Was anyone else somewhat disappointed by HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS? [Spoiler Alert]

[derby378]

Okay, the hype's died down, we've all gotten through the book, and the series is over at last. Did anyone else here think that maybe J.K. Rowling ended the Harry Potter saga not with a bang, but a whimper? The last four chapters of the book seemed just a tad confusing when it came to what happened to Harry and Voldemort. And the final duel was just way too short.

Not that the book overall wasn't a good read, because it was, but I have my doubts that it was worth five stars.

[graywarrior]

1. I'm still in mourning

[derby378]

2. Alas, poor Severus...

But yeah, there's that. Forever carrying a torch in his heart for Lily - poor guy.

[graywarrior]

3. Hell, I'LL never get over it.

I always knew he was the good guy.

[Skittles]

4. not disappointed but extremely sick of it

argh

[deucemagnet]

5. I've been thinking about posting a rant on that subject.

I'd like to research exact quotes from the book before doing it, but here's the gist of it in a nutshell.

****MAJOR SPOILERS FOLLOW****


J.K. Rowling and the Unforgivable Inconsistency:

1. In book 4 we're introduced to the 3 Unforgivable Curses. Casting a single UC gets you thrown in Azkaban where dementors suck the joy right out of your soul!

2. In book 5, Harry is enraged when when a curse hurled by Bellatrix LeStrange knocks Sirius through the veil of death at the Ministry. So enraged, in fact, that he casts the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix in the Ministry atrium. When the curse fails to do any significant damage, she says:

"Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?" she yelled…
"You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain - to enjoy it - righteous anger won’t hurt me for long…"
(OotP pg. 810, US Hardback)

So Bellatrix establishes that a certain level of maliciousness in necessary to cast an unforgivable curse. This is confirmed by Harry's inability to cast it.

3. At the end of book 6, Severus Snape casts the Killing Curse on Dumbledore, killing him. So Snape had to really "mean" that curse, to enjoy it, right? Well, no. Not if it interferes with a plot twist.

4. Now we come to book 7. By my count, Harry himself has cast 3 Imperius Curses before the final battle. No problems, no guilt, no fear of Azkaban. Then in the waning chapters, Harry successfully casts a Cruciatus curse! Has Harry turned evil? What could possibly incite such rage, when even witnessing the murder of his godfather wasn't enough?

“It’s not a case of what you’ll permit, Minerva McGonagall. You time’s over.
It’s us what’s in charge here now, and you’ll back me up or you’ll pay the price.”
And he spat in her face.
Harry pulled the Cloak off himself, raised his wand, and said, “You shouldn’t
have done that.”
As Amycus spun around, Harry shouted, “Crucio!”
The Death Eater was lifted off his feet. He writhed through the air like a
drowning man, thrashing and howling in pain, and then, with a crunch and
a shattering of glass, he smashed into the front of a bookcase and crumpled,
insensible, to the floor.
“I see what Bellatrix meant,” said Harry, the blood thundering through his
brain, “you need to really mean it.”

(HPatDH p503, US Hardcover)

Um, OK Psycho. McGonagall then promptly Imperiuses Amycus. What the hell, all of the cool people are doing it now. It's only wrong when somebody we don't like does it.

So what's the lesson here? Unforgivable Curses are bad, mmm-kay? And only bad people use them. Well maybe they're not that bad if they're involved in a plot twist. Or maybe if they're any main character at all, then it's OK, and they're not bad and you should probably forget what was said earlier. What was the question? :crazy:

[Fire Walk With Me]

6. Good point. It's very easy to dislike others when they use our tricks.

So don't use tricks.

[derby378]

7. Two points...

1. The Cruciatus Curse was the only Unforgivable Curse where you had to "really mean it." And even at Harry's worst, he made a guy writhe with pain and then smash into a bookcase. It wasn't one of those sanity-destroying, soul-searing, Block-11-of-Auschwitz-is-for-wussies torture sessions that Voldemort and Death Eaters like Bellatrix were so fond of. The Killing Curse simply required (according to GOF) that you be a wizard or witch with substantially more magical power than the average Hogwarts fourth-year student could muster.

2. In the absense of any real law and order at the Ministry of Magic other than Voldemort's law, do you really think anyone would be tried and punished for using an Unforgivable Curse? It's sort of a Mad Max scenario - you're not going to be imprisoned for roaming the highways with an unregistered machine gun if the ATF has been nuked and what's left of local law enforcement is just trying to keep Toecutter or Humongous from going all Mike Tyson on their asses.

[deucemagnet]

8. To address your points:

1. Question: Why would Bellatrix refer to all unforgivable curses ("Never used an unforgivable curse before...") when the observed effect only applied to the cruciatus curse? Could she not just have easily specified "Cruciatus curse"? Answer: Because Rowling wrote herself into a corner and decided to gloss over it.

2. My argument isn't really about the punishment one might recieve for casting an unforgivable curse, or even the legality, but rather the morality. Is it OK just because you won't get caught? If it was wrong in book 4, is it still wrong in book 7? Barty Crouch (disguised as Mad-Eye) gave a damn good demonstration of why these curses were illegal in book 4. Either they're showing some pretty flexible relative morality in book 7, or, more likely, Rowling found herself in a tight spot and decided to ignore her own rules again. (I'm betting it was the second one. ;) )

[sanguinivorous]

10. One thought...

2. In book 5, Harry is enraged when when a curse hurled by Bellatrix LeStrange knocks Sirius through the veil of death at the Ministry. So enraged, in fact, that he casts the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix in the Ministry atrium. When the curse fails to do any significant damage, she says:

"Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?" she yelled…
"You need to mean them, Potter! You need to really want to cause pain - to enjoy it - righteous anger won’t hurt me for long…"
(OotP pg. 810, US Hardback)

That could have been just Bellatrix's way of talking trash.

[sanguinivorous]

9. I thought the ending sort of sucked...

I mean...seriously. As the series progressed, it got darker and darker. Death and despair all around. Then right at the end Harry pulls a victory out of his ass, none of the three majors dies or is even seriously injured, and everybody goes on to marry their "high school" (or whatever you'd call it in Britain) sweetheart. Seriously, in the 19 years between Voldemort's death and the epilogue, Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione never meet anybody else?

It's like Rowling was building up to a dramatic ending, then started to worry that some 12-year-old uberfan out there might kill herself because Harry had a toe blown off in the end or something.

It just seemed very lazy and sugar-coated to me.

The build up to Voldemort's death was too convuluted as well. Stop EXPLAINING crap and just write a good story. When Voldemort finally died, it was massively anti-climatic.

[XemaSab]

11. Shut the hell up

ya Nazi.











































(Why do you hate America? :shrug: )