Harry Potter 7 Discussion!! (WARNING - SPOILERS)

[MSTJedi]

Okay, finished the book last night . . . or this morning, actually (around 6am). Had to wait for my wife to read it first since she's the one who got the book. First off, loved it. It was a little hard to get into it at first, though. Not because of the story itself, but because of the distractions of being a husband and father. So last night I decided to stay up and finish it off after everyone was asleep. Glad I did. Made the book much more enjoyable.

I was happy to see that some of my predictions turned out true. The biggest one being that Snape was under Dumbledore's orders to kill him. Definitely brought out a new side to the character of Snape to know that he had been in love with Lily.

I have to admit that most of the deaths in the book I didn't see coming. I was hoping Harry wouldn't die, but I was prepared for it. I think the deaths that really got to me the most were Lupin and Tonks. Fred's death was really sad and so were Hedwig's and Dobby's (poor little elf), but maybe Mooney and Dora's death hit me a little harder because they had just had a child.

The only thing that confused me was the true owner of the Deathstick being Draco. Maybe I should've just reread the paragraph a time or two more and I'd have gotten it. At the time I was a little too apprehensive to find out what was going to happen to spend time figuring it out.

I was interested to see that Rowling included a couple of Biblical quotes. I recognized "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also," straight off, but it didn't occur to me that "The last enemy to be destroyed shall be death," was also a Biblical passage. Guess I shouldn't be too surprised since Rowling was pretty all-encompassing in her mythological(/ theological) influences.

[Chaos]

The only thing that confused me...

Yeah, that was a little complex, mostly because it involved specific events from the previous book. The reason the Elder Wand "belonged" to Draco is because Draco disarmed Dumbledore on top of the tower in book 6, thus "defeating" him, so the Elder Wand recognized Draco as its new owner even though Draco never actually retrieved or touched the wand... that's how wandlore works as Rowling described it throughout Deathly Hallows. So when Harry overpowered Draco (again, "defeated" him) and took his regular wand, the Elder Wand ALSO recognized Harry as its new owner, again even though Harry had never touched it at that point.

That was one of the liittle points of the book that I liked the best - again, because Voldemort's inability to understand how something worked, because he thought it was beneath him, and that disdain on his part is what ultimately cost him everything.

[MSTJedi]

The only thing that confused me...

Yeah, that was a little complex, mostly because it involved specific events from the previous book. The reason the Elder Wand "belonged" to Draco is because Draco disarmed Dumbledore on top of the tower in book 6, thus "defeating" him, so the Elder Wand recognized Draco as its new owner even though Draco never actually retrieved or touched the wand... that's how wandlore works as Rowling described it throughout Deathly Hallows. So when Harry overpowered Draco (again, "defeated" him) and took his regular wand, the Elder Wand ALSO recognized Harry as its new owner, again even though Harry had never touched it at that point.

That was one of the liittle points of the book that I liked the best - again, because Voldemort's inability to understand how something worked, because he thought it was beneath him, and that disdain on his part is what ultimately cost him everything.

Funny enough, I actually figured it out by reading the synopsis on the Wikipedia entry. Who says that site isn't good for anything?

[DrForester]

Okay, finished the book last night . . . or this morning, actually (around 6am). Had to wait for my wife to read it first since she's the one who got the book. First off, loved it. It was a little hard to get into it at first, though. Not because of the story itself, but because of the distractions of being a husband and father. So last night I decided to stay up and finish it off after everyone was asleep. Glad I did. Made the book much more enjoyable.

I was happy to see that some of my predictions turned out true. The biggest one being that Snape was under Dumbledore's orders to kill him. Definitely brought out a new side to the character of Snape to know that he had been in love with Lily.

I have to admit that most of the deaths in the book I didn't see coming. I was hoping Harry wouldn't die, but I was prepared for it. I think the deaths that really got to me the most were Lupin and Tonks. Fred's death was really sad and so were Hedwig's and Dobby's (poor little elf), but maybe Mooney and Dora's death hit me a little harder because they had just had a child.

The only thing that confused me was the true owner of the Deathstick being Draco. Maybe I should've just reread the paragraph a time or two more and I'd have gotten it. At the time I was a little too apprehensive to find out what was going to happen to spend time figuring it out.

I was interested to see that Rowling included a couple of Biblical quotes. I recognized "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also," straight off, but it didn't occur to me that "The last enemy to be destroyed shall be death," was also a Biblical passage. Guess I shouldn't be too surprised since Rowling was pretty all-encompassing in her mythological(/ theological) influences.

I kind of figured Lupin would die.  It was pretty obvious that Wormtail would die, and to have 1 surviving member of that old group woudl have seemed odd to me.  James, Sirius, Lupin, Peter.. They all had to die I think.

[Chaos]

Okay, finished the book last night . . . or this morning, actually (around 6am). Had to wait for my wife to read it first since she's the one who got the book. First off, loved it. It was a little hard to get into it at first, though. Not because of the story itself, but because of the distractions of being a husband and father. So last night I decided to stay up and finish it off after everyone was asleep. Glad I did. Made the book much more enjoyable.

I was happy to see that some of my predictions turned out true. The biggest one being that Snape was under Dumbledore's orders to kill him. Definitely brought out a new side to the character of Snape to know that he had been in love with Lily.

I have to admit that most of the deaths in the book I didn't see coming. I was hoping Harry wouldn't die, but I was prepared for it. I think the deaths that really got to me the most were Lupin and Tonks. Fred's death was really sad and so were Hedwig's and Dobby's (poor little elf), but maybe Mooney and Dora's death hit me a little harder because they had just had a child.

The only thing that confused me was the true owner of the Deathstick being Draco. Maybe I should've just reread the paragraph a time or two more and I'd have gotten it. At the time I was a little too apprehensive to find out what was going to happen to spend time figuring it out.

I was interested to see that Rowling included a couple of Biblical quotes. I recognized "Where your treasure is, there your heart shall be also," straight off, but it didn't occur to me that "The last enemy to be destroyed shall be death," was also a Biblical passage. Guess I shouldn't be too surprised since Rowling was pretty all-encompassing in her mythological(/ theological) influences.

I kind of figured Lupin would die.  It was pretty obvious that Wormtail would die, and to have 1 surviving member of that old group woudl have seemed odd to me.  James, Sirius, Lupin, Peter.. They all had to die I think.

My wife said the exact same thing, and I pretty much agree.

Also, it makes dramatic sense for both Lupin and Tonks to die, because it draws some very deep parallels for Harry to have his godson an orphan just like he was. A little predictable, maybe, but still a nice dramatic tie-up for that part of the story.

[sarcasm_made_Easy]

i was surprised actually.  I figured you needed one person to have survivor guilt and that someone i thought was lupin.  also i was shocked by the twins death.

[msmpls]

Does Harry Potter die?
(I never read any of the books, never seen the movies, really don't care about the franchise, I just want to know if he kicks the bucket or not)

[Tripe]

Nope

[msmpls]

and the franchise lives on!

[Tripe]

I hope to God not, though judging by the end there's certainly leeway.

Actually I heard Joanne's writing a detective novel next.

[Fuzzy Necromancer]

I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the one most pressing on my mind is

What's with all the unforgivable curses?! o_O

Seriously, our brave hero goes around using Imperious and Cruciartis on random goblins and deatheaters? Griphook actually orders harry to use Imperious on his fellow working stiff. McGonnagle uses an unforgivable curse to, and all of this when, for disabling purposes, stuff like petrificus totalus or encarcerus work just as well, if not better than the torture curse, and there's little an Imperioused individual will do that you can't accomplish in the short term with memory modification or confundus. I find this very hard to take, especially considering the utterly offhand and dismissive way in which the unforgivable curses are used. There's no drama, no heart-stopping shock from those around him, no sense of morals betrayed or disillusionment. The two most potent and inhumane spells in all of Rowling-recorded thaumaturgy are hurled about by beloved characters the way monkeys fling crap. It's just plain out of character.

Very disatsifying. =/

[headlesschocolatebunny]

I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the one most pressing on my mind is

What's with all the unforgivable curses?! o_O

Seriously, our brave hero goes around using Imperious and Cruciartis on random goblins and deatheaters? Griphook actually orders harry to use Imperious on his fellow working stiff. McGonnagle uses an unforgivable curse to, and all of this when, for disabling purposes, stuff like petrificus totalus or encarcerus work just as well, if not better than the torture curse, and there's little an Imperioused individual will do that you can't accomplish in the short term with memory modification or confundus. I find this very hard to take, especially considering the utterly offhand and dismissive way in which the unforgivable curses are used. There's no drama, no heart-stopping shock from those around him, no sense of morals betrayed or disillusionment. The two most potent and inhumane spells in all of Rowling-recorded thaumaturgy are hurled about by beloved characters the way monkeys fling crap. It's just plain out of character.



Very disatsifying. =/

I completely agree w/ you! plus there was so much death that by the time Lupin dies it is mentioned as an off handed comment! I had to re-read atleast 4 times for it to really sink in. I thought that was heartless!

[Fortis]

I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the one most pressing on my mind is

What's with all the unforgivable curses?! o_O

Seriously, our brave hero goes around using Imperious and Cruciartis on random goblins and deatheaters? Griphook actually orders harry to use Imperious on his fellow working stiff. McGonnagle uses an unforgivable curse to, and all of this when, for disabling purposes, stuff like petrificus totalus or encarcerus work just as well, if not better than the torture curse, and there's little an Imperioused individual will do that you can't accomplish in the short term with memory modification or confundus. I find this very hard to take, especially considering the utterly offhand and dismissive way in which the unforgivable curses are used. There's no drama, no heart-stopping shock from those around him, no sense of morals betrayed or disillusionment. The two most potent and inhumane spells in all of Rowling-recorded thaumaturgy are hurled about by beloved characters the way monkeys fling crap. It's just plain out of character.

Very disatsifying. =/

There is a way things have to be done in writing stories, stories differ from reality, the heroes have to dabble in illegal things. The heroes have to do everything and anything they can to stop the bad guys. If the heroes had an easy time of it without moral dilemma's, than the villain is obviously not scary/cool enough. Trust me, its good for characters to have this happen. And there were moral dilemma's to it, JK rowling just left us to deal with them, if she showed the repercussions it would slow down the pacing, because they aren't needed. Especially since this isn't the first time we have seen our heroes use them.

If you were on that cart, going into Gringotts and you knew that the only way you could find the thing you need to bring down the bad guy, was to take control of another person, would you do anything different? Would you say to the Goblin...hi, I need to break into somebody's vault, but no, I"m not stealing money, I'm stealing something from you know freakin who, but if I destroy it, it could potentially kill him..." You think he is going to let you? Even if he did, all those freaking death eaters had to do then was torture the goblin into telling them that he helped them. But by you casting that horrible spell on him, you get the thing and help destroy moldymort.

Well then...that is why she used them, sure they are horrible, they are illegal...I mean torture, loss of free will, and murder...I agree that those are prisonable offences...But sometimes the hero has to take matters into his own hand. (I'm still talking about harry potter)

I have a lot of thoughts about this, but the one most pressing on my mind is

What's with all the unforgivable curses?! o_O

Seriously, our brave hero goes around using Imperious and Cruciartis on random goblins and deatheaters? Griphook actually orders harry to use Imperious on his fellow working stiff. McGonnagle uses an unforgivable curse to, and all of this when, for disabling purposes, stuff like petrificus totalus or encarcerus work just as well, if not better than the torture curse, and there's little an Imperioused individual will do that you can't accomplish in the short term with memory modification or confundus. I find this very hard to take, especially considering the utterly offhand and dismissive way in which the unforgivable curses are used. There's no drama, no heart-stopping shock from those around him, no sense of morals betrayed or disillusionment. The two most potent and inhumane spells in all of Rowling-recorded thaumaturgy are hurled about by beloved characters the way monkeys fling crap. It's just plain out of character.

Very disatsifying. =/

I completely agree w/ you! plus there was so much death that by the time Lupin dies it is mentioned as an off handed comment! I had to re-read atleast 4 times for it to really sink in. I thought that was heartless!

Lupin's death wasn't an off hand comment, she used that part to shock people...as you obviously were. Those types of deaths create atmosphere, and pacing. If you are in a battle scene with dozens of characters you care about, the best thing the author can do is cause shock to readers by some people's sudden unexpected deaths. If JK Rowling had spent a lot of time on each characters death, the last chapter would be slow, with exposition interrupting action and emotion. Sure it can be dissatisfiying, but I fail to see how an author could have handled it better than her and still have the heart racing non stop action throughout that she was able to achieve. she handled it beautifully.

[Tripe]

A problem I have with the books is that they become increasingly cruel. Not within the narrative per se, because it can be argued that hey the world is facing a great evil and thus tit seems darker. No, the general thrust of the books just becomes crueler and even the "good" characters become nasty pieces of work.

The death of the fox at the beginning of the fifth book really solidified my distaste for them.

And everythings so bleeding one dimensional.

[Fortis]

I dunno. I don't think she knows how to write a death; every one of her "deaths" was really, really anticlimactic.  And yeah, some smartass, glib responder will say "well that's how death is in real life--"  Well, firstly I don't agree, but it's possible to argue that way--but more importantly, it's just bad storytelling. 

All her deaths just seem like...wait, what the fuck just happened?

I dunno. She's got a good sense of creating a world, and she draws you in, but she's not a prose stylist or a master of exposition. I think Fortis gives her far too much credit.

I will give you that her deaths are kind of "holy crap" moments when they don't have to be, especially during books 1 - 6. Book 7 I think it is handled well, because deaths like that need to happen during scenes of battle. But you have to cut her a little slack, she is a novice writer who suddenly got thrown into this pit of success with bajillions of fans to make happy.

She is by far not my favorite author at all, the best way she can think up making names for things is to look in a Latin dictionary. Her books can drag from the beginning till the end, and it seems to me that she had mixed feelings between what kind of character she wanted to make Harry, so he becomes this character that is hard to relate to.

I to, can see the weaknesses of the Harry Potter books, but, I still think the seventh book was written very well, the seventh book was where all of her writing strengths are finally able to overshadow her weaknesses. You have to give her this though, she is a master at foreshadowing, even if not with prose or narrative.