I’ll come back from vacation briefly to confess that I spent most of yesterday reading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Verdict: I thought it was quite good, not without the inevitable rough patches but overall probably the best book of the series. Harry himself is still an insufferable git, willing to think the worst of his closest friends at the slightest provocation, but the teenage-angst stuff is kept to a minimum.
Best line, at least in context:
“NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!”
I got a bit misty in places, including that one. Rowling does a much better job at tugging on heartstrings here than in previous installments.
Let’s allow spoilers in the comments, so don’t read them if you don’t want to be spoiled.
July 22nd, 2007 at 7:42 pm
Next wave of fantasy films is to be very close to the topics of Cosmic Variance: “His Dark Materials”. Not only Dark Matter, but also extra dimensions are explicitly named in the books, let’s see what happens in the filmed version.
July 22nd, 2007 at 7:58 pm
I loved the book, finally another person who has already finished it. I always knew Snape was a friend!!!
July 22nd, 2007 at 8:34 pm
Not a fan, and felt like yelling at everyone at the mall on saturday “Dobby dies, Snape is good, Voldimort dies, Harry and whatserface have three kids, as do Hermonie and Ron (together, not separately) and Draco has a boy called Scorpio”. But then, I had managed to restrain myself when sitting next to “The Secret” reader on a plane a few days before, so I decided not to.
July 22nd, 2007 at 9:12 pm
I rather liked the last 250 pages, but didn’t like the aimless drifting that happened in the earlier parts. I mean, if it had served a purpose yeah I would’ve been fine with it, but they just ended up going and doing what Harry wanted to do anyway so what was the point? (I was also not a fan of Harry Potter being Jesus, kinda-sorta.)
And yes, I loved that line too.
First (and only) time Rowling actually used something approximating a swear word in the books, so I actually laughed out loud.
And if anyone here has yet to read “His Dark Materials,” stop whatever you are doing and read it now!!!! It was my favorite book when I was in sixth grade, and as A Rivero said it was filled with talk of extra dimensions, dark matter, science vs religion, and all these other things 11 year olds clearly need to know about. The author (Phillip Pullman) had a philosophy that you needed to give scientific explanations for what was going on, you see…
But yes, that book introduced me to most of modern physics and probably helped me become an aspiring physicist today. Having scientists/physicists as lead charecters and having the protagonist say in the second book that she thought being a physicist would be cool when she grew up probably helped a great deal too.
July 22nd, 2007 at 9:21 pm
Somehow, I was delighted to hear my favorite Big Brain Cosmologist had read and enjoyed this… and…bewildered as I admit I am as how this might be possible for anyone half way well read… all I can say is…
Let’s hear it for human diversity, eh!
Glad you enjoyed it! And even more, that you weren’t ashamed to admit it. Good for you!
July 22nd, 2007 at 9:48 pm
personally I liked the way harry called voldemort ‘riddle’ in the final showdown. Also Neville showing his true colours was gratifying. I also liked the ‘19 years later’ epilogue – yes, it’s corny, but I’m a sucker for that sort of thing.
Some of the middle part of the book was unnecessary, but to be honest, even if it was 2000 pages long I’d still love every minute of reading it!
July 22nd, 2007 at 10:01 pm
I definitely liked that line … I was completely not expecting to burst out loud laughing at that particular point in the book.
July 22nd, 2007 at 10:14 pm
Oh, yeah, I absolutely loved that book too. Got it yesterday morning, finished it last night. Easily the best in the series, and a very fitting end.
July 22nd, 2007 at 10:26 pm
Yeah, it was pretty good. The rough patches were pretty rough, particularly the (inevitable) stall in the search for the Horcruxes, but I viewed them as painful but necessary parts of the story. Pretty satisfying conclusion, IMO.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:15 am
19 years later…Harry Potter, burdened with all the stress that comes of raising children in conditions of economic uncertainty, walks down the street with a heavy, tired-looking Ginny who never seems to be interested in sex. They pass by the bookstore and one of the brats throws a tantrum. “No, I am *not* going to buy you those frigging seven books, you little shit! You wouldn’t even read “Stalky and Co”!” said Harry.
July 23rd, 2007 at 5:33 am
Harry vs Voldemort confrontations, Ron + Hermione, Neville, house elves, Dumbledore’s past, Luna & father, Potterwatch: Good or excellent. The final plot twists with the wands left me breathless.
Deathly Hallows, Snape’s past revelation: Not bad but could have been better
Snape’s death, Lupin + Tonks, Ginny, epilogue: Bad or horrible. Snape was quickly and pointlessly dispatched instead of having a major role in the climax as he deserved; a major character like Lupin died offstage and without any pathos; Ginny didn’t do anything in the whole book, and the epilogue gave all the “answers” that readers knew already while omitting the interesting ones. What happened to Luna? To George without Fred? To the Ministry, and to non-human races? Who is headmaster of Hogwarts? And so on…
Overall: a very good end to the series. Difficult to compare with the others as it has a very different structure and tone. But very good.
July 23rd, 2007 at 8:43 am
Just finished it around 1am this morning, and I thought it was an excellent and satisfying end to the story (modulo the aforementioned rough patches).
Overall, I would say His Dark Materials is better written and more inventive (I really hope the movie is decent), but reading the Harry Potter books seems to tap into some deep reservoir of happy childhood memories for me. It’s hard to think there won’t be any more books to look forward to…
Oh, and Harold Bloom is a prat (as Fred and George would say).
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:11 am
[...] Sean Carroll at Cosmic Variance is allowing spoilers in the comments to his post, Deathly Hallows. [...]
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:16 am
An interesting question is whether Harry Potter really exists in the universe. E.g. one could argue that Boltzmann Brain states that subjectively experience being Harry Potter for a fraction of a second must exist. All the different Boltzmann brains together, each experiencing different parts his life, then generate the complete life of Harry Potter.
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:31 am
Count Iblis: You don’t need a lot of different Boltzmann Brains. Just wait a few zillion^zillion years more after the Boltzamann Brains appear, and you wil get a really major quantum fluctuation that will simulate the whole Harry Potter world, complete with all its characters and events. Of course, it wouldn’t really work by magic but by a hugely unlikely succession of quantum events that mimic exactly the effect of magic, but the characters would not be able to tell the difference.
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:59 am
gfl:
Your restraint is appreciated.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:06 pm
As a girl with the name of Lyra, I’m not looking forward to His Dark Materials coming out. They’ll mannage to pronounce the name wrong (as usual) lol. It’s Lyr-a (Lear-a) not Ly-ra (Lie-ra). But that’s just my little rant. I’m planning on going by my middle name once the movie comes out, since I wont be able to escape the inevitable.
I haven’t read Harry Potter since the 4th book came out. I know she had to re-write them, and I didn’t like the way the stories started to go once she did. I’m glad she left in some of the good things though that I knew were coming, Dumbledore dying perviously, and I’m glad that Voldemort died, although that was obviously coming.
I also have to say, that being a PotHead (Harry Potter fan) when I was younger, drew me to the sciences, and that’s why I’m now getting my degree in chemisty. Just so I can see water light on fire, stuff “magically” appear, and a purple rock come from 2 clear liquids. Of course now I know it’s not magic, but it still makes me feel like it is.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:26 pm
Well I enjoy Harry Potter, I felt that the book should have been longer, after all it is the most important quest. I agree with Alejandro that having Lupin die like that was not the best thing, but I also remember how confusing the battle at the end of book Five, that was confusing because we were following several fights at the same time. I also agree that I wonder about who is the Headmaster, and what in the world is Harry doing? And Ron are they seeker and keepers on the same team? I would like to have that LOTR ending where you get a timeline to show what happened to each character.
July 23rd, 2007 at 12:34 pm
I’m not a reader of these books, but I am a huge fan of the effect they’re having culturally. The evidence is right in this thread. Really amazing that it is inspiring so many ppl to do more with their lives, to look deeper, in whatever way suits them.
For me, that’s the measure of art. I love the fact that something that’s been treated with critical condescension (at best) until the last couple books is going to have a far greater positive cultural impact than every Philip Roth and Cormac McCarthy novel added together and raised to the power of Pynchon.
July 23rd, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Why did Neville run up to Voldemort unarmed (how did he know Voldemort would summon up the Sorting Hat from which Gryffindor’s sword would be available in order to kill Nagini)?
July 23rd, 2007 at 1:38 pm
Thoroughly enjoyed it — especially the chance to spend an entire afternoon lost in a good story — something that doesn’t happen much these days. And the kids that I read the first few books to had to work this weekend so I got it first, finishing in time to hand it off to my son when he got home; he pulled an all-nighter on Saturday and passed it on to his sister to start after work yesterday.
We’ve agreed no discussion until she’s done, which will be a good excuse to go
out to the Chinese bistro for dinner tonight.
We also read and loved the Philip Pullman books, esp. the first one. Highly recommended.
July 23rd, 2007 at 2:19 pm
I loved the book, but was hoping the kids could deal with the more sinister matter of “the wretched man” (Book 6, P. 1).
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Arun: Neville didn’t run up unarmed; however, Voldemort disarmed him extremely easily.
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:57 pm
Good grief – over 600 pages in one day? Respect
I was goggle-eyed and mentally knackered after reading C J Samsom’s novel “Dissolution” in a single sitting, and that’s barely 400 pages.
Well worth the effort though. It’s a brilliant thriller, set in Tudor times, about skullduggery in an English monastery. Very much in the “Name of the Rose” genre, but better IMHO or certainly at least as good.
It’s one of the “Shardlake” series (that being the sleuth’s name) and I’d highly recommend them all, although of course they’re not exactly fantasy in the Potter style or SF a-la Pullman.
Potter #7 wasn’t the only “final episode” released this week – Sadly, the last episode of Rome 2 was shown on UK TV yesterday. What a brilliant series (two series) that has been as well – Made “I, Claudius” look like Muffin the Mule!
Cheers
July 23rd, 2007 at 3:58 pm
Neville’s determination in the face of miniscule odds is part of his inspiring charm. He has no more chance than Harry apparently has had many times, yet his impulsive actions ultimately succeed.
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:00 pm
All I can say is that Hermione actually utters the following line:
“Ron, come over here so I can do you.”
Should I be ashamed for snickering when I read this?
July 23rd, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Woops – that should be “C J Sansom”
July 23rd, 2007 at 6:02 pm
I just finished the book, too, and loved it despite frustration with the meandering plot. Did it really need to take 370 pages before they destroyed the first frickin’ Horcrux? Sheesh. Also, even though I was rooting for Harry to end up with Ginny Weasley (who I agree ought to have played a bigger role in this last book), I found the epilogue flat and disinteresting… I’d have preferred seeing more of the immediate aftermath. Too emotionally difficult to go from watching one’s favorite characters fall one by one to happily-forever-after… even readers need time to grieve a little…
gfl, I’m curious as how someone who is “not a fan” would know so much about what happens in a book s/he supposedly despises?? I mean, I managed to avoid every single spoiler all weekend long with very little effort, and my own fiance was reading it.
While I, too, occasionally get annoyed at all the Potter hype, the books always win me over in the end. (Rowling’s a gifted story-teller, plain and simple, however inelegant her style might be at times. And ultimately, it’s all about the story.) What I don’t understand is the compunction to bitterly spoil everyone else’s fun. Thanks, gfl, for resisting it and allowing your higher nature to hold sway. Although you may very well have been lynched on the spot for such a transgression.
July 23rd, 2007 at 10:16 pm
>> gfl, I’m curious as how someone who is “not a fan” would know so much about what happens in a book s/he supposedly despises??
Easy – I went looking for the spoilers to wind up my mates – took 5 minutes to find a movie which flashed up the key spoilers and when they occured.
July 23rd, 2007 at 11:42 pm
I thought the epilogue was setting up a second series, where we will find out what happened in the intervening years.
I figured out that Dumbledore had ordered Snape to kill him, so that was not a surprise. But I expected Snape to die heroically in the final battle.
July 24th, 2007 at 7:34 am
I liked the books, but honestly.. CS. Lewis, Lloyd Alexander and a host of others have done the same gist much better years before this ever came out.
They are just as readable for young kids, and theres more substance to them.
I also can’t help but feel that the latter versions of Harry Potter still keep the main protaganists with the mental age of 11 (probably b/c Rawling is still writing for young children and not adolescents)
July 24th, 2007 at 7:49 am
Would have been better if Snape had lived to tell Harry himself, and then survived (against the typecasting) to continue as Headmaster in the post-Voldemortian age.
July 24th, 2007 at 8:34 am
I know many people like the 3 novels comprising “His Dark Materials” partly because of alternative universes.
I would like to offer your readers a scifi novel that relies heavily on string theory. It can be found at:
http://www.fmstories.com/stories/scifi/Kimmay.txt
It is an “amateur” novel, meaning that it has not been proofread by a professional, and because it is fiction, some scientific liberties must be taken.
It is offered only for your entertainment and it has no significance beyond that.
GLH
July 24th, 2007 at 9:08 am
More epilogue: Luna became a mathematician.
July 24th, 2007 at 9:18 am
The epilogue returns us to life itself, the sort of life you and I lead. Freed from the exigencies and constraints of a world with Voldebush, Harry and the others must find whatever love or meaning they can in the moment, in the day-to-day and, some might say, mundane. No more hype: what is there really?
July 24th, 2007 at 11:44 am
CS Lewis’ Narnia chronicles did not, IMO, “do it better” than Rowling. They’re didactic, simplistic, and heavy-handed in their overtly Christian symbolism, with little of Rowling’s whimsical humor and sharp characterizations. His characters are barely recognizable as human. Where Lewis shone most brightly was his least-known novel, TIL WE HAVE FACES, which I’ve always mourned being lost to near-obscurity. There, he managed to leave easy allegory and didacticism aside to produce a genuinely beautiful mythological retelling of the Cupid and Psyche story from the perspective of the ugly older sister.
Pullman can certainly match Rowling. Tolkien, frankly, needed a editor.
July 24th, 2007 at 12:49 pm
Oh, the various and sundry.
First, I thought it was quite good. To anyone who is like ‘Oh, this series or that series is better’; certainly you’re allowed to think so, but I think that Rowling drew on certain things Lloyd Alexander, Pullman, and Most Certainly Lewis and Tolkien do not.
In specific – and my major objection to any of the comments stems from this – Rowling never, ever resorts to ‘a higher power’. The entire plot of the books comes from real people living in a world with natural laws, and never is there even the hint of some deity pushing things along and forcing poor ‘good guys’ to suffer for some obfuscated morality. In this way Voldemort tops Sauron; he has no Morgoth he’s serving, he’s simply a product of his environment and acting as energetically as he can upon those personality traits. I love this about this series. It makes it real in a way those others simply aren’t.
And, frankly, I hate it whenever a main character is compared to Jesus. Harry doesn’t die in DH. Straight up. Near death, sure. Near death experiences are a long-recorded phenomenon. But he didn’t die, so he can’t resurrect. Even if he had, come on! Just because there is one story about a person resurrecting doesn’t mean that all stories with resurrection are that story! Also, he’s not a prophet.
Finally, Neville resisted Voldemort not because he had a plan or was willing to work hard to defeat him, but because he was a Gryffindor, not a Ravenclaw or Hufflepuff. He had a wand (for a moment anyway), and the will to resist – the latter being the important part. Whatever else is said, I think that Rowling does a good job of having her characters act as they would act; it makes sense in the context she presents. This is strong storytelling, even if you object to the earthier tone of her writing. For me, though, it worked quite well – I would have gladly absorbed another 800 pages to fill in all those things I wanted to see but was not allowed to; Tonks and Lupin’s death, for instance. The aftermath. Draco’s redemption (which one must infer from the epilogue). I think that for this book, at least, she would have done well to break away from the Harry-centric viewpoint a bit and explore those other lives that were in the crucible. Alas.
July 24th, 2007 at 4:37 pm
I too gave up my weekend for the sake of Harry Potter.
The story is wrapped up beautifully.
I cannot decide whether the H.P. books or the Narnia books are the best children’s books ever, but certainly as regards plot, and imagination, J.K. Rowling is top of my list.
I suppose the best thing about Harry is that he is not all that special; he’s an ordinary boy with ordinary talents, ordinary virtues and ordinary vices who achieves something extraordinary just by facing the problems the Fates have posed him with determination and courage.
There is a lesson here for all of us.
I hate to quibble having enjoyed the books so much, but I agree with Alejandro’s points in comment #11. It was all a bit convenient: Harry finding Snape dead while Voldemort had nipped out for a leak (or whatever it was), and then siphoning off his memories. This could, I think have been done better. She could have shortened the beginning and middle for the sake of a longer post-Voldemort section.
I do not agree with Jennifer about Tolkein in comment #36; some it is sheer poetry, all of which is lost in the films. But I do agree about Till we have faces, which is easily the best thing that C.S. Lewis ever wrote.
July 25th, 2007 at 6:01 am
As I have posted on other discussion of Potter, a much better series, and much funnier, is Jonathan Stroud’s “Bartimaeus Trilogy”.
http://www.bartimaeustrilogy.com/about.html
The last book is the most accomplished, but of course you should begin from the beginning to get to know the characters and for the entertaining plots and comments.
Much more cynical that Potter.
July 25th, 2007 at 9:35 am
Have to disagree about the Snape comments. Snape could not have lived with the thought of the James half of Harry knowing the truth, but needed the Lily half to hear it directly from him. I think the Pensieve was the only way to achieve this goal.
On the Pullman series, I loved the first two, but thought the third one wandered off, with the philosophy and metaphysics overpowering the story, much like with L’Engle and the Narnia books.
July 25th, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I thought the climax of the book was the escape from Gringott’s on the back of a dragon. Up to that point the book was truly excellent. After Gringott’s it was good, albeit a little bit predictable. The epilogue, however, was a big disappointment. I think she should have described how the protagonists coped with their loss, because with so many dead it was not a happy end.
Oh, and Ginny should have had a bigger role.
July 25th, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Most people seem to think that the book was pretty good — and then go on to list the ways it could have been better. And I basically agree. If I could have improved one thing, it would have been Snape’s role. He should have been a bigger presence in the middle of the book, and certainly deserved a more nuanced and active ending.
July 25th, 2007 at 3:01 pm
i did not get a harry potter book….. for one … i was having sex alot on the weekend and n e one that would go for sex instead of harry potter …. give me a” hell yah!! “
July 25th, 2007 at 5:27 pm
Athough religion does not play an overt role, neither is the book atheistic. The characters use phrases such as “Thank God” (Page 74). Rowling considers body and soul separate, each capable of continuing without the other. We have living bodies without souls (those who have received a dementor’s kiss), and souls with no bodies (ghosts, Harry’s dead parents, Horcruxes, and others). While the existence of differentiated bodies and souls could be held without an accompanying belief in a deity, ancestor worship, or any such, soul-body distinction is a typical element of religious belief systems.
Harry is referred to as “The Chosen One.” Chosen by whom? Before you dismiss this as a mere linguistic quibble, consider the situations in the real world in which people use similar expressions. Most or all such phrases arise in contexts presupposing a conscious group or entity “choosing.” The phrase cannot allude to the choices made by Voldemort because most of the people using the phrase, along with those who apparently coined it, do not know the details of the prophecy or Voldemort’s response to it.
Finally, Harry is, to put it mildly, extremely lucky. In retrospect, the deck seems to have been stacked in his favor to a thoroughly implausible degree. For instance, on page 61, Harry’s wand acts totally of its own volition to break Voldemort’s borrowed wand right in between Voldemort’s “Avada” and “Kedavra.” How unusual was this? On page 495, Ollivander, the expert on wands, says, “I had…never heard of such a thing. Your wand performed something unique that night.” If you have read the book (or the whole series), you can supply numerous other examples yourself. It’s hard to believe that nobody’s cheating.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
As far as the religious themes go, I really liked this particular statement describing Harry’s thoughts on page 185:
“He looked away, trying not to betray the resentment he felt. There it was again: Choose what to believe. He wanted the truth. Why was everybody so determined that he should not get it?”
Granted, this statement was in an entirely non-religious setting (talking about Dumbledore’s past), but I always like it when I see somebody uphold evidence over emotion when it comes to what to believe, something the religious are frequently loathe to do when it comes to their own religion.
July 25th, 2007 at 8:29 pm
Terry Pratchet’s 25 or so book Discworld series is much better than
Rowling’s cliche-ridden books. He has the advantage that he both can write
and has a sense of humor. (See Harold Bloom’s review of the Potter series).
July 25th, 2007 at 11:39 pm
I couldn’t just leave this page without my two cents. A few people mentioned Tolkien in their reviews of the Potter series. (By the way – THE best example of “I can’t wait for the next book to come out” during my lifetime – and I’m still waiting for Stephen King to bring out his next Dark Tower novel…)
Well here it is: If Tolkien had never written LOTR then Rowling would never have been published.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:23 am
To me, what is most remarkable about J K Rowling is that she vividly remembers what it was like to be eleven years old, and twelve years old, and thirteen years old, and so on, in a world that is similar enought to ours to be recognizable, and then gets it down on paper. This is, in my reading experience, extremely rare. None of the other authors mentioned so far in these comments that I have read (and I’ve read most) comes, in my view, anywhere close to pulling this off. I think her ability to do this is why Rowling has become the first billionaire artist in history, and I think it’s well deserved.
Two reviews, both from Salon, of the first and last books in the series do a good job of capturing what is great about them all:
http://archive.salon.com/mwt/feature/1999/03/cov_31featurea.html
http://www.salon.com/books/review/2007/07/20/harry/index.html
(To get past Salon’s ad page without having to watch the ad, first go to
http://www.salon.com/news/cookie756.html )
July 26th, 2007 at 9:57 am
Just to add some balance to Mark’s links and encomiums, here is
Harold Bloom’s review of an earlier Potter:
http://wrt-brooke.syr.edu/courses/205.03/bloom.html
Bloom is the grand Pooh-Bah of the Western Canon, and
super grinch when it comes to Rowling’s writing skills.
July 26th, 2007 at 10:32 am
On Religion and Potter.
Brian: I really can’t call the book less than ‘agnostic’. In essence, while you can stretch a little and suggest there may be divine forces, they’re not explicitly written in. Phrases such as ‘Thank God’ hardly suffice as evidence; plenty of people who are areligious use that phrase, because it’s a common phrase. It would be *odd* not to hear it, because it is part of the culture.
The issue with souls I really can’t see as anything but an expression of the natural world, when you’re including in that world a nebulous but scientifically explored notion of ‘magic’. I don’t think the book lacks religion because the existence of souls and their natures are not attributed to a higher, divine source. Nothing is. All actions in the world are attributed to people within the world.
Regarding ‘The Chosen One’ moniker; I admit I’m a little hard pressed to suggest why it was Rowling chose to use that, other than Harry was clearly held up as a hero. But never was he held up as a hero backed by God, or Gods, or some divine power, or indeed ‘chosen’ by any other virtue besides the fact that he was The Boy Who Lived. I think the issue of his ‘luck’ ties into this; he is the protagonist of the story. Nearly every story’s protagonist suffers from something of a protective shield cast by the writer. The protagonist, by definition, cannot leave the story until the end of the story – so of course for the duration of the story they’re going to seem abnormally lucky.
But therein lies the crux of the matter; it’s not that the story does not require a suspension of disbelief – it’s a story after all. But nowhere, as an element of the story, does a divine presence come into play. All the morality derives from the world in which they live. All the motivations and rewards come from that world. And what is beyond that world is explicitly left beyond it; even in Harry’s near-death experience, when he is talking to Dumbledore it is explicitly suggested that he is in his own head, and what is beyond the veil of death is beyond it.
Lee; One last thing, you totally cannot prove that Rowling wouldn’t have been published if Tolkien hadn’t written LOTR. I suspect it would be hard to even substantially support the claim. She draws from too many sources to attribute it all to Tolkien; I particularly liked, for instance, her allusions to the Song of Roland, and the taking of Durandal from the stream of poison. There is truly nothing new under the sun, only new perspectives on it, so I don’t think you can get down on her for drawing from any number of sources, ancient, modern or even contemporary. (Does anyone else think the latter books were influenced by the acting performances in the first movies?)
July 26th, 2007 at 11:07 am
I think I disagree Mark. The characters don’t resemble anything I knew past the age of 11 or maybe 12. Worse, they stay at that mental age throughout the entire series.
Part of this I think is b/c she is writing for a younger audience, so they can comprehend things and some of the more delicate topics are sort of hinted at rather than pronounced explicitly.
For a more accurate portrayal of what it feels like to be 13, at least for a guy, try Stephen King novellas or Catcher in the Rye.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:21 am
Nate,
The motivation for my post lay in comments I had heard prior to reading the book: that some Christians objected to the series and were attempting to have it removed from libraries, for instance, because they claimed the books were atheistic. Thus, I was somewhat surprised to hear Harry say, “Thank God” – not because of concepts I had formed from reading but because of the expressed opinions of others.
The contention in my post was that the books were not atheistic, not that they were theistic. Your term “agnostic” fits nicely within the range of my claim. As to the phrase “less than ‘agnostic’”, I’m not sure which side of agnostic is more and which side is less.
In any case, I enjoyed the book virtually without reservation.
July 26th, 2007 at 11:30 am
Haelfix,
Those of us in our “second childhood” can relate also. Such universality!
July 26th, 2007 at 12:34 pm
Brian,
“Less than agnostic” was probably poor wording, but I meant it on the scale of 0 to Atheistic, wherein zero would presumably be “The Inferno” or “Everyman”; there is a god, he drives everything and you better listen up! And presumably Agnostic is somewhere in the middle. But, definitely bad phrasing.
Anyway, I get a riled up when religion is inserted everywhere. As Salon points out, the strength of the books is very much that they are strong ‘domestic fantasy’; I think that on some level they’re combining the sort of fantasy that Lackey is known for (and typically consumed by girls) and the sort of fantasy that Tolkien spawned (and is much more often consumed by boys). There is still a hero, a quest, and a villian (traditionally boy story elements), but the things that matter are relationships, society and identity (more often girl story elements).
I think the books were great, and substantively different enough that claiming others did it better is silly.
July 26th, 2007 at 12:43 pm
De gustibus non disputandum est.
July 26th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
Gordon: When I was reading Bloom’s book on how Shakespeare “invented us”, I mentioned to my wife that Bloom wrote that Falstaff was the greatest character in all literature. She replied “Well he must be big and fat himself then.” Bingo: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Bloom . I think that’s a pretty good example of Bloom’s general level of perspicacity.
Haelfix: I share your admiration for King and Salinger as chroniclers of childhood. Have you read “Hearts in Atlantis”? A truly great book, IMO (though my wife claims that King doesn’t get the girls right).
July 26th, 2007 at 3:15 pm
Mark: Bloom may be fat, but I agree with his assessment of Rowling—
adequate dreck. Pratchett is much better.
Bloom had better shed afew pounds or the New Scientist will have Gores
comrades after him for AGW:
“How the obesity epidemic is aggravating global warming”
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/mg19426105.600-how-the-obesity-epidemic-is-aggravating-global-warming.html
July 26th, 2007 at 5:34 pm
They’re still there…. Sitting on the train, on park benches, at the cafes and bars… Beady little eyes staring into the big fat book with the gory colours on the front.. Still there, silent, vapid, like the victims of the “Invasion of the body snatchers”. I to am silent. I to must conform. I want to scream “It’s a childrens book for crying out loud, you know Harry is going to be alright, the last thing JK Rowling wants is a million bawling ten year olds”…. But I’m quiet. I know that if I scream their eyes will shift to me, their mouths will start to move, and in a low, monotonous tone they will all being to chant “Well, it’s quite grown up and well written, and the story is quite spiffing….”, the same chant they have uttered since book one. I don’t want to hear it again, although the fire burns within me. I stay quiet……..
July 26th, 2007 at 6:10 pm
gfl,
Your post is too good, too hilarious. I can’t top it. I’m speechless.
July 27th, 2007 at 6:24 pm
Forgot this before, but can’t resist posting it now I’ve remembered: re the people that have been discussing whether HP is religious/agnostic/whatever, I could not believe my eyes when I saw the following dialogue between Xenophilus and Hermione (about the Resurrection Stone):
H: “Well, how can it be real?”
X: “Prove that it is not”
H (outraged): “But that’s -I’m sorry, but that’s completely ridiculous! How can I possibly prove it doesn’t exist? Do you expect me to get hold of -of all the pebbles in the world, and test them? I mean, you could claim that anything’s real if the only basis for believing in it is that nobody’s proved it doesn’t exist!
X: Yes, you could. I’m glad to see that you’re opening your mind a little.
For a moment I thought, WTF, Harry Potter has suddenly become one of those endless Cosmic Variance or Science Blogs discussion threads about atheism! Seriously, haven’t we all read this very dialogue with some minor variation dozens of time here?
I think it is clear, by the way, that Rowling comes out endorsing Xenophilus while at the same time understanding fully Hermione’s logic -not that I am myself endorsing Rowling on this.
July 27th, 2007 at 8:41 pm
I thought that exchange between Xenophilius and Hermione was funny – similar to some of the humorous sequences in Alice in Wonderland.
July 27th, 2007 at 9:55 pm
My niece recently called me from the Harry Potter midnight line at her neighborhood Barnes & Noble. She’s 18 now, but she read the first book when she was 10 or 11. She’s part of the original Harry Potter generation, the one that grew up with Harry and his friends.
There aren’t many books or events that capture quite as many eyeballs as a new Harry Potter release. Wandering around Seattle the other day, we saw a dozen copies in arm, and later we ran into a camper heading out in Olympic National Park with the book strapped to her backpack.
In my opinion, the book was a ripping yarn. Rowling is a good plotter, with a lot of attention to detail and character. She also has a great sense of humor, particularly when it flows from the characters.
As for the rivals:
C.S. Lewis was just too Christian for me. I kept moaning whenever Ass-Lion showed up.
His Dark Materials was great, but he had too much to say in just three books. He should just trash the last one, or even the last two, and rewrite it as three or five separate books and let things develop properly.
Lord of the Rings was magnificent in scope, but it would have been better with characters. Tolkien built a very convincing world, and I felt that the movies really brought it to life. I really didn’t expect that.
Kipling’s Stalky and Company was awfully moralistic. Stalky and friends might outwit the teachers, but the head would always slap them down on principle. Maybe this plays better in England, but Americans like a sense of due process.
I’ve been recommending Lloyd Alexander’s Prydain series for those who need a post-Potter rebound fix. The characters are a lot of fun. The plotting is good, and Alexander always delivers.
I’ve never been able to get into Catcher in the Rye, and I keep running into people who’ve had the same problem. It’s just too hard to empathize. Maybe I was never a proper adolescent?
July 28th, 2007 at 12:48 am
I thought this book was awesome. Best of the 7 definately, I like how at the end you like snape, which is difficult after hating him for so long… And I gotta say my heart skipped a beat when harry found out he is supposed to die. Im just glad that he didnt actually have to. Im satisfied with the outcome, I just wish there were more books to be written in this great series.
July 28th, 2007 at 7:20 am
“I suspect it would be hard to even substantially support the claim. She draws from too many sources to attribute it all to Tolkien”
Nate:
I see your point, but I was referring to the willingness of publishers to print the book. And, even though they would probably think it was a good read in itself, would people in bookstores have picked it up without the genre of fantasy made so credible, even classical, by LOTR?
“and the sort of fantasy that Tolkien spawned (and is much more often consumed by boys)”
You are absolutely correct about that. I kept re-reading LOTR before I was married – then when my daughter was old enough I bought her a beautiful edition of The Hobbit. She turned up her nose at it. Her sister implied that the girls at school insisted Tolkien was all about how boys were better than girls.
But when the movie came out she kept raving about it. She kept sending me emails and IM’s referring to it and I could tell that she had gone back and read the books since she could relate to them after seeing the movie. LOL
(She got me back, however, by turning me on to the Harry Potter series. Now I keep re-reading them the way i used to devour Tolkien. And I, also, like the movies better. Ahhh, daughter are there to remind you how much you miss in life by not being female.
)
July 28th, 2007 at 9:23 pm
For any of u who were wondering, Rowling did an interview where she elaborated on the epilogue. It states:
“The epilogue does not directly state that Ron and Hermione are married, but Rowling states that indeed they are. Harry and Ron are both Aurors; Harry is the department head, and Hermione is “very high up” in the Department of Magical Law Enforcement.
Luna Lovegood has become a naturalist of sorts, searching the world for odd and unique creatures.
At Hogwarts there is now a permanent Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher; Voldemort’s jinx on this position was broken with his death. There is also an unknown headmaster, as Professor McGonagall had gotten too old. Rowling did not identify either the Headmaster or the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.”
Hope this helps, you guys, but you’re absolutely right: it would have been nice to find out about George and the other Weasleys, Kreacher, or even Hagrid and Grawp instead of Draco whom I personally could care less about. But at least she elaborated on Harry, Ron, Hermoine and gave some insight about Luna’s life.
And does it bother anyone else that we never hear another word about Cornelius Fudge? What the hell happened to him from book 6 to book 7? He just disappeared! She couldn’t please everyone, I guess. Overall, I loved the book, I just think the epilogue could have been a bit more detailed and definitely should have included more characters.
July 28th, 2007 at 10:19 pm
I loved it. I really did. I didn’t want it to end so I read it as slow as possible!!! LOL I agree with sum of the statements made here: about Snape being good, I always knew he was as well, even till the very end when the teachers turned on him. I also got that feeling about Harry/Jesus thing towards the end as well…I really don’t know what to say here about that I don’t want to offend anyone, but I still liked it, I also agree that this is probably the best book yet, J.K was back to her old brilliance (you really are bloody amazing, lady!!!) and OH my gosh!!! I was sure that one of the fab 3 was going to die if not all of them!!! but they all survived and got married and had kids!!!! My heart melted when the names of the potter children was revealed…Albus, James and Lilly…awwwwww. I always knew he would end up with Ginny I just didn’t think JK would take it that far!!! and Ron and Hermione, well we all kind of knew that was coming from very early on but I wonder why they named their children, Hugo and Rose (Is that right?). The only thing I was a bit upset by was why didn’t she mention anything about adult Luna towards the end?? Did she get married? Did she have children? What did she end up doing in the end? Besides that I would have to say it was one of the best books I have read in a long time
July 29th, 2007 at 7:37 am
Have just finished book and have asked 4 other people who are totally confused about the Elder Wand ownership. Can anyone else enlightened me about how come Draco Malfoy got ownership of this wand when he did not actually defeat Dumbledore. Agree that the middle part of the book was a bit long-winded
July 29th, 2007 at 12:16 pm
I found the whole “dying and coming back to life” thing with Harry quite cliche, and yet, interesting. Jo Rowling (or should I say Harry) really manouvered her (his) way out of that sticky spot rather cleverly. I had an enormous lump in my throat when McGonagal cried Harry’s name at the site of his body in Hagrid’s arms, and Ron, hermione and Ginny’s cries.
The film will be unbelievable sad due to the numerous deaths.
Dobby’s death came as a tragic shock to me, he was a secret favourite of mine. Molly weasley is, officially, my favourite character of the book. Her line before striking Bella Lestrange is spot on.
Thoroughly heart broken at Fred’s demise.
Loved “nineteen years later,”
Didn’t Love Harry’s choice of names for his children “Albus Severus potter”?
Why not call him “Bob Tim jones Potter?” Seriously, over kill!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:19 pm
Another thing I forgot to add.
This note is not intent on offending anyone, and neither am I.
How similar are “Harry potter” and “The Bible” ?
How Dumbledore and Harry are so similar to God and Jesus in little doses, how wormtail betrayed harrys parents (and harry, in a sense) how “devilish” voldermort is.
its narnia all over again!
July 29th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
” Laura – “I just think the epilogue could have been a bit more detailed and definitely should have included more characters.”
There’s a reason she killed off so many characters …
July 29th, 2007 at 12:35 pm
Draco controlled the wand because the owner didn’t need to be killed, just defeated, for the wand to be won. He disarmed and cornered Dumbledore at the end of book 6, so it became his.
I enjoyed the book, but could have done without the epilogue. I firmly believed in Snape being good, but did anyone else think that, after 7 years of Harry loathing Snape, it was a bit of a leap to calling him “the bravest man [he] ever knew?” I was kind of hoping for some sort of funeral/reconciliation scene in which Harry came to terms with things, like his relationship with Snape. Plus you’d think that after all the houses contributing to the defeat of Voldemort, there would be a little more house unity 19 years later.
July 29th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
i enjoyed the last book, even through the critical analyses of how the middle portion was useless and meandering, and the countless numbers of people suggesting how harry potter and Jesus share similarites, you have to admit rowling has been endowed with the talent of writing a story.
i do believe that snape should have had a bigger role, as well as ginny..however, the book was still magnificent even with the lack of involvement from the two.
i cant wait until the movie for the deathly hallows comes out because i know it is going to be amazing. personally, i think the movie should not cut out anypart of the book, even if it becomes 5 hours long because i know that everyone would still watch it.
July 31st, 2007 at 2:53 am
Just want to comment on some things that have been said. Tania wonders why Ron and Hermione’s kids are called Hugo and Rose. I don’t know about Rose, maybe somebody has an idea, but Hugo made me think about a famous Hugo, Victor Hugo, and we do know about a Victor in the books who used to be pretty close to Hermione…
About the religious connection, what stroke me is the “blasphemous” one with Voldemort: “Before the night is out,Potter will have come to find me”. All in all, I don’t think there are religious undertones to the HP series, or I guess you could find some in any book….
I agree with most that has been said, JKR didn’t always do a good job with the book, though it’s pleasing to read. Personally I thought the Dudley thing was promising but then the Dursleys disappear from the story so it was all in vain.
July 31st, 2007 at 2:54 am
Oh Gosh! I forgot!!!!!!!!! It’s July 31st! HAPPY BIRTHDAY HARRY!
July 31st, 2007 at 4:44 am
I’d just like to take a moment to point out another series of books which appears to have slipped under the radar amidst all this talk of Lewis and Tolkien.
Many years ago, whilst I was still at school, our class read a book called The Dark is Rising, by Susan Cooper. This book is actually the second part of the series of the same name, a series which I immediately set out to find in our local library. The series is a loose expansion of Arthurian legend, set in modern times and featuring – strangely enough – a small boy who discovers his magical inheritance on his eleventh birthday.
In my opinion The Dark is Rising stands far above the works of Rowling, although you have to admire the way that Harry Potter has encouraged kids to start reading again. It’s also making its way to the silver screen later this year, and I strongly encourage you all to go and read the book before its theatrical release.
July 31st, 2007 at 11:31 am
Since everyone else has done a great job of commenting I only have a few things to add from a non-Western cultural point of view.
The scene when Harry goes to meet Voldemort in the forest to allow himself to be killed reminded me of the scene in “Shogun” when Blackthorn is about to commit seppuku but is then reprieved. It is also, to some extent, reminiscent of the scene in “The Last Samurai” when Katsumoto is dying and says of the cherry blossoms that “they are all perfect.” Charles Taylor’s review of “The Sorcerer’s Stone” is spot on in regards to these stories being deeply rooted in the here and now. Just the act of breathing is a miracle that is thrown away in our daily lives until we know how few breaths are left. Harry’s recognition of this, whether Rowling knew it or not, is very Buddhist in its syncretism with East Asia.
For those who keep insisting that something “otherworldly” or “sublime” must somehow be part of this story, well, people see what they want to see unless they have learned to see what is. I truly believe that Rowling is showing how none of that is necessary in order for good and evil to exist in the world. As Dumbledore says at the end of Chamber that it is our choices that determine who we are when Harry so desperately wanted to be in house Gryffindor rather than house Slytherin. Voldemort exemplified all that is evil by killing Harry’s parents. For what?
And in the explanation of Voldemort’s life in Half-Blood Prince, we see that it was the events and circumstances of his life that created the monster he eventually became. And in Buddhist (karmic) fashion the hallmarks of house Slytherin were of a propensity to cruelty and indifference born from a wizard who thought himself superior to others. As the recipient of that legacy born from the most egregiously authoritarian circumstances of Tom Riddle’s mother and the abuse she suffered at the hands of her father…..well, one does not need Satan to explain the stupidity that humans are capable of. All that is needed, as Mencius says, is for there to be a lack of empathy and commiseration for a human to not be a human. Dr. Gilbert during the Nuremburg trials bears this out when he realizes that evil is the absence of empathy. The creature under the chair at the end of The Deathly Hallows shows precisely what a life born without the benefit of and without the capacity for love and empathy looks like.
If there is indeed a God, what people need to understand about it is that it is not the name or the book or the words that matters. What matters is whether we follow what God (if there is one) etched in our hearts about liking kindness over cruelty. The Malfoys, Narcissa particularly, makes that point very deeply at the beginning of The Half-Blood Prince when she begs Snape to save her child’s life. Bellatrix provides the counter-point to emphasize those who do not know what to truly value in the time we have been given between birth and death. The curt nod of Draco on the platform in the epilogue is the recognition that his own son would not exist had it not been for the defeat of Voldemort.
In the end, this story is in fact a morality tale stripped of unprovable dogmatic belief systems in favor or the more practical realities of living in the here and now and what we do with the time we are given. It will provide the surest method of critical judgement for a whole generation of children (and perhaps some adults) to know whether a doctrine is worthy of following or not.
Think about that the next time you vote. (My apologies. I just had to throw that in there.)
July 31st, 2007 at 12:45 pm
Wow. I am amazed at the amount of plot analysis here.
Anyway, I’m with all of you who said that the epilogue was disappointing. It was too happy too quickly, so I put it down after the first sentence and read it the next day. I was left wondering how George got on without Fred…
And having made it to the end of the comments (although I expect there are more by now), I must say that I appreciate the perspective that NeoLotus offers on a series that is, at least on the surface, thoroughly Western.
I appreciated that deities were not invoked in the struggles and perceived that the characters were acting and reacting to one another rather than some grand scheme. “The Chosen One” was a comforting notion that other characters had adopted. While his life and Voldemort’s were deeply entwined, it was due to their first encounter rather than some outside force choosing him.
July 31st, 2007 at 3:31 pm
JK Rowling is supposedly not finished – she is writing an accompanying encyclopedia (presumably akin to the appendix in the LOTRs) which, I am hoping, will answer many of the questions left unanswered in final chapter.
[That Bloom article is hilarious. I had no idea he had a gift for self-deprecating humour].
August 2nd, 2007 at 12:30 pm
I adore all the Harry Potter books, but can’t understand why. When I started book 7, just like all the others, I could not put it down.
There are loads of wonderful childrens authors, all as good as, and some much better than J.K. Rowlands, so what is the secret?
Wanting to read more of them becomes an obsession. Could it be that there is real witchcraft hidden inside the pages which mesmerise you as soon as you read the first book?
Nothing else explains the Harry Potter hysteria. It must be magic.
August 4th, 2007 at 4:33 am
Okay, I don’t get how Neville got the sward after it had been “confiscated” at the bank?!?!? If the hat gave it to him, how did the hat get it back from the Goblins?
Okay, carry on.
August 4th, 2007 at 4:55 am
Geoff: The hat is *magical*. It belonged to Gryffindor originally as well, and it has the property of being able to summon Gryffindor’s sword when any member of the house has urgent need of it. A deus ex machina, of course, but it had been established long before book 7. Harry did it in book 2 to kill the basilisk (the sword was not in the hat when the phoenix first brought it to him, if you read carefully; it appeared magically afterwards in the moment he needed it to kill the beast), and Neville does it in book 7 to kill Nagini, thereby mirroring what Harry did before and proving himself a “true Gryffindor”.
August 4th, 2007 at 7:08 am
I think I might have missed something in the book but at the end when Harry’s son is concerned about ending up in Slytherin house, Harry says something about him being called “Albus Severus” after two great headmasters of Hogwarts, one of them being in Slytherin. So how was Snape a Hogwarts headmaster? And in naming his son after Snape, has he therefore forgiven him for everything that happened in the previous books?
August 4th, 2007 at 8:10 pm
Hi Emily: Snape was made headmaster by the ministry in the process of the Death Eaters gradual takeover of the Ministry and Hogwarts. Harry found out through the pensieve that Snape had been acting as a very deep mole indeed, and had done almost everything he did at Dumbledore’s order, and for love of Harry’s mother. Besides that, Harry had gradually found out over the course of several years preceding what a jerk his dad had been to Snape when they were in school together.
August 5th, 2007 at 3:10 pm
Also, it says that Harry understood what Dumbledore saw when he looked in the Mirror of Erised, is this his family back together?
August 6th, 2007 at 12:04 am
Greatly shortened version of what I submitted earlier today which was not accepted as a comment, perhaps because I’m nerdy and verbose even by the standards of my alma mater Caltech, and have published a lot of fantasy and Svience Fiction professionally?
The main things that my JPL friends and I previously agreed we needed to know to be satisfied in hard SF/Fantasy mode that were NOT resolved in Deathly Hallows:
(1) How were house-elves enslaved, and Goblins beaten, and maybe giants?
(2) is Muggle-world OUR world or not (i.e. an alternate history world)? If so, when and how did split occur?
The best plot summary of Harry Potter 7 (snarky
version, but quite accurate, including pointing out
plot lacuna):
http://diogenes-sinope.blogspot.com/2007/07/potterdammerung-mega-spoilers.html
Okay, just before the International whatchamcallit
of 1689, when Wizards went into hiding, what
was going on in what was either the Muggle World or
the Muggle-not-yet-separated-from-Wizard world? I previously listed several Isaac Newton and King/Queen of England events from that decade, from my little Science Fiction/Fantasy/Science web domain that gets over 1.5 x 10^7 hits/year, that might be related.
We’ll see when J. K. Rowling (with whom I spoken, face-to-face) publishes the Encyclopedia of Harry Potter that she’s started. Might be a lot of backstory, in the mode of the lengthy appendices to The Lords of the Rings. Rowling is somehwere between Tolkien and Dickens, but has a better sense of humor than Tolkien.
August 6th, 2007 at 6:58 pm
My comment is to all those that are discussing which series books are better.
To me, writers such a Tolkien and Rowlings are brilliant in their own right. But to me the “bigger picture” is that these books get people to READ! In the world of computers and computer games, to see people (especially children) get as excited about Harry Potter as the newest Xbox coming out is nothing short of amazing! Not only this, but parents have also read the books. Family time is precious in todays busy world. As one man stated about his daughter, it eventually lead to them also having LOTR as a common interest.
These books get boys to read. A group that is very hard to write for from what I have heard writters say. I am in my late 30’s and have heard so many men state “Oh, I never got into reading”. My favorite was “Men don’t read. They are too busy keeping up with sports”. I feel so sorry for them. I wish everyone got the “rush” of a personal journey through reading a great story.
I love the fact that books, such a Rowlings, make the kids use their imagination and “take them to another world”. How I would have loved such a series as Harry Potter when I was a kid. I think it speaks volumes to hear of children who have “grown up” with Harry Potter. I have read that these books have inspired many kids to try things they may never have. It is not that these books have to have symbolism in religion or undertones of the story of Christ. It is the typical “good-vs-evil”, or you could say “the underdog” we so hope wins, that draws us to such characters as Frodo or Harry. We cheer on the good guy and boo when the bad guy gets a leg up. This is where we “mortals” loose ourselves in a story.
I have to confess that I have yet to read a Harry Potter book. See, I have two (soon to be three) young children and want to experience these books with them. To me this is where the “magic” lies. My kids enjoying a wonderful story and Mom getting to share the fun. I “tip my hat” to a writer that can not only bring a great story to light (as I can’t fathom how they do it) but to give such gifts as getting people interesting in reading. Knowlege is everything. Reading is the “window” to knowledge.
August 7th, 2007 at 8:06 am
What about the Molesworth canon, chaps? Hell, even the name of the place, Hogwarts, was gleaned from the annals of St. Custards. Homage or rip-off, who can tell. Like the heretic Bloom, I never got past the Philosopher’s (Sorcerer’s in the US) Stone effort, so I shouldn’t critcise too much. Perhaps the later books got better, with prose that did not limp along and plots and characterisation that were somthing more than exercises in cut and paste.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:42 am
in the goblet of fire i remember the line where there was a ‘glint of triumph’ in dumbledore’s eyes when he found out that voldemort had taken harry’s blood. Now i understand why!!
brilliant book. absolutely superb. best of the lot and wrapped up beautifully!!!
made me laugh out loud, cry my eyes out and scream in excitement at the book about a thousand times.
THE BEST BOOK I’VE EVER READ!!! (and i read a lot)
August 10th, 2007 at 8:45 am
JK Rowling is the Shakespeare of our era!!
mark my words in a few years time all schools in the UK will be teaching Harry Potter as part of the curriculum!
August 10th, 2007 at 8:58 am
hey emily,
my theory is that when dumbledore looked in the mirror of erised he saw grindlewald killing his sister ariana instead of him because you know how dumbledore doessnt know which of them it was.
August 10th, 2007 at 9:24 am
Well, Lila and Emily, consider for a moment that it is revealed in the last book that Dumbledore never took power because he was afraid of what he would do with it. So perhaps what he saw in the Mirror of Erised was not nearly so nice as either of those suggestions, but was instead his dream with Grindelwald: that he had united the three Deathly Hallows and become the ruler of wizard, witch, and muggle alike (though I’m sure he envisioned himself a benevolent ruler).
Remember, after all, Dumbledore’s astonishment that Harry’s look into the mirror was so simple as having a whole family. It seems plausible, I think, that Dumbledore was always afraid of where his most deep-seated desires would lead him, were he to give them free reign. He recognized, I think, that his desire could never be realized as he conceived it, that it would lead to much suffering and death instead. And even if he wanted power, he didn’t want that.
August 10th, 2007 at 6:15 pm
This is the first book that has really honestly excited me in so, so long, in fact I’m not sure I can think of an equal. No matter how “rough” sometimes, or those few months/years that you got kind of sick of Harry Potter and shoved him on the back burner… There’s something about actually having an “ending”, rounding it all up, that never happens in life even though it’s the one thing that should. Anyway, it touched me; saying goodbye to Harry Potter is a hell of a thing!
Although, there’s a couple of bits that I didn’t get, which is annoying. What was the baby thing at the “death” King’s Cross? That was the major one, could somebody please have a stab at explaining? The other bits I can’t remember, will think of them in time.
The thing is, it’s all very well fighting over narnia and lord of the rings etc etc, but does it really matter? Can’t it just be a book that some people loved and some people didn’t? Some writers are better at some things than others, it just goes round and round. Let Rowling have her moment.
August 10th, 2007 at 8:01 pm
Katylou, my guess as to what the baby thing was is that it was the part of Voldemort’s soul that resided in Harry, and was killed when Voldemort sent that killing curse at him.
August 11th, 2007 at 3:55 am
*sigh* All was well…
I love a happy ending. But I hate when good things have to end. At least the magic of Harry, the magical world, fierce love, friendship and all the many good qualities people need will be alive in our hearts and will never end. I’m so thankful to J.K. for the wonderful times spent reading the book. It has enriched my life and imagination, and has given me many thoughts on life and many aspects of it. Although at this moment the ending of the book and the atmosphere of it will leave me with an almost sad feeling that everything has ended ,later on I’ll always look back with a shining smile to the books series and re-read them ( with my children, wife, grandchildren, or just friends ), to enter the grand world of Harry Potter, because it will keep amusing people for generations, just like any other book, that has become a must-read classic. The most important thing is that he book has made me think about life, appreciate my loved ones, fight for my friends, make people happy.
Everything that has a beginning has and end… but not the circle. The circle of life, love. I believe that Harry Potter has sealed that circle of needed qualities for the humanity and will be used as a mean of hope and inspiration. Harry was my companion from the start of the book, when I was 11 (just like Harry). Now that I’m 18 I feel that a part of Harry will always live on with me, I’ll try through Harry to inspire people to love, and to live their lives. For what it’s worth…
August 11th, 2007 at 6:02 am
The next stage:
http://media.universalorlando.com/harrypotter/
What a shame that it is not going to be in England or Scotland.
August 14th, 2007 at 10:03 am
What was your favourite part of the book?
I think mine was either when Harry was talking to Dumbledore in the King’s Cross place or when Harry told Voldermort why Snape’s patronus was a doe.
August 19th, 2007 at 8:43 am
what happends to luna in it
August 20th, 2007 at 1:00 pm
Thanks all of you for your insightful commentary!
I loved Harry Potter 7 but I had these problems (many touched on already):
1. On finding himself free of Voldemort, Harry didn’t run to Ginny, sweep her up in his arms, and kiss and squeeze her. Didn’t he love her? wasn’t Voldemort the ONLY obstacle to their being together? I would have grabbed a broom and flown her up to the top tower for a makeout session.
2. When Voldemort died, there should have been some little introspective discourse, like, “this one evil man, the reason for all of it, the struggles, and death, and fear, lay dead, right here in the Great Hall. Harry looked down at the twisted, lifeless face, the reptilian skin stretched over that skeleton that hadn’t been human for so long. He felt the smallest bit of pity, in spite of himself, for this man who couldn’t feel love because he had never felt it, never seen its value. But most of all he felt more free than he ever had, because Lord Voldemort, You Know Who, the one who changed his whole life, was really dead, finally, and Harry would never have to chase, or fight, or run from Tom Riddle again.” Instead, Harry just walks away, ho hum, another Main Antagonist Dispatched, what’s for dinner?
3. None of the main characters deaths seemed appropriate in their contexts. Hedwig was just sitting there, caged. Moody, Tonks and Lupin die “off-camera” and Fred is just near a wall that explodes. Dobby is too magical to suffer a non-magical death by a casually thrown knife; his death plays like an afterthought that is only in the book to jerk tears gratuitously.
4. NOWHERE NEAR enough flying. Didn’t Harry say, repeatedly, that he hates Apparition? Wasn’t he the best flyer at Hogwarts? In a single page or two, Rowling has him lose his broom and his owl, and that seems more like cheap plot contrivance than any real contribution to the story’s narrative or emotional flow. Afterward, no owls are used, and no brooms, either, except for the brief escape from the burning Room of Requirement. I think at least there would be flying warriors in the Battle of Hogwarts. Fred and George were good at Quidditch; surely they would be able to summon their brooms again, and Harry too, since it worked against the dragon in GOF?
5. Why wasn’t Harry raising Teddy Tonks? He was made his godfather right at his birth, and when his parents died, that would make him the default dad, right?
6. The book didn’t wrap up the rest of the story properly. What happened at the Ministry of Magic, namely, how did they get rid of Umbridge? And did she finally, FINALLY get her comeuppance for being so evil and delighting in others’ suffering?
7. My biggest problem of all: Neville Longbottom didn’t kill Bellatrix, or even punch her in the mouth. To me, as surely as Harry’s destiny was to finish Voldy, so Neville’s was to avenge Bellatrix’s torturing his parents into madness. If he wasn’t going to kill her, he should have at least been more instrumental in her undoing.
Thanks for reading this and for all your amazing comments! Long live Harry, Hedwig, Hogwarts and Mad-Eye Moody!
August 21st, 2007 at 3:43 pm
John Nations – Re your point #7: Actually, none of the kids (Harry, Ron, Hermione, Luna, Neville, Ginny, or Draco, for instance) ever kills anyone in any of the seven volumes). Voldemort killed himself.
August 25th, 2007 at 1:24 pm
I just finished reading the last Harry Potter book. Over the last five years, I’ve read all of them aloud to my wife and daughter (who is now ten years old). They’ve given us all a huge amount of pleasure—thank you very much, Ms Rowling. Anyway, here are my thoughts on the series:
Essentially the saga breaks down into two parts: the first three are essentially children’s books; the last four are the Potter epic. I think Rowling’s great idea is the attempt to follow a central character year by year through the steps of his maturation from child to adult, and to write those books so that they accompany her readers—at least many of her original readers—through the same process. It’s a wonderful gift for a writer to have given a generation. Obviously, the last ten years have seen Rowling go from an obscure nobody to one of the most wealthy and successful women on the planet. I think she should be credited with having kept faith with her readers all the way through that process.
The first three books are very entertaining and successful. Hogwarts is a great place to go, full of wonder and mystery and just the right amount of danger. Rowling has a really great gift for comic dialog that makes it a pleasure to participate in the Harry-Hermione-Ron relationship. As I detail below, I think that the last four books in the series are really flawed, but if there was an eighth, I’d read it happily, because Rowling has succeeded so well in making me care about those core characters—love them and think about them as real people. Obviously, that’s a great thing for a writer to have accomplished.
I think that the transition between the children’s books and the epic books is poorly handled. Goblet of Fire is the transition book with its long account of the Tri-wizard Tournament being our last taste of simply escapist daily life at Hogwarts. That book is followed by Order of the Phoenix which seems to me the weakest book of the series. The “climax” of the book is the revelation of the prophecy that merely tells us something we all know anyway: that Voldemort and Harry are destined enemies only one of whom can survive. The attempt to complicate this non-revelation with some ambiguity centered on Neville Longbottom is pathetic, and Rowling seems to pretty much drop it in the final books.
It seems to me that it would have been desirable to combine the main events of books four and five into a single book. The Potter epic half of the series has three great moments: Voldemort’s return, Dumbledore’s death, and Voldemort’s defeat. Combining books four and five would have tightened that story arc and created a nice three and three balance between children’s books and epic books.
The series rebounds a bit with book six, but even so, I don’t think the Potter epic is nearly as good as the first part of the series. I would site two main reasons:
First, as the series expands Rowling has to leave the clearly defined confines of Hogwarts School and paint an ever more ambitious portrait of the wizarding world as a society. She never really succeeds in making that portrait believable. We’re led to believe that this world is wracked by something like civil war, but all of the conflicts in the book remain purely man to man. It’s simply Dumbledore versus Voldemort or Harry versus Voldemort. In the final analysis, the Ministry of Magic, the Order of the Phoenix, and the Death Eaters as a group do nothing except provide background noise to the really significant and all deciding acts of individual combat. That seems to be Rowling’s sense of how the world works—she even hints, I believe, that the Second World War, properly understood, was just background noise to the confrontation between Dumbledore and Grindelwald.
Notice how the head of the Ministry of Magic is always afraid not of Voldemort but of Dumbledore—that he will simply decide to take it over. If we think in the books’ own terms, the Ministry seems right to be afraid. The wizarding world seems to work like a pack of dogs, run by the strongest animal. In human terms, they’ve barely emerged from Hobbes’ state of nature, and all forms of communal authority are tenuous. This situation itself might be interesting if the books reflected on it, but they don’t. Rather it seems that Rowling’s imagination, so wonderfully fertile on the level of detail, has simply failed on the higher level of social abstraction.
Other symptoms of this failure include the annoying non sequiturs and ambiguities of wizard society. Does it make sense that Wizard political units seem to simply mirror their muggle counterparts? I mean, is there a Spanish Ministry of Magic, and do Basque wizards feel oppressed by it? Why does the Hogwart’s calendar include both Christmas and Easter holidays? Are Wizard’s Christian? And if they are, shouldn’t that be evident in some of Dumbledore’s endless talk about love and the soul? Judging from the books, these questions don’t seem to have even occurred to Rowling, and I think she must have a pretty limited conception of how something as complex as a society works. Like a lot of people, I imagine that she assumes that many social arrangements are simply natural, when a little thought shows that they are not natural at all.
There’s a real contrast here between the Harry Potter series and the Lord of the Rings. I’ll admit up front that I really love Tolkien, who of course provided me with my own Harry Potter like reading experience when I was much younger. In Tolkien, of course, everything is obsessively thought out. More importantly, in the Lord of the Rings, the actions of large communities do have important consequences. If the Ents don’t rise against Saruman, the Rohirrim will be defeated or delayed, and if the Rohirrim don’t come to Gondor’s aide, Frodo will either fail or be too late to do much good. To be sure, Tolkien presents us with noble characters who make a difference, but their destinies are believably dependent upon larger social forces that they cannot hope to completely control. Rowling seems to feel that individuals are completely free to forge their own destinies—a belief shared only by Americans and the other eternally immature people.
The second important weakness of the Potter epic is Voldemort; he’s a bad villain. He’s too simply and obviously evil in a scenery chewing, mustache twirling manner. Why would anyone follow a leader who is so manifestly cruel to and uncaring about his subordinates? The answer is supposed to be that all the Death Eaters want immortality. But Voldemort’s only gesture toward immortality is the horcrux gimmick, and it doesn’t appear that any of his supposed followers have tried to emulate it. Furthermore, it’s not clear how Voldemort’s desire for immortality is furthered by his plans for conquest. Quite the opposite actually—the plans for conquest make a significant number of people intent on destroying him. The horcrux thing might actually work if he just kept a lower profile! And what are those plans for conquest anyway? Despite the fact that his people have supposedly taken over the central institutions (such as they are) of the wizarding world, Voldemort seems very little interested in consolidating or furthering his gains. All he’s interested in doing is finding Potter; it’s the man versus man thing again. Voldemort is simply too obviously a mere foil for the hero rather than a force in his own right.
Finally, of course, Voldemort’s simply not very bright. Dumbledore is a really successful character—morally complex, suffering from pain and regret, always trying to balance the present moment’s need for human decency with the complex demands of future, general good. In some ways the Potter epic should be a chess match between Dumbledore and Voldemort, but the latter is not a worthy opponent. There are stunning gaps in Voldemort’s knowledge, and Dumbledore is always several steps ahead of him. As I’ve said above, in the final analysis Voldemort is bad in the same way that a big mean dog is bad, and the wizards are just lucky that there’s a bigger, nice dog to put him in his place.
Once more, with regard to the villain issue, there’s an instructive comparison with Tolkien. An effective aspect of the Lord of the Rings is that the high level villainy is split between Sauron and Saruman. Sauron is the big, abstract principle of evil, and he doesn’t need to do much other than exist. Saruman, on the other hand, is the active principle of evil and is allowed to be a bit more complex. Indeed, Saruman, in his descent from one of the “great and wise” to being just a petty thug, is one of the best things in the book, showing how ambition, envy, and despair lead to human evil. Along with Dumbledore, Snape is one of Rowling’s best creations, and like most readers I was happy that the final book brought him in on the side of the righteous. I wonder, however, if it wouldn’t have been a better choice for Rowling to have made Snape her Sauraman.
Bitch, bitch, bitch . . . that’s all I seem to be doing. The fact of the matter is that my voice broke as I read the final pages to my wife and daughter. Not because of what was happening in the book, but because we were reaching the end of such a long and enjoyable experience—a real life experience. Like I said, if there was an eighth book, I’d read it. But I know that the first three are the only one’s I’ll ever consider re-reading.