Monday, July 23, 2007

Book report: JK Rowling/Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

This won't be a plot synopsis, and I won't touch on anything Angelle said in her excellent forum, so this is basically my emotional response to this era of my life having been unwillingly brought to a conclusion. Needless to say, THERE WILL BE SPOILERS. So read on not, oh ye moderates.

Yes, yes, it goes without saying that I love Harry Potter, but I know for a fact I'm not the only one a little bit upset with DEATHLY HALLOWS. No, of course I'm relieved that Harry didn't die, but does anyone else feel JK copped out by ceremoniously killing off only the most minor of characters?

Good-bye, Mad-Eye; you were a tough ass but won't break too many hearts. Good-bye, Dobby; you were annoying as fuck but we appreciate your sacrifice. Flowers shall grow on your grave. Come on, here, HEDWIG?!?! Seriously?!?!

Also---how come it was never discussed in greater detail how earless George is going to respond to Fred's death?! Why does JK suddenly pretend that they are two separate characters to be separately mourned, when throughout the entire series we have seen them as two gallant and jovial halves of a whole? Nope, nope, weep for poor Fred, Fred is dead. Is anyone thinking of George?! How does George go on?! That didn't even make me sad, just mad. This VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE wasn't even addressed in the Epilogue.


In a side note--apparently the actors who play Fred and George (all this through IMDB) are tricksters themselves, and in the filming of the 3rd movie they swapped undetected and filmed a bunch of scenes as each other. Heh heh. When the director found out, he made them refilm. Again, seriously?

All right, folks--I DARE you to tell me which one is George and which one is Fred. Apparently it's quite easy--one has a mole under his left ear, and the other doesn't. Let's hope it's not George.

The big revelation at the end that Harry was a Horcrux--I gotta admit, Bluenana suggested that idea to me two years ago, and it seemed downright obvious ever since.

I really WAS relieved that Harry survived the second killing curse, and I think the Hallows were a really neat device to work that out. Well done, JK.

Was anyone else sick enough to hope that Ginny would give it up at the beginning? I mean, I think it's pretty safe to say SHE wanted to. Melanie reminds me this is a children's book and the adults must be satisfied to read between the lines. I, however, has reasonable hope that the movie will jazz things up considerably. (By the way, this photo is the first hit to come up on a Google image search of "Harry Potter." Fun fact.)

I also have this feeling that JK cheats death--all of the beloved people Harry has lost, especially Dumbledore, are JUST AS if not MORE accessible when they're dead.

I was sorely bothered to discover the book dook place in 1997. Any ideas about why JK would set it then? Just because that's when she started writing? I'm not sure I understand why she bothered to set it in time at all.

Also...DAMN but wizards seem to procreate young.

How come Dumbledore never got married? And why don't we ever see any concrete hints at any homosexual relationships? (Well, I suppose that question answers itself.) (But wait--did I miss any?!? PLEASE fill me in.)

Sob. What shall I live for, though, now that it's over? Oh, Lord of Irresistable Fantasy!! Hasten to send me a new wagon to jump on!!

6 comments:

angelle said...

Oh, the question of grief. I did wonder why Percy was the one throwing himself all over Fred's body and not George. Poor George. He's going to have to run that store by himself.

I, for one, felt very upset when Hedwig died. Well, okay, not very upset, but it was sad.

I thought, with the loss of Tonks and Lupin, there was going to be some Harry-becomes-Sirius to his new godson type thing going on.

Yeah, I thought about the dead people become alive in paintings thing. I mean, now, if Harry REALLY wanted, he could just pick up the portrait of Dumbledore (well, it probably has a permanent sticking charm, but forget that for a second), and stick him in Hermione's beaded bag and have him around ALL THE TIME! That's no way to treat Dumbledore, of course, but I mean really. Why does anyone lament death, when all you need is a portrait of someone? Although, the question is, how come people in paintings move around and have their own personalities and are seemingly alive, but photographs and chocolate frog cards just wave and don't do anything?

It took place in 1997? Did I miss something? But that might answer something I always wondered - why do wizards use owls (very pretty but slow as hell) to send mail, when muggles already invented something as fast as email? You'd think they'd come up with something of that caliber. Well, I guess the fake Galleon and Dark Mark are sorta like that, and I guess the Patronuses do well for that, but still. Where's the Wizard equiv of a blackberry?

I lost count of the horcruxes - let's see, 1) ring 2) riddle's diary 3) locket 4) ravenclaw's diadem 5) himself 6) goblet -- i see, so the whole point being nagini wasn't a horcrux at all? i was very confused about that whole thing because i was losing track of all the horcruxes. very nice, red herrings abound.

i miss harry and all already.

i still kinda don't like the epilogue. seems like a crappy way to end the book to me for some reason, even though i like knowing what happened to everyone.

i dont think i could have survived any more major characters dying, frankly.

moonrat said...

It just seemed unrealistic, what with the death toll in the last wizard war. After all, just about EVERYONE has a parent or loved one who bit it the last time Voldemort came around. That's why it seems like they all got off too easily.

moonrat said...

the 1997 thing--Lily and James died 16 years ago, and their gravestone says 1981. Hence.

angelle said...

well supposedly, harry's sacrifice of his life, you know "love" and all, that saved them, the way harry's mom saved HIM. that's what harry said anyway.

per your comment on the horcruxes, I thought dumbledore mentioned in book 6 that one of the 7 was voldy himself, because the last part of his soul resides there, obviously, so that he can actually be alive.

moonrat said...

damn. that throws a wrench in everything.

clenpi said...

i have come across your blog waay too late but i know i was meant to find because of the entire section devoted to HP and all the he is to us "muggles". now because i have read the books in order at least 14 times (i start with HP 1 before each new book and movie racing to finish all before the realease date) i can answer some of the questions raised here.

I am also upset about the lack of explanation with G & F they are a set now uneven what will happen to one without the other to riff off of daily?

Also dumbeldore was only accesible to Harry when Harry was dead as well. He just had set all these wonderful clues in place before his death. Also when the news broke that Big D was gay the clues in the book stood out more. i can't recall page #'s but there are many refrences to his peculiar style of dress and others reaction to it that could give truth to the underlying gayness that is Dumbeldore. (as i am writh this after HP6 the movie came out you will notice in D's past he is wearing a quite snazzy scarf on his visit to Tom Riddle)

to the ? of why didn't they take D's portraitwith them where evr they may go? they (HP R ang HG) were out laws and could not waltz into Hogwarts and just take the portrait. Death eaters were in charge by then.Also i'm sure the magic portraits only work if commissioned before the persons death . since no Sirius portrait has popped up at all.

and the horcruxes 1 the ring 2 the diary 3 the locket 4 the cup 5 the diadem 6 Nagini 7 voldy himself and 8 secret horcrux but now quite obvious harry. the whole Nagini issue was that it is very dangerous to put part of your soul into another living being.

I know i am years lat and you've probably figured this out amongst yourselves but the upside is i am available for HP disscusion after Deathly hallows the movie comes out. Love your blog!