Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

[Jessweeee♪]

Spoilers are inside here, and I probably won't tag the ones I type myself.

I didn't get to discuss it with you kind people last time around, and reading the other thread made me really want to.


SO LET US DISCUSS THIS WONDERFUL BOOK.


I thought it was purdy and nice and purdy. I'm kind of curious to hear about Poor Teddy's life growing up.

[Vivisteiner]

I thought it was rather average actually, and I was disappointed by it. (Although I really shouldnt have been, since only a few in the series are what I'd call 'really good'.)

Still, I did enjoy reading it, although the epilogue sucked balls. Can't remember much about it though, apart from the tragic death of our D friend.

[DMKA]

Snape kills Dumbledore.

[Comet]

Snape kills Dumbledore.

Snape dies.

[Goldenboko]

Snape kills Dumbledore.

Snape dies.

You die.

[Moon Rabbits]

Snape kills Dumbledore.

Snape dies.

This is the only death that I perpetually forget about, even though it's one of the only ones in the book that I gave a <img src="http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif" alt="skull" /><img src="http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif" alt="skull" /><img src="http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif" alt="skull" /><img src="http://forums.eyesonff.com/images/smilies/rpg_009.gif" alt="skull" /> about. Unfortunately I didn't see any other way for her to finish off Snape's character arc, though :(

The random appearances of Death Eaters every where was cool, because throughout the other books she never really developed a sense of terror or anything. It was always stories about Voldemorts last reign, then BAM omg everyone is dying everywhere~

Also - Dumbledore<3

[Rantz]

I liked the book overall, but the epilogue was a little too sugar sweet for my tastes. Although I guess it might have been somewhat needed as closure for all the tragedy in the book (and series).

[Miriel]

The epilogue was just so SO bad.

Overall the book was a disappointment. The buildup was huge and the payoff... not so much.

[Ouch!]

Spoilers abound, but this should be apparent at this point. I'm not gonna bother marking them.

At this point, I feel like I should have seen it coming. It, of course, being a terrible deus ex machine ending relating to the nature of magic as poorly defined by Rowling. I know enough of fantasy at this point to say that basing the limitations on what magic can't do is asking for trouble. It leaves the writer with a the means to explain away an awful lot of problems.

The thing is, Rowling wrote herself into a bit of a corner, and it's awfully tempting to explain away problems with such a blanket excuse. "The relationship between body and soul is unexplored magical territory, Harry! Nobody could have predicted what would have happened!" certainly explains away the need for more than the barest of foreshadow (really all we got was the famous gleam in Dumbledore's eye at the end of The Goblet of Fire). If nobody could have seen it coming in the diegesis of the novel because magic isn't so well understood, why should the reader, especially when Rowling likes to play a fairly unreliable narrator.

That said, the opposite isn't much better. Gandalf in The Lord of the Rings is quite possibly the most powerful being in Middle-earth; he is, like Sauron, a demi-god of sorts, after all. Yet his power is not properly defined in the series, and it's only through the Silmarillion and Tolkien's notes that we ever learned what exactly an Itsari is. He's the stereotypical (although Tolkien is responsible for a great many of our fantasy genre stereotypes, so I can't fault him too much for it) old mentor with boundless magical power. He's an example of what happens when an author resists the temptation to use a deus ex machina as a cure-all to the problem, and it's result isn't much better. There are plenty of times with Gandalf and characters like Gandalf where one wonders, "Why the hell didn't he just use his power to fix it all right away?" Gandalf's excuse isn't strictly explained in the Lord of the Rings, but from what I understand, he and the other Itsari were forbidden to use their powers to explicitly aid the inhabitants of Middle-earth. Rather, they were meant to be guides.

In either case, the reader is often left with a strong sense of, "Well, that was lame." As such, I generally think defining magic by what it can do as opposed to what it can't can avoid both situations entirely. Unfortunately, Rowling did the exact opposite and we ended up with The Deathly Hallows. I didn't mind at first. I was too busy being annoyed by the atrocious epilogue. I don't really care much at this point, though, since the whole series basically led itself up to that one giant moment of let-down. Should have seen it coming.

Still liked the book as a whole, though.

[Araciel]

Overall the book was a disappointment. The buildup was huge and the payoff... not so much.

Summed up in the final showdown between hero and villain, no less.

[Goldenboko]

Why am I the only one who loved everything about the end of this book? xD

[Ouch!]

More easily pleased?

[Rantz]

As such, I generally think defining magic by what it can do as opposed to what it can't can avoid both situations entirely.

I couldn't agree less. Much of what I enjoy about fantasy is the possibilities that are opened by a new world. By defining magic and other supernatural forces as being able to do this and that, but nothing more, you limit the possibilities and, doing that, you enclose the world in a box. You make it predictable.

I absolutely hate the idea of a perfectly defined world, a world where there is nothing new to discover. I don't see the point of a world where there is already an answer to everything. One of the most charming things about even the real world is that we don't know everything, that there are still some mysteries left.

[PhoenixAsh]

I found the ending better on the second read. Once you get over the poor resolution to the prophecy, everything else is actually pretty good. Everything after King's Cross is awesome, and finished the series well. The epilogue is actually forgivable too I think. Admittedly it probably would have been better left out, but I think it was primarily to avoid fan-fiction...

As for the rest of the book, the camping was awful, and the planning section for the MoM was dull enough, so why it was repeated for Gringott's I don't know. Overall, probably weaker than the rest of the books, but as keeping the old (winning) formula was out of the question it was a good end to the series.

[Garnie]

good book! but tbh i like the fan made epilogues more! Jo said there would be those who hated the ending of this book, but she liked it! i agree! it was always something that was gonna be odd! Harry was always gonna win dead or alive. remember its supposed to be for the kids! also i think the epilogue was so bad because of 2 things! 1 that there were people who wanted to know everything what happened after that and 2 she may decide that shes not finished yet. So she wrote the epilogue that way to give her that choice if she wanted to!

[demondude]

Apparently she wrote the epilogue because she didn't want other authors to take her series and expand on it, It was never supposed to be the true ending.

[Araciel]

Apparently she wrote the epilogue because she didn't want other authors to take her series and expand on it, It was never supposed to be the true ending.

Not that it's stopped them anyway...

[Depression Moon]

This book is my econd favorite in the series. It held suspense throughout the whole book, but the epilogue didn't explain enough for me. The whole issue with Dumbledore supporting Grindewald in the past without really any explanation as to why he was so fathomed by this evil man, seemed underdeveloped. There was also a couple of deaths that I wished didn't occur in the book like George's.

[Aerith's Knight]

I really liked this book, it had lots of action and some deep emotions, but without overdoing it.

As DM said, the Dumbledore/Grindelwald story was a little underdeveloped and rather unexplained.

But the chapter when Harry walks towards his doom, without knowing he would survive, when everything just clicks..

..I got goosebumps.

[NeoTifa]

some moving parts, but on the whole..... the part with kings cross on was horrible. she shouldve stopped with harry somehow sacrificing himself to kill voldemort. then maybe later on a sub series where ron and hermione go and rekill the once thought dead volddy. idk. but harry shouldve died in the battle. it wouldve made more...... inpact. but this is a kiddie book, sooo.....

[Depression Moon]

kdie book what's so kiddie about the motivation of human life and there is also things concerning underage drinkin, profanity, and sexuality in the books.

[Ouch!]

As such, I generally think defining magic by what it can do as opposed to what it can't can avoid both situations entirely.

I couldn't agree less. Much of what I enjoy about fantasy is the possibilities that are opened by a new world. By defining magic and other supernatural forces as being able to do this and that, but nothing more, you limit the possibilities and, doing that, you enclose the world in a box. You make it predictable.

I absolutely hate the idea of a perfectly defined world, a world where there is nothing new to discover. I don't see the point of a world where there is already an answer to everything. One of the most charming things about even the real world is that we don't know everything, that there are still some mysteries left.
There's a difference between putting your world inside a box and setting down some ground rules. Rowling's only rule was that magic can't bring people back to life. Otherwise, there were very few specifications to its limitations. That aside, the rules for a given system of magic never have to be made clear to the reader. In the end, I just think that explaining away the ending with a vague, "Nobody could have known!" is one of the worst cop-outs ever.

That aside, there are other (and arguably better) ways to be unpredictable without resorting to such an unsatisfying technique as a deus ex machina.

[rubah]

JKR's magic can do anything so long as you know the proper latin to invent it 8)

I thought the ending was perfect. The epilogue was just cute fluff to lull you to sleep with happy thoughts at 8am on July 21 2007.

[scrumpleberry]

Spoiler marking? What the hell? It's been more than a year, I'm not spoiler marking anything.


JKR's magic can do anything so long as you know the proper latin to invent it 8)

I thought the ending was perfect. The epilogue was just cute fluff to lull you to sleep with happy thoughts at 8am on July 21 2007.

4am, get in >;o


(Although I spent a couple of hours afterwards feeling depressed about Schnaaaape :kaocry2:)


People complain about her dubious latin, but it's a whole sight better than just making stuff up, isn't it? And I think it's just fine, all language warps over time, the spells would be the same. Heck, maybe the wizards who invented them knew only dubious latin. It's not a massive point, in any case.

Epilogue was pretty "ehhhh..." but keep in mind she wrote it when she wrote PS, which was a lot more fluffy happy fun magic time and not as complex, and it does tie off everything nicely. Jesus, she has a thing about making people have hundreds of kids though. Look at the family trees on wikipedia, and you'll see what I mean. Ted and Scorpius are the only only children of the lot of them!

This was actually my favourite book, perhaps because I have a very fangirl mentality towards Harry Potter and it tied lots of things up and was awfully epic compared with the rest x)

Possibly my favourite thing about it was Ron's final transition from dickery into...not dickery. It just worked, and I think it made him a much more real character. He did get very nasty in books 5 and 6, but I still couldn't help but like him because he was quite flawed without much reason, which I thought made him a lot more real.

Oh, I liked Grindeldore. It finished off Dumbledore nicely, and it explained his fixation with second chances and the whole POWAH KORRUPTZ ME thing I felt worked very nicely for him.


The random appearances of Death Eaters every where was cool, because throughout the other books she never really developed a sense of terror or anything. It was always stories about Voldemorts last reign, then BAM omg everyone is dying everywhere~

Agreed :3

[Rantz]

There's a difference between putting your world inside a box and setting down some ground rules. Rowling's only rule was that magic can't bring people back to life. Otherwise, there were very few specifications to its limitations. That aside, the rules for a given system of magic never have to be made clear to the reader. In the end, I just think that explaining away the ending with a vague, "Nobody could have known!" is one of the worst cop-outs ever.

That aside, there are other (and arguably better) ways to be unpredictable without resorting to such an unsatisfying technique as a deus ex machina.

But really, nobody in Rowling's world could have known. Harry's relation to Voldemort is unique; no one has ever experienced the same situation before. To propose that some character could have predicted how such events would unfold is bizarre! Even the range of what simple spells and can be "invented" is unknown, it's really no surprise that the effects of such arcane magic is unknown.

Either way, I suggest we call it a matter of differing opinions before this turns into a discussion of literary technique. :)

[rubah]

I'm sorry! I'm getting old! I did go outside for like half an hour and bask in the golden sunlight and think about how it paralleled the sun rising after the battle of hogwarts.

[Miriel]

good book! but tbh i like the fan made epilogues more!

Haha, yeah. I read some fan made epilogues that were pretty great. And I actually resisted giving the book a second read so that the details will remain fuzzy in my head and I can fill things in how I think things should have gone down rather than how they actually went down.

[Ouch!]

There's a difference between putting your world inside a box and setting down some ground rules. Rowling's only rule was that magic can't bring people back to life. Otherwise, there were very few specifications to its limitations. That aside, the rules for a given system of magic never have to be made clear to the reader. In the end, I just think that explaining away the ending with a vague, "Nobody could have known!" is one of the worst cop-outs ever.

That aside, there are other (and arguably better) ways to be unpredictable without resorting to such an unsatisfying technique as a deus ex machina.

But really, nobody in Rowling's world could have known. Harry's relation to Voldemort is unique; no one has ever experienced the same situation before. To propose that some character could have predicted how such events would unfold is bizarre! Even the range of what simple spells and can be "invented" is unknown, it's really no surprise that the effects of such arcane magic is unknown.

Either way, I suggest we call it a matter of differing opinions before this turns into a discussion of literary technique. :)
I'm not quite so sure what's wrong with a discussion of literary technique when we're talking about a book. On a final note, I understand why it was able to go unexplained. That's exactly what makes it a deus ex machina. It came out of absolutely nowhere because there was no reason for a good explanation of foreshadowing. I think this is weak storytelling. Even if it works due to the way the whole system was set up, I just think it was poorly done.

[Depression Moon]

I don't really know if I like ms. Rowling anymore. I just received a letter from her that I sent out six months ago and I don't think she even read it because she sent me some stuff about FAQs on her book and life. What I was asking her was if she could give some good advice to a first time fantasy author.

[Rantz]

But really, nobody in Rowling's world could have known. Harry's relation to Voldemort is unique; no one has ever experienced the same situation before. To propose that some character could have predicted how such events would unfold is bizarre! Even the range of what simple spells and can be "invented" is unknown, it's really no surprise that the effects of such arcane magic is unknown.

Either way, I suggest we call it a matter of differing opinions before this turns into a discussion of literary technique. :)
I'm not quite so sure what's wrong with a discussion of literary technique when we're talking about a book. On a final note, I understand why it was able to go unexplained. That's exactly what makes it a deus ex machina. It came out of absolutely nowhere because there was no reason for a good explanation of foreshadowing. I think this is weak storytelling. Even if it works due to the way the whole system was set up, I just think it was poorly done.

I guess I put it wrongly. What I meant was that if we're discussing literary technique in general, it's probably better suited for another thread. If we're discussing this single case, I think we've already reached the end of the line, since we both acknowledge that it could hardly have been foreshadowed (this is where I misinterpreted your original post—I thought you were saying it should have been), but disagree whether it's good or bad storytelling. There's no proving each other right or wrong there.

[escobert]

I didn't want lupin and tonks to die :(

[Aerith's Knight]

Yeah and it was in the end. No dialogue, no death scene..

Just, Tonk and Lupin were dead.

At least Fred went out in glory.

[escobert]

seriously. Hey were like "oh hey yeah they're dead. oh well" I really liked them. I didn't want fred to die but one of the brothers had to go. it was going to happen eventually.

[blackmage_nuke]

I was rather hoping Hermione would hook up with Krum instead of Ron, and they wouldve had some kind of genius, athletic super children but other than that i thought it was good.

[Depression Moon]

I still don't understand how Snape could have possibly been on the good side with the way he treated Harry and Sirius. What guy holds a grudge against somebody's son even if their father had stole your girlfriend. Him just treating Harry like that was just childish and what did Sirius do to him make him happy that he's dead?

[rubah]

I keep having these Deathly Hallows dreams. I haven't even read the book recently.

The first dream was just Harry looking at a creek thinking about his horcrux quest, but the one this morning was my attempt at remembering how harry triumphed, except translated into dreamtime.

sirius and dumbledore were both alive and harry was supposed to meet them, but the hideout was left wide open and he knew the deatheaters had been there. George showed up (or was it fred?) and he was supposed to impersonate harry via the plan but he just got killed instead while harry, transfigured into a vase had to watch in terror.

It was awesome.

[Rantz]

I keep having these Deathly Hallows dreams. I haven't even read the book recently.

The first dream was just Harry looking at a creek thinking about his horcrux quest, but the one this morning was my attempt at remembering how harry triumphed, except translated into dreamtime.

sirius and dumbledore were both alive and harry was supposed to meet them, but the hideout was left wide open and he knew the deatheaters had been there. George showed up (or was it fred?) and he was supposed to impersonate harry via the plan but he just got killed instead while harry, transfigured into a vase had to watch in terror.

It was awesome.

:D I didn't know he was a ceramimagus!

[rubah]

I'm not sure how he managed to transfigure himself back. I was kinda worried about that in the dream, but he managed.