Oh, I read them. Rowling isn't much for world-building or consistency. Look at how every bit of the way the government works in the novels is inconsistent, the complete lack of accountability and investigation for multiple attacks and deaths at the school (Quirrel, the troll attack, people petrified for most of a year, Lockhart, Moody, Cedric.) Also look at the incoherence in Voldemort's past versus his standing and the lack of any real platform or message behind the entire Death Eater organization. Dumbledore is at best incredibly incompetent from the beginning of the series to the end but somehow manages to represent multiple levels of the wizarding world without being questioned.
Granted they're intended (at the start) for kids so the lack of world detail and the inability for adults to be anything other than incompetent or cruel isn't abnormal, but those problems don't go away as the subject material in the books becomes more adult. Explicit death and torture and abuse and persecution and societal failure written the way Rowling portrays it just doesn't work well with a world simplified for children. The inconsistencies mentioned above plus the series not addressing any of those major issues as the subject matter evolves indicates that the absence isn't by choice so much as in skill.
I doubt anybody cares about this argument so if you want to take it further you can PM me.