DEATHLY HALLOWS DISCUSSION: SPOILERS

[jgraz]

I'm going to hold off on sharing my impressions for the moment, but I'd love to hear what others thought of the book.

[Pale Blue Dot]

1. I know your opinion is different than mine, but I loved it.

I think it's almost superhuman what Rowlings has accomplished with this series.

All the loose ends were neatly tied up, it remained as unpredictable as ever, and I cried - Several times.

"I'll open at the close." :cry:

[jgraz]

3. Honestly, I'm really hoping my opinion changes

I did that with Finding Nemo, hating it at first and then coming to really like it. I hope that a few other reviewers can set me straight and convince me of the goodness that I was missing.

[jobycom]

34. You'd have to elaborate more

on what aspect of the brilliance you didn't understand! :)

Just teasing.

I loved it, but I think there were some places she stumbled a bit. The King's Cross scene wasn't my favorite, and I felt a little cheated by the final lines of that scene, where Harry asks if it is happening in his head or if it's real. That's the kind of scene and line that most writers wince to reread, and edit with vigor.

And while the Voldemort battle with Harry worked and gave the emotional satisfaction people wanted, I thought she could have done better. First, it felt like every final gunfight in every good guy/bad guy western ever made--the good guy puts it all in perspective for the bad guy, reveals that his downfall is caused by the ruthlessness he believes is his strength, and then DRAW! BANG! and the bad guy's body falls. Only thing mising was the camera misdirection to make you think the bad guy won.

As with most fantasy/magical books, the magic, especially at the end, seemed a bit too contrived. "There is a magical loophole that only applies in this one exact circumstance that means that the very weapon you are holding is, due to circumstances that really aren't my doing and therefore do not make me in any way more heroic or worthy of victory, the very one that cannot defeat me because of something special about me that no one else can claim." But, I had the same problem with "Lord of the Rings," "Thomas Covenant," Shanara, Sword of Truth, and many others. Heck, half the James Bond films end that way, too.

And I felt that several of her deaths were gratuitous, simply to toy with the audience emotions. And conversely, in a situation and final battle as fierce as those in this book, I wondered what the odds were that so few of the heroes did die. Especially the kids. The least experienced duelers, the ones who couldn't do all the flying birds and flame dragon conjuring and all, were able to battle the most ruthless and talented villains and suffer very few losses.

And finally. Why the Hell did the Ministry/Death Eaters wait so long to try to wipe out the Weasleys? I mean, come on, Harry hides at the house of his best friend since the first book, and despite the fact that the father and brother of this best friend go to the Ministry every day, and that the father is a known Muggle-supporter and a friend to Harry Potter, no one thinks to watch/check the Burrows, or grab every Weasley available? Voldemort kills a teacher for writing an essay he doesn't like, he kills his most trusted leutenant to test a hypothetical point, but he's going to hold off wiping out the hated Weasley family because he's not completely sure Harry is there? Rowling needed a little more work on that.

But I thought the pluses outweighed the negatives. First, there are very few writers who can juggle that many characters and have each one with such a vivid and (mostly) distinctive feel, who can have the audience understand and relate to the characters so completely that the audience anticipates how the character will react in a given situation. Even in the Weasley family, every family member (except the twins) is unique, with different motivations, emotions, desires, ways of approaching a problem, etc. She may have the lowest ratio of stock to original characters of any author I've ever read.

Second, she creates a universe that is nearly seemless. Like your "Finding Nemo," she takes the reader into a unique world that occasionally brushes against our own, and develops a complex plot, vivid characters, and a myriad of scenes that are totally dependent on that world and its rules and realities, and does it so well that the reader would have to be actively resisting to not believe it. Even when the world intersected our own, the interactions seemed consistent with both realities.

Third, she has all the gifts of a storyteller. The book created suspense, manipulated emotions, kept the reader flipping pages and skipping meals. You seem to have finished it as quickly as the rest of us. :)

Fourth, the metaphysics of the book all worked, even the overplayed, hokie-but-still-emotionally-effective, dual themes of love being the magic to overcome all evil, and pride and arrogance as the path to becoming evil. She was consistent even on smaller evils, such as Dumbledore's youthful flirtation with absolute power and its resultant negative consequences. Rowling set up all the final conclusions nicely. True, the book slowed a bit as the characters learned what they needed to know, but I felt like she still kept the character interplay and the individual scenes interesting enough.

True, one could find flaws, and I did, but my overall feel was that few of the flaws jumped out at me, and only did so if I tried to find them. I picked up the book, I read it, I was enthralled for--I estimated--eighteen hours (I'm a slow reader), I shed a few tears, I laughed aloud, I even cheered at one point in the end, although I will admit I was hungry and sleep-deprived and may have been more easily moved because of that. It was a great ending to a great literary endeavor. I cared about the characters, and cared about the ending.

Anyway, those are my thoughts on the book. I loved it, I saw some flaws. Now I need a hot meal. Later. :hi:

[jgraz]

37. Hmmm...I agree with almost everything you said

I think the shortcomings just affected me more than the brilliance in this one.

[XemaSab]

40. Ok, tell us in great detail what you thought the shortcomings were please.

:)

IMHO, I thought the pacing was odd and to put it bluntly, all the stuff about wands annoyed me, like there should have been some of those details in earlier books. There were a couple parts where I thought there could have been a paragraph or so of reflection or explanation, like when Harry performs the unforgivable curses and when a certain werewolf and metamorphmagus (not to mention a certain Weasley twin) die at the end. :(

Everything else was really well done.

[jgraz]

41. Here's what I posted in the Lounge a few days ago

I've put off posting this here because I didn't want to seem like a troll. I know a lot of people were going to love this book and I'd hate for my whining to reduce their enjoyment in any way.

But since you asked, here's a first take on my problems with this book:

Ginny: I was so looking forward to a serious girl power moment from her, but we got nothing. Six years of hearing how all-fucking-powerful Ginny is and in the end she's treated as a MacGuffin to add a bit of tension to the final scenes. Sad. Ginny's power should have been key to at least one major victory in the battle.

Hedwig: You killed his BIRD? For God's sake, talk about tormenting your readers. This might have been recoverable if Hedwig had been replaced by...I don't know...Fawkes, maybe? But the Phoenix isn't even mentioned in the book. So Harry's pet gets AK'ed and then BLOWN UP for fuck's sake and for what? Nothing that I could see.

Snape: WTF, Jo? Seriously, WTF?? He lurks around in Voldermort's gang for 17 years, kills Dumbledore to stay in their good graces and then...what? He gets offed by the fucking SNAKE? No confrontation with Harry, no moment where Voldy realizes just how badly he's been hoodwinked...nothing. Snape just dies and then effectively monologues his backstory via the pensieve. This guy was one of the best, most complex characters in the series. He deserved better.

Wormtail: Again, no serious climax or resolution to his story. Just a quick death and we're done with him.

Fred: Don't even get me started

Tonks & Lupin: See above re: Fred

The Dursleys: Another WTF moment. All the years of hints, Petunia being "oddly flushed", the mystery of Dudley's dementor visions and we end with a handshake? Yeah, it was nice and all, but what happened to the "character who discovers magical powers later in life"? Didn't Jo hint that that would be one of the Dursleys?

Lucius: This guy really needed to be beat down by either a) Arthur Weasley, b) Draco or c) Ginny. What actually happened to him in the final battle anyway?

Neville: Any Gryffindor could have killed that snake. Neville needed to be inside kicking Bellatrix's ass. Why the hell was that battle given to Molly of all people?

The setting: Why in hell did Harry, Ron and Hermione have to go camping? For one, the monkey-wrench to the formula makes the entire book read like fan fic. It's also completely unnecessary. Go to Hogwarts, hole up in the Room of Requirement and just walk outside the gates an apparate wherever you need to go. This puts Harry in the thick of the action so we don't have to hear about all the Hogwarts developments third-hand. I, for one, would have liked to have been in on the attempt to steal the sword, Snape's return as headmaster and the student resistance that followed. Harry's absence from the school meant that all of these key elements had to happen off-stage.

and finally

The Room of Requirement: Seriously, Voldemort thought that he was the only one who could enter it? Wouldn't you think the mounds and mounds of OTHER PEOPLE'S SHIT would have given him some clue as to the flaw in his plan?

There are a few other things that come to mind, like the cheesiness of characters like Trelawney and Neville using their designated Wonder Twin Powers in the final battle (especially since Weasley's Wizard Wheezes were all but forgotten), but the above issues are the big things that bugged me as I was reading it.

[jobycom]

53. I gotta say, most of your complaints are what I consider the unforgivable curse of critiquing.

First, so you won't think I'm trying to bash you or blindly defend the book, I'll say I agree with a couple of points. I did feel like some of the camping scenes were a bit lazy, and that some of it seemed to be only to dance the characters around. And I did feel that the deaths seemed, often, rather random, rather than being caused by plot devices and intriques, thus giving them a sort of gratuitous feel, as though Rowling were just trying to play with emotions, and had lost some of her way. I didn't think it was fatal, but I did feel, when I had finished the book, that it was her laziest, even though it still worked well for me. It someone reminded me of "Return of the Jedi," in that I thought she had so much on her plate that she gave up trying to make every subplot end with a tidy resolution.

Now, my unforgivable curse. Most of what you said is "I wanted X, but got Y." I never consider this, by itself, a valid criticism. I want to see what the creator is trying to do, and I don't want the creator to be trying to write what I want. To me, the purpose of art (I'll use a lower-case 'a' here just to avoid any argument over the appropriateness of the word) is to introduce the audience to the insights of the artist, not to show the audience what it already knows or anticipates. I'm a decent writer--if I want to see characters do specific things, I'll write them doing it. (I did that once--I got so mad at "Elfstones of Shanara" that I rewrote the ending of it to how I thought it should end!)

Anyway, my point is, most of your criticisms were that she didn't do what you wanted, not that what she did was wrong. I just don't judge art, no matter how "low brow" the art may be, that way. I look for what the artist was doing, instead, and judge by that.

Again, just my thoughts. Not saying yours are wrong or less valid than mine. Just saying mine are better than yours! :rofl: Okay, not saying that, either, just explaining maybe why my enjoyment wasn't overpowered by the flaws, and yours seems to have been.

[jgraz]

57. No argument here

That's the attitude I started with: let's see where this ride takes us. I wouldn't even call my post a critique -- I'm not really trying to convince anyone else that the book was bad. I'm just saying that I didn't like it and here's why.

Your analysis is spot on about what really bugged me. I had expectations and they weren't met. The only thing I can say in my defense is that many of those expectations were set by Jo herself -- promises (direct or implied) which she never followed through on.

So this is more a reaction than a judgment. I'm not commenting on the quality of her writing, just the fact that my response to it was overwhelmingly negative. I've loved every one of her books up to now, so this came as something of a shock. :( :(

[intheflow]

75. I wonder how much the editor took out that Rowlings wrote.

Her hints could have been dead-on but the editor thought it ran too long. Like HBP, I thought this one was heavily edited. Probably a combination of editors and too many subplots for her to tidy them all up, as was suggested above.

[northzax]

69. I have a different series of complaints

Mainly, i think that having everything happen second hand simply demonstrated harry's isolation from his world, that worked for me. Including the deaths, shit happens in battle, and often you never really know what actually did. Who cares how colin creevey died? It's not important to anyone but the creevey's what's important is that he did. Welcome to war.

my complaint is simple. rowling set up Harry's death for 7 books, and then created a loophole (true, a loophole almost consistent with her universe) to save him. The whole deus et machina thing is boring. A good movie ending, but disappointingNonetheless.

[Mist]

54. Just finished it about an hour ago (couldn't read consistently on Sat., and

Sunday was given over to family duties. As soon as I left an overlong birthday party, I finally finished the book). I have to agree with most of what jgraz lists as complaints. I have the same complaints overall, except I actually thought Wormtail's death well-done. And yes, Tom Riddle thinking he's the only one to find the RoR in it's attic incarnation is just plain silly--could ALL that junk have been put in there only after Riddle used it?

I hate that Fred, Lupin, and Tonks died--just seemed unnecessary. And Hedwig? That really shocked me, but maybe that was the idea--to put the reader in shock and overdrive from the get-go. Still, it seemed gratuitous.

The whole camping for months thing got old, and seemed to hold the trio back. However, if Harry had been at Hogwarts, he couldn't have remained hidden for long.

I also would like to have more info on how the incredibly compromised ministry was reinstituted, and more on how the surviving deatheaters were dealt with. And where did the dementors go? Back to Azkaban?

I thought it was silly how Harry, Ron, Hermione, and others didn't use killing curses. It was all-out war--why were they pulling their punches? They're fighting wizards who are torturing and killing and they're okay with stunning them and walking away, leaving the bad guys with multiple chances to come back to torture and kill?

And why were we deprived of Umbridge's death? Damn, I was really looking forward to that!

[jobycom]

62. My comments on killing curses, Umbridge, and the Room of Requirements.

I agree, the Voldemort Room of Requirements thing was a bit hard to accept. I could come up two possibilites: one, Voldemort assumed the stuff had come from somewhere else, since he (like a lot of highly intelligent people) would tend to assume that no one else was as smart as him, so they couldn't have figured it out. Maybe he didn't fathom the full extent of the room, and just thought it was a storage room that only he could open. The second possibility is that maybe his requirement for getting in the room made it empty for him. Rowling didn't explain any further, though, so it was a weak spot. To be fair to her, editors and publishers are brutal, and may have edited out her explanations, finding them redundant. I find much of pop fiction and much of television drama so over-edited as to often be incomprehensible--it's almost, sometimes, like they are speaking in text abbreviations, figuring the audience just doesn't need to know about the finer details. MAYBE that's the case? Just guessing.

Umbridge--she didn't seem to be a Voldemort supporter so much as an overly-officious underling with no conscience. I was hoping less for a brutal death and more for something that hurt her where she lived--like being exposed as half-blooded and having to face the same type tribunal she ran. I thought that's where Rowling was going when Umbridge made up a story about the locket being a family heirloom showing her connection to wizarding families. I still think Rowling was setting up such a scenario, and gave up or had it edited out for brevity. Again, just guessing, but given the way she meticulously set up everything in the rest of her novels, something seemed out of character.

Third, the killing curses were dark magic, and they did have Remus chastise Harry early on for not being more brutal in battle. Harry defended himself, basically saying he would never become like the Death Eaters. I think Rowling should have hit on the point again at the end, but she didn't, or the editors didn't allow it.

I wonder if we'll ever get an author's cut of the book, or some revised version. I loved the book, but it felt incomplete. Not bad to me, just incomplete.

[Mist]

71. Those are good explanations you listed, jobycom. I think indeed some editing

might have taken place, and if so, it was ill-considered. I still think killing people who are trying to kill you, and will definately try to kill you again if you let them go, is OK.

An author's cut of DH--could we persuade JKR on that? I would love it. I actually expected this last HP book to be even longer, just to tie up all the loose ends and subplots. I was expecting (hoping for?) a good thousand pages!

[XemaSab]

102. In Half-blood Prince

Harry makes the assumption that a lot of the stuff is hidden by house elves, but he also acknowledges that probably students have hidden banned things in there too.

Voldemort's a dumbass.

[Lorien]

137. I agree with you on most counts, though I think the protagonists avoided

using the killing curse because it was dark magic that would make them become like the things they were fighting against. Hedwig's death was completely gratuitous. As an animal lover myself I somehow always got the feeling that Rowling never had a beloved pet of her own. With the exception of Hagrid, no other character in the series shows a real connection with their animal companions. I think Hedwig's death would be more of a blow to many of the children who had grown up reading the books than it was to Harry.

Aside from the endless and directionless camping scenes and sniping between Harry, Hermione and Ron, the bit that really bothered me was how Godric's sword got from Griphook's clutches to Neville Longbottom's hands. Every other loose end seemed to be fairly well tied up, but that rather large one was left hanging.

Overall it was a very entertaining and fast paced read. The series as a whole is quite an accomplishment. Rowling's imagination and knack for story telling never ceases to amaze me.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

2. I BAWLED my way through it...

It starts off BOOM, and then drags for a while, then Oh my god. I was SOBBING...
Duckie

[FloridaJudy]

4. I needed a whole box of Kleenex

When Harry does that thing he has to do at the seaside cottage. Very Dickensian indeed.

Much of it read like the "Perils of Pauline", with cliff-hanger after cliff-hanger: the MoM, the Bank, the {umh-humh's} cellar. I glad nobody gave away some of the plot twists. I had to read it in a 12-hour Marathon, since I kept wondering "How on earth are they going to get out of that one!"

[YellowRubberDuckie]

5. I read from around 10 AM until just after 6:30.

And I think I read so fast I missed some stuff. But that's OK...I'll read it six or seven times before the end of the year. I'm a freak like that...
And not to give anything away, but didn't you LOVE The epilogue?
Duckie

[XemaSab]

9. Hey, this is the spoiler thread...

and I found myself HOPING that little Albus Severus becomes a Slytherin, and befriends the young Scorpius Malfoy... :D

[YellowRubberDuckie]

25. How much is Lily like her mommy? She's going to miss those brothers...

And I'm still very on edge from the whole Weasley twin loss. Fred was my favorite. I'm bitter. Jo will get a piece of my mind if we ever meet. Those boys were by favorite in the book, and what is George going to do without his other half? :cry:
I was very excited to see Hagrid came through everything all right. And having tea with little Albus. How cute!!
I'm just gushing. Skip is going to take three months to read the book. It's frustrating.
Duckie

[Pithy Cherub]

38. You popped into my head as soon as I recovered

from that - what in the world... It was what I knew was going to happen (instinct - no spoilers) and we both were thinking about months ago how this would end and whether we would be happy with Jo. weren't you a bit unnerved by the poems dedicated to dead friends and the inspired 7 dedications...

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

46. You loved the epilogue?

It was definitly the worst part of the whole series for me, and the worst part of the 7th book imho. I just didn't care that all the main characters were married popping out babies. I was more interested in finding out about the cleanup of voldemorts people, the end of his shadow government, what happend to all the kids who didnt complete their 7th year at school, did they get to take the N.E.W.T.s? What did their jobs become? etc...It did nothing for me to find out they were all baby making machines.

[eridani]

87. Same here

Nice to know that Neville became a Herbology professor, but what were Harry, Hermione, Ginny and Ron doing for a living? And what did they do with that gawdawful monument in the Ministry of Magic? Seems like a lot of denazification would have been required. LOTR was much better at mopping up that kind of detail.

[XemaSab]

8. I agree about the pacing...

...there was a stretch in the middle that was a little confusing about where it was going... but loose ends were neatly tied.

When Dumbledore says "my mistakes are greater" he really wasn't kidding.

[AZBlue]

50. Snape really got to me. I cried so much when Harry reviewed his last thoughts.

And when Harry was walking into the woods to meet his death and was talking to his parents and Lupin and Sirius - oh my gosh, I cried so hard. There were other points in the book when I got teary, but those were the two worst for me.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

63. I thought it was just Sirius and his parents.

I don't think Lupin was dead quite yet, was he?
I don't get the story down pat until I've read it a couple of times.
Duckie

[AZBlue]

64. Ha! I'm the same way.

I cheated and went back to look it up. Lupin is there at that point.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

65. I HAVE to reread the thing.

I missed some. I was reading too fast.
Thanks!

[AZBlue]

68. I was too - especially at that point in the book.

Actually, I'm thinking now would be a good time to reread all the books, starting with the first.

[Reader Rabbit]

6. Incredibly intense.

I was upset at every single fatality, but only one allowed either Harry or the readers to grieve. The pace of the book was just incredible.

[XemaSab]

10. Which one do you think that was?

:shrug:

[Reader Rabbit]

27. At the seaside cottage.

All the other deaths happen in the heat of battle, and events are moving so quickly that Harry barely has time to process them before he moves on to the next catastrophe. Dobby's death allowed Harry (and the reader) a bit of breathing space to internalize and mourn. I cried when they all started putting clothes on Dobby, but none of the other deaths touched me as much because the pacing of the story was such that the main focus was on surviving, not on the loss of loved ones.

Did that make any sense?

[realisticphish]

22. i agree

the deaths at the end, fred, lupin, tonks, just whipped by; even snapes death was kind of wham-bam done. Dobby's gave you time, but i was REALLY suprised at those three in particular; not that they died, but that it was almost in passing. Still fantastic, though

[XemaSab]

35. I thought the point of that whole chapter

was to give you time to understand Snape and what he had done, and mourn his loss. :(

She could have made the chapter much shorter, and cut right to the "good part" where Harry learns the truth about himself, but no, she kept it rolling. So sad. :(

[realisticphish]

36. hmm, true about the snape chapter

i posted immediately after finishing the book, i didn't have time to reflect.

That was a sad chapter, knowing that Snape was a dick, but he did actually care. Even about not wanting to use Harry.

The part where Dumbledore tells snape to kill him just blew my mind; it was the only time my jaw actually dropped

[Liberal Veteran]

43. I'm glad there was a believable reason for Snape killing...

...Dumbledore.

A mercy killing was hardly expected. I was expecting maybe to throw Voldemort off the trail of something or to give Harry more reason for revenge.

[jgraz]

59. That part was done very well

I loved the way she set up Dumbledore's death. It was a very crafty scheme and I didn't see it coming at all.

[CBHagman]

129. I finally found the portion of the interview on Fred.

I'd only caught part of the NBC interview with J.K. Rowling, and that only because I religiously watch Countdown. Here's the bit about the Weasleys:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/20026225/

Lupin and Tonks may have taken the fall for Arthur Weasley, but the entire Weasley clan could not be saved. Fred Weasley, one half of the fun-loving twins, was another casualty in the Battle of Hogwarts.

But why Fred and not his brother George?

“I always knew it was going to be Fred, and I couldn't honestly tell you why,” Rowling said.

Rowling guessed most people would have expected George to die before Fred because Fred was the ringleader, George the “gentler” twin.

“Fred is normally the funnier but also the crueler of the two. So they might have thought that George would be the more vulnerable one and, therefore, the one to die.”

She didn’t make her decision because it was easier to kill one twin over the other, however.

There's more there. I was especially interested to read the bits about Hagrid, because I was always convinced that he was slated for a dreadful end. A couple of the scenes in the last three books made me really wonder if Hagrid would be left standing!

[Matilda]

130. When both Lupin and Tonks died,

I wondered what is it about J.K. Rowling and orphans? Harry and Voldemort, and Snape and Neville
as good as orphaned - the one unwanted and unloved, the other not recognised by his parents. So
it's not surprising that she does have a message about the tragedy of orphans.

I guess losing an ear was enough to saddle poor George with - I know she has said in another
interview (on Mugglenet) that George carries on, although of course never forgetting Fred, but I
wonder - their relationship was so symbiotic, and they fed each other with their ideas, I wonder
how effective George would really be. Somehow I can imagine Fred carrying on without George more
easily than I can George without Fred.

[CBHagman]

131. Those storylines troubled me a bit.

I knew the minute Tonks went looking for Remus, it was the end of both of them. So those are the two people J.K. Rowling alluded to, I thought.

But the epilogue gave me to understand that Harry made up for some of his own mistakes and disappointments (all that went unspoken between him and Sirius, the lost time, etc.) with Teddy Lupin, who of course is over at the Potters' house all the time. I also suspect Teddy takes after his mother more than he does his serious-minded, melancholy father.

As for George, I don't know what to say. I assume the Weasleys rallied around him in some fashion, but it's still heart-breaking situation. And George and Fred really did affect the outcome of the battle with Voldemort. Think of all the Weasley twin tricks Harry, Ron, and Hermione employed in the quite serious missions.

[Matilda]

132. I didn't pick up on Lupin/Tonks as the two until it happened.

I had a feeling about Lupin - he was so melancholic, and in a way death would have been that
"merciful release" we hear about. But Tonks - no, I didn't think it for a minute - and my first
thought when we knew she'd died too was "she's just had a baby", as if it made death impossible.


Somebody sent me a link to some fanfiction on Snape's death, that also includes Fred Weasley (and
Hedwig) - I don't normally read fanfiction, but this piece was good. It brought a tear to my eye,
and then made me smile.

"Hell was, Snape decided, a crowded railway platform. If any more people joined them, he wasn’t going to be able to breathe, and if he ever found out who’d just trodden on his foot, that child was going to be very sorry. The station was packed to the brim, children and teachers alike squashed uncomfortably together as they waited for the train to arrive.

And it was raining. Bloody British weather.

A tinny voice came from the tannoy, and he raised his head to try and make out what it was saying. A hush fell over the assembled travellers for a moment – no-one wanted to miss the announcement.

“We regret to announce that the train from platform nine-and-three-quarters will be delayed by approximately-“


http://googlebrat.livejournal.com/431112.html

Enjoy - I did.

[CBHagman]

134. Oh, I loved that!

In my mind I'd already written an epilogue to the Dobby story but hadn't read anything online. That was just wonderful.

[XemaSab]

7. Totally epic.

I cried when Hedwig died, and all through the chapters "The Prince's Tale" and "The Forest Again" I was BAWLING UNCONTROLLABLY. :cry:

[jgraz]

12. That was the start of my dislike of the story

I have birds myself and Hedwig's death struck me as an unnecessary cruelty to the readers.

I'm going to wait a while before posting my own opinions (though I did manage a bit of a rant somewhere else). I want to let people savor the last book without someone peeing in the punchbowl.

I truly envy your enjoyment of the book. I wish there was a pill I could take that would make me like it more than I did. It's truly depressing to have lived with this series for ten years and be so disappointed by the final story. :(

[XemaSab]

13. I was just musing on your post

Maybe Hedwig died so that Harry, Ron, and Hermione would be cut off from everyone else for the rest of the series. :oooo:

[jgraz]

14. Maybe, but that doesn't make sense to me

Can't they just apparate somewhere, or use a different owl? I don't know why Hedwig was killed, but it really shook me up. And blowing her up was just gratuitous.

Hey -- wasn't Harry's firebolt in that sidecar? Why wasn't the loss of his broomstick ever mentioned?

Which also reminds me: there wasn't a single scene with Harry on a broomstick the entire book. It would have been nice for his spectacular flying skills to play a small part in the story.

[XemaSab]

15. What about the scene in the room of requirement?

:shrug:

[jgraz]

17. hmm..you'll have to refresh me on that

I don't have the book with me right now, and I finished it on Tuesday. What about that scene are you referring to?

[XemaSab]

18. Um... everything's on fire?

:shrug:

[jgraz]

19. ah -- for the broomstick thing

It was just a bit too vague for me ;)

Yeah, you're right. He was flying then. My bad.

[XemaSab]

20. It's him, Hermione, Ron,

Draco, Crabbe, and Goyle. Crabbe sets the room on fire and they all flee, saving Draco and Goyle along the way.

[Bjornsdotter]

47. I thought that was a brilliant start

...having Hedwig die, not because I wanted to see the owl die but because it was so unexpected. I don't think I read anywhere on Book 7 predictions about the owl. For me it came totally out of left field and as a result threw me for a loop and I started to doubt all of my predictions.

Dobby was also unexpected and boy did I cry over that poor little elf.

Cheers

[jgraz]

58. You may be right about why she did it

My reaction to it was very negative, though. It just seemed cruel.

[Bjornsdotter]

61. Oh no doubt

...I won't deny it was cruel, it was.

I also thought that Fred's death was cruel, the Weasley Twins split up for good. In some ways I think it would have been less cruel to have them both die....for George to live without his other half; it will be devastating. So many things in the book come to mind as being cruel...Moody's eye in the door, Severus' last request to look into Harry's eyes as he dies, the snake in Bathilda's (sp) body, torturing Hermione etc

However, I do think it's important that she shows this part of war to the kids reading the book. War and death are not video games and movies, people don't get a "do over." For those of us who grew up during the Vietnam War it was brought into our homes everyday on the news, unlike today's war which is brushed under the rug.

I don't know if this was her intention...it's just my interpretation.

Cheers

[jean]

100. Looking into Harry's eyes

he had his mother's eyes - one final connection to Lily for Snape.

[eridani]

86. I think Hedwig was killed off because she would have been an ongoing link--

--to Harry. Just follow the white owl, Death Eaters.

[Orsino]

79. Killing animals in fiction *always* pisses me off.

I don't revere them over people, but there's something particularly sad about the death of a creature that can't really understand why it's dying, and didn't exactly volunteer for it.

[Orrex]

81. Killing animals in western fiction is very often a proxy for killing children

Our general aesthetic doesn't permit the wanton murder of children, even in our fiction, so "innocent" animals, especially pets or cute animals, are offered up in place of the kids.

Not sure if/how that tracks with the Potter series, though...

[XemaSab]

103. She killed off a couple anonymous kids in the book (at Gregorovitch's house)

but she really held back when it came to killing off Harry's classmates.

I think she thought (perhaps rightly) that killing off scores of kids in the book would be pretty messed up.

[Caution]

11. I absolutely loved it.

I was hoping that snape wouldn't be "redeemed" but i thought that was handled pretty well overall. Otherwise I have no complaints. I forced myself not to cry because my wife was sitting with me the whole time and I didn't want to spoil anything for her but there were so many moments! Hedwig, Fred, Remus, Tonks, Colin and of course I'm in that elation/depression I always feel at the end of a really great story. Elated by the fact that it met my expectations and depressed because it's over.

[jgraz]

16. Wasn't Colin muggle-born?

If so, what was he doing at school at all, given the pure-blood restrictions?

[Caution]

26. He wasn't necessarily at school. They summoned all of the DA

which included Colin.

[jgraz]

32. Ah right -- I gotta read it again

I whipped through it so quickly that some of these details didn't stick.

[FloridaJudy]

21. My gut feelings about Snape

Were completely accurate. What he did - and the reasons he did - it were pretty much evident if you'd read the entire series. Still there were some surprises (Snape's patronus and how he used it, for one).

And the death of one "minor" character left me bawling: the one I suspect that JKR was referring to when she mentioned an "unexpected" magic user (though that's not an accurate description IMHO).

I thought the best part of the book was the exploration of Dumbledore's character, and how it emerges Rashamon-like in supposedly contradictory biographical accounts. It makes him a more fully-rounded and tragic figure, rather than a stereotypic Wise Old Wizard. One becomes wise by learning through experience, after all: one isn't born that way.

And was the thing under the chair in the penultimate scene what I thought it was, i.e. what was left of Voldemort's soul after he himself had destroyed most of it in making the Horcruxes? That makes what Harry says in the climactic scene quite understandable.

[Mist]

73. Yes, that would be my take on the "thing under the chair" --a frightened, childish,

deformed, damaged soul. :scared:

[badgerpup]

23. The scene between Harry and Dudley was a bit surprising...

I always thought Snape would turn out to be a tragic hero...and there was something between him and Lily. Poor Severus...
:cry:
She kinda left Mad-Eye "Is he, or isn't he? We never found the body" until that bit of evidence in Umbridge's office...(did you know that Ms. Rowling doesn't like cats? Can you tell?)

My brain feels full. Have to digest for a bit before re-reading to catch the bits I missed.

[XemaSab]

24. Most of the cats are negative

But Crookshanks and McGonagall are fairly beneficial.

[realisticphish]

44. I actually wondered

if the cat mentioned in Lily's letter would turn out to be Crookshanks

[LWolf]

28. Overall:

I have to be cautious. I ripped through it so quickly that I probably didn't do it justice as a reader. I also haven't read anyone else's review yet.

I'm a little intrigued by the connection of seemingly unimportant details, while leaving what feel to me like many loose ends.

While I expected Snape to be vindicated, I also expected him to join in that final battle for good. His end was rather...er...I can't think of the word I want. To have been the silent martyr for so many years, to have sacrificed all for a cause, and to be killed so easily, surprised me.

The deaths? Part of the reason I was racing through it was the feeling of doom hanging over every character. All my predictions went out the window, and I fully expected each and every one of them to die at any time.

In the end, my predictions weren't too bad. Neville and Luna survived, and I was glad to be wrong there. I predicted that some adult characters, one or both of the twins, and other students would die. Creevy was a side character, and the other 50 in the big battle weren't named, so I didn't do too badly. I'm wondering who the "2" were. Lupin and Tonks, would be my guess.

I was glad to see Neville come out a hero, although I would have liked to have seen a little more of him throughout the book.

The final battle, taking place at Hogwarts, was satisfying. I never doubted Molly for a moment; it's a mother thing. :D Often, throughout the series, I wondered why Harry could be so single-minded and blind to nuances around him. Of course, the protagonist has to make mistakes, and that seemed to be Harry's biggest. In parts of DH, I grew impatient with the hiding out in a tent, fighting with one another, and accomplishing what seemed to be little. In reality, when Harry faces Voldemort a final time, he has grown well beyond his peers and adult mentors and caretakers. Some may find the final confrontation between the two anticlimactic; not enough pain, torture, and fear. I found it fitting. It is when Harry is able to shed the last of his fear, and to accept fully the mantle of responsibility, and of doom, that has laid on him, that he is ready to face and defeat V.

The intricate part Malfoy played, unwittingly, interests me. I wonder how nasty HIS son is, in the next generation; if the efforts to save his life taught him anything.

I've been recently watching Joseph Campbell's "The Power of Myth" on DVD, which pointed out many of the mythological elements in the potter series. I don't know if I'd say that they were all well done, but they do all support the underlying theme of choosing good, and love, over evil, and hate.

The first "death" of Harry fits that category. Rowling doesn't create the depth of backstory that allows us to truly understand living and dying as a wizard/witch. She alludes to it frequently, but never really clearly lays out a belief system to give it structure. I think this is a weakness.

There's more, but I need to do a second, more careful reading. The epilogue was somewhat unsatisfying; I always expected Ron and Hermoine to end up together, and Harry to end up with Ginny. I was more interested in what happens to the rest of the DA, for example, than in what the core group named their kids.

How did George adjust to the loss of his twin?
How did Luna end up?
Who is now headmaster/mistress at Hogwarts?
Did Umbridge finally get what she deserved?
Did Harry have any further contact with the Dursleys?
What careers did Harry, Ron, Hermoine, and Ginny end up with?

Overall, it was a satisfying, fitting end. I'm not sure that any book could live up to the hype that's been building for a decade. This one is decent, if not brilliant. The emotional resolutions carry the reader through and over some of the weaker points.

I'm off now to read the thoughts of others.

[Matilda]

113. I've just re-read your post,

and I share so many of your sentiments.

I also felt that JKR didn't delve deeply into the nature of death and
dying, or love and sacrifice - she skirted around the subject, and what
she had to say was interesting, but I could have done with more.

I thought we may have revisited the veil in the Ministry at some point -
Harry was so attracted to it, and wanted to explore its mysteries, and I
thought we'd come back to it in book 7, but it wasn't mentioned. Also
the locked door - I thought we'd learn its secrets, but that too was left
alone.

I wonder if Rowling didn't want to buy into the Christian/non-Christian
philosophies - bound to upset some - but a belief system based on the
eternal struggle between the light and the dark would have given a reason
for the whole thing to be happening. Even evil has a philosophy.

[Reader Rabbit]

29. Who was the character who performed late-in-life magic?

JKR mentioned this as one of the spoilers: Someone who hadn't performed magic before would do it. Who was that? I may have read too quickly, but nothing leaped out at me.

[FloridaJudy]

30. I think she was referring to Dobby

But he already could apparate and perform the hover spell (remember the great scene with the Dursley's fancy dessert?). I just guess she didn't think we'd expect him to perform the kind of magic that saves lives.

[Orsino]

80. Late in life?

The only one that springs to mind is Neville Longbottom's granny, who shows up for the battle of Hogwarts as Neville's biggest fan. This couldn't possibly have been the first time she used magic, but was probably her first spell-casting in the series.

I think that Dobby's been Apparating through several books.

Possibly whatever you read could be a reference to Harry's wand casting of its own accord?

[Matilda]

151. JKR changed her mind about that one.

It was in one of the interviews - so there was nobody new to magic after all.

[Liberal Veteran]

31. I'm glad Kreacher was redeemed.

Pitiful creature that he was in OotP, it was nice to see there was something good in him.

[Orsino]

77. And that Harry was able to help bring it out.

It underscores the previous point that Sirius was flawed, and just as with Dumbledore, Harry was fundamentally "better" than either of his mentors. The Dobby funeral really impressed the Gringotts gnome, though the latter was not a very nice (by human standards) person.

Harry's a worthy hero, and deserved his happy ending.

[Thirtieschild]

33. Powerful, powerful book

Initial thoughts & feelings (just finished it fifteen or so minutes ago):

Expected Snape to turn out to be one of the good ones;
Expected Neville to come through at the end - after all, he was also born at the end of July & when they were babies V. had to choose whether the prophecy meant Neville or Harry;
Cried at the scene at the Shell Cottage. Very moving. Also glad to see Kreacher redeemed;
Harry preparing to meet V. in the forest was, to me, the most powerful scene in the book;
Would have liked more answers in the epilogue - always thought Luna would end up with Neville - did she? What careers did they all choose?
JKR created an amazing, wonderful world. This is a series that will be read - and re-read - for centuries.

And btw, her writing got better in each book, until it was tremendous in this one. I was always impressed with the writing at the crucial points - you could tell when she was inspired - but this book did away with the adverbs.

[Pithy Cherub]

39. Luna's bedroom made my heart catch.

That was just inspired.

[jgraz]

42. Yeah, that was a very nice touch

Luna's easily one of my favorite characters.

[MadAsHellNewYorker]

45. Loved it, but the Epilogue sucked.

The end was great. The epilogue ruined it for me though. I was more interested in how and what happened after the fall of voldemort and his fake govt, not their stupid kids 19 years later. I wanted to know what would happen to those not in school for their 7th year? did they get to take their N.E.W.T.s? what did their jobs end up being? How did the magic world cope with the reveling that voldemort has been in charge for the last year? I was curious about Luna and the other side folks. It added nothing to the series to know that all the main charecters were all straight, married, and baby making machines.

Otherwise it was a great roller coaster ride. The only thing that disappointed me were the death of Tonks and Lupin. They seemed central before, and then it was like they were just dead. no discussion, no fight, just bodies on the floor.

[Lorien]

138. Yes, and who raised their child? Ted came to dinner at the Potter's home

but she didn't mentioned who raised the boy. I would have thought that the Potter's would have taken him in at some point as Harry was the Godfather. And, was Teddy a werewolf?

[Mist]

140. Teddy was raised by Tonks' mother, Andromeda, I think. And no, he's not

a werewolf.

[Matilda]

48. Finished the book at 1.30 a.m. this morning (Monday) (Spoilers)

On the whole, I thought it was very satisfying, quite gripping in parts - not a lot that was
unexpected, but for the most part it was all tied up very nicely.

I did like that Neville found his strength at last, and was so glad he didn't die - but I agree with
XemaSab, it should have been Neville who killed Bellatrix - I suppose JK Rowling didn't want him to
be credited with two deaths (there was something for everyone to do), but Bellatrix would have been
fitting. Why not Ginny taking out Nagini in the end - she was really reduced to a bit part in
Deathly Hallows, and that was disappointing. I thought for sure when she left the Room of
Requirement that she was going to do something very important and dramatic. I wasn't at all
satisfied with Molly taking on Bellatrix - Molly's been mostly limited to "home duties" for years,
while Bellatrix has kept her skills honed - sure, mother-love is a powerful weapon, as we know, but
the reality is that Bellatrix would have won that fight hands down. Bellatrix should have been
Neville's.

I was also disappointed with the way Snape died - I was quite sure he was going to reveal where he
stood when McGonagall saw him in the hallway before the fight, because it was going to end that
night, one way or the other, so why go to Lord V at that time? I was certainly amazed that
he chose to desert the school at that point; I was quite sure he was going to join the fight on
their side. It would have been nice to see him down in the Great Hall hurling insults and curses
at Lucius Malfoy and taking him out. He could have been mortally wounded and died later, so that
Harry could still have taken his memory; he definitely wasn't the type to make a personal deathbed
confession.

I was glad that Dumbledore was revealed to be less than perfect - it made him more human, and
he would have been a more understanding person because of the errors of judgment he'd made, because
he learned from them. I do think the story of his sister was a bit unnecessarily nasty - dying
would be bad enough, but the early business with the Muggles was really ugly and I don't think it
added to the story.

And I have to say that I wasn't at all happy with the epilogue - it sounds as if they've all become
middle-class working wizards or housewives. Hermione with her brilliant brain and Charm skills
would have made an excellent headmistress for Hogwarts one day - following McGonagall. And what
does Harry do? Snape was right about one thing - Harry wasn't an extraordinarily skilled wizard
(Hermione had more wizarding skills) but he had great daring and courage, and it's hard to imagine
him being happy sitting behind a desk at the Ministry.


Edited to Add: Spoilers notice

[AZBlue]

49. Neville or Harry would have been good choices to kill Bellatrix but

Molly Weasley's calling her a bitch and telling the students, "Get back! She is mine!" was a highlight for me - she took the words out of my mouth. I think the students were no match for Bellatrix - the only one who might have been able to pull it off is Hermione. And, Molly Weasley was shown in a motherly fashion all through the story, but don't forget that she was part of the original Order of the Phoenix and had been fighting Voldemort since his beginning - perhaps this was Rowling's way of letting us see her other side.

Plus, I don't recall any of the kids actually killing anyone except Neville killing Nagini - although I might be wrong on that. Perhaps they did in the battle, but we don't know that for sure. (I don't consider that Harry really killed Voldemort - because of his own greed and stupidity, he killed himself, IMO.) I'm wondering if Rowling didn't do that on purpose.

I liked the Epilogue - thought it was a good way to definitively end the story and not allow for any talk of a sequel. However, I would have liked a little more info after the battle at Hogwarts - what happened to the Malfoys and the other Death Eaters who lived? How's Hagrid? Did McGonagall become headmistress again? And so on.

[Matilda]

51. Good point about the kids not killing - I hadn't thought of that.

Regarding the post-battle situation - there were also a lot of Dementors on the loose, too - not
a pleasant thought. Dumbledore always said it had been a mistake to put them in charge of Azkaban,
but what would be done with them? They run away from Patronuses (Patroni?) but how do you kill
them? We never had a Dementor die in the books.

[AZBlue]

66. Oh, I hadn't thought about them - good point.

That's definitely a loose end. I guess you're just supposed to assume everything worked out and maybe use your own take on it.

[XemaSab]

52. The kids didn't kill anyone

but boy, Harry was sure playing fast and loose with the crucios and imperios. :P

[sinkingfeeling]

56. Spoiler: Finished it yesterday. Loved it. Thought it was the best book. It really flowed and

It really flowed and was almost impossible to put down. I knew that Snape was really a 'good' guy and that Harry had to 'die' to get the last part of Tom Riddle gone. So no surprises there. I can understand why she killed of Lupin, but not Fred. Guess Tonks had to go so Harry could act as Teddie's god father.

My only complaint is the epilogue didn't provide all information I'd liked. Did Harry get to become an Auror? Did they go back to Hogwarts and complete their schooling? Did Hermione go into law? Did Ron join his dad at the Ministry of Magic?

[Twillig]

145. I suppose that Neville killing Bella would be partly seen as a

revenge kill, even if in self-defense.

Sweet Revenge imo, but probably Rowling didn't want to indulge the more innocent of readers with that.

('first dig two graves' etc. etc.).

Molly's kill was protective. That's gotta have a higher moral quotient.

[kath]

106. Snape couldn't join the fight on the side of Hogwarts at the time McGonagall saw him, because he

still had to carry out Dumbledore's final instruction to him -- that, when the time came that Voldemort kept the snake very close to him, Snape needed to inform Harry that he was going to have to sacrifice himself.

Snape needed to check in w/ Voldy to see how things were proceeding. Then, when he realized that Voldy was indeed protective of the snake, Snape offered multiple times to go get Harry and bring him to Voldy. This would have given him the opportunity to give Harry the heads-up about the necessary sacrifice.

[Solly Mack]

55. I cried...I did. My husband just handed me a roll of TP (he couldn't find the tissues)

and patted my head, I was blubbering so much.

He even teared up at my crying...

[jgraz]

60. Question: was Dumbledore really the most powerful living sorceror?

I mean, he was master of the Elder Wand and he still couldn't defeat Voldy in the MoM. What gives? Does that mean Voldy is, in fact, quite a bit more powerful since he was only using a standard-issue Ollivander wand?

[LWolf]

67. The prophecy.

Without the prophecy, Harry doesn't get the scar, and there is no plot. Without the prophecy, Dumbledore takes him out in the first round, without having to wait for Harry to mature and for V. to find a way back to a body.

There are some obvious holes here, of course. What makes a prophecy legitimate? An actual look into the future, seeing an event that is written in stone, or does it unfold because people act on it and bring it about because they believe it?

The only reason for Dumbledore to wait for Harry to take out V. is that he believes the prophecy, and therefore believes that he can't do it.

Otherwise, he has his opportunity in OOtP, when he shows up to defend Harry at the m.o.m..

Voldemort is obviously not as strong as he thinks he is, and as people believe him to be. While he may have been brilliant and powerful magically, a good portion of his power is derived, not from skill, but from the fear of those around him. His deatheaters are not more powerful than those they fight, they are just remorseless. V. is obviously not operating on all cylinders; seems to be himself, but splitting his soul has affected his thinking, his skill, his power. That's what leaves him open to defeat. I think, once the horcruxes were dealt with, any of the Order could have taken him out, if they only believed they could.

But that's where the prophecy kicks in, isn't it? They don't believe they can.

[Matilda]

70. Agree - it's all about the prophecy, and Harry's destiny.

It has to be Harry, not only because of the prophecy, but also because of the horcrux he carries.
Lord V. couldn't be totally defeated until all the horcruxes were gone, and for Harry to survive
the destruction of the last one, he had to make the ultimate sacrifice.

All part of Harry's rites of passage.

[Matilda]

72. Still puzzling a bit over Snape,

and why he fled from the castle just before the fight. I really thought he was going to join in
on the side of Harry and the school, and for a while there I thought I had Snape completely wrong,
and he was with the Dark Lord all the time.

He hated Lord V. for killing Lily, and he'd made his promise to Dumbledore and intended to keep it,
but when he left to join Lord V. at that crucial time, was JKR hinting that in spite of his great
love for Lily, he still had a natural affinity with the Dark Arts and couldn't resist keeping his
hand in? Voldemort thought that Snape suspected the truth about the Elder Wand, and he probably did,
because he was certainly smart enough. I just can't see what purpose he thought he was achieving by
being with Voldemort at that point - does anyone have a theory?

[LWolf]

74. I believe

that he left to maintain his "cover" as a DeathEater. If he stayed, he would either have to "come out of the closet," so to speak, or he'd have to help fight students, or at least stand by and not help them.

What could he do at that point? He didn't have any way of knowing that Harry had found and destroyed Horcruxes. It could be that he thought he'd have a better opportunity to shield/defend/help Harry if he was on the spot with V.

He was going to have to get to Harry to tell him about the last Horcrux somehow; perhaps he knew that would take some sort of major event, that Harry wouldn't quietly go into the headmaster's office with him. With V closing in, perhaps he thought his best chance would be at that point?

Perhaps if V. realized sooner that Snape had been working against him, he would be more defensive than if he thought Harry DIDN'T have much in the way of powerful, adult protection/support. Snape was probably the most powerful, magically, of all the rest alive.

Ok, I've thrown everything I've got...anything "stick" for you? :)

[Matilda]

76. Yes, your second point - that Snape could probably do more

to help Harry if he was beside/behind Voldemort - by deflecting charms, etc. - does make sense,
because the minute he appeared on the same side, he was going to be a target (which is how I thought
he would die - Rowling was much more imaginative).

He already knew about all the horcruxes from Dumbledore, and knew Harry would have to face Voldemort
and be willing to die - his task was to protect Harry, not necessarily from death in the end, but
from meeting a premature death, before the horcrux was destroyed. I was forgetting what his actual
promise was. It was to protect Harry, for the sake of Lily, not necssarily to take up arms against
Voldemort.

It all fits when you look at it that way.

[Orsino]

78. I was hoping that Snape's redemption...

...which I knew had to be coming, would happen when he was alive, and that Harry would have it shoved in his face. I'm just the tiniest bit disappointed that his true role was revealed only in flashback.

[Matilda]

84. I also thought that Snape's death would be his redemption,

and it would involve a deliberate choice on his part to make the sacrifice. Not having a choice,
and his death being really a mistake, took away some of its significance.

Perhaps in some ways it was more appropriate to Snape's character though - he was such a private
person, and only Dumbledore really knew him. Even Lily didn't quite understand him. Still, he
obviously wanted Harry to know the truth, or he wouldn't have told him to take his memory. If he'd
been held up as some sort of hero in front of everyone, he probably would have sneered in his usual
fashion, however he felt inside.

[kath]

107. no, Snape didn't know jack about the Horcruxes.

Remember how several of Snape's memories in "The Prince's Tale" chapter revolved him being very frustrated that Dumbledore was telling Harry things that he was not telling Snape.

[Matilda]

112. Snape did learn the truth from Dumbledore.

When he was complaining about not knowing everything, and Dumbledore said
"Come to my office tonight, Severus, at eleven, and you shall not
complain that I have no confidence in you ..."

That was when Dumbledore told him how part of Voldemort's soul had been
blasted apart from the whole, and attached itself to the only other
living thing in the building - Harry. "Part of Lord Voldemort lives
inside Harry ... and while that fragment of soul, unmissed by Voldemort,
remains attached to, and protected by Harry, Lord Voldemort cannot die."

Snape would have understood the nature of a horcrux, and that was when
he learned that Harry would have to die in order for Voldemort to be
destroyed.

[kath]

114. Snape may have been told about that "accidental" (as it were) horcrux, but I don't think Dumbledore

ever told him about Harry's quest for all of the other horcruxes.

[Matilda]

115. I think Dumbledore must have told Snape everything,

because it was Snape who helped Harry to find the Sword of Gryffindor
which he needed to smash the locket horcrux. I don't think someone like
Snape would have just blindly followed the orders of the dead Dumbledore
without asking questions.

[Reciprocity]

82. This book was not worthy of the fans who have passed on.

I keep thinking of all the fans who will never read this final book because they have died before it was published. It was only passable to me. Maybe my expectations were to high.

For the most part the book was just Harry and Co. reacting to one disaster every other page. All the deaths were (pardon the pun) overkill. I ceased to care who else died long before the final chapter, there were simply to many of them.

The death of Hedwig was just a device to illicit a reaction that has been over use in books and movies before and was one of the deaths that I predicted. Want to make the audience cry, kill the pet. I think I cried more than Harry did over her death. So she killed off Fred and then we the reader never get to see how George takes this news.

The reaction to the wearing of the locket thing, was just to Lord of the Rings and Molly saying Get back bitch was reminiscent of Ripley in Aliens.

One of the best parts of the book was what's his name spitting in McGonagall
face and Harry losing it. Way to go Harry!

[sinkingfeeling]

83. I totally disagree. This was the best of all of them. It flowed for me like none of the

others. I would call it a 'page burner'. All the loose ends were tied into a perfect package. Loved it. Definitely designed for a more mature audience than the first and second ones of the series. As it should have been.

[Matilda]

85. Not the best of the books, IMO, but still well worth reading.

I thought there weren't enough deaths - at least one Malfoy deserved to die, preferably Lucius.
I was glad that Neville survived triumphant though, because I was really afraid that he would die
an heroic death.

I did have a feeling that the last few chapters were rushed, probably to meet the deadline. Things
didn't unfold as slowly as usual, and the final showdown between Harry and Lord V., with Harry
telling V where he'd gone wrong and wrapping it all up, was a bit like an old B-grade whodunnit,
with the clever detective summing up the case so everyone could go home.

And I didn't like the epilogue - everybody playing Happy Families, and being terribly middle-class -
a bit of a let-down I thought.

[XemaSab]

149. I thought there should have been more deaths too

:o

[intheflow]

88. Overall, good, but the Epilogue sucked.

I was sorely disappointed in the Epilogue because it focused (as someone mentioned above) on Ginny and Hermione becoming baby-makers rather than giving us any real sense of the men and women the gang would become. (Except Neville--why in the world did Rowling chose to tell us his vocation and not Harry's, Ron's, Ginny's, or Hermione's--even George's? :crazy: ) I was also surprised to see that Teddy didn't go live with Harry, though upon reflection I guess Tonk's mother lived, so she must have raised her grandson.

But regardless of the ending, I thought the overall book was good. Would I have liked more details, and more loose ends wrapped up? Absolutely! Was I totally annoyed that Voldemort kept giving his resistors a half hour, an hour, to bury dead and determine if they wanted to follow him? Very much so--it seemed completely out of character. But I have to remind myself that this is a children's series, however much of an adult following it has garnered over the years. Given the enormous popularity and complexity of the books, I find it remarkable that Rowling was able to wrap it up at all.

A note about the deaths, though. I gasped when Hedwig, Dobby and Fred all died, but I was honestly surprised that more people closer to Harry didn't die. By that I mean specifically that I expected at least one of the following to die: Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Neville, Luna, or Hagrid. While Tonks and Lupin were fond of Harry, neither of them really got the opportunity to hang out with him as regularly the afore list. I guess Fred was the closest, though, again, I didn't see Harry being as close to him as I felt the hype about a "person close to Harry dying" led me to believe. But I'm willing to view that as my own biases getting in the way of the interpretation.

The camping/wandering chapters were also less than desirable, moving slowly. I would have liked a few chapters about what resistance was happening in the rest of the world. Find it very hard to believe that no one died when the Death Eaters crashed Bill and Fleur's wedding, or at any other time when Harry, Hermione and Ron were on the lamb. But again--must remind myself it's a children's book and cannot be all things to all people, and certainly not all things to all adults.

And then, there's no telling how much was edited out by the publisher for the sake of brevity. I hope someday Rowling releases an "Author's Cut" version of the series. I'd buy the whole series in hardback again should that ever get released. :)

[Branjor]

91. I agree....

about the disappointingness (is that a word?) of the Epilogue. It's as though, after all those books and all the development of the characters, it really wasn't all that important in the end what they finally did with their lives vocationally.

As to George, I somehow can't see him continuing in the joke shop business without his other half. Of all the characters I would imagine him as having the worst time adjusting to "life after".

I also don't see why Remus and Tonks had to die. Tonks' death at least was not necessary in order for Harry to play Godfather to Teddy.

And Hedwig - don't even get me started! It was out and out CRUEL. There may have been a reason for it but it doesn't make me feel any better.

[Branjor]

92. Another question not answered

in the Epilogue - a minor point, maybe, but since Harry shed the fragment of Voldemort's soul which had been residing in him by his temporary death, I wonder if he then lost his ability to speak/understand Parseltongue?

[intheflow]

101. About parseltongue...

I'd wager Harry might still be able to speak it. After all, if he got his cloak form being a direct descendant of the Peverell family, and Riddle was also a direct descendant of the Peverell's, then Harry's ability to speak parseltongue may have inherited genetically, it might not have been due to surviving Voldemort as was widely assumed.

[Branjor]

109. I thought

Voldemort's ability to speak parseltongue came from his Slytherin descent. Were the Peverells and therefore Harry too also descendents of Slytherin?

[intheflow]

110. Not sure.

Have to go back and read HBP now! :rofl:

On edit: hard to know. It seems to me that the fable about the stone, the cloak and the wand might pre-date Hogwarts, since it seems that most wizards view it as merely a cautionary fictional tale, not a story based in true historical events. It could be that Slytherin descended from the Peverells--especially seeing how both the Wand of Elder and the Resurrection Stone have been sources of so much misery, coveted by dark wizards.

[Matilda]

111. The way I read it, both the Slytherins and the Potters

were descended from the Peverells, but through the female line. Remember
the cloak was passed from "father to son, mother to daughter"? And of
course there are the name changes, so I think female Peverells married
a Slytherin and a Potter in due course, so there is a common heritage
from the Peverells, but Harry is not a Slytherin.

[Matilda]

95. I wonder if the one to be reprieved from death was Harry.

JKR has said in the past that she's often changed her mind as she wrote, and I wonder if she was
setting Harry up to die. After spending three-quarters of the book roaming around England not
achieving very much, there's a sense that the final chapters were written in a hurry, with a great
deal of activity in half a dozen chapters - was it because the ending was re-written? Harry's
summing-up of the situation to Lord V. when they were duelling was very hasty, and not resolved in
JKR's usual painstaking and careful way.

I also thought Hedwig's death sucked - yes, I know the innocent always die in war, but poor Hedwig,
I hate when animals suffer because of humans, and she died still mad at Harry, which was bad.

Also did not like the explanation of Ariana's descent into mental instability - it seemed to imply
that she was probably raped, and I can't see that this episode served the story at all, but was
just gratuitous nastiness. If the only point was to bring out Dumbledore's lack of care, she could
have used something else to render Ariana vulnerable. It was the only point in the book where I
thought "I wish she hadn't written that".

I also feel concern for George's fate - given the symbiotic relationship between identical twins,
and he'd operated in tandem with Fred all his life, I worry that George wouldn't be able to function
so effectively without him.

I also wonder whether Mr Ollivander would be able to go back to wandmaking - he was not young, and
had suffered such trauma at Voldemort's hands, I hope he didn't lose his skills, which were
obviously highly refined.

[Branjor]

99. Ariana...

***Also did not like the explanation of Ariana's descent into mental instability - it seemed to imply
that she was probably raped, and I can't see that this episode served the story at all, but was
just gratuitous nastiness.***

It was very ugly and gratuitous. Also, there is nothing at all about any legal consequences for the muggles who did this to Ariana, the question that there would be doesn't even come up, but Dumbledore Sr. gets Azkaban for killing their monster asses. Just like this beauteous society.

[XemaSab]

104. She said in an interview this morning

that the one who got the reprieve was Arthur Weasley.

[Matilda]

105. Ah, so that's why he wasn't seized at the Ministry.

It did seem a bit odd that they allowed him to just go on with his work, when his whole family was
under a cloud.

[Ilsa]

89. I have a question about the Sword of Gryffindor:

The Goblin Griphook took the sword in payment for letting Harry and the others into the Lestranges' bank vault. How was Neville Longbottom able to draw it from the sorting hat if it was not possessed by the school? I guess you can steal the sword through the hat no matter who has it?

"It takes a true Gryffindor to pull the sword from the hat." Per Dumbledore to Harry near the end of book 2. Neville's the man!

[intheflow]

90. Here's my totally off-the-cuff/probably BS response:

The sorting hat was created by a human witch or warlock, so it followed human-ownership rules, rather than goblin ownership rules. That is, the sword was created by goblins, but it was commissioned and paid for by humans--as was the hat--and so the hat recognized the sword as belonging to Godric Gryffindor, and by extension, his scholarly descendants.

Maybe? :shrug:

[WhollyHeretic]

93. It was Godric Gryffindor's hat. He turned it into the sorting hat

That must be why the sword could be pulled from there

[Ilsa]

97. Both responses to my question are good and satisfying for me. Thanks! nt

[Matilda]

94. I guess the sword decided who was its rightful owner,

a bit like the way wands choose their owners.

Griphook demanded the sword from Harry because he believed it rightfully belonged to the Goblins,
but Harry only appeared to agree because he had no choice. He didn't willingly cede the sword to
Griphook.

The sword went where it was needed, not where it was wanted.

[Ilsa]

96. Both responses to my question are good and satisfying for me. Thanks! nt

[Marie26]

162. Not exactly

Godric Gryffindor used magic to create a spell that would allow any "true Gryffindor" to pull the sword out of the sorting hat, no matter who had posession at the time.

Harry & friends were planning to double-cross Griphook - They promised him the sword if he helped them get into Gringotts, but they really intended to keep it for themselves. Griphook did exactly what he promised to do, and IMO he was entitled to the sword in exchange. So Griphook takes the sword & runs with it. Payment made. Then, days later, the sword suddenly disappears from his hands as the Sorting Hat spell gives the sword back to the Gryffindors. Magic makes might, and might makes right.

Somewhere there is a very bitter little goblin planning another rebellion.

[eridani]

98. One small item nicely resolved

In GoF, in the scene where Dumbledore is getting the details of Voldemort's return from Harry, there is an excited gleam in Dumbledore's eye when he finds out that Voldemort has taken blood from Harry and is no longer tormented by touching him. I got a really creepy feeling reading that, as if she was possibly setting up Dumbledore to be working for Voldemort, either voluntarily or involuntarily. After finishing the series, it seems plain that Dumbledore was momentarily happy then because he realized that Harry could now survive being killed by Voldemort.

[Matilda]

108. What I really did like about the book ....

I did like the way she tied up all the ends - or all the ones that really matter. She must have
such copious amounts of notes, because she can pull in something mentioned from the first books
and resolve it in the last quite seamlessly.

I liked the fact that Dumbledore wasn't perfect - he'd made the same kind of mistakes most people
would, and been attracted to ideas that were wrong (albeit from the best intentions) that many of us
are when we're young and our value systems aren't fully formulated. But he was able to recognise
his mistakes and learn from them, which is why in the end he was so wise and seemingly all-knowing.
I'm glad he wasn't born perfect.

I'm glad that Kreacher became reformed - it would have been difficult for him to continue to be
forced to serve Harry who seemed to embody everything the Black family had hated, and he would be
a much happier elf serving a master he could respect. There was something very endearing about his
leading the Hogwarts' elves on the attack from the kitchen, with his locket shining on his chest.
If we had to lose Dobby, at least there was some consolation in knowing that Kreacher was a worthy
successor.

I'm glad that Neville found his courage, and with it the power to perform strong magic, and make
his grandmother proud. And that Luna, who was sometimes not quite of this world, showed an amazing
strength in her serene acceptance of whatever happened, never getting rattled but keeping a clear
head even when facing Dementors that froze Harry. She turned out to be one of the most lovable
characters.

And Snape - most of us felt he was probably on Harry's side, and some of us suspected that he'd had
a crush on Lily, but what a surprise to learn that it was such a deep and life-long love. It
enabled him to overcome his hatred of James and dislike of the son and carry out the promise he'd
made to Dumbledore when Lord V. had killed the one person in his life whom he'd ever cared for.
For a moment, when he flew out the window, I wondered if I'd been wrong about him, but when he died
asking Harry to look at him, he broke my heart. That was a beautifully sad moment, and JKR said
so little, but everything we needed to know.

And the picture of all the kids - beginning with Dumbledore's Army and spreading throughout the
school - coming together with all the resources they possessed to fight a force more terrible than
they could probably really imagine. They had that youthful idealism that believes it can really
change the world - and it did.

[CBHagman]

116. Thoughts about Snape.

Many of us seem to have always believed that Snape's behavior had a rational explanation, and I was glad Rowling fleshed out that story. We always had evidence of Snape's willingness to protect Harry, such as his deliberately providing Umbridge with fake Veritaserum (or whatever it's called) when she's trying to grill Harry.

One thing that struck me is that it must have been torture for Snape to have to even see Harry. Not only is Harry, after a fashion, the reason for Lily's death, but he has his mother's eyes and his father's appearance. As such he is a living reminder both of Lily, Snape's lost love, and of Snape's tormenter James Potter.

[Matilda]

117. It's Snape who's been most on my mind since I finished DH.

Like you, I think that Snape was so horrible to Harry, partly because
he looked too much like James of course, but also because it was painful
to look at him and be reminded of Lily. I wondered whether he
deliberately tried to put up a barrier between himself and Harry as a
means of self-protection.

Or am I reading too much into it?

[CBHagman]

118. I don't know about that.

Was the open animosity part of his cover as much as anything else? Or was it that Snape was made bitter by the crushing disappointments of his life? In a previous book, Harry read Snape's memories in the pensieve, and by then it was already clear that Snape was an emotionally scarred man.

But I went back and re-read Snape's death scene and realized why he might have asked Harry to look into his eyes: at the moment of death, Lily's eyes would be looking back at him. I get choked up just typing that.

[Sabriel]

122. I read the "Look at me..." like this

Not as in "look at my eyes," but rather, "Look at my memories I'm giving you and judge me afterward."

I don't think Snape wanted to see Lily's eyes one more time...he wanted someone to know all that he had suffered and his incredible courage.

Remember his shout at Harry in HBP? "Don't...call...me...a... COWARD!"

[XemaSab]

119. It's an intense and complicated story

Rowling has said in interviews that Snape was targeted by James because James was in some ways jealous of Snape, and it was Snape's love for the Dark Arts that kept Lily away.

What a tangled web we weave...

[Matilda]

120. It is indeed complicated, and Snape is probably the most complex

of all her characters. Although Dumbledore was also revealed to be far more complex than we thought,
which made him all the more interesting, it's Snape who was the enigma throughout the books, and
Snape who still occupies our thoughts so much at the end of it all. (And Snape for whom I cried as
much as I did for Harry and Dobby).

The relationship between Snape and Lily was made rather more sad - I thought - because as we learned
more about James Potter, we discovered that he really wasn't a totally likeable person. He was
arrogant, a bully, and a bit of a tosser. Snape was also not a really good person, even though he
went over to Dumbledore - he did seem to have an affinity for the Dark Arts, which is why he'd be
such a good DADA teacher.

Something in Lily's character must have attracted her to dangerous men .....

[XemaSab]

121. There's definitely a huge amount of lost opportunity

and excruciatingly subtle differences between James and Severus that led Lily to make her choice...

One of the things that KILLED me on the reread was the line to the effect that James was obviously cared for and adored... and Snape wasn't.

Another thing that really got me was the whole sorting and the really, really fine line between Slytherin and Gryffindor that ultimately exists. What would you say the difference is between the houses? Given that Snape was sorted into Slytherin, Sirius into Gryffindor, Regulus into Slytherin, James into Gryffindor, Lupin into Gryffindor, Pettigrew into Gryffindor, and Lily into Gryffindor. Not to mention Harry and his friends (except Luna, who is surprisingly a Ravenclaw).

[LWolf]

123. Somewhere, at some point,

Dumbledore makes a comment to Snape about the sorting hat; I don't remember the words, but I believe he was suggesting that perhaps Snape was sorted into the wrong house. That his environmental affinity for Slytherin was not as significant as other qualities.

I wonder if being sorted into a house causes a focus on those particular qualities, which strengthens them in relation to whatever other qualities a person may have? Hermoine could obviously have been a Ravenclaw.

It doesn't surprise me that Luna is a Ravenclaw, although she's got enough courage for a couple of Gryffindors. I think the surface "differences" that mark her as "loony" are very like the way true intellectual genius is treated in the real world; they don't fit in. She is obviously intellectual enough to be a Ravenclaw, when you look past the fact that she doesn't fit the stereotypical adolescent.

[XemaSab]

124. The exact quote:

"You are a braver man by far than Igor Karkaroff. You know, sometimes I think we Sort too soon...."

He walked away, leaving Snape looking stricken....

(DH, page 680)

[LWolf]

125. That's the one.

I inferred that he should have been sorted into Gryffindor. I don't know if Snape was stricken by regret for what might have been, or by the thought of not having his identity as a Slytherin, which seemed to be all he DID have.

[XemaSab]

126. I thought it was for what might have been...

I got the message that being a Slytherin was really all that kept him from Lily, and going back to the whole "it's our choices that define us" message, it would really, really suck to know that there was yet another choice that could have been made differently.

Then again, it doesn't look like the Sorting Hat took much time with him at all... but that's not to say that he thought he wanted to be in Slytherin at the time, and the hat respected that wish. But if he'd wanted to be a Gryffindor, what would have happened then? Would the hat have placed him in Gryffindor? Or even Ravenclaw? (One thing's for sure; Snape is no Hufflepuff. :D )

Lots of food for thought...

[Matilda]

127. I'd like to think it was for what might have been,

because that would indicate that Snape was aware that he'd made some wrong choices, and that he'd
developed some understanding about the way his life had turned out.

It could be argued that pupils would perhaps be better served if they were put into houses that would
develop characteristics they seemed to need, rather than those they already displayed. Perhaps
Hermione was smart enough to know that she already had intelligence and the ability to work hard,
but needed to develop courage, and so wanted to be in Gryffindor. But the Sorting Hat could perhaps
have assisted Snape to develop his qualities of mind or courage by putting him into Ravenclaw
or Gryffindor, instead of Slytherin - is that what Dumbledore was thinking?

I've wondered why the Sorting Hat considered Slytherin for Harry - was it that part of Voldemort's
soul was coming through and the Hat picked it up?

[XemaSab]

128. That was my understanding...

the hat saw the Horcrux and didn't know what to think...

...then again, Harry struggles a lot between the good and the evil. He's angry with Voldemort because Voldemort killed his parents, but had Voldemort not been his enemy, then what?

Rowling has said that the defining moment for Draco is the moment Draco and Harry first meet.

[Twillig]

146. I always thought that the Sorting Hat 'considered' Slytherin

for Harry because Harry was thinking/saying to it, "Not Slytherin, Not Slytherin."

If Harry had thought: "Not Hufflepuff, Not Hufflepuff" instead of "Not Slytherin," would The Hat have said, "Not Hufflepuff? But Hufflepuff can make you great."

Or later on (Chamber of Secrets, I believe) "I stand by what I said, you'd have done well in Hufflepuff."



I always thought that this 'wanted me in Slytherin' business was a Harry assumption, and a maddening Fan fic assumption too. Just a li'l pet peeve of mine.

But you gotta wonder what/if the Hat found in Harry's head. Did it detect that fragment of soul, as you said?

[Matilda]

152. I think it was definitely picking up the Voldemort vibes in Harry.

Especially as Quirrell was there, with Voldy under his turban, and a little later Harry's scar
started to hurt for the first time. The Voldemort connection was being established for the first
time since the night Harry's parents died.

[CBHagman]

142. I agree with that.

One of the things that KILLED me on the reread was the line to the effect that James was obviously cared for and adored... and Snape wasn't.

Agreed. In fact, from what Rowling has gradually revealed about Snape's life, not only was he not cared for and adored; he suffered a combination of neglect and abuse, both at home and at Hogwarts. It's likely the only good things in his life were his magical abilities and his love for Lily.

[Broken_Hero]

133. just finished it about an hour and a half ago...

I thought it was pretty good, as a matter of fact...the best in the series. There was always action, or intrigue throughout. About my only complaints/gripes are just little missing details. Neville killed the snake with the Godric's sword, but ? The Goblin, had the sword..after the debacle at Gringotts, so...how did Neville get Godrics sword back? There was no mention of Griphook coming to Hogwarts(or any other goblin), during the siege/battle at the end of the book...so Neville, where did you get the sword?

But otherwise, I thought the series was pretty good...in all, a solid 8.5 on a scale of 1-10, 10 being the best. The killing of the characters throughout, was a good touch....Rowling did, what a lot of other writers refuse to do...kill off some characters. One of my fave series, is the Drizzt series by RA Salvatore, the series is great up to the Passage to Dawn book...everything afterword has been painstakingly worthless clap trap...RA doesn't have the courage/guts to kill off any characters, or add any new angles to that particular series....Rowling, I believe did a good thing by killing off some of the characters, and the biggest surprise for me, was the death of Fred....Man, the twins(George/Fred), were in my top three favorite characters in the novel! It suprised me that Rowling had the courage to kill one of them off....as for the rest, I believe it was a lot of slash/burn killings...especially Tonks/Lupin, where their death/fight sequence wasn't even talked about....

The Death of Doby, was probably the most emotional/heartfelt loss, and I fear that part will be lost in the movie(when it comes out) since the house elves haven't been seen/mentioned since the Chamber of Secrets flick.....but anyways, I'm just ramblin now, :D

[Broken_Hero]

135. I just rechecked the Godric sword thing

Rowling didn't say it was Godric's sword, it was silver with a glittering rubied handle....which has to be Godric's Sword, right?

[Lorien]

136. Yeah, that was the same sword, and I had the same questions you did

that was the one loose end that remained a loose end. She tied the rest of them up quite neatly, but there was no mention anywhere of how Godric's sword got from Griphook to Neville. Very odd.

[Matilda]

139. The Sword appeared in the Sorting Hat,

as it did for Harry in The Chamber of Secrets. Only a true Gryffindor
can pull it out of the hat. It comes when it's most needed.

[Marie26]

141. So am I the only one who hated it?

Because I did. Totally. I'm almost willing to agree w/the fundies that there's something evil about this series.

- Harry using Unforgiveable Curses like it's nothing? Heros torturing bad guys for fun?

- Death is totally cool! Doesn't hurt at all! Jump right in, Harry. Am I the only one who got a pro-suicide vibe from that chapter?

- No House unity - Slytherin = evil. No moral complexity at all. And because Gryffindor = good, no one can ever question anything the Gryffindors do.

- Social justice? Who needs it. After all the talk about house elf rights, goblin rebellions, & werewolf discrimination, those themes are totally dropped in the end. The heroes retire to middle-class bliss, secure in their position as the elite of the wizarding world.

- Dumbledore was an evil manipulative bastard, but I'm still supposed to like him? No way.

- I'm starting to think JKR is a strict Calvinist - she's set up a totally deterministic universe in which no one can really change or grow, and characters are saved or damned by the Sorting Hat at eleven years old.


It was an entertaining read, but IMO the moral messages it sends were pretty disturbing.

[Mist]

143. I have to agree with your points, Marie26. I've overlooked the flaws of

the series because I've enjoyed being swept up and carried along by the story. I've always been bothered by the "Slytherin=evil" thing in the series. As if there's no hope for change for some people, even when they're so young. And the "lookism" of how Slytherins are described: homely, lumpy, fierce, or just plain doltish. Draco is the only "pretty" one, it sounds like. JKR's simplistic equating of homely=evil is obnoxious.

About the social justice issues--I get the idea that with Hermione at the head of the Control of Magical Creatures Dept. things will change, but I can't believe a less prejudiced name for the Dept. couldn't have been found: "control" is incredibly obnoxious, and encapsulates the wizarding world's entire prejudice prolems in that one word.

Yes, DD is certainly shown to be more manipulative than we'd been led to believe, but I never "loved" DD (he screwed up too much, and left HP to solve too many dangerous problems alone). And DD was taking a very long view of how to ultimately defeat LV.

I'm not sure I'd agree that there was a vibe of "death is cool" in the chapter where HP accepts that he's going to die. I think Harry just realized it was necessary. And am I the only one who thought that when HP asked "Does it hurt?" and is reassured that it doesn't, and Lupin says "He will want it to be quick, he wants it over" that Lupin was referring to the imminant death of Voldemort? Just a thought.

The Unforgivable curses were used when necessary--if anything, the good guys held off too long, IMO.

But yes, I'd have to agree that there's a Calvinist streak to JKR's interpretation of morality.

[XemaSab]

144. I don't agree with your "lookist" interpretation

First of all, Draco and Blaise are both good looking. Well, okay, Draco has a "pale, pointed face," cold gray eyes, and whitish hair. There are only two Slytherin girls in Harry's year who are described, and yes, they're both unattractive. Crabbe and Goyle are big and mean-looking, but Nott is never well described.

The Black family are all good looking, and they're almost all Slytherins. Sirius used to be good-looking, but notsomuch post-Azkaban.

Harry's comrades, on the other hand, aren't so good looking. Harry grows up to be cute (according to Hermione and Ginny) but he's described in the first book as being small and skinny with messy black hair, knobbly knees, and glasses. The only thing he likes about his own appearance is his scar (oh the irony).

Ron is described as "tall, thin, and gangling, with freckles, big hands and feet, and a long nose." He's also got dirt on his nose. :P

Neville is described as "round-faced." He's called "fat" by one of the Slytherins. He's also described as accident-prone with a bad memory to boot.

Hermione has a "bossy sort of voice, lots of bushy brown hair, and rather large front teeth."

Luna has "straggly, waist-length, dirty blonde hair, very pale eyebrows, and protuberant eyes that gave her a permanantly surprised look." She also doesn't blink.

Ginny, Cho, Cedric, and Blaise are the only kids (kids= Harry's cohort) who are explicitly good looking, IIRC. (If that's right, it's one of each house).

The only adults described as good-looking are Fleur, Bill (pre-Grayback), Lockhart :eyes: , Madame Maxime, the Blacks, the Malfoys, Madame Rosmerta, and Lily.

Adults with less-than-flattering descriptions include Hagrid, Lupin, Mad-Eye, Dumbledore, and the Weasley parents. And Snape. :D

Frankly, she's really into describing the less attractive qualities of people. :P

A few years ago there was some hoo-ha about her making bad people fat, and she responded quite vehemently that there are both fat bad people and fat good people in her books. I'd assume that she'd have the same response to the "lookist" allegation.

[CBHagman]

147. I loved Hagrid's crush on Madame Maxime.

Hagrid's endearing as all get-out anyway -- he cries at funerals AND weddings -- but the attraction to Madame Maxime was a hoot, especially since the kids noticed. And she kept saying that she was not a giant, just "big-boned." :rofl:

Someone (probably Christopher Hitchens) accused Rowling of having no sense of humor. On the contrary, I got a lot of laughs out of the books when I wasn't crying or turning pages.

[XemaSab]

148. He's got to be high

There's some hardcore snark there, as well as U-No-Poo. :P

She's got a lot of human spirit and emotion in the books.

[Mist]

150. Well, you've certainly taken me to task, XemaSab! You're right, the non-Slyths are

described as looking more average but it still seems a lot of Slytherins are unflatteringly described.Perhaps it's just their expressions or overall appearance that I'm remembering as being unattractive. And yes, I'd forgotten Blaise!

[Marie26]

153. Calvinism & Slytherins

Slytherin=evil was always my main objection to the novels, & I was curious to see if she'd turn it around in the end. Nope, now Slytherin = evil Nazis as well. I dunno, it's just disturbing to me. It's like the novels preach against stereotypes & bigotry while actually reinforcing those same concepts in how Slytherins are portrayed. IMO, there's a degree of dehumanization of Slytherins that really bothers me. And combined w/the Calvinist streak - it makes me think that Slytherins are damned? At eleven years old? That's awful!

And, as you say, the prejudice of all wizards against other creatures isn't really addressed. I never noticed, but you're right, "control" of magical creatures is a pretty obnoxious description - it also bothered me that the heros seemed to accept house-elf slavery at the end. The book's an entertaining read for sure, but the more I think about the underlying moral issues, the more it all seems to turn to mush.

[CBHagman]

154. I' ve only just discovered...

...that the whole "Slytherins are bad" thing arises in the Wikipedia entries for Harry Potter. See the following links and make up your own mind. Remember too that Snape, Horace Slughorn, and Regulus Black are Slytherins.

"One good Slytherin" article (which I haven't read yet):

http://www.redhen-publications.com/GoodSlyth.html

The Horace Slughorn entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horace_Slughorn

Snape:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severus_Snape

[Marie26]

155. Well

IMO the "Slytherins are bad" thing arises from the text itself, though I love that fans cheerfully subverted that message. But man did she demonize the Slytherins in this book. Yes, there are mild exceptions in Slughorn, Snape, Regulus, but they're all in the older generation. JKR made sure to show that every single Slytherin student went to Voldemort's side, that Pansy Parkinson tried to betray Harry Potter, that Slytherins didn't have a flag up in the room of requirement, etc. And what was the deal when Voldemort tried to burn the Sorting Hat so everyone would become Slytherins?? It presents a uniform message, pretty much across the series, that this group of people are "less worthy," than the noble pure Gryffindors. And the Sorting Hat sorts the "more worthy" and "less worthy" children out at eleven years old. I think this book is basically a Calvinist allegory - w/the "Divine Elect" sorted from the unclean masses by a singing hat.

[Matilda]

156. The issue of Slytherins being bad was addressed by JKR in interview later.

She did say that after the defeat of Voldemort, the Houses were not so sharply divided - possibly
somebody had brought up this topic with her. It is a valid point, though. There's also an
impression that all Hufflepuffs are dumb, as though qualities like loyalty and honesty preclude
somebody from being brainy or courageous (Cedric being the one exception that we see).

I see it less as being part of a Calvinist mindset than simply a plot device - the school was being
undermined from within. Before the last battle, she does mention that some Slytherins stayed
behind to fight, although there were fewer of them than from the other Houses.

I sometimes have to remind myself that the first two books were definitely written for children,
and things were more black and white than in later books, but she was stuck with some of the ideas
that she'd had from the beginning. It was only after adults hijacked the stories that some moral
ambiguity began to creep in, and we saw more shades of grey.

[Matilda]

157. I've thought a lot about your points, and it's time to reply.

The books aren't perfect, although I think Jo Rowling is wonderfully imaginative, clever and amusing.
She's dreamed up a whole society and culture and while it's flawed in places, she's sustained it
over 17 years in the writing of the seven books in a way that's always left us wanting more, and
that's no mean feat. If she never wrote anything else, she's already earned her place in the history
of books and writing.

Harry was certainly hurling Unforgiveables in HBP and DH, but they were mainly at Snape, when he
was traumatised by witnessing the death of Dumbledore at Snape's hands, and believing that he was
probably going to meet the same fate. He believed he was fighting for his life, so the use of an
Unforgiveable was - forgiveable. I'd have to do some re-reading, but I don't think he used an
Unforgiveable against Voldemort in the final battle, because he'd figured out who the Elder Wand
belonged to, and knew he had protection from the worst that Voldemort could hurl at him.

One thing that a new Ministry of Magic should maybe look at would be whether they should declare
"Sectumsempra" an Unforgiveable once they found out about it, because it's quite possible that if
Snape hadn't intervened, Draco could have bled to death in the bathroom. Harry didn't know what
it was going to do, but although Draco was certainly out to inflict as much damage as he could,
Harry probably wouldn't have used Sectumsempra if he'd known what would happen. There must be an
argument for putting it in the same category as an Imperius or Cruciatus.

The Social Justice issue was always a minor thread, and I saw it as being introduced mainly as a
way of underlining Hermione's rather pedantic habit of political correctness. It was just another
instance of the way she always played by the book, although it was a valid concern. House elves
were slaves, and it's a bit extraordinary that even enlightened wizards didn't seem to be troubled
by the way they were treated. Of necessity, it had to be a very minor theme in DH, but we did see
Kreacher coming to accept Harry because he was treated with respect, and in the end he brought the
Hogwarts elves into battle because Harry had done the right thing by him, and for no other reason.
There was also the respect shown by Harry towards Dobby when he dug his grave with his own hands -
a wave of his wand could have achieved the same end, but it wouldn't have had the same meaning.
Few other wizards would have bothered.

I see Dumbledore's manipulation and Harry's willingness to sacrifice himself as being essential to
the "Hero's Journey". I never felt that Dumbledore was in any way evil, although we learned in DH
that he could have taken that path, but chose not to. Therefore he chose the greater good over his
own ambition. He fulfilled the Mentor role for Harry, and as such it was his task to guide and to
warn, but not to interfere in Harry's quest. He had to let Harry face everything, up to and
including death, in order for Harry's heroic journey to be completed. It was all played out in the
traditions of the great myths and legends.

Harry didn't welcome death at all - he was afraid, and didn't know if he could face it without
the support of his parents, and Lupin and Sirius. He chose to face it only because - as Voldemort
guessed - he couldn't accept that his friends were dying because of him. It was them or him, and
he chose to die in order to save them (although it's a moot point whether Voldemort would have
spared any Hogwarts students or teachers who fought with Harry). Many true heroes in battle have
made the same choice in the necessity of the moment, not from suicidal fantasies.

Where the pre-determination comes in seems to be in the way the wizarding society is structured - it
appears to be ruled by a group of unelected elites who write all the rules and quite often get it
wrong. We're not told how the make-up of the Ministry is determined, but it doesn't appear to be
the result of a democratic process, but rather groups of the great and good (presumably pure-bloods)
getting together and deciding who will hold what position. Having done little better than GW Bush
in the way they tackled the problem of "terrorists" in the form of Voldemort and his Death Eaters,
it seems that political reform is overdue in the wizarding world.

[Marie26]

158. Unforgiveables,

Thanks for the thoughtful response.
"Harry was certainly hurling Unforgiveables in HBP and DH, but they were mainly at Snape, when he
was traumatised by witnessing the death of Dumbledore at Snape's hands, and believing that he was
probably going to meet the same fate. He believed he was fighting for his life, so the use of an
Unforgiveable was - forgiveable."

That actually isn't true. Harry uses Unforgiveables against various goblins in Gringotts - who were not attacking him - in order to evade discovery. Later, he uses the Crucio curse against Carrow. When Harry does this, he is not fighting for his life, and is not in any personal danger. He's just really, really, angry. Harry is hidden underneath the Invisibility Cloak at the time, and sees Carrow spit at McGonegal. This pisses him off so much that he reveals himself, shouts "Crucio!" and tortures Carrow. McGonegal, the authority figure, then tells Harry that this was "gallant" of him. (??!!) Then she uses an unnecesary Unforgiveable Curse as well against the unconcious Carrows. WHAT is going on here? It'd be one thing if JKR had set up that these Curses are acceptable in some settings, but from the beginning we are told that they are Unforgiveable because they require an evil mindset - you have to *want* to torture, kill or control somebody.

Harry actually agrees - after he tortures Carrow, he says "she was right, you really have to mean it". Meaning, you really have to want to torture, cause pain & enjoy it. I can't understand why this is bad when the bad guys do it, but OK & acceptable when the good guys do it. It reminds me a little of the Bush Administration claiming that it isn't torture when *we* do it, because we're the good guys! And these are terrorists, so who cares if they get hurt!

I agree w/your points about the Social Justice issues as being rather minor in the end, and about the incompetence of the Ministry. But IMO Predestination is most obvious in the House Sorting - children truly are sorted as good & bad at eleven years old, and the novels show very little evidence of people ever changing afterwards. That will always bother me. The novel is also totally OK w/dividing the world between "us"& "them," and labeling the "other" as evil, wrong, inhuman, & almost deserving of hatred. This reminds me a little too much of how Bushco. also labels the "other" as evil in order to direct Americans's aggression. Instead of understanding & reconciliation, the ending seemed to feature a lot of the good guys getting revenge against the bad guys. Which was ultimately sort of depressing to me.

[Matilda]

159. More Unforgiveables.

Yes, I'd forgotten the details of the scene in the Ravenclaw Tower. A
lot of uncharacteristic behaviour occurred there, and I'm not sure what
point JKR was trying to make, but you're quite right about Harry.

Regarding the predestination of the Sorting, I think Rowling has probably
realised what she was doing, hence her remark that in future it would
be a bit different, with the House characteristics less marked. And
Dumbledore's comment to Snape that perhaps they sort too soon is also
significant. I'm still inclined to put the sharp divisions between
"us and them"/"good and evil" down to the early books being written for
a young audience, and less ambivalent than if she was consciously writing
for adults. James Potter gradually becomes someone we suspect we might
not like very much, while the initially revolting Snape becomes a man
for whom we feel compassion - not to mention the flaws we discover in
Dumbledore. All human, in ways that adults can relate to, whereas
children are more at ease with moral absolutes.

I don't know how much was thought out in advance, but from interviews
we know that storylines changed, and quite probably her characters also
evolved in some ways that perhaps she didn't intend. It would be so
interesting if an interviewer could put these questions to her.

[XemaSab]

160. My take on it (in part)

is that the books are very much from Harry's point of view.

Harry thinks the Slytherins are evil, so that's how we the readers see them.

I'm sure one could write a REALLY GOOD series from Draco's point of view, with Draco as the protagonist, instead of Harry. He's Harry's opposite number in a lot of ways, but they're also similar in some ways too. I think Rowling intentionally drew a parallel between Draco and James. They've got the same casual snobbery, and interestingly enough, use some of the same words.

"Imagine being in Hufflepuff. I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?

"Who wants to be in Slytherin? I think I'd leave, wouldn't you?"

One of my favorite interpretations of the story as a whole is a class reading of the books. (Hey, I'm a liberal, what do you expect? :P )

The Slytherins are the nobility, where blood purity counts for everything. They're rich, privileged, cliquish, and look down on people outside their class.

The Ravenclaws are the educated academics, such as the doctors, scientists, and professors. (I was amused and fascinated by the "riddles" one had to answer to get into Ravenclaw tower.)

The Hufflepuffs are the working class: patient, determined, hard-working, friendly, non-judgemental.

The Gryffindors are left as the fighting middle class! :woohoo:

With this reading, the banding together of the academics, working class, and middle class to overthrow the elites makes perfect sense. :D

It's my old boss, who was British, who sold me on this theory (or at least got me thinking about it seriously). He also discussed the point that in Britain, kids ARE "sorted" early through tests and by the time you're not much older than Harry it's clear whether you're going to university or not. In the American system, you really get all the chances you want. Even if you flunk out of high school, you can still go to junior college and transfer to a university with the proper grades. Still have to PAY for it, but the opportunity is there if you can work towards it.

Finally, we must remember that Rowling is a HUGH Jane Austin fan, where class is virtually totally controlled by outside circumstance. :D

[Marie26]

161. Dehumanization of the "other"

I used to think that too - that the negative view of Slytherins is just Harry's biased POV. But then I realized that no, it's actually JKR's biased point of view. Every single Slytherin abandoned Hogwarts, Pansy pointed Harry out like a kind of Judas, etc. Even the traits are bad - cunning, ambition, bigotry, etc. JKR totally demonized the Slytherins & that really bugged me.

And no offense to your teacher, but isn't that a total stereotyping of each class? Working class people are patient & loyal? Rich people are all cunning & cliquish? How come poor, unprivileged Snape is a Slytherin then?

But you're right, we're totally supposed to identify w/the good noble middle-class Gryffindors & cheer when they put those Slytherins in their place. It's "us" vs. "them" all the way, and the reader is supposed to feel the benefit of being part of "us" (the good, the brave, the Gryffindors), :woohoo: and get a vicarious pleasure out of beating the awful "them".

Isn't that cliquish? We're also encouraged to see the Slytherins as almost less human than the good guys - they're described as "troll-like," "brutal", w/little to no reedeming qualities. And in the last novel, they almost all turn out to be evil, too. At the end of the novel, Slytherins have not been integrated into the school, but remain alienated & hated by most of the other students.

I think what's really going on here is classic dehumanization & group identification. Tribalism is one of the most deep-set instincts of human beings, and JKR uses it w/abandon. She gets readers to identify w/"us" so much that "they" almost seem less human. Almost less worthy of fair treatment by the good people. They're bad, after all, so why should the good people worry about being fair or humane to them? It's Bushco. thinking; the same type of dehumanization that makes people defend torture or unfair treatment in the real world. It sort of disturbs me just how easy it is for all of us, even progressives, to jump on that bandwagon. The appeal of just identifying with "us" is almost overwhelming.

The Psychology of Dehumanization

"Dehumanization is the psychological process of demonizing the enemy, making them seem less than human and hence not worthy of humane treatment. This can lead to increased violence, human rights violations, war crimes, and genocide.

Dehumanization is actually an extension of a less intense process of developing an "enemy image" of the opponent. During the course of protracted conflict, feelings of anger, fear, and distrust shape the way that the parties perceive each other. Adversarial attitudes and perceptions develop and parties begin to attribute negative traits to their opponent. They may come to view the opponent as an evil enemy, deficient in moral virtue, or as a dangerous, warlike monster.

An enemy image is a negative stereotype through which the opposing group is viewed as evil, in contrast to one's own side, which is seen as good. Such images can stem from a desire for group identity and a need to contrast the distinctive attributes and virtues of one's own group with the vices of the "outside" group.<4> In some cases, evil-ruler enemy images form. While ordinary group members are regarded as neutral, or perhaps even innocent, their leaders are viewed as hideous monsters.<5>

Enemy images are usually black and white. The negative actions of one's opponent are thought to reflect their fundamental evil nature, traits, or motives.<6> One's own faults, as well as the values and motivations behind the actions of one's opponent, are usually discounted, denied, or ignored. It becomes difficult to empathize or see where one's opponent is coming from. Meaningful communication is unlikely, and it becomes difficult to perceive any common ground.

Once formed, enemy images tend to resist change, and serve to perpetuate and intensify the conflict. Because the adversary has come to be viewed as a "diabolical enemy," the conflict is framed as a war between good and evil.<7> Once the parties have framed the conflict in this way, their positions become more rigid. In some cases, zero-sum thinking develops as parties come to believe that they must either secure their own victory, or face defeat.

http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/dehumanization/

Doesn't this description sound just like the conflict between the Gryffindors & Slytherins?

[XemaSab]

163. I give Rowling's readers a bit more credit.

You're right, the Slytherins are basically shown as, if not EVIL, totally selfish. Narcissa tells the crowd that Harry is dead so she can go into Hogwarts and find Draco. Slughorn is easily plied with flattery, pineapple, and liquor. Snape's SOLE MOTIVE is to have Lily for HIMSELF. Snape does not care if she is happy with James, he just wants her. (Like, honestly, did he really think that if Harry and James were killed and she was spared, she would get with him?!?!?)

Not that other characters aren't motivated by jealousy, revenge, pride, misplaced loyalty, anger, bitterness, misanthropy, bigotry, cowardice, and other less-than-virtuous motives, but the Slytherins seem to have these in spades.*

I agree that Rowling oversimplifies the divisions, but what does it say for her readership that we are given enough perspective throughout the books to feel deeply sorry for most of the "bad" people and worry about them? Note well that Snape and Draco have been two fan favorites for many books.

Let's contrast Rowling with some other writers here. Tolkien: nobody roots for the Orcs. Lewis: nobody roots for the witch. The Bible: Judas fans are few and far between. :D




*Footnote: If we're going to look at the Slytherins as old-timey SINNERS, why not pull out the 7 deadly sins?

Gluttony: Slughorn

Sloth: Pettigrew (not technically a Slytherin, but chilling at the Weasley house as a sleepy rat for 12 years wasn't exactly pro-active)

Lust: Bellatrix. Ew.

Avarice: Snape.

Pride: Blaise and Draco.

Greed: Crabbe and Goyle, for two.

Wrath: Voldy, among others.

[Matilda]

164. This is all true, and has some relevance to the stories.

But it is also what constitutes a great deal of fiction/adventure
writing, from Tolkien and Lewis through to the adult fiction of writers
like Ludlum and Forsyth. Two principal groups of protagonists, one
identified as good and one as evil, whether they're based on political
views, race, religion, or class - the reader is programmed to take sides,
to identify with the "us" against "them". It begins with childhood fairy
stories, and Rowling begins just a few steps on from there. This kind
of story is really a morality tale, and one of the mechanisms used to
teach the young how to make moral choices.

I do understand what you're saying about stereotyping from an early age,
and we have to wonder how much the Sorting turns into a self-fulfilling
prophecy. But I think we have to remember that the first two books at
least were written for children as young as eight years, and they
wouldn't have had a problem dealing with black-and-white criteria. There
is a noticeable shift later on as lines become blurred - the "bad" become
a bit more sympathetic (Narcissa puts her love for her son above her
service to the Dark Lord), and the "good" reveal fatal flaws (Dumbledore
wouldn't have died if he hadn't been tempted to put on the cursed ring).
I don't know whether Rowling always planned to introduce a more adult
perspective, or whether it just happened as she realised she had an
adult readership, but there is a shift in consciousness as we progress,
until in Deathly Hallows it's revealed that Dumbledore could very
easily have become a dark wizard, and Snape has displayed courage equal
to any.

[Matilda]

165. Having had time to re-read the last chapters,

and stand back from it a bit, there's one relationship that has always bothered me and still does -
Hermione and Ron.

I just can't see those two really making a couple - Ron's a decent guy, but not always quick on the
uptake, and not a particularly talented wizard either. It's just so hard to imagine someone of
Hermione's intelligence and talent being satisfied with Ron. I can fully understand why there's
so much fanfic out there on Hermione and Snape, who are intellecutally more of a match, although
personally I always expected that Hermione would become a teacher, and one day Headmistress of
Hogwarts, and probably never marry.

I can accept Harry and Ginny, and could even have accepted Harry and Hermione at a pinch, but
Hermione and Ron - I just can't buy into that.

[intheflow]

166. I totally agree.

Someone had to point the relationship out to me before the movies came out and spelled it out. I don't get that pairing at all. they really have nothing in common except the adventures they've shared, and of course, Harry's friendship. There was really no one in any of the books that I feel would have been a good match for Hermione; if Percy hadn't been such a prig, he might have served well, very ambitious, very smart. But no one matched Hermione's wizarding gifts, her devotion to academia, or even her personality, imo.

[Matilda]

167. Except Snape, had he lived.

I can see how tempting that relationship is to fanfic writers - you can
imagine them playing endless mind games, and working their way through
the Kama Sutra.

But a middle-class witch, having babies and keeping house with Ron? No,
I just can't see it.

[XemaSab]

168. Interesting observation

I've never "gotten" Hermione and Ron either, and for just that reason. What would Hermione see in him?

I can see Hermione going for Harry WAY better. Harry's a tortured soul, and smart chicks dig that. They're different enough for there to be attraction, but they've also been through a lot together and that would create a bond.

I'll say frankly that Ron has never been one of my favorites. Maybe that's the mystery for me why Hermione would like him.

(ps Harry's not the only tortured soul in the books, but I must say Hermione/Snape spawn would be UGLY. Greasy, bushy black hair, big noses, buck teeth, pale skin... :scared: )

[CBHagman]

169. I remember a Harry Potter fan writing years ago...

...that Ron and Hermione were meant to be together and that they, at that point, were the only two people who didn't know it. Rowling had been working up to the Ron-Hermione pairing for some time, and I would have been disappointed if they had not gotten together. It would have been even worse if one or both of them had gotten killed, though I began the final book with the conviction that those who survived would include Hermione, McGonagall, and probably Flitwick (Yeah, I was nervous about Rowling's approach to killing off characters).

I understand what everyone's saying about Hermione's tremendous work ethic and highly developed skills, and I too was waiting for Snape to be impressed by her and was always astonished that he seemed to have taken against her as much as any of Harry's circle of friends. Why wouldn't he favor a student who got where she was on merit and hard work? But perhaps Snape could barely stand the presence of a Muggle-born Gryffindor girl of obvious talent -- too much of a reminder of Lily, perhaps. And I suspect wizarding ethics would have kept Snape from becoming involved with a student, quite apart from the fact that he never got over Lily Evans.

As to Ron and Hermione, I suspect Rowling meant to have the classic routine of a couple squabbling all the way to falling in love -- Beatrice and Benedick, Pat and Mike, Sam and Diane, Harry and Sally. And even if Ron is nowhere near as impressive as Hermione, they complement each other. Hermione's a great character, but even Rowling pokes gentle fun at her tendency to be relentlessly correct and serious. We all know how exhausting it is to be around a true believer of any kind, someone who tells you you're not recycling enough or should have a more ecologically friendly diet or exercise more. Ron provides a lot of heart and some badly needed levity.

Besides, they both had chances with very different partners, and still wound up choosing each other.

[Matilda]

170. "A Muggle-born Gryffindor girl of obvious talent" -

you might have hit on something there; the similarities might have been
painful for Snape, quite apart from his total bias against anyone who
wasn't Slytherin.

And of course, he was too correct to ever attempt anything that looked
like an affair with a student, and now he's dead and that's that. But
I still can't imagine Hermione being stimulated and satisfied with Ron -
he has a good heart and no lack of courage when required, but where would
be the meeting of minds, the intellectual challenge that Hermione would
need? I think she would gain far more from reorganising Hogwarts along
her own lines, freeing house-elves, and bossing students and faculty to
her heart's content.

And perhaps enjoying late-night conversations with Professor Snape's
portrait ....

[CBHagman]

171. In case anyone else has forgotten or missed it...

...here's the link to the fan fiction story continuing Snape's tale. Enjoy.

http://googlebrat.livejournal.com/431112.html

[Matilda]

172. This is also an unexpectedly good story from the same author

“It wasn’t my fault. I didn’t mean to!” The little man’s voice wasn’t much less shrill that the rat’s squeaking had been.

AND YET YOU WERE THE ONE IN THE VENDING MACHINE. The Guard observed. He eyed the man’s right arm, which appeared to cut off abruptly at the wrist. WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR HAND, PERSON-WHO-IS-ALSO-A-A-RAT?

“Peter. It’s Peter.” The man looked down at the missing appendage, and flushed, “I uh.. I lost it. It wasn’t my fault!” he added defensively, as though expecting the Guard to accuse him of something, “Someone made me, and I was scared, and…

http://googlebrat.livejournal.com/440424.html


I never expected to shed a tear for Wormtail, but I did ...

[XemaSab]

173. The genius of Rowling is in her setups

As Matilda said, there are so many places the plot can go.

JK's like a dragonfly, where she heads straight in one direction and at the last minute swerves off onto a whole new path.

In this reread I realized what she's doing with Harry and the unforgivable curses.

You KNOW Harry's going to kill Voldemort, the question is how.

After Harry performs Imperio and Crucio, JK's setting you up for the possibility of the big one.

At the last minute, when Harry and Voldemort are face to face and each preparing to attack the other, Harry busts out the tried and true "Expelliarmus!" :)

But there is that suspense...

Oh, and on edit: Snape's first spell at the dueling club is the disarming of Lockhart. After that, Lockhart proceeds to drop his wand and bounce Malfoy's snake in the air (instead of vanishing it). I don't think we ever see Lockhart performing any magic after that (except with Ron's spellotaped wand, which backfires.)

[Matilda]

174. I think I understand why she ended the fight the way she did -

because of the young readers she has, although she's on record as saying
that Deathly Hallows was not written for children. Even so, as someone
pointed out on another thread, none of the children actually killed
another human being.

I did find it just a bit of an anti-climax though - the tension for me
was in the scenes where Harry was walking to the Forbidden Forest - not
being sure that he wouldn't die, feeling the fear and the sadness. The
final showdown was not quite up to the same level.