the fact that they have no "college."

Second, as previously said, items are simply added to the world. I believe this is because Rowling didn't fully consider the kind of magic she would allow in her universe and simply added it without considering the repercussions of doing so. These books are not at all like Earthsea.

The first sign is that many of the books contained the "spell of the year." Disarming in the second book, patronus in the third, and stunning and the three main ones in the fourth. When first introduced, these spells are incredibly strong; adult wizards are pictured utilizing them in professional work, yet they are not utilized in prior books, sometimes by the same wizards.

Nobody is disarmed in the first book. No one stuns anybody before the fourth book, despite the fact that the professors should know it (especially when it's shown stunning a dragon, stunning wicked wizards, and fucking stunning everyone in that book). Similar to this is the counter-spelling, which is abruptly introduced, and the Professors are suddenly skilled.

Then there's the killing spell. It can't be stopped! Until it is proved to be false. No, all you need is some older magic and some sacrifice to resist it. As if by magic. However, there may be other ways to prevent it. It's just more difficult to block than other spells (not that this matters; practically all spells seem to have instantaneous effect if they hit you and you can't do anything about it). The best that can be said is that you don't appear to be able to create a shield to prevent it, as you do with "minor" hexes/curses.

Another thing that was added at random was a spell that made you unable to betray anyone! It would endanger your life. I'm curious as to why Voldemort did not employ this spell. Did he believe his people could be trusted? What difference does it make to him? It also appears to be an unbeatable combination when paired with the hidden keeper spell. To be honest, after that was presented, I felt like James and Lily perished for no reason at all.

Not to add that in a world when truth serum exists, people should not be falsely imprisoned. Sirius should never have been imprisoned. It beyond comprehension. Truth serums, however, did not exist in the third novel because they had not yet been introduced. No, that had to wait till the fourth book.

Portkeys were also distributed at random. They may also be used to enter and exit Hogwarts, which was thought to be impossible. But I gave up on Hogwarts security after discovering that the disappearing closet could be exploited to get entry.

Finally, there are random contradictions in the universe. Polyjuice potion, for example, is incredibly powerful. When combined with the spell that controls individuals, I find it amazing that any government can exist at all. Or that wizards can put their trust in anyone. Then there's the question of why, given the power to counter spells, utilize spells that impact only one person. When Peter faked his death, he blew up an entire street, although by all accounts, he was not a powerful wizard.

More AOEs and fewer single target spells would appear to be required, but how do the conflicts between the death eaters and the order look? A storm of single-target spells. Only Crabbe, Goyle, or whatever makes the fire that destroys everything, and even then, they can't keep it under control.

Also, who built Hogwarts' defenses? Who created the required room? What type of sorcery is at work here? Who manufactures anything? Voldemort, Dumbledore, and the twins seemed to be the only persons who made things and appeared in the present throughout the novel! Brooms, books that eat people, invisibility cloaks, and the enemy detector are all mass-produced (with the exception of the invisibility cloak), but no mention is made of who developed them, nor do the students appear to be studying any skills relevant to the production of such products.

Omg! I left something out. In a life-or-death scenario, why would anyone who is capable of casting the killing spell cast any other spell? Why? They lose when there is no "power" or "mana" or anything else. In fact, no one in the Harry Potter universe appears to get tired of utilizing magic, and it appears to cost them nothing. 

Given this, why would you utilize anything other than the tried-and-true? Do they enjoy putting themselves down? Do they enjoy having their spells thwarted? Do they enjoy failing? Other than AOEs, this is the only spell I can envision being employed.