| | | |
| gatorgirlie |
Original Post: Jul 24 '07, 11:34 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 245 Member since: Mar 07 '03
|
|
Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
I figured I'd leave the other thread open to discuss our reviews without fear of encountering spoilers. This thread can be used to actually discuss Deathly Hallows.
Ok... So....
What does everyone think of the book? I know I've read reviews, but by and large we avoided putting anything specific into it.
Needless to say... Thar be spoilers ahead.
First thoughts? Whew, I was right about a few things... but SO WRONG about most of the story. I always had an inkling that Snape loved Lily (from "Snape's Worst Memory" in OotP) and I was 100% sold on the idea he was Dumbledore's man... but Harry being a Horcrux? So wrong on that one.
Second? I thought she pulled everything together perfectly. From Dumbledore's "gleam of triumph" at the end of Goblet of Fire, Rowling knew how Harry would end... and it was crafted so nicely. Her themes of redemption, remorse, love conquering all, salvation and death were included so fluidly.... I was truly impressed. Everything just clicked into place and I felt like I understood everything Rowling had written. I still feel that way.
Snape is one of the most tragic characters in the entire series -- his death was so touching and poignant that I cried. I'm glad to see how much respect Harry carries for Severus -- even to name his son after him.
I know some people didn't like the epilogue, but I felt it tied things up nicely. Harry and Ginny, Ron and Hermione deserve to have happy endings, and that's what they received. It also shows how much Harry grew and matured from the 10 year old boy petrified of being put into Slytherin -- he was comfortable with the thought of young Albus being sorted there. I know there were quite a few unanswered questions, but I'm not sure Rowling could have answered them all without writing a 2000 page tome...
Anyway, your thoughts?
Jen |
| | | |
| jsgoddess |
Posted: Jul 24 '07, 12:19 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 140 Member since: Apr 06 '00
 in Books, Magazines & Newspapers |
|
Deathly Hallows... spoilers! spoilers! Danger!
Quote: gatorgirlie I know some people didn't like the epilogue, but I felt it tied things up nicely.
I loved the book (and the series). I was disappointed in the epilogue in that I really wanted to know about some other people, like Luna and George.
And I'm rather depressed now that it's all over. *sniff*
Julie
|
| | | |
| AdaDavis |
Posted: Jul 24 '07, 4:54 pm (Updated: Jul 26 '07, 7:45 am) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 74 Member since: Nov 16 '00
|
|
RE: Deathly Hallows... spoilers! spoilers! Danger!
Might want to read THIS
And for some more interesting info on what characters are doing - THIS TOO |
| | | |
| gatorgirlie |
Posted: Jul 25 '07, 6:37 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 245 Member since: Mar 07 '03
|
|
RE: Deathly Hallows... spoilers! spoilers! Danger!
Quote: jsgoddess I loved the book (and the series). I was disappointed in the epilogue in that I really wanted to know about some other people, like Luna and George.
And I'm rather depressed now that it's all over. *sniff*
Julie
Yeah... It didn't go as in depth as I'd like it, but I felt ended it nicely...
But, she is going to write an encyclopedia with details on what happened to characters, etc... so that more than makes up for a crappy epilogue :).
I do wish I'd have found out what happened to Umbridge. I assumed she got kissed by the dementors, but that might just be wishful thinking.
Jen |
| | | |
| smorg |
Posted: Jul 27 '07, 10:13 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 197 Member since: Jul 03 '06
|
|
RE: Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
Quote: gatorgirlie What does everyone think of the book? I know I've read reviews, but by and large we avoided putting anything specific into it.
Hiya! I love it. Most Epinionators have been very good about not spoiling the book in the reviews indeed. I waited until I had finished before reading the reviews, just to be on the safe side, tho.
Quote: gatorgirlie I was right about a few things... but SO WRONG about most of the story. I always had an inkling that Snape loved Lily (from "Snape's Worst Memory" in OotP) and I was 100% sold on the idea he was Dumbledore's man... but Harry being a Horcrux? So wrong on that one.
Same here! I wasn't sure whose side Snape was on until he AKed Dumbledore on the tower in #6... strangely enough! It seemed too much a set up, and I remembered how Hagrid had overheard him and Dumbledore arguing in the Forest before, and I know that Dumbledore wouldn't plead for his own life. He had offered Draco a way of not spliting his soul before, so the 'Please, Severus' must have been to protect Draco and the others rather than himself.
I didn't catch that Harry would be the 7th Horcrux indeed. Took Dumbledore's half truth bait that Harry only got some of Voldemort's power from the failed AK... Now that I've thought it over, I probably should have suspected that indeed. Rowling is a heck of a clever author! :o)
Quote: gatorgirlie Second? I thought she pulled everything together perfectly. From Dumbledore's "gleam of triumph" at the end of Goblet of Fire, Rowling knew how Harry would end... and it was crafted so nicely. Her themes of redemption, remorse, love conquering all, salvation and death were included so fluidly.... I was truly impressed. Everything just clicked into place and I felt like I understood everything Rowling had written. I still feel that way.
Here! Here! I wondered what that gleam in Dumbledore's eyes was, but had almost forgotten all about it when I started this book since nothing in Book 6 addressed it, and I have a rather lousy memory. ;oP
I think I now get why Rowling said in an interview a while back that by the time she's done, nobody will be able to question that she is a Christian... It's very neat and clever the way she incorporates so much of that theology into this book. The ultimate protection magic that is cast when a person voluntarily gives his/her life to protect others... Lily only had Harry in mind, but Harry had all the good guys fighting at Hogwarts in mind when he faced the Elder Wand the first time. Only survived because of the 3 hallows, I gather...
It is just brilliant the way she has Snape's side of the story told, ay? I was really thrown on it, since DD didn't leave the pensieve to Harry.
I don't care much for the epilogue either... Perhaps she should have written a new one rather than using the old note, since the style is too different now. All the new names that popped up in the first 2 paragraphs confused me a bit, too.
It's amazing that she managed to tie all the essentials story lines in the final book without going over 800 pages indeed! I couldn't see how, but she did it brilliantly. I hope she'll fill us in with background books, too. Hogwarts: A History would be a good start!
Cheers,
Smorg :o) |
| | | |
| gatorgirlie |
Posted: Jul 30 '07, 11:19 am |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 245 Member since: Mar 07 '03
|
|
RE: Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
Quote: smorg Hiya! I love it. Most Epinionators have been very good about not spoiling the book in the reviews indeed. I waited until I had finished before reading the reviews, just to be on the safe side, tho.
I tried to do my best -- it's so hard writing a book review on Harry Potter, knowing how it was going to end... and wanting to discuss it with everyone (lol).\
Quote: smorg Same here! I wasn't sure whose side Snape was on until he AKed Dumbledore on the tower in #6... strangely enough! It seemed too much a set up, and I remembered how Hagrid had overheard him and Dumbledore arguing in the Forest before, and I know that Dumbledore wouldn't plead for his own life. He had offered Draco a way of not spliting his soul before, so the 'Please, Severus' must have been to protect Draco and the others rather than himself.
You know, that's exactly when I realized Snape was good as well. I really hated Snape up until then... and then all of a sudden, it all made sense. The argument, the pleading -- Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him to preserve Draco. Classic.
Quote: smorg Here! Here! I wondered what that gleam in Dumbledore's eyes was, but had almost forgotten all about it when I started this book since nothing in Book 6 addressed it, and I have a rather lousy memory. ;oP
I think I now get why Rowling said in an interview a while back that by the time she's done, nobody will be able to question that she is a Christian... It's very neat and clever the way she incorporates so much of that theology into this book.
I'm actually surprised at the number of people who are insisting there wasn't any Christian imagery in this book. Look, I'm not a Christian but even I saw the multiple uses of Christian symbollism in this book. From the biblical quotes on the tombstones to the repeated use of "holy" imagery (such as when Harry marks a grave with a "cross" and when Harry is in Limbo... he thinks he's in "King's Cross" station) to the overt parallels drawn between Harry Potter and Jesus Christ... I just can't see how people don't see it, or they don't think it's there on purpose.
Quote: smorg The ultimate protection magic that is cast when a person voluntarily gives his/her life to protect others... Lily only had Harry in mind, but Harry had all the good guys fighting at Hogwarts in mind when he faced the Elder Wand the first time. Only survived because of the 3 hallows, I gather...
Actually, he lived because of what Voldemort did in GoF. Voldemort rebuilt his body in GoF using Harry's blood, effectively tethering Harry's soul to earth as long as Voldemort was alive. When Harry was hit with the AK curse, the part of Voldemort's soul that was stuck to him (for lack of a better term) didn't have any protection, so it died (that's what the flayed little boy was in King's Cross). Thus Harry was presented with a choice -- he could choose to live and return to his body, or choose to die and have eternal peace. If Voldemort hadn't rebuilt his body with Harry's blood, Harry would have permanently died right then and there.
Anyway, did you hear about the encyclopedia that's going to come out? I don't know when, but she's definitely said she's going to do it!
Take care :)
Jen |
| | | |
| AdaDavis |
Posted: Jul 30 '07, 12:24 pm (Updated: Jul 30 '07, 3:10 pm) |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 74 Member since: Nov 16 '00
|
|
RE: Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
Quote: gatorgirlie Actually, he lived because of what Voldemort did in GoF. Voldemort rebuilt his body in GoF using Harry's blood, effectively tethering Harry's soul to earth as long as Voldemort was alive. When Harry was hit with the AK curse, the part of Voldemort's soul that was stuck to him (for lack of a better term) didn't have any protection, so it died (that's what the flayed little boy was in King's Cross). Thus Harry was presented with a choice -- he could choose to live and return to his body, or choose to die and have eternal peace. If Voldemort hadn't rebuilt his body with Harry's blood, Harry would have permanently died right then and there.
Actually, using Harry's blood gave Voldemort a chance to change direction and live even if all his horcruxes were destroyed. He had a last chance at repentance, but rejected it. And as you said, it also stopped Harry from being destroyed outright by the AK curse.
That's half of the equation. The other half is that Harry unknowingly possessed all three of the Hallows, which made him the "master of Death." He owned the Invisibility Cloak, Dumbledore gave him the Stone inside the Snitch, and he (unknowingly) controlled the Elder Wand even though it was in the possession of Voldemort. That's why he had the choice to go back, or go forward.
If the Hallows hadn't played a part in keeping Harry alive, then there would have been no point in Dumbledore's gift of the Snitch to Harry and the book to Hermione. In truth, there would have been no point in the whole retelling of the folk tale of the Hallows. Or the title of the book, for that matter! |
| | | |
| smorg |
Posted: Jul 30 '07, 6:17 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 197 Member since: Jul 03 '06
|
|
RE: Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
Quote: gatorgirlie You know, that's exactly when I realized Snape was good as well. I really hated Snape up until then... and then all of a sudden, it all made sense. The argument, the pleading -- Dumbledore wanted Snape to kill him to preserve Draco. Classic.
Yup, indeed! And yet Rowling still manages to stir my doubt about Snape up again at the beginning of #7 when he gives Voldy a more correct info on how Harry's to be transported from the Dursleys'. I hope she writes more mytery series. The gal is good!
Quote: gatorgirlie I'm actually surprised at the number of people who are insisting there wasn't any Christian imagery in this book.-- I just can't see how people don't see it, or they don't think it's there on purpose.
I think a lot of them just don't want to see it indeed. :o) I'm not a Christian either, but the theology in the books are really unmistakable. They might get away with not seeing it before, but after the final book, there is no excuse! And I love that she goes for the 'loving' side of the theology rather than the divisive side.
Quote: gatorgirlie Actually, he lived because of what Voldemort did in GoF. Voldemort rebuilt his body in GoF using Harry's blood, effectively tethering Harry's soul to earth as long as Voldemort was alive.
Quote: AdaDavis That's half of the equation. The other half is that Harry unknowingly possessed all three of the Hallows, which made him the "master of Death." He owned the Invisibility Cloak, Dumbledore gave him the Stone inside the Snitch, and he (unknowingly) controlled the Elder Wand even though it was in the possession of Voldemort. That's why he had the choice to go back, or go forward.
Ack! I forgot all about that Lily's blood thingy after the first read. Thanks! ;o)
Very interesting take, too, Ada! I think you have it right there. I'll have to have a re-read of this thing. So much to absorp. ;o) The Hallows sub-plot has me wondering how it ties into the other parts of the story. I thought it's there to explain AlbusD's behaviors at first, but it is also a good parable on its own, ay? The wise brother is the one who doesn't seek to defeat death, but welcomed it in his own time.
I guess I just have to hope that Harry doesn't go and get beaten by another wizard (amazing how he didn't even have to hex Draco to beat him in the Wand's eyes), or the Elder Wand wouldn't go extinct with him when he does snuff it one day. ;o)
Quote: gatorgirlie Anyway, did you hear about the encyclopedia that's going to come out? I don't know when, but she's definitely said she's going to do it!
O, I just read about it on NBC's site, matie. That'd be way cool indeed! I'd love it if she writes up Hogwarts: A History and a few other text-books as well. And I wonder how a few other characters would do... And old Figgy just disappeared!
Hope everyone's week has started well!
Cheers,
Smorg ;o) |
| | | |
| gatorgirlie |
Posted: Aug 01 '07, 7:37 pm |
Reply |
|
Reviews written: 245 Member since: Mar 07 '03
|
|
RE: Actual Discussion of Deathly Hallows...
Quote: AdaDavis Actually, using Harry's blood gave Voldemort a chance to change direction and live even if all his horcruxes were destroyed. He had a last chance at repentance, but rejected it. And as you said, it also stopped Harry from being destroyed outright by the AK curse.
That's half of the equation. The other half is that Harry unknowingly possessed all three of the Hallows, which made him the "master of Death." He owned the Invisibility Cloak, Dumbledore gave him the Stone inside the Snitch, and he (unknowingly) controlled the Elder Wand even though it was in the possession of Voldemort. That's why he had the choice to go back, or go forward.
If the Hallows hadn't played a part in keeping Harry alive, then there would have been no point in Dumbledore's gift of the Snitch to Harry and the book to Hermione. In truth, there would have been no point in the whole retelling of the folk tale of the Hallows. Or the title of the book, for that matter!
You see, I disagree. I think the gleam as evinced in GoF was enormously important because it allowed Harry to stay alive. Dumbledore himself believed the DH were a fool's quest and he ultimately intended the Elder Wand's power would die with him -- how would he know that Harry would become Master of the DH back in GoF, when he himself didn't even realize where the Resurrection stone was kept (or that someone would manage to defeat him and thus take the wand's power)?
Dumbledore specifically let Harry know about his plan for the EW in the King's Cross scene. He never intended for Harry to become the Master of the three Hallows because he intended to destroy one Hallow himself. If it were really true that the DH played a part in keeping Harry alive, Dumbledore then always believed Harry would die... and the gleam of triumph would again be rendered meaningless (because if you can't have one without the other... and he was never intending Harry to become Master of the Hallows... he wouldn't have cared that Voldemort had taken Harry's blood).
The reason he put the Snitch and the story in his will (which was written before Dumbledore died... meaning before Draco foiled Dumbledore's plan for the EW) was because he felt Harry would need the Resurrection stone to aid him in walking to his death. He knew Harry would be able to use it correctly but he also knew that Harry would have to understand what it was first. The only way to understand what the stone was, was to understand the story given to Hermione. He also gave the answer as to why Dumbledore didn't just come out and tell Harry what the stone was -- he needed Harry to reason out what happened and be prepared enough to walk to his own death. If he had gotten all the facts straight up, he might not have been able to go through with it.
I would agree with you, but Dumbledore was so sure that the power of the EW would die with him. Harry even makes a light remark about it in the King's Cross scene -- it was one of the few parts of the plan that failed Dumbledore. If his plan had worked, he would have effectively killed Harry if he had to be Master.
Take care,
Jen
|
|
© 1999-2008 Shopping.com, Inc.