Timewaster's Guide Archive
Departments => Books => Topic started by: House of Mustard on June 26, 2003, 01:16:19 PM
-
Okay, I finished it. All 255,000 words - longer than the New Testament (and when was the last time I read the New Testament in three days?)
1) Why does Voldemort always make his final move in June? (other than the reason that June is always the end of the book.)
2) I was a little dissapointed. Rowling leaked out that Harry will find love and that a major character would die. Unfortunately, he doesn't find love (his entire relationship consist of one kiss and two arguments).
Also, it was dumb that Sirius was the death. At that point in the book, I really wasn't terribly concerned about him (he wasn't that sympathetic of a character) and I was mad that it wasn't one of the principle characters.
3) Umbridge reminds me of my boss.
Why was she allowed to run away? She not only admitted to sicking the Dementors on Harry, but she used the illegal Cruciatus curse.
4) Why does Harry never tell anyone anything? I'm sure that the Order of the Phoenix would be interested in knowing Voldemort's thoughts and mood.
-
It was a good book, but not as good as #1 or #4. It was kind of like #2. I was bothered by the fact that nothing important really happened--the book generally produced its own conflicts, then resolved them, placing the characters back where they were at the end of the last book. In example:
At the end of the last book, Voldemort's return is announced. Then, at the beginning of this book, that is called into question. The main conflict of the book was proving what we assumed had been proven at the end of #4.
At the end of the book, Harry's 'love' life is in the same, semi-questionable position as it had been at the end of #4.
We found out about the 'prophesy' that Harry was to defeat Voldemort. This is a conflictless revelation since it's pretty much what every reader has assumed since book one.
Sirius did die. That, at least, was something of a surprise. However, it was a 'oo, is he really dead?' death. I didn't think he was as unsympathetic as you did--he was a nice character. In addition, he was probably as 'main' a character as could be killed in book #5 with the exception, perhaps, of Dumbledore. If we're going to lose one of the trio--and I doubt we will--it would have to be in book seven, maybe six.
As for your point #4, I wasn't bothered that Harry didn't tell anyone anything. He was a sullen, grumpy teenage boy. However, I am bothered that the other characters still have this air of 'lets seclude Harry from the truth.' Very bothersome. You're fighting the Dark Lord; you want any edge you can get. Harry's a pretty big edge. But, Dumbledore's explanation at the end was passable, if not excellent.
-
Yeah, can't reckon on why Umbridge got away. She abused MoM priveleges, and that's NOT counting giving someone a bad grade for no reason. I was kinda hoping though, that the Fudge, or at LEAST Umbridge was a death eater.
And yeah, at least Dubledore doesn't suffer from an Allanon complex. I was getting frustrated with the fact that Harry doesn't get told anything, but she addressed that. But I agree with EUOL that he has the character not to tell anyone. He needs to straighten that up.
Which is my real problem. Harry doesn't learn anything. He's a jerk at the beginning (maybe with good reason, but probably most because of hormones) and he's a jerk at the end. I wanted him to learn that he needs to control his anger or at least start telling people things.
I also wanted him to say something to Snape like "No wonder you hate me." Which might have been enough to straighten out their relationship, or at least made Harry more sympathetic. But then I guess that It wouldn't be a Harry Potter book without a mean Snape. And, as EUOL said, he's a teenager, and isn't necessarily going to think of doing something like that. I liked how that revelation gave us a less flatly heroic image of Harry's parents. They're good guys, but they have their hang ups too.
One other thing, why didn't they (or at least Hermione, who definitely has the sense for this) tell Neville how they don't think he's a dork for having insane parents. After all, his parents ARE heroes, almost like the Potters were. Neville WAS almost Harry Potter. But everyone avoids it like they're talking about dirty underwear.
Finally, why didn't Rowling develop the whole anger/unity thing? She makes a big deal early about how uniting the houses will give them greater power, and Hermione seems to understand, but they don't ever DO anything about it. Maybe that will develop more in 6 and 7, giving 5 less of an insular plot as EUOL points out.
Now, I did enjoy it, just wanted to get that rant out.
-
Speaking of the romantic aspect, I was surprised about Ron and Hermione. In #4, there were lots of reference and inferences that something might be in the works, but #5 completely ignored it (unless the fact that Ron and Hermione can't talk to each other without arguing can replace a real relationship).
-
Yeah, I think we're supposed to take the fractiousness as a sign of young love. Though it would have worked better if Rowling had pursued her theme of unity/division that she tried to bring up.
-
Well, I just finished reading the book today.
I'm not really bothered that so many people avoid Neville's parents and that Neville doesn't tell anyone about them. Neville gets picked on enough. Even if his parents are heroes, that hasn't stopped kids from picking on Harry, but Harry has the fortune of his parents being dead. Having insane parents would just make things worse for a kid. It's not like any of the school kids no why Neville parents are heroes.
I guess going along with the unity/division thing, I'm waiting for there to be a Slytherin member, other than Snape, who isn't evil or a jerk.
-
Just a few thoughts:
I really liked that in this book Harryfinally got to act like a real teenager, sullen attitude, mood swings, and all.
The whole sub-plot about Hagrid's brother was nothing but filler. And pretty bad filler, at that.
I was really ticked off that a 'major' character didn't die. I never really cared much for Sirius, and a MAJOR character should be one that has been in all five books. I really thought McGonnagal was going to snuff it.
If Neville would have been the Chosen One instead of Harry, the series might well have ended before the conclusion of the first book.
I feel bad for Snape, but I find it hard to believe that that was his WORST memory.
Yes, it WOULD be cool to have a Slytherin with some redeeming characteristics. I have a feeling that Draco is going to become, if not a bona-fide good guy, then at least an interesting anti-hero.
I liked that Mad-Eye returned, and I kinda like Tonks as well. After JK ends the Harry Potter series, I'd really like a stand-alone book dedicated to the Aurors, possibly a bit darker and more dangerous than the Hogwarts world.
For the first time in the series, I actually got a feel that there was an entire magical world living side-by-side with the muggle world, not just a big fancy school in the middle of nowhere. We get to see that wizards come from all walks of life: aristocrats, batty old ladies, punks, and even two-bit criminals.
And was it just me, or did Kreature seem to be a bit too much like a character from ANOTHER well-known fantasy series?
-
Oh, and I don't know if I mentioned it or not, but I'm getting very tired of Neville playing comic-relief at very inapropriate times, such as at the climax of this book.
I do, however, have a positive comment. Why the heck are these books so engaging? As a writer, I'm curious at what it is that these books do that others can't manage. Despite the fact that some of the sucess is, undoubtedly, hype, the books really are engaging.
-
Just finished it (seriously--like five minutes ago). I can't remember what order your comments were made in, so I'll address them (and my own) in the order I think of them.
1) Umbridge didn't actually get off a cruciatus curse, but she did admit to attacking Harry with Dementors and that, at the very least should have gotten her thrown into Azkaban. It was very odd that Rowling seemed to forget this, as she's usually very tightly structured. On the subject of Umbridge and Fudge, however, I'd like to point out that I'm very glad they turned out to not be Death Eaters--it was refreshing to see another side of the war instead of just the good/evil dichotomy. The MoM was a very satisfying villain with a different set of priorities and methods than the other villains we've seen.
2) Sirius dying was kind of cheap, but kind of important, I guess. He's certainly not a major character (for the first 400 pages I was certain Dumbledore would be the one), and I think a lot of the sympathy we're supposed to feel for him was forced on un via Harry--I never felt connected to him, so I was supposed to feel bad because Harry was connected to him. Maybe that's just me, though. In the end, I think it's important for the direction of Harry's character that he doesn't have the father figure to help stabilize him.
3) The characters were so accurately adolescent that it was sometimes painful to read. I wanted to shout at the book sometimes because the characters were so sullen, or so hot-headed, or so bipolar, but I had to remind myself that that's exactly what 15-year-olds are like. The only character I thought was undeveloped and false was Cho--I was actually convinced that she was a metamorphmagus in disguise, trying to spy on Harry, but after their second break-up I dropped that idea. In the end she turned out to just be an over-emotional teenage girl, which helped me accept the character somewhat. As Lupin put it, "everyone's a jerk when they're 15," so the fact that Harry didn't learn anything or talk to anyone or resolve his conflict with Snape was fine with me.
4) Speaking of Snape, I can't tell you how glad I am that he continues to be a fascinating and complex character, both noble and petty. I have an unexplainable attachment to him, and I root for him in every book. I do wish we'd gotten to see a little more of his undercover work, though. And yes, I'm sure that wasn't his worst memory.
5) I agree with EUOL--the "startling revelation" about Harry's scar was a huge letdown. Tell us something we don't know, Rowling. The meaning behind their relationship is so obvious I actually thought they'd already explained it.
6) While I continue to say that the second book is the worst (I actively disliked it, whereas I've enjoyed all the others), I have to agree that this one was a little weak and showed some poor writing. The book was an endless cycle of "something happens, we reflect on it," over and over, as dozens of tiny one-shot conflicts pop up and get smacked down a few pages later. This was also the first book without a twist ending (one of the reasons I kept suspecting Cho--I tell you, the concept of the metamorphmagus was a gun on the mantle that bothered for all 870 pages), though in some ways I was glad, because I'm really get sick of twist endings in modern media.
7) Stuff like Grawp (and, I suppose, the metamorphmagi) was obviously put there as hints and set-ups for future books. I have to say that I'm really intrigued by the steadily growing themes of racial equality, and I'm dying to see how she wraps it up.
8) The romantic tension between Ron and Hermione was only addressed once, when she kissed himon the cheek, and I was really bummed to see Rowling ignore it. Of course, both of their characters kind of got neglected this time around, so I guess that explains it.
-
Hm, I should have anticipated that my 8th point would turn into a smiley. Oh well.
In answer to EUOL's question: "Why are the books so engaging?" My best answer right now is that we're invested in the characters and the world--as weak as I think the book's structure was, I can't deny that I was completely captivated waiting to find out what the characters would do and say. Neville is such a throw-away character, but he's one that I've read about for four books so I was really pleased to see him do so much in this one. Obviously, though, that can't be the only reason or I wouldn't have taken the time to invest in the characters at all.
One thing the books do that intrigue me, as a writer, is the transfer of the traditional fantasy quest into the modern world. The warrior of prophecy and the rise of the dark lord are all very old fantasy cliches, but I've never seen it done in a modern world with laws and policemen and newspapers. A villain like the MoM couldn't exist in a normal fantasy book, and Frodo could never defeat Sauron by giving an exclusive interview to a tabloid. It's a very clever blend and she does it very well.
What it all comes down to, I think, is that Rowling writes about interesting characters. We love the good guys and we hate the bad guys. She sets up a thoroughly horrible villain like Umbridge, gives us every reason to hate her, and then gives us the satisfaction of watching Fred and George lead the whole school in a revolt as she slowly loses her grip. She lets us watch Ron fail at Quidditch time after time, and then lets us watch him win. These are strongly drawn characters who produce real emotion in us--be they positive or negative--and they have strong, satisfying conclusions that provide emotional catharsis. The fact that we can predict a lot of these conclusions actually hightens the effect by increasing our anticipation and thus increasing the payoff when it actually happens. She keeps the tension alive by occasionally throwing in a twist we didn't expect (though not in this book, obviously).
-
You know, I think it is the endless cycle of little short events that makes the books so engaging. Every chapter has a sort of an individual rising action and climax without being a complete short story. This actually make a lot of sense because in reality things don't happen in a linear fashion. And some aspects of our lives go ignored.
Also, I noticed how much of this book is written for young adults. Remember that Rawlings couldn't care less about how many adults read this book. So there is writing geared towards young adults who a) remember details better than adults, b) look for clear good versus evil story-lines, c) take things in chunks rather than wholes, d) read slower and more carefully, e) are more empathetic, f) have more trust in the author.
Also, it doesn't surpirse me at all that Umbridge doesn't go to Azkaban. She was insane at the end of the book. There is nothing in the books to suggest that they send insane criminals to Azkaban. Umbridge is probably headed to St. Mungos. I assumed the fate of Umbridge is being left to the next book or is simply unimportant.
-
Jeff, I'm going to disagree with most of what you jsut said there. I don't think that Rowling doesn't care about the number of adults who read her. Every book she sells is money in her pocket, whether it came from a 14 year old or a 34 year old. I also don't think think that younger people necessarily remember detail better or read slower than adults.
And sure they send insane criminals to Azkaban. They're not worried about them going insane once they're there, so why should they care if they're insane before hand? Besides, if she's insane, it's even MORE irresponsible to leave her out on the loose. They just let her off scott free. That's sloppy writing and government.
and on other people's comments: sorry, I can agree more that Snape's worst memories are being tormented in front of everyone in the world that he knows. If you've been through it, you know what I mean. My worst memory ever is getting beat up by a kid a year younger than me in middle school. That stuff is scarring. When you're older you know how to deal with it, but when you're a teen, it often just stays with you, even after you learn how to deal with it. what can you imagine that might be worse in Snape's life?
other random comments:
I think Harry should fall in love with Tonk. That would rule. She's who I'd date.
The problem with ignoring Neville's parents is that not only does harry know, but so do Ron and Hermione, and Neville knows they know. Time to get it in the open, for better or for worse, especially now that Neville is a trusted ally, so everyone knows who cares about what. I don't think Neville detracted from the final scene. Yeah, he's bumbling, but he also did a lot of good and shows that he has the stuff. If he was the "chosen one" he could have been even greater. Remember that it is the opposition that WWMNBN set up that gives Harry his role.
-
I'm pretty sure they don't send the insane to Azkhaban. Look at Gilderoy. He tried to do some nasty stuff, but when he lost his memory he ended up at St. Mungo's rather than being incarcerated.
I was never bullied as a kid; actually I was on the other side of the equasion (but everybody is a jerk at 15, as Sirius would say), but what with all that Snape went through when he had to flee Voldemort's wrath after leaving the Death Eaters..... Well, I'm sure that HAD to be a tad worse than getting picked on as a kid.
And Harry can't get together with Tonks: she is probably close to twice his age. She would be sent up the river if she eventhought about it. Besides, Harry is saving himself for Britney Spears.
I get the feeling that Voldemort will be defeated once and for all only after somebody (one would assume Harry) unites all four houses of Hogwart's in the final book.
-
Am I the only person that remembers that Snape placed more than one memory in the memory thingy whose name I can't remember. Harry saw one of Snape's worse memories, not his worse memory over all.
Also, Umbridge going to to Saint Mungos is about as good as going to Azkaban. All mental wards are locked down as tight as any prison, well St. Mungos seemed actually quite lax. I was surprised that Harry, Ron and Hermione were allowed in, mental hospitals don't normally do those sort of things. Course, I guess that's just another reason for that nurse to get fired.
Also, in the interview I saw of Rawling, she stated specificly that she didn't care about the opinions of adults reading her books. She also has repeatedly said that the money she has earned from the books have caused her more problems in her life than she cares to admit.
-
Rowling can say whatever she darn well pleases in an interview, but that doesn't mean it's believable. The emotional tone of book 5 shows an admirable dedication to adolescent readers, but it seems to me that she's also taking care to connect with the adult audience--each book contains more adult characters than the last, and more explanation of how they feel and think. Whether or not it's for money, Rowling is doing her best to attract multiple demographics.
-
We don't really have an internal reason to believe that was not Snape's worst memory, so we probably should expect it, unless we think there's supposed to be a surprise about it, which I dont' believe. AND, incidentally, Voldemort thinks that Snape is still in his camp, right? He's the double agent. So he wouldn't have any horrible memories of that. I still maintain it's highly believeable that Snapes worst memory is getting horribly tormented in front of what ammounted to his whole teenage world.
And Tonks is probably not twice Harry's age. She's a brand new Auror, which means she might only be 3 years older than Harry.
Rowling complaining about her money sounds an awful lot like Eddie Vetter complaining about his fame. If it's such a frickin burden than wtf do you keep putting out the records (or in this case, books). Both of them whine about their current status but both seem content to perpetuate their current status.
-
SE, I think you're making a lot of stuff up or reading between the lines too much. There is nothing to suggest that Harry saw Snape's worst memory. We don't even know if Snape placed his worse memory in there. All we know is that he placed the memorie he didn't want Harry to see inside the device.
Also, when Professor McGonigal was explaining to Harry what is takes to become an Auror, she mentioned that is meant it took at least three years of school after taking the N.E.W.T.S. So Tonks is more than 3 years older than Harry. Besides the late 1980's description of Tonks, clearly places her two generations older than Harry. My thought is that Tonks is going to be the new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher.
-
The chapter where Harry sees Snape's memory is titled "Snape's Worst Memory." That seems little more concrete than you're suggesting, 42.
As for the next Dark Arts teacher, my guess is either Lupin or Snape. Lupin has proven himself time and again, and Dumbledore has recently gotten the authority to do pretty much whatever he wants, so I'm sure he could get a werewolf back onto the staff. And Snape, as she was sure to point out, has applied for the position every year, and it would be a cool development for his character. (Also, getting Snape out of potions is the only way to get Harry into the class at NEWT level, since there's no chance he got an Outstanding on his potion OWL.)
I kind of think that Tonks is there to act as a foil to Moody. The two of them make a really interesting Auror team that I'd like to see stick together and get into some adventures. That said, if my other guesses are wrong either Tonks or Moody would make a good Dark Arts teacher.
-
Yeah, there are concrete references to his worst memory.
And even so, that makes her possibly 5 years older. And it's not just late 80s. Hair dying still happens. Green Day, Pink, many others. Where have you been? Oh, yeah, Utah. Nm.
I think that Snape is dark arts. If I remember right, potions aren't as crucial to auror study. But then we'll lose Snape as a teacher (I remember thinking this as I read it). So if we move Snape to dark arts, then we still get the Snape/Harry relationship.
-
The new DATDA teacher will be a new character as it is an established tradition that (1) it is always a new character and (2) something bad happens to them by the end of the book to ensure the need for a new teacher the next year.
That being said, I still think it would be cool to see Snape, the double agent and former Death Eater, become the new DATDA teacher as an ironic twist.
-
I don't think that the Dark Arts teacher HAS to be somebody new--just because she's done it so far doesn't mean she'll have to keep it up. Altering her formula will keep it fresh (kind of like how the "big twist" in this book is that there's no twist). I think Snape has a very good shot at becoming the new Dark Arts teacher, which will make the Harry/Snape relationship even more interesting since Dark Arts is arguably Harry's best subject.
As long as we're making predictions, let me ask you this: who from Slytherin will join Harry's group? (Or the DA, if it still exists.) The sorting hat made a big deal about how everyone would have to band together, and then three of the four Houses united in the DA (though only Gryffindor was allowed to fight in the big battle--that was disappointing). The only one left is Slytherin, and I think somebody from there has to come over eventually. I really don't think it will be Malfoy, but I suppose it could.
I suppose you could argue that Snape already fills the role of "good Slytherin," but I don't think he counts. We need a student. The single biggest fault in this series is the idea that everyone in Slytherin is evil--it's an incredibly stupid premise, and I really want to see it turn around eventually.
-
Possibbly, Crabbe or Goyle could join the good guys. I'm waiting for the good guy from Slytherin to show up too. However, I'm afraid Rawlings won't do it because it would make a lot of third-graders upset.
Ans SE, your whole is Harry/Tonks relationship thing is just lame. I just don't see it happening.
-
Ans SE, your whole is Harry/Tonks relationship thing is just lame. I just don't see it happening.
I think you're being lame. I had an idea that you can't argue against as successfully as you like and so you just write it off. In truth, the idea wasn't entirely in seriousness so I don't know why arguing against it is so important to you. I don't see it happening either, but I think it woudl be fun.
I don't think Snape works for the "good Slytherin" either. He certainly isn't working on unity with Harry.
-
Hum. I like the Snape Dark Arts suggestion. However, I think that's a major character development that might be better off in book Seven.
I, like Dan, thought that the metamorph character was a HUGE gun on the mantle. I kept expecting one of the characters to turn out to have been her in disguise all the time. It's still too much of an opportunity for a Rolling-esque surprise for her to ignore, I think. I wouldn't be surprised to find a 'new' student in the next book who turns out to be Tonks.
As for the Harry/Tonks thing, I think it's a bit of a streatch, but not an unbelievable one. Personally, I think he has to end up with a student we've been following for a long time for empathy. I don't think Rolling would pair him off with an older woman simply because that might seem like too much of a betrayal to her young audience, who would subconciously wonder why one of the students wasn't good enough.
So, I predict a new Dark Arts teacher for the next book, Snape in the seventh. Tonks pretending to be a student, or at least someone unexpected, in the next book. (Which, actually, could let SE's Tonks relationship have an interesting little twist...) And Harry ending up with a student. (Ron's sister? Yeah, I know, seems too obvious.)
Now, here's another question. You think she's planning another series after this one, Harry the Auror? You'll notice the beginning, which lists previous books, lists them as 'First year at Hogwarts' 'Second year at Hogwarts' ect. I wouldn't be surprised if she had Harry end up with someone simple at the end of this series, say Cho, to give some completion, then had him go on for marriage to someone else later on.
-
interesting thoughts EUOL. Of course it's all speculation, but just as good as any, better than many
I don't know how I'd feel about another series. Once you get into Harry as adult you're out of the children's comfort zone. But that's already programmed into the current series, so I wonder if it won't happen anyway. Don't know how long I'd keep reading.
-
I saw an interview with Rowling where she said that the seventh book is it - she's moving on to something else entirely. I don't know if I believe it or not, but she sounded fairly determined.
-
I suspect that Harry will end up with Ron's sister Ginny, assuming Rowling doesn't just toss in a new character altogether. It won't be Hermione because of the developing Ron/Hermione thing, and it won't be Cho becuase, well, nobody actually stays with their first high school romance (a couple of exceptions notwithstanding). Ginny is the best choice because she's been there the whole time, she's becoming a more important character, she's not chasing Harry, and Harry's not chasing her. Sure it's obvious, like EUOL said, but I think it will have to be.
The other option is Luna Lovegood, which could be interesting. Or Pansy Parkinson, if she becomes the "Good Slytherin." :)
-
ick. Not Luna.
What about that chick from the French school? She sounded like a hottie.
And another possibility: He doesn't end up with anyone. we're all so anxious to hook him up, but he will only be 17 when the series ends.
-
What about Moaning Myrtle? Hey, just a thought.
-
no good. Harry's not Mormon
-
The chick from the French school hooked-up with one of Ron's older brothers.
I think Ginny has moved beyond Harry Potter.
I can see Luna and Harry. In fact it seems like Rawlings is setting these two up. I couldn't really see why Luna was there except to start a relationship with Harry. I can see Rawlings pulling an "Ugly Duckling" type story with Luna.
-
Sorry, I just don't see it with Luna
And as for Ginny, what 14 year old do you know who's moved beyond something permanently. I can see Harry falling for her and having to win her over. Or even moer, her finally admitting that she hasn't moved on.
-
He can hook up, but I doubt there will be any wedding bells. As for sequels, somehow I doubt that something this sucessful will be able to last without sequels. If Rolling does move on, she'll probably come back later. If she doesn't, by some miracle, then her estate will do so before the copyright lapses.
-
I agree that there are going to be no wedding bells in the sequels for Harry Potter. In the world of Young Adult lit, things usually have to mantain a certain amount of political correntness and last time a checked getting engaged or married right out of high school isn't all that PC.
As for Harry hooking up with Ginny. I just thought that Rowling (note corrent spelling finally) made is clear that Ginny had a crush, and now the crush is gone. That does happen all the time with that age group.
As for a 14 year old girl moving beyond something permanently, from my experience in Junior High schools, it seems to happen about every thirty-minutes or so.
-
Well, after waiting to read it unti after my Boards were done (which mirrored the O.W.L.s in a frightening way) I finally read the book.
I really, really enjoyed it. It certainly had some weak parts, but as mentioned, its just compelling. I couldn't put it down.
I really liked how much depth was added to a lot of the supporting cast. And Dumbledore rocked. I cheered aloud when I read his speech to the group when Fudge was arrested.
One loose end I would have liked to have seen tied up: Percy. When the very foundation of what he believed was right was rocked, what did he do? As much attention as he got I would have thought there would be at least a mention of him at the end of the book. Guess we'll have to wait until the next one.
I'm with Fell though, Snape is my favorite character...probably because he is one of the most three dimensional of all the cast.
As for Tonks and Harry...I think the age difference is a little much. Add on the few years before Harry graduates plus the three extra to become an Auror plus the fact that it was mentioned that the MoM hasn't taken on a new Auror is several years and it adds up to Tonks being in her mid twenties, at least.
I think I would like to see Harry and Luna get together as she has proven to be strange...but interesting.
-
Hey, I just like Tonks.
Anyway, I don't think Percy actually "Believes" in anything. I think he just wants to follow the established authority in the hopes of gaining some himself. He's the ultimate pencil pushing bureaucrat, and that's all he cares about: rules and administration.