Deathly Hallows Book Discussion **LoTs Of Spoilers**
 

Spoilers start in ther next post..... This first post has nothing in it to make sure that spoilers don't pop up on the front directory page when you hover your mouse over them. Aren't I nice. :D

So.....

I'm up to Chapter 9, and already:

• The Muggle studies teacher (?who?!?!?!) has died (first we've heard of her)
• Hedwig's died
• We think... that Mad-eye's died (I'm not sure yet)
• we think... that Mundungus may be the leak to the Death Eaters
• George lost an ear - perhaps an extendible ear can be affixed magically ?
• Bill & Phlegm get married.
• Scrimgeour dies

Lots of dead 'uns in this book !! :eek:

Add Snape to the list.

:eek:

I'm crawling out of my book reading hole. I admit I cried at points.

I'm up to chapter 32 or so. Harry and Hogwarts are prepping for the midnight showdown. I have to say, it was very difficult to get any quality reading time in at work today.;)


So, what does everyone think so far? I'm liking it better than I thought I might. Lots of action, lots of backstories being elaborated on and even an explanation as to why the Bloody Baron is so cranky! Oh, and our household bought four books this morning, just so no one had to wait for another to finish.

So far it's great!
 

I'm about a third of the way through...

If they don’t cast Judi Dench as Aunt Muriel, they’re crazy.

Mad eye Moody and Hedwig are gone. Sad… but I’m okay with that.

Really creepy beginning. I loved it.

So if one can have a teeny tiny bag that can hold everything, why the big trunks for school?

Great chapter with Dudley. So very touching.

Death Eaters, Death Eaters everywhere!

I'm all teary eyed after reading "Kreachers tale" chapter.

...I wanna hug him too. :eek:

I went to Target tonight and there were tons of HP books there for $17. I didn't buy it but I did flip thru the last few pages.

Colour me $17 richer... :)

Dobby's death sent me into tears for most of the next chapter. :(

I always believed in Snape- happy to see I was right.

I almost gave Dumbledore up as a right old bastard- but that turned out ok.

LOVED the Ron/Hermione kiss. :)

Loved that Percy came back, hated that Fred died, and loved Molly dueling Bellatrix.

Wish more things had been revealed at the end-
*what happened to Luna
*what are the trio doing now? Besides being parents
*Did George carry on the business he started with Fred
*what is the wizarding world like now?
...and lots of other things too.

Took me just about 10 hours to finish it. Last night I felt like I had been beaten with a very large emotional bat and I babbled about the book and the feelings non-stop (drove everyone in the family crazy) but after a good nights sleep it is easier to process now. It was alot to take in!

I was right! I was right about Harry being the last horcrux!! : ) And I felt so alone when I cried when I heard the prophecy in book 5-- because I thought it meant that neither could live if one of them died (and it sort of did mean that.)

A little confused about the Elder Wand and how it chose/got to Draco (so that Harry could steal it). And what wand Voldemort took from Dumbledore's tomb. Can anybody explain? (I feel confunded.)

SO pissed about Fred-- and really bummed we didn't get to hear more about how George carried on. But I don't think I could take it, really, so maybe that's for the best. What of Luna, what of Luna?? I'd much rather have heard less about the Potter/Weasley cousins going to Hogwarts, and more about the rest of the characters I care about. I loved the book (didn't as much enjoy the isolation of the trio through so much of the early stuff) but I rather thought the epilogue was cheesy.

Kind of grumpy about the lack of Ginny. I mean, she was set up to be such a powerful witch and we hardly got to watch any of her in action (her bravest moment--stealing the sword-- relayed in exposition, sigh.) Her mom kicked bitch ASS, though!

Oh, and poor Ron, worst fear that he'd lose Hermione to Harry. How painful to watch that in vision-form-- how brave of him to destroy the horcrux (and get his girl in the end.) Save the house-elves! That's quite the growing-up he did.

And I must say, I am proud of Neville. So proud of Neville, through the whole of the book (or, well, the parts that he was in.)

Ya-

Dumbledore had the Elder Wand. Draco cornered him in the tower- therefore "defeating" him- and becoming the Master of the Elder Wand.

Because Snape killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders- he was never the master of the wand- but Voldemort did not know this.

During the battle at Malfoy Manor- Harry defeats Draco- taking his wand- by doing so HE conquered the master of the Elder Wand and became it's master- even though he did not have it in his hands.

Voldemort took the Elder Wand from Dumbledore's tomb- but it did not accept him as Master- which is what led to Snape's death (and he died without Voldemort ever knowing Snape was Dumbledore's man) and eventually to Voldemorts defeat- because the wand saw Harry as it's Master.

I'm not reading any of this thread yet ... I'm only on page 415.

But here's a gem from that very page:


Words of wisdom, kiddies. Words of wisdom.

Lol! I'm surprised Voldie wasn't flying a Humvee.

I'm done! I was terrified I wouldn't be able to finish before work tomorrow and that someone, somewhere, would let something slip.

Done. I feel like Bastian in the Neverending Story. Phew.

This book was everything I wanted it to be. Though I didn't think I was going to be able to cope with Fred...that was hard. Hell, Hedwig was hard.

I think it did every aspect some decent justice, though you always end up wanting more, don't you? More Neville, more Snape, more McGonagall yelling war cries, even though she packed in all of their bits as well as she could.

I was irked at Harry's wand controlling himself and was rather concerned that this would end up being yet another book where Harry would get carried by everyone else and happenstance. Thankfully, that worry was unfounded.

Enough for now, I'm sated, and with a headache to boot. Glad I got through it. :)

So what's the over/under on how many years it is before Rowling writes in this universe again? Whether it be the continuing adventures of Harry Potter, the prequel of Dumbledore's youth, or the next generation of Harry Jr. and his friends?

I hope she has the willpower to leave it be, but in the modern era not many authors with successful series have been able to resist the lure of easy money and a return to people caring what you're doing.

So, in 15 years when it has been more than half a decade since she was recognized while shopping at the corner market and her non-Potter books haven't received that much notice (playing the odds on that, hope her the best continued success) do you think she is strong enough?

I've been reading the spoilers for kind of the same purpose as I keep an eye on who wins the NBA finals: so that I can be aware enough to hold a conversation if need be. Many people have mentioned Hedwig dying but I don't remember this character and don't see him in the credits for the movies. Is he introduced in the sixth book or just been not present in the movies?

Damn, forgot the question I was intending to get to with the first half of that post.

And regardless of whether she returns to it or not, do you want her to? Want more of the Harry Potter world or think it is best to leave the story told and move on?

Book was great - I'll have to post more later.

Hedwig is/was Harrys Owl and a gift to him from Hagrid in the first book.

As for what comes next...I do see how she totally left that window wide open with the ending...it will be interesting to see what she does as time goes on.

Ah, thanks. I hope his death was more noble than flying into a closed window or something.

Sleepy, yet unable to sleep - so I'll chime in with (without bothering to read the posts above):

I'm not entirely sure I needed the epilogue. I like to read and leave my own imagination to come up with an "ending." A bit too much cheese, in my opinion - though I do see new story lines of it. I don't have an inclination to know further, even without the epilogue. I'm sated. Sad, for the many losses (I rung out tears from my eyes until there were no more - the beauty of it being 'that time' while reading this book), but satisfied.

While halfway through the book late this morning, I went to a coffee shop to do a little reading outdoors. Mentioned the part of the book I was at to the quick-reading barista and she complained that the first part was so boring and dreadful.

To which I didn't say, though I felt it then, and believe it still - it was Rowling's intent to leave the reader in a state of emotional drought. To drag the reader through the day-to-day, the loneliness. I think it's brilliant. The first drops of water with Ron's return... it was the real turn of the book. Then cascades of action and character movement, on and on and on.... Wow. And I love Snape, simply, absolutely, love him.

And yeah - epilogue - meh.

I thought the epilogue was somewhat touching. I loved that Harry and Ginny's second son was named Albus Severus. I would have liked to have known more about their lives and the lives of others, but what I really wanted for Harry this entire series was for him to get a happy, normal (for a wizard) life after everything was done. And I got it from the epilogue.

I loved the entire Snape part. I really wanted to hate him when he took George's ear off, but I still clung to a shred of faith that he was good. It wasn't until he ran out of Hogwarts that I expected him to be bad after all.

So many deaths. The part where Hagrid was carrying his body was so moving. I loved how hard everyone fought after they thought Harry was dead. I think Voldemort would have been defeated even if Harry hadn't been there. I also loved that Harry never Avada Kedavra'd anyone. Just not his style. I was disappointed that he used Crucio.

Neville was so fantastic. I'm so glad he got so much glory in this book. It was so appropriate that the final battle happened at Hogwart's. And all the headmaster's cheering. Sigh...

To answer Alex's question...I think she'll leave it alone. I hope she'll leave it alone. She's written other books?

Just finished. Off to bed.

I'll be back when I've gathered some thoughts.

He did not mean to- I think in the memory chapter it refers to him aiming at a DE and missing.

Not that I know of, but if she is a writer and not just a Harry Potter biographer she will. And odds are against them having any great impact on society.

I've not read a spoiler yet, I'm up to chapter 12 and all I can say is, lots of action in the book so far. Lovin it. Back once I've finished.

Done.

I was very, very happy with this one. Erica's explanation of the book helped. I was about to agree with her barista until I read on. I think Rowling did want us to feel it. No doubt about it.

I was glad to read the chapter about Snape. Wonderful. I knew he was good. I just knew it. :)

Poor Fred.

In a way, I'm glad she killed off Hedwig. Now kids won't want owls as pets. the lesson being, don't buy owls... they explode.

So Harry sort of died. Okay, whatever. I'm just glad that the main three weren't killed.

I liked the way that saving Draco helped Harry save himself in the end. Had he finished him off, Mrs. Malfoy may have given it away that he was still alive.

Mrs. Weasley rocks. I can't wait to see that scene in the film.

I also can't wait to see Helena Bonham Carter as Hermionie sneaking into the bank. She could pull that off.

I wanted Umbridge to explode or something. Evil character...

I'm glad Neville didn't die. Grandma rocked, too.

I liked the Epilogue.

All in all, I'm happy with the last book and with the series as a whole. No idea what Harry's doing on the cover of the book. Anyone have any ideas? Where's he looking? Is this as Voldie is hit by his own spell?


This is the fastest that I have read any book. I read all day Sat and Sun. Outside of doing some shopping and laundry and planting cactus, I did nothing else this weekend but Harry Pottering.

The midnight line at Barnes and Noble in Burbank was maddening. I'll discuss it more when I have time to write more.

Long Live Harry Potter!
:)

Great book. I'm still exhausted from the adventure.

I don't know how I am going to get through the movie. Snakes and spiders! OH MY!

I thought that Hagrid was a goner when he was carried off. Loved the ending and the epilogue. I was hoping that there would be nothing left open to carry on the series. But I see it going on and on and on. Adventures of the Potter/Weasley kids for sure.

I heard someone say that it is the scene in the final battle in the Great Hall as Harry is reaching up to take the Elder wand and Voldemort is reaching out as well having just lost the wand.

That's what I figured. I like the cover a lot. Not much given away and NO synopsis on the jacket cover anywhere. I love that. :)

Do you ever listen to the Mugglenet Podcasts? I did not think they had some things right but the discussions now that the book is out are really interesting-

I liked the book very much. The epilouge was a bit corny but at least you had some finality to it all.

I didn't like all the deaths off camera so to speak - Lupin, Tonks, Mad Eye. They deserved a little glory.

I wanted to know more about Luna and her dad. I had hoped that somehow they wern't bonkers and there really were all these mad creatures and plants out there. Or at the very least that perhaps Luna's mothers death had sent her dad over the edge. I also thought Luna and Neville would have been a great couple in the end.

Dude, WE were in that line-- Aud and Tom and I. What line were you in?

I could have handled anything, I think, but the death of a Weasley twin. It took a lot of strength to pick the book up after that. If it hadn't been for 'The Prince's Tale' I may have been left in a permanent state of morning.

I'll be pissed about Fred FOREVER. Should have been Percy, dammit.

But Snape! I LOVE YOU, ROWLING!!!!

Potterwatch!!!!

Neville!!!

Here lies Dobby, a free Elf.

The entire Deathly Hallows plot, including the beautiful wizarding fairy tale.

So much to love. So, so much.

I've been gabbing a lot in LJ so don't have much energy or time to do so here, but I wanted to drop all the LoT Potter fans a line. I'm sure I'll read through everyone's thoughts throughout the week.

What?! You were?! Dagburn. Had I but known. I stood next to very, very weird people.
I was in the line that held the 400's... not sure which line number that was.
I'm surprised you didn't see me. I was wearing the shirt that said "Bring Back Maude Flanders and Poochie!" Obviously, I was hanging with the wrong crowd.
:D



Question:
Harry had Lily's eyes, right? Then is this why Snape said 'Look...at...me." before he died? Oooh how cool. OR he wanted Harry...
:D

No no no no. Percy needed to redeem himself. He really did. It worked so well. It was touching.

Fred needed to die because now Mrs. Weasley would never confuse the two of them ever again...
:D

By far my favorite part of the book. Oh. my. god. I love Snape.

Man, now I'm even more sad. I really thought he was going to project something into Harry's mind until he bled his memories all over the place. So you're probably right...twas Harry's eyes he wanted to see. GAH . GAH!

Well, not that Fred and George were going to be so hard to figure out with his missing ear and such.

As much as I cried my eyeballs out at the scene, I do think one Weasley had to die, and I figured it was going to be one of the twins, but not likely both. I agree with GC that Percy needed to redeem himself - though I wish I could be more sure he wouldn't go back to his old ways. I would like to think losing Fred would seal Percy's change in personality.

As for the epilogue - it was nice, but I guess I didn't think it was necessary, and was what I more-or-less figured that was what was going to happen. I did like that they went into showing Harry naming his second son after both Dumbledore and Snape, but other than that it was cheese. Confirming cheese, but still cheese.

Oooh, and Neville - couldn't have been prouder! J hasn't read any of the books and he figured out that Neville would grow in the series after seeing me beam at his scenes in Order. I'm going to slip the novels into the apartment on my next visit. I think he'll love reading them.

I love me some corny happily ever after. :D :sniffle: I wouldn't have it any other way. Albus Severus, beautiful, loved it. (although that is probably the worst name ever, if you take a step back. ;) )

I didn't catch the "look at me" bit, glad you mentioned it - poor Snape!!

It's small of me, but I would have loved to see Percy die die die!

I thoroughly enjoyed the book.

Albus Severus...? that kid's going to get his a$s kicked in school.
A name like that makes one Slytherin fodder.
:D


And don't forget that Crabbe died. Burned to death. How sad. Was he the cuter one?

Maybe... but he was named after two of the best wizards... so maybe in HPland he'll be the coolest kid in school. Besides, his dad is Harry Potter!!!!!!!!

I guess they could call him 'Al'.
:D

Is Lupin's kid a werewolf? Did they say?

Was Teddy raised by Tonk's mother or by Harry and Ginny? It was thrown in that Teddy has dinner at the Potter's house about 4X a week.

He was snogging with Bill and Fleur's daughter!

He was raised by his grandmother, but he obviously spent a lot of time with the Potters.

Hiya, sweet R!!!

xoxoxo

Whew, I know I'm behind a lot of you ... but that's the fastest I ever read a book in my life! (I had to take time off yesterday to, of all things, take some swankers to see the new Harry Potter movie).

I had the perfect break point today after my lunchtime, no-lunch, pure reading session. I had to go back to the office just after Harry'd been killed. I was all set for my first post here to be "Misery Chastain Cannot Be Dead!"



I generally liked the book, but can't say I loved it. It suffers, for me, from being very jeuvenile in its story. Really just a bunch of close-escapes for Harry and pals, and a denouement of battle action with a wrap-up of all the McGuffins that, naturally, the inventor of the McGuffins can dazzle us with simply by withholding their full story for a number of years.

That said, the book was entertaining ... after a very slow beginning. I liked the twists on the obligatory Dursley opening (very touching scene with Big D) and Burrow opening. But the first few chapters of the trio on the run were a bit of a slog.

After that, of course, pure action ... and the stuff I mentioned above as being jeuvenile was nonetheless tons of fun.

The book was a slaughterhouse of death, as I expected. But I did not expect to be most broken up by the death of Dobby the House Elf. Really moved by that, and by Harry's reaction.


I didn't like the Gringott's bank heist nearly as much as I enjoyed the Ministry infiltration. One undercover act too many, imo. Just as close-call escape after close-call escape wore a little thin.

Though I expected both the revelation that Snape was a good guy all along and some kind of Limbo Conversation with Dead Dumbledore, both were very enjoyable in the book. I was sorry that Snape was absent from the story for practically the entire novel, but he was given so much more juice than many of the other characters I'd have like to have "seen" more of.


I liked that Tonks and Lupin died off-screen ... because it was way more of a shock to me that way. And I thought it was a good off-the-scent thrower ... because I was sure at that point Harry would live, because he'd been made Teddy's Godfather. Made Harry's "death" a few pages later much more of a surprise to me.




Oh, and I liked Deathy Hallows soooo much more than Half-Blood Prince. It's a big win in my game of low expectations.


If J.K. is temped to come back to it after her 15 years of anonymity and fortune-gone ... I want that Snape spin-off!

Given to me by non-poster Andrew. Gibberish in Neutran: Potterdammerung.

Spoilers Central. But hillarious.

Missing you A :) You are the goddess of all things Weasley.

They do call him Al in the Epilogue-I think Teddy was like Tonks. They talked about him changing his hair- just like she did when she was little.

How do they do this stuff so quickly? Funny stuff.

Is anyone else thinking Teddy Ruxpin every time they read Teddy Tonks?

Me!

I wouldn't have put Teddy Ruxpin past J.K.


Sorry, but Rowling's names are second-silliest only to George Lucas's.

Ok, so a few questions:

1) How does Neville end up with the Sword of Gryffindor after it's been nabbed by the goblin during the bank heist?

2) When in all the commotion during the escape from Malfoy Manor does Harry gain the knowledge that the Cup of Hufflepuff is a Horcrux, and one likely to be in Bellatrix LeStrange's Gringot's bank vault?

3) When the goblins and a werewolf decend upon the camping tent after Harry mistakenly from habit utters "Voldemort," how is that ragtag band is able to capture such adept defensive-spell wizards as Harry, Hermoine and Ron (ok, Harry and Hermoine) without the trio using a single charm or spell in their considerable defense-of-the-dark-arts arsenal? WTF??

I understand maybe their own protective charms negate the abilty to dissaperate, but why was there no Expeliarmous, Stupify, Crucio or frelling anything?? It led to the most exciting stuff in the book, imo, but J.K. was lazy in writing a plausable way of getting them captured ... unless I missed something.

Did I?

My opinion only-

He pulls it out of the sorting hat the same way Harry did to kill the ballisk. Some kind of magic to do with the hat and Griffindor.

Harry doesn't know that's it's specifically the Hefflepuff cup. He guesses that's it's something from Heffelpuff or Ravenclaw but he doesn't know exactly what. And remember he "saw" Tom and the crazy lady that had the Heffelpuff cup from the pensive so he did know kinda what to look for. So he figured the cup but he still didn't know what the Ravenclaw part was.

They were taken off gaurd for one. Also remember Harry is wandless at this point.

1) Not sure, I did read it really fast, but the sword came from the Sorting Hat. Only a true Gryffindor could have pulled it out, maybe it just appears in the hat when it's needed?

2) No idea, would have to reread.

3) Maybe they couldn't anticipate what he was going to say in time to do the spells? Didn't realize how fast the capture would be?

I really need to slow down and reread it at a more normal pace to catch some of the details. I did not jump ahead and read the end first, which was hard for me, so I read it as fast as I possibly could.

If I didn't read too fast...Harry understood something was hiding in the LeStrange's vault based on how Bellatrix reacted when she saw the sword of Godric Gyffindor. It was supposed to be in her vault along with the cup. She freaked out when she saw the sword. He already had previous knowledge, albeit limited, about the cup.

From what I understand, that sword was a fake as well. The true sword was behind Dumbledore's portrait.

Ok, now I'm really confused about the frelling Sword of Griffindor and all it's lame copies.


But anyways, Griffindor has a sword, Hufflepuff has a cup, Ravenclow has (basically) a tiara. What does Slytherin have??

Don't be confused. Be happy. At least your Ron didn't die. :)

Yeah, but does he ever tire of Hermoine, and long for the days of Griffindor dormitory action???

No, I don't think so. Only the real sword could have destroyed Nagini, as it was infused with basilisk venom. The real sword will come to a true Gryffindor in a time of need by way of the sorting hat.

I gave up on ever getting the book from Amazon and bought it at Target last night (ty MW). I started it last night. I just finished it.

While I am pleased that everything came out the way it did, I just didn't feel anything. It was well written and a good read, but it just didn't pack the emotional punch I was expecting.

Slytherin had the locket. It was the horcrux that made Ron nutty while they were camping.

swanie

I don't know, but for awhile he had a bent wand.

:D

Hmmm, and Harry had a broken wand at one point. Considering J.K.'s rather obvious comparison of wands to, er, wands (on page 415) ... I wonder if there's some deeper meaning to be found in Harry and Ron's damaged wands.




Ok, the locket. Er, that wasn't a Slytherin House thing, was it? Or was it?



Another question:

A lot of folks have bemoaned that the Prophesy as revealed in the MOVIE version of Order of the Phoenix is only half of it, and not sufficient to understand what's going on. So my question is: What part of the prophesy unstated in the movie was necessary to the understanding of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows?

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any. I think the only part that proved relevant to the story was that neither Harry nor Volemort could live while the other survived. What else was there in the prophesy, and did any of the parts revealed in the OotP book (but not the movie) play out in the conclusion of the epic story??

The locket was Salthazar Slytherins - and passed on to eventually be worn by Tom Riddle's (Voldemorts) mother. She sold it to Burkes & Borgin when she was preggers for cash. Then it was bought by the crazy lady Tom killed and took all the valuables from including the hefflepuff cup. Then Regulus stole it after Voldemort made it a horcrux but died before he could open it leaving it in the care of Kreacher who couldn't ever open it either. Then Mudungus stole it from the house and tried to sell it in Diagon Alley. But Umbridge caught him and made him give her the locket. Then Harry stole it and killed it with the Griffendor sword (the real one not the fake one).

The only part that wasn't included was the possibility that it could have been Neville- since they don't allude to that, they no longer have to go into any sort of explanation as to how Voldie sealed the deal with Harry by jumping the gun.

At one point, in some interview somewhere, Rowling said she cried her eyes out when she killed off a certain character in this book or the last one. Who was she crying over? Anyone?

I think Fred would be a good guess.

(And Ron destroyed the locket.)

I was quite happy with how things were wrapped up in this book. I was really afraid that it would be too devastating emotionally but even with all the deaths I was okay though sad. But the aftermath of Dobby's death was the saddest part of the book and that really got to me.

Right you are it was Ron.

There's something about the scene where Ron having just destroyed the locket is standing there in the tent before Hermionie with the sword. *Sigh*

If J.K. Rowling is like the rest of us humans, she would have cried her eyes out after killing Dobby.



And yep, loved the scene where Ron destroys the locket horcrux and that aftermath.


I really hope the movie version has the wherewithal to show us the counterpart scene where Hermoine destroys the Cup Horcrux.



But, huh? Gryffindor has a Sword, and Slytherin has a .... locket??? WTF?


Oh, and why is Ravenclaw's mascot an eagle, and not a raven?

And why is Gryffindor's mascot a lion and not a gryffin? Hogwarts is messed up!

I hope Rowling doesn't continue the series somehow. I also home Scholastic doesn't try to continue it after she's dead.


I would have liked to have seen a cool Muggle be some sort of hero in the HP stories. She discussed equality between Goblins and Wizards and Elves etc but dissing Muggles was rampant.

I read today that she might compile an encyclopedia, filled with all her copious notes on the characters and such that were omitted from the books. (Such as Dean Thomas's story, which she said is good).

I guess that wouldn't bother me too much...
But the 'Adventures of Harry's Kids and Dobby's Twin Brother Slobby' would really tick me off.

That would be neat and pretty much the only additional HP book I would like to see her write.

I was hoping Harry really was dead, just so's the series could not continue (as the "Harry Potter" series at any rate) after J.K. shucks this mortal coil.




Oh, and Ginny Weasley was robbed. All that build-up, and then NOTHING. Nothing in the entire book except being the long-distance object of Harry's lovesick affection. Bah.

Here's the link.

You aren't alone. I didn't necessarily want him to die but I did not want any possibility for the story to continue. I think the epilogue did a decent job of preventing any more HP vs. Voldie story lines but there are a lot of openings for other paths...

Well, on page 631, Crabbe did call Ginny the Whore of Hogwarts...

















Haw haw. Made you look.

:D

Unless there are some really weird contracts out there Scholastic wouldn't have any rights to the characters, just publishing rights for the 7 books. Any continuation after Rowling's death would have to have the involvement of her estate.

So you'll have to hope that David and Mackenzie won't go against her wishes should Rowling make it to death without doing more on her own.

Maybe they'll go the V.C. Andrews/Tom Clancy route and in a couple decades we'll start seeing something like this:

J.K. Rowling's® Harry Potter and the Last Crusade in Search of the Holy Grail by Alan Dean Foster

Ooooh...... I can just see the movie.....Harrison Ford can play Dumbledore, and instead of riding around on thestrals they can just bang coconuts together!

just finished it. So tired. More later

I think the bird is a raven, but is sometimes shown in gold so it looks eagle like. Otherwise every picture I could find was a black raven.

A lion represents bravery- the trait of Gryffindor House. A lion best suits that (Gryffindor is not a literal Griffon)

Hufflepuff is a badger- so what does one have to do with the other?

Slytherin matches snake very well- of course.

you didn't feel anything at the loss of:
Remus & Tonks?
Hedwigs death
The sad tale of Snapes true youth with the evans girls
Dobby Dying
Snape (adter being revealed nice) dying
His atempts to show harry the real truth in the pensieve
Kreachers change of heart and mission - I would have adopted him!
Dudders friendship

I give her a few good calls for emo moments.

Nope, it's an eagle. Looked it up. What with how J.K. names her characters, I'm just surprised the interpretation of house mascot wasn't more literal.

Ah, but what a wasted opportunity, in a place with centaurs and unicorns, not to have the mascot be a griffin. Just sayin'.

* * * * *

Ok, what with Snape's final communication to Harry being his death-throe thoughts viewed in a pensieve, I'm now thinkin' the choice in the Order of the Phoenix movie to change the Snape kidhood flashback from the book's pensieve to a simple mind invastion during Occlumancy lessons will prove, in the long run, to be a poorly chosen time-saving device.

Doesn't J.K. fill the filmmakers in if they're going to make a decision that bodes ill for future episodes??

Potterdammerung
 

Well, one can hope that when Snape died, he was able to see Lily again, and here's hoping James was not a schmuck about it. I was so happy to confirm that Snape was on the side of good. Snape was/is my favorite character. This also may be colored by the splendid Alan Rickman (sigh) and I am looking forward to seeing more of him in the final two films.

I finished the book last night. I loved the starkness of the begining, the trio on the run and wept when Ron left. I kept thinking oh no, he's going to be captured by Voldemort. When he came back, I practically hugged the book. I wept.

I loved all the backstory and the plugging of many holes and was shocked by all the Dubledore revelations/suspicions and then was so pleased at his eternal wisdom in realizing he did not trust himself to be Minister of Magic. It rounded him out so much more, not just a merlin-like, gandalf-like fuzzy wizard, a great wizard with flaws like everyone else.

The Prince's Tale chapter really got me.

Molly Weasley kicked death eater butt! Neville was awesome and ended up a Professor, how cool is that?

In no particular order:
Here Lies Dobby - A Free Elf (sob)
Snape (sob)
Hedwig (sob) and
Fred (sob sob sob)

That was so hard to take, Fred getting it. The sudden appearence of Percy did nothing to asuage the mourning for Fred. Percy was a twit.

The book moved along at record pace for 700+ pages and I think that I would have left the epilogue off. Some things are better left to the imagination. But, seeing what happened so many years later to the characters in Gone With the Wind, perhaps Rowling was wise to put something on paper to avoid another author regurgitating her characters.

I loved this book, while like everyone else I would have liked a little more explanation of what happened, I think we'll get our wish in the end. I saw a news report with Rowling last night in which there was an indication of a sort of encyclopedia of Potter in which all the back story, etc. not used in the books would be brought out.

Bravo to Rowling for her achievement, there was some good storytelling in there and I will enjoy these books for years to come. :snap:

Question:
When Harry was 'dead' in the white Kings Cross station, what was the deal with the moaning fetus thing under the chair?

I thought maybe that was Voldie, I don't know, I wondered myself and hoped this would become clear when I re-read it.

Or was it a half-dead mandrake?

I think it was the bit of soul of Voldie that ended up in Harry.

I'm not saying (I think) that I felt nothing, just that I didn't feel as much as I thought I would. Maybe because I knew ahead of time who was going to die, that affected how I felt when I read it. It could have also been because I read the book so fast, I didn't give myself time to absorb everything.

The things that did pull at my heart strings were Harry buriing Moody's eye, and his burying of Dobby. I cheered when Kreacher showed up with the other House Elves.

OK - I have a question...

Mr. Swanie is about 200 pages into Deathly Hallows and he is convinced that Mad-Eye is still alive since he is one of the people that placed the enchantments on Grimmauld Place and that his Tongue-Tying Curse would have "expired" upon his death. Since Mad-Eye's Snape thingy comes up every time someone enters the house, he's convinced that he couldn't have really died. I know he'll figure out that he's really dead by the time the gang gets into the Ministry of Magic so I don't want to spoil his speculation at this point.

My question is was it ever made clear which charms/spells/curses/enchantments/hexes/etc. live on when a wizard dies? As I said, I didn't want to ruin his "what if?" thinking at this point, but I did point out that the photo and wall hangings in Sirius' room and his mom's portrait still hang in the house after their deaths even though they have attempted to take them down. But, one can argue that the magic dies with the wizard as did the spell that Dumbledore cast on Harry in the tower when Snape killed him. Is it that magic can remain on inanimate objects and not on living things? Or is it the fact that it was a "curse" on the house and it boils down to the specific kind of magic that is used?

I was not surprised at all that Ginny was relegated to Fair Princess status. Rowling handled their "romance" so poorly in other books that it was true to form. I think she falls into the Tolkein trap of being rather bad at dealing with that subject. Ginny being underage and too young for battle was rather convenient - I could almost hear Rowling's sigh of relief.

(Yeah, that's where I really start stabbing her as a writer...I found their relationship disappointing all around.)

Actually, it's more like this...
J.K. Rowling's
Wizarding World Sequence
Harry Potter and the Last Crusade in Search of the Holy Grail
(Author not mentioned on cover, found on verso only, buried in the cataloging info.)

Hmm, now I can't decide between your idea, BTD, and my brother's. He thought that when Harry was there talking to Dumbledore, Voldie was there too, experiencing the awful torment of being that nasty thing. I guess they could both be right.

What spell? I don't remember that. (I'm no memorizer.)

It's my impression that spells always stick, even after the caster dies, and that they must be undone by other wizards to be removed.

Wait wait wait. When did Tom Clancy books start being written by a ghost writer?

Dumbledore told Harry to go and get Snape, so he put on his Invisibility Cloak and started for the door. Just as Draco was bursting into the room, Dumbledore placed a freezing charm on Harry, so he couldn't move. That's how Harry watched the scene unfold...frozen in place and unable to move until Snape killed Dumbledore.

That's what I don't get. Is it just the matter of it being a charm vs. a curse, or an inanimate vs. animate object?

I think it's a matter of it not being consistent, or well thought-out by the author, and certainly not well explained by the author.


Much as I enjoy the Harry Potter books, J.K. Rowling is often a hack. Her stories are completely pedestrian, for the most part. The "rules" of the wizarding world are inconsistent at best, and not well conceived for dramatic purposes. It's her characters and the general world created that are her strong points.



*****


Ooooh, I love the mandrake-infant thing in King's Cross Limbo being the bit of Voldemort's soul now cast off from Harry. That makes much more sense and resonates far nicer than it simply being Volemort.

Although now I have to wonder what happened to Voldie while he, too, was unconsious. Did he go to a different Limbo? (A redder, hotter one?) Or was he simply blacked out?


I'm not expecting answers ... unless J.K. starts posting here. But I love the questions this brings up. Thanks, BTD, for the Voldie-Soul Cast-Off theory!

The book does reference that people under the Imperius curse start coming out of it when Voldemort dies- it's like killing the head vampire or something.

He does not write the books in the OpCenter, Power Play, or Net Force series. When the Net Force series first started they didn't even mention the real author on the cover, but I believe they've changed this in the years since with it still being the case that "Tom Clancy's..." is in huge letters and the author's name is nice and small. In those first books the only mention would be something in the acknowledgments like "invaluable contribution[s] to the manuscript by Joe Blow" when in fact the invaluable contribution was that Joe Blow wrote it.

So there are the now acknowledged series in which Clancy has just licensed his name but rumors that other recent books have been ghostwritten as well.

So he's not quite in the V.C. Andrews camp (at least not until he dies) but is an example of whoring out the name. Asimov did something similar in his late years but I think the appropriate authorial credit was given much more prominently.

Robert Ludlum is another. His estate has published about a dozen new books since he died in 2001, supposedly based on unfinished manuscripts but no authorial credit is given

Ahhh. Thanks. I knew Net Force wasn't by him (because I picked up on the Tom Clancy's..." but the others didn't even occur to me. I only follow the Jack Ryan series; couldn't get in to the other ones. And now I know why. I would be curious to know if Clancy wrote The Bear and the Dragon and The Teeth of the Tiger. I had a really hard time getting involved in those books. On another note, this link makes me happy (the chronological order of the books). I now need to go back and read them in order. I bet that would fill in some [not real] plot holes.

Sorry for the derail.

Yay! I *finally* finished reading and can finally read this thread! :)

Okay, so clear me up here... wasn't there a point in the book where portraits only being able to visit their own (other portraits of same person) a major plot point? And yet, later in the book (hell, the whole series), portraits are always visiting other pictures.

Is it too early after the book release to add this to quotes? :p

I think that they can visit othe portraits in the same building. The Fat Lady who gaurds Griffindor always has her friend Violet over. But they can only to go another building if they have another portrait there.

Hmmm, is the bit of soul captured in one's portrait captured and fixed at the moment of painting, or does the portrait of a dead person reflect that person's lifetime soul?

I'd say lifetime. Because the portraits are aware of current circumstances.

Why does the Wizarding world celebrate christian holidays like Christmas and Easter? There don't seem to be, that I can recall, and references to God in any form.

Do Wizards in say India celebrate Hindu holidays or middle eastern wizards Islamic holidays?

Yes. Unless you remove references to names and gender of said character.

Not sure. I never thought of it - always took it as secular.

There are too many holes in J.K.'s mythology.

As for portraits, I think they can be brought up-to-date, and perhaps even grow as "people" by observing what they can from their frames, and interacting with live people (and even other portraits in their building) ... but I have a hard time reckoning that their essence isn't set when they are painted.

If Dumbledore were painted before his sister died, I don't think the portrait Dumbledore would be as psyche-damaged as the real Dumbledore, even if the portrait one learned of the circumstances.

Hey, and what happens if ... as with many famous people ... more than one portrait is painted, and at different stages of life? Under my theory, the portraits would each be very different "people."




And yeah, witches celebrating Christmas is just odd. But I think it's more a matter of them being Brits than being witchfolk.

What if, as is common, additional copies of a portrait are made by copying the first rather than the living person?


I don't know if it is more rigorous in the books, but this has been my approach to the magic in the movies. That the underlying truth of it is that it works in the way necessary for the moment in which it is used. An alternate version of G.I. Joe where whatever machine was needed to stop this week's villainy just happened to be invented the day before (and was already on store shelves).

Of course, to a degree it helps me in with the movies that when I see something that appears inconsistent I just say "that's probably explained in the books...another reason these movies are very good for non-readers in the audience."

I thought it was weird that even Buckbeak "heard the call" and showed up for the final fight. To me that was a stretch.

They never did explain (did they?) what happened to Buckbeak after Grimmuald Place was abandoned by the Order. If he wasn't allowed to live in the wild while Sirius was alive, he could have been hanging around The Burrow for all we know. In which case, yeah, he would have known about the Hogwarts War, and come a'flyin'.

I assumed that the creepy Voldemort baby was a piece of Voldemort's soul, and that it was appropriately a creepy baby thing since Voldemort was reduced to being a creepy baby thing before Harry's blood and bone (in a way infected by that piece of Voldemort himself, since Harry was a Horcrux) restored him to his, uh, more manly status.

You're quite welcome. I think that Voldie died. Harry "faced death" head on and was given a choice. Voldie was convinced he was beyond being killed, therefore he died. Also, he split his soul so many times, and each of the 7 splits were killed he had no soul left to live.

I thought Buckbeak was rechristened Witherwings and Harry gave him to Hagrid. He'd be living near Hogwarts then, also a good place to know about the war!

I could be wrong though, I'd have to look it up.

On mugglenet.com there's a bit about a live chat with Rowling on Monday. Here is a link to the Bloomsbury site about it.

I wonder if Snape ever gets his picture on the wall of the headmaster's office. Oh - I know the story had to end - but I just yearn for more.

IT'S FREAKIN' BOOKS! WONDERFUL PIECES OF FANTASY AND IMAGINATION! ENOUGH WITH THE DAMNED ANALYSIS!

Is there a smiley yet for "if you didn't want to hear this, why did you click on this thread"?

You are correct Hagrid took Buckbeak/Witherwings.

It's the same sentiment that quite a few people were giving in the Transformers thread.

I remember at least once there were Christmas Trees in the Great Hall (and snow from the ceiling, if I remember rightly) - so they do celebrate Chistmas.

No word of what Padma or Pavarti did though.

I like Butterbeer.

Oh, alright- I'll go start the 'Let's not discuss Harry Potter thread. Any volunteers for the 'iSm goes ballistic' thread?;)




Lashbear, you are too funny! Good one....

IT'S FREAKIN' ROLLER COASTERS! WONDERFUL PIECES OF THRILLING ADRENALINE! ENOUGH WITH THE DAMNED ANALYSIS!


Oh, and btw, just what the fvck are you doing in this thread, Muggle? :evil:

Lol!!!! I typed in nearly the very same thing, but then erased it because I didn't know if Matt was just having a bad day and needed to vent.;)

(Actually I was thinking somewhat along the same lines but in lower case and without the exclamation points.;) )

These are books intended for kids and the rest of us have come along for the ride. I'm personally really impressed with how she developed the story and the characters through all the books. These books aren't great literature but since they're so much fun to read, who cares? Rowling could have gotten all the details right...if she'd spent so much time writing each book that the momentum and excitement would just about disappear.

So that's my two cents worth and a :snap: for a fun read. Now I'll go back to reading everyone's analysis and nitpicking which I'm enjoying just the same. You're all very articulate and thoughtful while all I can come up with is: Book good.:)

I've been having a great time with the books. Sorry for the screaming, I was doing it all in fun.

What do you think he meant by that? Anyone?

I think he was saying anybody who likes Harry Potter is stupider than the people who didn't like The Transformers.

"Book Good"- lol! :D

Knew you were joking, Matt, but didn't want to mess with you just in case you weren't. Some people have not been in a very good humor over some of this, so I find myself tippy-toeing......;)

What do you mean Harry Potter is a wizard????

MAN!!!!!!!!!!! You ruined the entire encyclopedia!

As long as you can take it as well as dish it, babe ;)

I need to steal that one, Matt.

You think in lower case?

What I love about these books has been the way the story lines, as well as the writing style and tone of the books has matured along with the characters.

Most importantly, I think the best thing is that, from the first book, kids are reading again! Erin, who is now twenty, commented the other day that when they look back, Harry Potter will be one of the main culteral influences of their lives.

My generation read Tolkien, which lead to a love for reading. In the eighties, it seemed like so many other things were happening - computers, MTV, video games, etc - reading sort of got lost. Editorials were written (ironically) on the death of the written word.

Now, thanks largely to J.K. Rowling, a new generation are excited about books. Sure, some may never pick up another, but many will go on to embrace reading as an important part of thier lives. Whatever your opinion of Harry Potter, this is a good thing.

Those are my thoughts, sweeping generalizations and all.

ron

I second that thought!

I have a DD, who is already an avid reader and at the ripe old age of 8 knocked out the first Potter book in 7 days. That is much faster then her father, who took at least 3 weeks. Granted he doesn't have as much time on his hands, but even I managed the longest book in 2 days.

I love the fact that she scored in the 98th percentile (on national level of ranking) in her reading and comprehension tests score this year. :D I am even prouder (even though he hasn't picked up a Potter book on his own yet-just our family bedtime readings) that my oldest DS hit 99% this year as well. Reading is so important, and no matter what gets them into it, I am glad there are books that get this much press attention to entice them to read. It is much better than the Spears and Lohan press IMHO. When was the last time that any childrens or fanatsy books had been given this much press and hype?

Agreed on the reading explosion among kids. I even welcome the fantasy series that sprung up to fill the new needs of the genre. Those hangers-on are actually good books and give the kids something else to chew on. Rowling really has done a service to this generation of kids. My younger brothers are among them.

I really can't wait to introduce B to HP. I think I'll do a mommy/daughter book club thing with her. That way I can read it again too! :)

What made this series so great to read is because it's easy to follow. Lots of secrets and mysteries for you, the reader to figure out. Not very many books do that.

Lord of the Rings is a great read, but at a lot of points gets a little boring. HP does have that at some times but that's where the hidden stuff is and when you should be paying attention the most which makes you say to yourself "Oh so that's why this and that was included..."

Are kids really reading more or are there just a whole lot of kids reading Rowling?

Also, when I was working at Borders, I noticed a lot of kids reading Manga. I didn't see them anywhere else.

I think every generation has its genre. We had Babysitters Club, Sweet Valley Twins/High, Christoper Pike, RL Stein and VC Andrews.

Not sure what was before that - but it seems to come in waves. RL Stein started writing for younger kids and the older kids turned to what seemed to be sci-fi and fantasy.

Of course, I could be wrong since I work neither in a library nor a bookstore. Just my observations of wandering the youth section of bookstores and seeing what is in your face.

Hard for me to say, to me it doesn't seem there is much more reading. But then where I'd put the bar is probably really skewed from reality.

According to a study in 2002 less than half of all adults had read even one book (novel, short story, play, or poem) in the previous 12 months. It was a survey based on self reporting so the real number is probably even less.

So if 80% of kids who read Harry Potter grow up to read one book a year that would be a significant boost over average.

But it wouldn't even show up on my radar. I can't imagine going 12 hours without having a book in front of me at some point let alone months at a time. So I think my perception of what constitutes "a reader" is just too high.

MSNBC has an article with more information [that was not included in the epilogue] about where everyone is in life. There is stuff about Luna too.

Click me

Ah, ya beat me to it, I was just coming in to post that :)

You are awesome.

Though we're in the same generation, BTD, I didn't read those (though I did spend a small portion of time reading Babysitters Club.) I did, however, spend much time in libraries (summer programs, anyone) reading mostly books that'd been around for awhile. A long while in some cases. E. B. White's Charlotte's Web, Trumpet of the Swan, Stuart Little... John Bellaire's youth mysteries... anything and everything Samuel Clemens... L'Engle and her various tesseract books... weird old books of fairy tales that were falling apart... strange adaptations of Robin Hood... From the Mixed-Up Files of Mrs. Basil E. Frankweiler... The Westing Game...

None of these came out when I was actually reading them, but all of them have stood the test of time. I hope that the kids today are still encouraged to pick them up, even if there aren't midnight releases with costume contests and scavenger hunts and parties for them.

Ack, how can I save this as my avatar? If I click to save it all I get is a static image.

This is too good to miss!

God, I feel old, really old...... I was reading Beverly Cleary when they wre relatively new. I did love the Madeleine L'Engle books, but I came to those much later, in fact, I was in my late 20's when those were pointed out to me.

I tried and tried and tried to read Tolkein, never could get through them.

I was reading EB White, of course, and many classics, never a Nancy Drew crossed my threshold. I did read anything I could get my hands on, thank god we had a good library, I wore out my card.

The Potter books have been enormous fun for me, and I'm happy if one kid learns to love reading from them.

I read all the Beverly Cleary/Judy Blume books when I was little. Picked up my first steamy supermarket romance at 13. ;) Always had a thing for books about witches though. There are a surprising number of them.

Completely agree. Those books cross generations. I read all those too. As well as Nancy Drew, The Hardy Boys and Choose Your Own Adventure. Those books have been around for decades and will hopefully be around for forever more.

I was talking more about the passing trends. The books I listed from back then (yes, they are still around but not nearly as popular - how often do you hear of kids forming their own Babysitters Club these days?) and HP of today. Hopefully HP stands the test of time. They are children's books. Yes, they had a huge impact on our culture. It is great that adults can read them and enjoy them. But they are kids books. When I have kids I'll be making sure that along with Charlottes Web, A Wrinkle in Time and Stuart Little they also read Harry Potter.

I used to have a book collection about witches and magic- loved them but can not- for the life of me- recall their titles. Simple, paperback......details of the stories come to me but not titles. Very frustrating.

I hope that they are buried in my parent's basement somewhere!

On edit- Mom's are wonderful.

The author is Ruth Chew.

One of the other titles I loved was "The Littlest Witch"

She thinks the books are gone- but not sure where. They are on Amazon and I may start to re-collect them.

"Witch of Blackbird Pond" was, I think, my first. Then there were these other stories, I remember "The Changeover", read that in like 5th or 6th grade, and there were various others, good stories but can't remember their names.

Awesome kids books:

The House with a Clock in Its Walls (and the two sequels)

A Wrinkle In Time (and the two sequels)

Charlotte's Web

Anything by Roald Dahl (especially The Witches, The Twits, and George's Marvelous Medicine)

Scary Stories to Tell In the Dark

To Kill a Mockingbird (ok not a kids book but I read it in 5th grade).

I didn't get into Stephen King until 7th grade, when I picked up "Eyes of the Dragon" and "It". (Around the same time I read Anne Rice's Vampire Chronicles).

There was a book about a coven of teen witches. I forget what it was called now. So not teen appropriate. Same with VC Andrews. Of course I started reading Stephen King in 7th grade and Clan of the Cave Bear in 8th. Dabble in the dark side of life continued with Go Ask Anne and Jay's Journal (no, not true stories).

If you right click and make sure to save as a gif, it may look like a static image as a thumbnail, but open it with your browser and it should animate. It should work fine as an animated avatar too.

Save it as a gift?

I feel incredibly old right now. I, too, picked up my first Stephen King book in 7th grade, but it was Salem's Lot and The Shining. That was also the year I read Caravan's by Michner (sp?).

In 3rd and 4th grade I wore out my copy of Charlotte's Web and Stuart Little. I also discovered the Little House series and could not get enough. I would also go "into town" when my mom was working and walk to the "big library" in Turlock to devour the Nancy Drew, Hardy Boys and Nurse Cherry Ames series.

Sorry to take this thread back a bit, but this goes to our local library chick, CP......why isn't this stopping at our library? Knight Bus

:cool: I know, I am just wishing out loud, but it looks like Los Angeles gets the bus for at least 4 stops over a couple of days! :rolleyes:

Now back to our regularly scheduled program....

I too am a Beverly Cleary kid, the Chronicles of Narnia, and Little House on the Prarie books. I also still have my collection of The Black Stallion books.

The whole Wizard of Oz series. Over and over and over and over again.

I found the whole death of Dumbledore in 6 to be much more sentimental than any of the deaths in 7. I cried through the whole end of 6 and for some time after. Dobby and Fred dying did make me tear up a bit, but it was no comparison to the sentiment I felt when Dumbledore was gone.

I have almost wore out my copy of Witch of Blackbird Pond- it's one of my all time favorites.

Yeah, but those days were in early July. Bah.

Yeah, I found the writing in this book to be very dry. I can't quite put my finger on why, with all the action, it was oddly uninvolving. I actually sat around for a while last night and tried to think of other ways the series could have ended, being that - yeah - there had to be a showdown between Voldemort and Harry Potter, and, yes, some action-packed stuff and maybe even lots of character deaths were de riguer.

I dunno, I was just unimpressed and meh about the whole story of being on the lam while sorta hunting down horcrux McGuffins and deathly hallow McGuffins, while racking up a mortality score of one character snuffing it after another, with one close-call escape from Death Eaters after another and a pair of polyjuice-aided infiltrations and, yawn, a big big battle at Hogwarts.

Hmmm, it sounds better to me in that synopsis than it was to read it. Not that it was horrible, but I somehow wish the final chapter was a completely different story.

The only bits of writing I found involving were Harry's travails in the aftermath of Dobby's death, his Limbo time with Dumbledore, and his walk to the gallows with all his dead loved ones for company.

In that interview someone linked to in this thread, Rowling says that last bit had been part of the story since forever ago - and that finally writing it was cathartic or something. It was a moving scene, as were the other two I mentioned.

I just got the feeling she had those few end points mapped out, with no real story to get there. I think she pulled this McGuffin-hunt tale out of a hat, and I wish there were others she could have sorted through.



This book wasn't as dry as the last one .... but I have to say I don't like the turn the series took after Order of the Phoenix. Oddly, now that the series is no longer "alive" (i.e., no more books), the last two movies that will come out are the ones where I'd rather the story had died.



Oh well, I still love me some Harry Potter (and, currently, some Ron Weasley) ... but I think J.K. Rowling ran out of steam some time ago.

Hmm, you raise some good points iSm. I already feel the need to re-read, I think partially because I rushed through the book, and seemed to have absorbed not a lot. That said, I thoroughly enjoyed it. I'm sure full of holes, but it moved and I was caught up in getting to the end before I saw any spoilers that would ruin my fun.

The series, as a whole, took a turn for me right after Goblet of Fire (which is still my favorite book of the series). I do admire Rowlings williness to make her hero someone you dislike as I did the angst-ridden and whiney Harry of Order of the Phoenix. Some of the magic left the books and got mired in too much, what, too much plot, too much darkness. I think dryness is a good word. Unfortunately, I think there was so much to finish up, the book already overlong, it was kind of weird to see so many names pop up for the literary equivalent of a cameo in the final battle. Not to second guess Rowling, for me it would have been nice to see more cross-cutting between the wizarding world and the trios adventures as they sought the horcruxes.

I felt more for the sentimental death of Dobby, the loss of Fred Weasley than I did for Sirius or even Dumbledore. I felt sad for the death of Snape, even though he was not a pleasant character, he was bad and spiteful, but he was also honorable and brave. I liked Snape, a lot (colored by Rickman's portrayal of him, as well).

I'm looking forward to taking each of the books again in hand to revist the whole adventure. Not the highest form of literature, but still a darn tootin good adventure, very immersive and I will look forward to the last two films, as well (More Snape!).

The book and the latest film in the same week made for a very potty snowflake.

Heheh, a friend and I were talking yesterday about how different the Harry Potter of the movies is from the Harry Potter of the books. Book Potter is a bit of an asshole, actually. Motivation for it or not ... he's testy, very quick to anger, very quick to judgmentalism and thinking the worst of people, even those he purportedly loves.

I suggested maybe Rowling was intent on keeping the character realistic and relatable to the natural dickheadedness of the teenagers who are the main target audience. And, in a way, I admire that. Harry's not a dislikeable character, but his movie counterpart is played much more loveable.

Um, yeah, I myself have to apologize for posting every two seconds in the twelve Harry Potter threads ... but in the past 3 weeks I've watched every DVD, seen the new film 3 times, read two novels simultaneously, attended 3 Harry-Potter themed events, and developed a serious and disturbing crush on Ronald Weasley.

It's been my Potterist month EVER!

So, who's the real hero of this book? Harry or Snape?

Oh, and speaking of having a very potter weekend, ayone care to join me for a back to back screening of films 1-4 at the Castro Theater over Labor Day Weekend? I'm thinking about it, could be fun.

Well, Grint is very cute, and has suffered from some bad hair in a couple of the movies.

The twins now look as old as me, how will they make it to the final film without looking older than their parents?

I had a crush on he who played Oliver Wood, I'm sure ot had everything to do with the accent.

Diggory was high on the cute-O-meter, too.

Oh, yes, I know NA saw Harry Potter naked, I know!

Tempting. Unlikely, but tempting.

I guess it is safe to poke my head in these parts again.

A clear four of of five for me.

One thing that I must say I find disappointing in the epilogue is a trope common to YA lit. It isn't a huge knock since it is pretty much a given for the genre but I'd be happy to see it sidestepped.

That is the assumption that the romantic feelings of teenagers are permanent and significant. Of course, sometimes they are, but not often. I'd be happier to read of Harry taking the kids to the platform and he's having a conversation with Ginnie but it both turns out that they're married to other people and just remain good friends.

I didn't find book 6 OR 7 dry. But that's just me.

Here's something that hasn't been brought up here (I don't think.) If the three fairy-tale-but-real brothers who received the original hallows passed them down as family heirlooms... and Harry is the heir who received the cloak... and Riddle is the heir who received the stone... then way, way back, they're related!

I know JKR denied that Harry and Voldemort are related a la Empire Strikes Back, but it rather seems to me that it *is* a recreation of the Spaceballs "I am your father's brother's nephew's cousin's former roommate."

Hahahaha, that's true.


Oh, and I'd find Snape the hero ... if he had more "screen" time in the book (and hopefully the movie will give more time to "off-screen" stuff such as events at Hogwarts under Snape's headmastery, and Hermoine's destruction of (and likely torment by) the Hufflepuff Horcrux).



Snowflake: Oliver Wood is my biggest Potter crush, 'cause I was hooked on him for two of the movies. I have to print a correction: The unlikely, but :eek: name of the actor who played Wood was Sean Biggerstaff ... not Jack Biggerstaff (which was obviously a freudian mistake on my part).

If Frodo Potter ever does his full Halloween costume again, will he wear a locket horcrux on the same chain as his One Ring?

O, the weight!

Party pooper, if ever there were a venue in which you could wear a really splashy tiara, this would be it.

Oh, bwahahahahaha. Poor Sean, now forever rechristened on LoT, Olver Wood as played by Jack Biggerstaff.

Laughing all the way to the bank on that one!

Since we're discussing actor crushes - my movie-going companion and I were fighting over Sirius, which is odd, because normally I'm not terribly attracted to Gary Oldman. But add that hair and some jail house tattoos and we were swoon city.

I'm so happy that so many remember and loved The Witch of Blackbird Pond. That was the first book I read of my own accord (a.k.a. not school-related, and no one shoved the book in my face). I don't even remember how old I was, but I went to a bookstore, picked it out and devoured it. Must've read it at least a dozen times.

Oh, I was in love with Sirius the first time I read about him - even when he was the scary guy who broke out of Azkaban. Love me some Gary Oldman!

Um, ladies ... believe it or not, I once had to sign an autograph as Gary Oldman at DCA because some woman insisted I was him. Hahahaha!

You can't see it, but I am giving you my best Spock-like arched eyebrow right now.

Then again, without the Sirius hair, Monsieur Oldman isn't my cup of tea.

You know, the same is true for Malfoy Senior. Without that hair - not interested.

Yeah, come to think of it, Jason Isaacs' other attractive role was as Jas. Hook, Captain ... he had long locks in that role, too.

I have a crush on Harry's father.
:)

The one in the moving photo or the one for the first film?

Or the young one who taunts my other new HP crush, Young Severus??

The one that's dancing with Lily in the sepia photo. *sigh*
:blush:
The older one. I'm not you.
:D :evil: ;)

Love me some Sean Biggerstaff...as Oliver Wood? Have you seen Cash Back? Not awful, but rather boring and not great. Heh.

I LOVED that Oliver Wood showed up for battle. Huzzah!

Yeah, he was cute.

The ages in the book are so drastically different from the film. Lily and James died at 21. Which would make their school chums about 31 or so. And Alan Rickman is double that. Ah, wizards. They live so long, but age so poorly. Heh.

There's something about handsome smiliey guys with glasses...
:)

OMG, mouthful there.











Um, must not say too much. Too many people read the LoT.

Yes, but I will take Alan Rickman, any day of the week. I think it is safe to say, there is a contingent of Rickman groupies here on the LoT

Wood... Biggerstaff... hehehe...

You rang?

Atta girl! :cheers:

I agree on all the comments regarding long hair. Elijah Wood, Viggo Mortensen, bleh. Add hobbit/ranger hair and hell yeah.

I do kinda wish that the series of films had caught Rickman at an earlier age though.

You know, long hair is turn off for me. It just is. I don't know why.
All through the Lord of the Rings films, all I wanted to do was cut Viggo's hair and give him a bath.

:D

Like baldness, long hair is only sexy on very select men.



Many more men than are sexy bald, but still - it hardly works on everyone.




Re HP: Sirius ... it works. Snape ...works baby. Um Harry and Ron ... not so much. I think they were their least attractive in Goblet of Fire when, coincidentally or not, their hair was longest.

Of course, Ron's hair ain't exactly close-cropped in the latest ... and, well, we all know how I feel about him now.

I just wanted to wash his hair- and take a bath with him.:D

I thought the boyz were cuter with long hair, especially the twins.

"It's your one last chance," said Harry, "it's all you've got left....I've seen what you'll be otherwise....Be a man...try...Try for some remorse...."

I figured during that scene that it was Voldemort's soul, and this, to me, confirms it conclusively. "I've seen what you'll be". "Be a man" (as opposed to an infantile soul).

Snape's still an ass. His motivations were always selfish, his participation begrudging. It's not that he wanted to help Dumbledore defeat Voldemort, he just wanted to molify his own guilt and convince himself he was doing something for the love he screwed up. No pity or redemption from me.

The epilogue was cute but unnecessary.

I skimmed the thread, so sorry if this has been addressed, but one thing kinda bugged m. With the amount of stuff that was in the Room of Requirement/hiding room (enough to crush Crabbe), how could Riddle/Voldemort thought no one else could get there? I mean, I understand that the idea was that he was arrogant and all, but that just seemed like a bit too much of a stretch.

Overall, I enjoyed the journey. I'm amongst the ones that had rather lost interest by the end of book 6, and definitely went into this with a, "At least if I get through this it'll be over and I don't have to think about it anymore." But this one grabbed me from the start.

Yep, stupid thing No. 832 by J.K. Rowling.

The Room of Hidden Things version of the Room of Requirment is described as a cathedral-sized space with towering piles of junk forming a labyrinth. Clearly, people had been hiding stuff there for a looooong time before Riddle hid the diadem.

It's not even clear why Ron says, "And he never realized anyone could get in?" ... when the only way Tom Riddle could have missed that is if he were blind.

So perhaps it's not a matter of Riddle thinking he had the hiding place all to himself, but rather that it was a fine hiding place regardless.



Hmmmm, yeah, doesn't make much sense? Welcome to the Wonderful Wizarding World of J.K. Rowling. ;)

Meh, I long ago conceded to accept most of the inconsistencies. It is, after all, magic. Cop out? Perhaps, but as long as it remained fun, it didn't really bother me.

It's only the inconsistencies of character and motivation, which have nothing to do with magic, that really stand out to me anymore, and this was the most glaring one.

My personal bugs-me-to-death one:

Okay, I know I just said I overlook the magical inconsistencies....but why is the wizarding world not plagued with house elves stealing things from otherwise magically protected places?

The Hiding Room didn't bother me at all. When you are looking for someplace to hide something the room appeared, just for your item. When they were looking for the room they were looking for the room that held all of the hidden items, so it showed them everything.

You mean all those 50,000 students and staffers really thought they were the only ones using the Hiding Room? All of them were maroons, not just Tom Riddle?


It's one think to posit that proto-Voldemort was a blithering idiot, but to ascribe that same stupidity to tons of people is a bit of a stretch.



Because as soon as one person thinks 'hmmm, I wonder if someone else has ever hidden something in the RofR?' ... the jig's up.

I'm now on the fence whether I buy it or not. I had forgotten, the first time Harry found the room, thinking, "I need somewhere to hide something", the Room of Requirement showed him an empty room. And when he thought, "I need the room where I hid that," it showed him a room with just that item. So if that's all he (or Riddle) ever did, they might think not realize that there's a third option, the, "Show me everything" option. I guess the question is, how much of a logical leap is that? Did all of them perhaps think, "I asked for a place to hide stuff, therefore the room it gave me can't be found by anyone else," never really prompting them to think of another way to ask for the room? Perhaps....perhaps.

I think it's a room of requirement, meaning Harry could only find the room with all the stuff in it because he actually needed to find it. As with everything wizarding, it's a subjective, vague concept, but it works well enough.

Thank you CP, that was what I was trying to say.

Hmmm, I'll buy that. Perhaps Harry's requirement being, well, really required was a key.

I still contend that other people might have really really really needed to find something that others have hidden, and that there's no big logical leap needed to go from "what a great place for me to hide things" to "what a great hiding place."


From what I understand, the Room of Requirement does not make a moral judgment. If Harry needed the diadem tiara to destory Voldemort, I don't believe the "Room" fullfills that request with any more preference than if someone needs the tiara because it perfectly matches the gown they're wearing to the Yule Ball. ;)

See ! Didn't I swoon when I first met you ??? That proves it !

..but in DH Harry remembers the Tiara on the bust with the mop for hair- so he clearly saw more than an empty room to hide his items. He had seen the rest of it before.

Because, and I forget the specifics or even which book, he once before needed to see where everything was hidden, rather than just a place for him to hide one thing. I'm sure someone will fill in the details that I can't reall.

And maybe someone will fill in the holes in J.K. Rowling's rather tenuous logic and wizard-rules/world construction, hmmmm.


This is a gaping one .... so bring lots of disbelief suspension wire.

I just looked back in 6. When he has to hide the Potions book, he only says he needs a place to hide his book. When the Room opens, it's full of stuff and he hides it in a cabinet. To mark the place he hid it, he puts the tiara and wig on a bust on top of the cabinet.

Beat me to it ! :p :snap:

So who's the bigger dunderhead? Tom Riddle or J.K. Rowling??

Hmm. One's dead, the other's a kazillionaire. Do the math.
:D

So you thought you knew all the spoilers eh?

Well did you know....

When Dumbledour looks into the mirror of erised he sees himself reunited with his family

Luna marries the grandson of the great Newt Scamander and not Neville as I had hoped.

Dumbledore uses homenum revelio to "see" Harry under the cloak.

At the battle of Hogwarts, Neville does in fact call the sword of Gryffindor to help him via the sorting hat.

Ron makes it onto a chocolate frog card.

Etc...

WOW that link is AWESOME. For Rowling to take the time and answer all that is amazing; I just love her.

Yeah, that's an amazing thing. Thanks so much for linking to that, Moonliner.

You just know it's been killing her for years not being able to talk about all this stuff. I expect we'll see/hear a lot more from JK in the next few months.

If I were her I'd just make up answers every time a question is asked and then cackle has the internet tries to reconcile the inconsistencies.

The biggest Harry Potter fan is Rowling herself. :)

Harry was a Horcrux.

A horcrux can only be destroyed by extreme magical stuff.

So was Harry essentially invulnerable for the first 6 and 9/10 books?

Why was the Horcrux in Harry not destroyed when he got Basilisk bit?

I don't have the book in front of me, but something about the way the whole "Voldy's soul inside Harry" thing made me think that he wasn't quite a horcrux. I seem to recall thinking that there was some crucial difference between him and horcrux.

I don't know if a "mistake horcrux" works any differently than a puposeful one. The fact that he was bitten by a basilisk kinda blows it, unless it's the scar itself that needs to be bitten...

I suppose you could argue that Harry would have to die in order to destroy the horcrux but since the phoenix healed Harry the Horcrux was also healed.

That's what I was thinking. That since Harry lived so did the horcrux.

Magic works the way it needs to work at the moment it is used. Just go with that and all issues fade away.

It is the Star Trek equivalent of "for everything that needs detection, there is a particle" or "for every anomalous region of space there is a poorly conceived justification for entering it."

Kids Lit though it may be, I find I want a more well-constructed and motivated universe created for a series of novels than I do for a series of television shows.

Sure, I'd want the same, but unless the whole series is written all at once before release it won't happen, at least not perfectly.

At some point the writer just has to decide (sometimes consciously, sometimes not even aware of it because they'll never be so into the picayune as the fans) to sacrifice perfect continuity over the entire series to the demands of the story at the point in the story.

I have no idea if the issues raised here are big and obvious or small and picayune but I long ago gave up on putting too much concern into anything like perfect continuity unless the entire story is released all at once. And it isn't even a "kid's lit" allowance but any series.

Actually, I find the phoenix explanation to be rock solid. It's very clearly stated that the Horcrux's host must be completely destroyed in order to kill the horcruxiness. Phoenix tears are always a full cure-all, as long as it's "in time", which it was, apparently.

I love the word "horcruxiness."

That is all.

I agree with CP - Harry was "dying" not "dead".

I think Rowling's wizarding world is wonderfully well-constructed.


Say that three times fast.:D

Well, that was a rollicking fun read! I haven't been this "into" a HP book for since HP 2. I was amazed how she got everyone out of the sticky situations in a reasonably believable fashion. I only had one major "huh" moment, which is, "Where did Nevil get the Sword of Gryffendore to kill the snake?"

I'll go back and read the rest of this thread now.

From the sorting hat just like Harry did. A true Griffendore can pull the sword from the sorting hat if he/she is worthy and needs it.

OK. I just read all 5 pages of this thread and feel my questions have been answered. I, too, had a problem with the RoR being filled with lots of stuff and Tom Riddle not noticing that, but the explanation makes sense. Of course, I barely remember the details of the other books, so I'm willing to believe just about anything.

I. too, thought the baby thing was Voldermort.

My crushes in the book are Sirius and Snape with a fascination for Bellatrix and Narcissa. I LOVE both of their names. I think it is the hair all around. Malfoy Sr also seems pretty hot, but I love the actor as Hook. And, speaking of hair, John Malkovitch as Valmont is super hot. I love long hair on men. Love it love it love it.

I was a voracious reader as a kid - much more so than I am now. L'Engle, Nancy Drew, Phantom Tollbooth, Black Beauty, (Misty of Chincoteague, any horsey books) Narnia, Roald Dahl - I couldn't get enough of any of them.


Oh, and when Harry wakes up naked, I could totally picture it. ;)

A friend is having a Harry Potter Halloween party and I think I'm going to go as Bellatrix Lestrange. She so rocks in an evil way.

That sounds like a lot of fun!!

....Did I mention my SIL made his quilted velvet jacket for the movie amongst other things...? :p

/back on topic

OK so I have 200 pages of HPatDH left to go and it just hit me that there was a rather large logical gap with the horcrux issue that perhaps has been discussed or someone can resolve:

Why can't Voldemort create yet ANOTHER horcrux?

Supposedly you gotta kill someone and then cast a spell on an object and whammo, a horcrux. If HP and friends destroy all the horcruxes, then Voldy is mortal. So why can't Voldy just create another one on a random object after his resurrection? One that has no sentimental connection to him and therefore would never be guessed at by Harry Potter and Friends?

Is this explained somehow, because I am missing it. Or perhaps I haven't gotten to it yet.

The more you split your soul the more unstable what's left becomes. Making one horcrux is bad enough but he's made many more. Each time he rips his soul in half a little less is left. And what's left becomes more and more unstable.

So he could do it - but he's already gone way to far.

Yes ! I'm sure Slughorn explains this in Half Blood Prints.

Plus, he's a dimwit (as portrayed by Rowling) who doesn't realize till waaaay too late that Harry's knocking off the Horcruxes (horcruxi??) one-by-one.




Maybe all that soul-splitting has split off too much of his brain power.

YAY I am finally done with the book. Freaking loved it -- definitely the high point of the entire series. Very worthy finale.... I just loved Hermione and Ron's kiss, as well as the "NOT MY DAUGHTER YOU BITCH!" line... wowie!

I hope the movies of the last two books will do them justice, since it was dizzying how much was packed into those pages. Escape from being kidnapped (Malfoy Manor, my fave chapter) , a bank heist, a mystery, a war, and I swear she kills someone every 50 pages. Just ... fantastic.

I do agree that Voldemort was a little too dumb and arrogant at the end, but I guess that was the point. I still don't understand why he didn't just make another horcrux when he realized that HP had destroyed some of them. If I ever re-read Half-Blood Prince I suppose I'll look for that explanation from Slughorn, because I don't remember it.

If you kill all 31 other versions of yourself in parallel universes, you become all powerful. Wait, that's "The One" with Jet Li. Well, best not to think about these things too deeply.

Loved the book. Well worth the disappointment of the last three. (I've gone back to re-read key portions of the Order of the Phoenix in anticipation of seeing the movie, and it still sucks.)

Some quibbles: the final duel with Voldemort, like all the OK Corral wand battles did not sing out on the page. Harry went from "Do you feel lucky, punk?" to zen master who would not use the killing curse. I didn't like it.

I also was exquisitely worried that Hermione would be put on trial as a mudblood and would have to be rescued--or not. But that didn't happen. I also can't believe Harry and Hermione didn't hook up after Ron ditched them, but maybe that'll happen in the rewrite.

All in all, an amazing achievement, even with all the wretched excess.

I LOVE Order of the Phoenix. All a matter of taste, I suppose. But I dig the allegory.


I HATE Half Blood Prince, but am re-reading it now because I just read both books that, heheh, bookend it. Maybe I'll like it better the second time.

Well, I finally finished - and I enjoyed it. I was glad that this one recovered from the last and had enough momentum to keep me up reading when I should have been sleeping.

High points for me not mentioned (or noticed by me anyway) in this thread:

No Quidditch - thank god for that, those long passages of quidditch matches always annoyed me.

I liked that the characters become more complex and flawed, that came quite away from the Good vs. Evil of the earlier books. The Malfoy's willingness to betray Voldermort, for the sake of their son - but never fully coming into the fold. Snapes unrequited love and the power it has over him that transcends questions of good and evil. Dumbledor's failings and dark past. Ron's abandonment of the quest. It made them all more real, and to me more satisfying.

That said, the epilogue was unnecessary - and a bit annoying if I think too long about it.

Harry Potter Promo Stuff for sale!
 

Hi Guys, Melissa (Russell's/Boss radio's wife) here! I mentioned to Heidi (and Russell) that a friend of mine who worked in the movie biz was moving and wanted to sell lots of her promo stuff and they (and I) thought it might be wise to mention them here to the other Harry Potter fans here first in case you guys wanted a stab at them!

She wanted to sell as a lot, but I can have you email her if you have questions other than what you see in her description and I have photos if you want me to email them to you too. I wanted them, but with the kids, the ink and quill would be ruined in about 4 seconds and I hate to see that happen. Here is her info:

Actual Warner Bros. issued promo items from “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone” and “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets” films. Lot includes:

From “Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone”: Bertie Botts Every Flavor Beans backpack (with tags) (backpack is a bit dusty), Harry Potter baseball hat, special first edition film soundtrack (sealed), bag of Bertie Botts Every Flavor Beans and 4 lightning bolt tattoos.

From “Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets”: Tom Riddle’s diary (sealed), quill and ink set (ink has dried), Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets baseball hat, Ravenclaw notebook.

$100/OBO (contact her directly with offers!)

Contact: Cris at: crisco4@hotmail.com

P.S.
I loved the book and read 600 pages of it in one night once Russell and the kids went to bed! Got to bed at 3:30am! Could not put it down.

Coolstuff Medievilme, but I can barely afford the Valentino I collect, let alone getting into the Potter franchise. I confess, though, back in the day of movie 1, on ebay there were some genuine Hogwarts Letters hitting the auction block and I did lust after one for a while.

Just found a blog post offering up a funny alternate ending to the final book.

[DERAIL]

Speaking of alternate endings....

Have we ever discussed this or this. I love those....

[/DERAIL]

I'm re-reading HP 7.

I don't know how they're supposed to do the wedding at the Burrow in the Deathly Hallows movie if the whole freakin place was burned down in the last movie...

Well, presumably someone's just going to go "Domus Reparo"

I get the feeling the wedding scene is going to be omitted. Frankly, I'm surprised they included Fenrir- judging from this movie, he's not going to have a lot to do. Maybe Bill will get attacked in the next- kind of moving plots around? It just seems odd that, in a movie that was so pared down of characters from the book, that they did include Greyback.

I didn't like Deathly Hallows.




There, I said it.

Couple of things:

1. The DVD for The Half Blood Prince has a teaser trailer for Deathly Hallows on it. It looks like it's gonna be goooood!

2. The actor who plays Neville is kind cute now. 20 and not as goofy as he used to be. Just saying.

3. The actor playing Fred Weasley apparently is the A.D. for Deathly Hallows. That's pretty cool.