Because I can’t wait five damn days for the Pandagon comment thread, and I’m not joining some Yahoo discussion group
Published by junk science July 23rd, 2007 in BooksFor those who’ve finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Thoughts appear at random.
OMGWTF HEDWIG.
Voldemort continues to be a sadly and unjustly underwritten character. The scenes with the Gaunts and at the orphanage turned out to be as pointless as they were overlong and unilluminating, because being a sociopath is not a hereditary condition, and there should be a reason the rest of the kids at that orphanage didn’t turn out snake-eyed, scenery-chewing mass murderers. Whoever said Voldemort is as much a part of the backdrop as Hogwarts got it exactly right. Which is fine, as it turns out, because he’s still terrifying in a way most Evil Overlords wish they were. His Public Address System of Doom was an excellent touch. His greatest joy is to frighten, to stir up fear like a kid poking an anthill with a stick, to watch you looking over your shoulder and checking under your bed for him. Killing is almost a disappointment to him, because dead people can’t be scared.
All of which is somewhat tarnished by the (however amusing) fact that he couldn’t kill Harry because he violated the Section D, Line 7 clause of the Stealing Someone’s Blood to Make Yourself a Body contract, and he died because he failed to read the fine print in the terms and conditions of lifting fairy tale wands from dead people.
I don’t know why I’m surprised that Rowling took the tired and obvious path with Snape. She’s been going for the obvious answer a lot lately, so I should have been expecting it. She’s done such a good job making Snape sympathetic and interesting that his story comes off fittingly tragic even as poorly as it’s recited to us. Dumbledore and Snape’s scenes in “The Prince’s Tale” might be the worst-written passages I’ve ever read in any book. I imagine them enacted by sock puppets in the movie.
My feeling in the end is that Snape, as a character, deserved better than to end up just another man who thought himself a hero for loving a woman who didn’t love him back, and to have nothing to comfort him his entire life but his doe Patronus. He deserved to grow up and move on. He deserved much more than Dumbledore did to take his own life, on his own terms. He deserved to have his story told better. Having Potter’s second-born named for him is not an adequate memorial to the man. (Also, “Albus Severus”? Poor little bastard.)
Rowling didn’t drop the ball on everyone. Dumbledore was a cold-blooded bastard all along, just like we all knew he was. Kreacher just wanted someone to be nice to him. Lupin had a nasty, cowardly side lurking underneath his impenetrable politeness. It hasn’t escaped Ron’s notice that he’s not allowed to be good at anything but chess when Harry and Hermione are around.
That “epilogue” was beyond belief. Next time, Rowling, leave the fanfiction to the fans. They’ve already done it better.
I thought Snape’s story was great, honestly. It would have sucked if she hadn’t paralleled it to Dumbledore’s. But since he and Dumbledore ended up having roughly the same adolescence, it made Snape a tragic victim of circumstance, an ugly reminder that life is simply not fair.
Dumbledore’s story works for me because Harry didn’t have it regurgitated to him in one chapter. I’m not as irritated by Snape’s story itself as by how poorly it’s told. I’m sure she could have given Harry a way to discover the truth piece by piece, the way he learned about Dumbledore. If nothing else, it would have come off better if the poor man had told it himself, instead of giving Harry his bizarre, stilted memories of it.
If nothing else, it would have come off better if the poor man had told it himself, instead of giving Harry his bizarre, stilted memories of it.
I’m totally with you there. I mean, on the one hand, Rowling kind of painted herself into a corner there — after the end of HBP, if Harry and Snape had met again (without Voldemort already there), Harry would have had to lose his freakin’ mind and then somehow be convinced to calm down so he could hear the story. Considering Harry was pretty bent on killing Snape, that might have been tough.
At the same time, though, I hated the big blob of exposition, and I really hated that it followed Snape’s death. If Harry had somehow gotten access to those memories before Snape died, so then they could have had the big, “I’m sorry, I had no idea”/”Yeah, well…” convo? I wouldn’t even have minded the Pensieve. But I wanted Snape to get a real redemption scene. Dammit.
if Harry and Snape had met again (without Voldemort already there), Harry would have had to lose his freakin’ mind and then somehow be convinced to calm down so he could hear the story. Considering Harry was pretty bent on killing Snape, that might have been tough.
What kills me is that she did the exact same scene with Sirius Black, and handled the situation completely believably. And she hasn’t missed the parallel, because she sent Harry back to the goddamn Shrieking Shack, of all places, to meet Snape for the last time. I got all excited when I saw where they were going, which made my disappointment that much worse when the scene I was hoping for didn’t come.
Oh, man, good point. I’d completely forgotten that yeah, she already wrote the exact scene I was looking for.
I think the reason she didn’t piece out Snape’s story is because Snape’s arc is so interesting that having it parceled out would have made the book about Snape. Initially I hated it being one long exposition-y chapter, but in the end, it made the arc of Severus Snape even more tragic. The way it came down, Snape died without a friend in the world, all because he wanted to do the right thing. The profound unfairness of it is downright Shakespearean.
It was all worth it to me to have the last memory of Snape’s, though. Where he’s sitting alone in the headmaster’s office, talking to the only friend he’s got in the world, who is dead. It was a brief thing, but it really drove home how Snape gave up everything, in a way that makes Harry’s sacrifice of just his life seem weak.
I think the reason she didn’t piece out Snape’s story is because Snape’s arc is so interesting that having it parceled out would have made the book about Snape.
Which I was secretly hoping for all along. I guess I should have listened to Rowling when she told us not to get too attached to the “bad boys.”
Amanda, great points — and I did love what we learned about Snape. Like you, I figured on Snape having been in love with Lily, but Rowling made that storyline much more moving and complex than I expected.
But then, like Junk Science, I guess I was secretly hoping for a book about Snape.
The multiple parallels were great—Snape learned to be a better man from Lily, and in turn Harry learned to be a better man from Snape. Dumbledore and Snape both flirted with fascism in their youth and paid for their flirtation with the death of a beloved woman.
Like you, I figured on Snape having been in love with Lily, but Rowling made that storyline much more moving and complex than I expected.
Agreed here. I found the whole Snape thing quite beautifully tragic. But also, I didn’t think Snape thought himself a hero for loving a woman who loved someone else; I think that just became a fact of his life that he was never going to move on from Lily, because she was the first friend he ever had. She was what inspired him to go over to the good side, but what kept him there was hat he was, after all, a good person.
Also, the HP books have always had a very cruel streak–a lot of people thought Sirius’s (and in this book, Lupin’s) death(s) were unjustly quick and undealt with for characters we love so much, but I always thought that the quickness of Sirius’s death really undermined the hideously unjust, unfair, pointless nature of war. I thought hearing Snape’s story after his death–which really was a truly cruel death–made it even more painful. A real redemption scene would have been too nice to the readers (heh).
Also, I used to mind Voldemort’s being underwritten, but lately it doesn’t bother me as much. I guess I figure, if someone wrote a huge biography of Hitler, outlining his tragic childhood and explaining that this is why he grew up to be, y’know, Hitler, I’d come away with it all, but lots of people had horrifically tragic childhoods and did not, in fact, become Hitler. I think there comes a point when evil can’t really be explained; I certainly feel like that in the real world, so I don’t mind it in Harry Potter. I mean no one knows why Emperor Palpatine wants to take over everything but he’s still one scary mofo.
Here’s something that occurred to me only today about Snape’s death scene: in that scene, Harry gets exactly what he thinks he wants. He gets to kill Snape. Sure, Voldemort does the “official” killing, but Harry is right there in Voldy’s head when he does it. And, of course, Harry finds it extremely abrupt and unsatisfying … you know, the same way that we, the reader, feel about it. And he only understands Snape in retrospect … the same way we do.
Of course, I’m also one of those people who thought that the ending to “The Sopranos” was one of the most brilliant things I’ve ever seen on TV, so YMMV.
I took from Snape’s story something different.
Before I go into that I really don’t think a hot headed 17 year old who holds a grudge against someone whom he feels is responsible for not only for the death of his parents (he was outside the door when Trewlaney made her first prophecy and informed Voldy) but also responsible for the death of Dumbeldore. He is simply not going to listen.
I think I wou;d have scoffed if she had written of Harry listening to Sanpe before his death.
The pensive acts the safe go between because the what anger and hatred may still remain in Harry with Snapes utimately useless death, Harry and what Harry must know.
that said. . .
Snapes whole life has been about redemption. From the first time he used the term “mudblood” toward Lily, to trying to save her by speaking to Dumbeldore, to watching over her son, no matter how hard it was.
“Mudblood” was that one thing that pushed away that which you desire and want most. Words matter, and one may spend a life trying to make up for that one word, (or that one action) that what you want and desire hinges on.
A story was relayed to me about a woman here who was just sick of the insults and words her children used toward one another. She was trying to get through to them the damage that words can do. So she had them hammer a nail into their fence every time they said something hateful or hurtful to a family member. A month later not only did she continue to have them hammer in a nail for what they said but every time they apologized they could remove a nail.
After a month of that addition she then told them to look at all the holes in the fence. The lesson “what you say hurts and while the apology helps the wound your word causes may never heal.”
And that is exactly how I read and took the whole life and regret of Snape.
I agree that Snape’s story was compelling but poorly presented. I also really liked the 6th book. But here’s the thing. It was named after Snape and Snape is hardly a character in it. Harry spends the whole book working with Snape’s potion’s textbook and the revelation of whose it is seems kind of like an afterthought. As does the Lily-Snape chapter in Deathly Hallows. Couldn’t the 6th book have had some of Snape’s story arc pieced out to our intrepid heroes? Wouldn’t that have been a logical way to drop some hints and make the Chapter-o-exposition a little less forced? Or would that have had Harry’s head exploding?
I saw a comment somewhere else (I forget where) pointing out that Snape’s love for Lily was ultimately what saved the world from Voldemort– if Snape hadn’t asked Voldemort to spare her, then Lily would not have been able to voluntarily sactifice her own life, thus Harry would have had no special protection. I was very satisfied with how Snape’s arc ended– it was awful, but as others have said, it was a great piece of tragedy, especially since we learn that Snape’s motives in some ways were more altruistic than Dumbledore’s.
I wish we’d seen a bit more of what happened to the other characters after the battle, especially George. The last we see of him, he’s kneeling over Fred’s body with the rest of his family. I want to know if he went back to the joke shop, if he was still able to joke around without his brother to bounce off? Did he irreverently set off a bunch of fireworks on Fred’s coffin spelling out rude words?
I agree about your reaction to Hedwig– that upset me more than Mad-Eye. But Most Touching Death goes to Dobby. The whole scene with Harry digging the grave by hand, and then him, Dean and Ron all wrapping Dobby in their clothes as a mark of respect… heartbreaking. And the epitaph was just perfect– the fact that Dobby was a free elf really underlined his sacrifice.
One thing I really loved about this book though was the way that Rowling balanced all the really sad and touching moments with humour. “It’s not all wandwork, you know!” “By Merlin’s saggy left–” etc. While this book was the saddest one, it was also the funniest.
And, who didn’t cheer at the “NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!” I mean, WOOHOO MOLLY!
I loved Neville killing the snake, and also Ron’s horcrux-destroying scene. I just wish that Hermione had gotten an equally good character-development scene when she destroyed the cup, and that Ginny and/or Luna had destroyed the diadem, instead of deus ex machina.
OMGWTF HEDWIG.
For real! I was totally startled by that.
I admit, I cried when Snape died, partly because I was so mad that he was basically not in the book at all until it was time to kill him off and goddammit, he died without anyone to miss him. And because I was so sad about that, I loved the Super Exposition: The Revenge, even though I would’ve rathered it be done a bit differently. But the fact that he had no one at the end except for a painting, because the only person in the entire world who had any idea that he really was trustworthy was dead. And not just dead, Snape had to kill him. Sure he was going to die anyway, but man. Fucked up.
I’m with Sjofn: The death of Hedwig caught me way off guard (as did the death of Dobby).
The Snape exposition didn’t actually bother me so much, for the reasons that Amanda and Mnemosyne have gone into. The bit that really bugged me (other than Ginny getting to do absolutely nothing) was Harry’s exposition just before Riddle died. Why did Riddle let Harry do a bad guy monologue? It didn’t make sense other than to let Rowling explain exactly which part of Section D, Line 7 that Riddle missed.
I agree with OMGWTF Hedwig. Why did she have to die? And Molly’s little outburst was the cause of the fact that she was the smling, happy, overbearing mother for six AND A HALF BOOKS. (Which didn’t mean is wasn’t good. I loved it.) I am happy, however, that Dumbledore turned out to be an overbearing jerkoff. I always liked Snape better, and I think, honestly, she only killed off Lupin, Snape, George, Tonks, Mad-Eye, (holy crap, that’s a lot of people, what happened to two?!) I mean, really, she kinda figured, “Hey, I’ll write a longass forest scene that’s almost COMPLETELY useless, and 72 million people buy it anyay?! Wow! I think Voldemort’s death because of Section Three, Line Six, Paragraph B, etc., is wholly unfair, simply because it’s so stupid. He, having survived Dumbledore, deserved better. And the ending was so sappy my teeth hurt. I mean, really. Snape also deserved his own arc, simply because she had us believing he was Teh Bad Guy, then writes about how much he loved Lily, and in the end, it killed him. Which is some hellish mixture of Shakespeare, and Freud (the pure woman motivates the man to be good person, blah, blah, blah…) All in all, a disappointment. I demand a second generation storyline.
randomliberal -
I think it was to mess with Riddle’s head and to drive home the point that NO ONE is invincible
I agree with Mnemosyne about the Snape bit. I thought it was well done, and really, I don’t see any other way she could have done it while keeping with the tone of the series anyway. If it had been different, with little clues here and there, then the book would have been about Snape, and it just isn’t. He’s a character in Harry’s story. Admittedly, a very interesting character and one of my favorites, but it’s still Harry’s story.
I also loved how Dumbledore turned out to be such an asshole in the end. Shows that all great men (and he was) are just human like everybody else and, becaue they’re so great, their flaws are as magnified as their attributes.
And I had to reread that Hedwig scene about 4 times before I could wrap my brain around the fact that, crap, she just killed Hedwig. I see that it kind of had to happen, he couldn’t have taken Hedwig with him (a snowy white owl would have been noticed), but that was still just really cold. Plus, Dobby was very, very upsetting. However, I liked how Kreacher was redeemed in the end.
And what the hell happened to George? I want to know how he turned out after losing Fred.
From personal experience (by virtue of his being a horcrux, and thank you JKR, for not shirking any of those implications) Harry knew with certainty that Voldemort suffered from severe performance issues concerning his wand. He demanded Lucius surrender his, rendering his host a eunuch in his own mansion. He kidnapped or murdered wand specialists to find out whether or not any performance enhancements could be obtained, and went so far as to pry one from a dead man and kill in the hope that it would perform even better.
As for it being a Section D, Line 7 clause speech, just before the moment portrayed on the book’s cover, Mr. Potter’s purpose was to exploit Voldie’s performance anxiety about his ability to make his wand erupt with sufficient force and distance. Planting the seeds of doubt with, “You’ve got to ask yourself one question: ‘Do I feel lucky?’ Well, do ya, punk?” Dirty Harry made Voldie’s wand prematurely shoot out of his hand, without even having to use his own wand, but that of the emasculated Draco.
Whoa Beppie & I agree on almost everything! (the exception being, I didn’t mind not hearing more about the other characters; Rowling is an author who pretty much actively encourages speculations, theories, even fanfiction, so I think she wanted to leave some things open for further speculation. but then I’m also the only person I’ve found so far who liked the epilogue).
I’d like to mention a huge WOOHOO for Neville killing Nagini, because that was just badass, and for Ron’s Horcrux scene, for relying on one of my favorite fantasy tropes ever (hero does physical battle against his own insecurities/temptations). So good!
As for Voldemort dying over a wand mishap… eh, I dunno. I think the real reason he died was because of his own arrogance, his own inability to recognize that Snape had, in fact, gone over to the Order for good, because of love, his own thirst for power. The wand mishap was a symptom, not the underlying cause.
I think Voldemort’s death because of Section Three, Line Six, Paragraph B, etc., is wholly unfair, simply because it’s so stupid.
Somebody over at Kevin Drum’s place reminded me of something so basic that I’m embarrassed that I didn’t put the pieces together myself. Voldy doesn’t die because of the ownership of the wand — he dies because Harry had possession of all three of the Deathly Hallows when Voldy tried to kill him. That’s what that whole speech is about — Harry points out that he mastered Death (or whatever the phrase is that she uses) because Voldy never had true possession of the Elder Wand. It’s the only reason that Harry survived.
Is anyone else annoyed by the Griphook plot? As in, Harry being spared from making what could have been a very morally nuanced decision and coming to terms with how nasty wizarding history really was?
Mnemosyne- i like that explanation of Vold’s death better. But Harry had already thrown away the resurrection stone by the time of his voluntary “death.” Does it still count as posession? But I guess you could argue that he technically had it in the same way that he had the elder wand…
OMGWTF HEDWIG
For. Real. Just what the hell?
But JKR got in my good graces with Neville kicking ass, so…
Mnemosyne- i like that explanation of Vold’s death better. But Harry had already thrown away the resurrection stone by the time of his voluntary “death.” Does it still count as posession?
I’ll have to check when I get home, but I don’t think he had thrown it away at that point — I think it was still in his hand when Voldy cursed him. But, yes, given the “chain of evidence” way that things were working, he wouldn’t be able to relinquish possession of it just by dropping it at his feet.
I don’t have the book anymore (the husband returned it to the library yesterday by accident, so I don’t get to reread until at least Christmas), but I thought he dropped it on the way into the forest, right after his parents/Lupin/Sirius/etc., were summoned back. Although, I definitely could be remembering wrong and I can’t check to be sure.
Neville’s whomping of Nagini was up there among Ron v Horcrux and Molly v Bellatrix in the list of Totally Awesome things in Deathly Hallows.
I would have liked to see more of Neville/Luna/Ginny and the New DA, or more Ginny in general, but I realize there’s only one name in the title, and he’s the series’ focus. It’s not Potter and Friends, or Potter and the Weasleys.
The Taboo against the Dark Lord’s name I was not expecting, but it was neat.
He definitely dropped it right before he took off the Invisibility Cloak and went to meet Voldy. It even describes where he sees his parents, Sirius, and Lupin vanish after he does it.
I think I wou;d have scoffed if she had written of Harry listening to Sanpe before his death.
Did you not find the Sirius Black scene in the Shack believable? Because it’s the same scene. Harry wasn’t at the point where he could kill anyone yet; he had never done it before (although with him casting an effective Imperius and Cruciatus, I figured he was working his way up to a solid AK). Snape would have had plenty of time to stammer out his defense with Harry’s wand pointed at him.
And, who didn’t cheer at the “NOT MY DAUGHTER, YOU BITCH!”
Eh. I guess Bellatrix deserved the disgrace, but I don’t think Molly deserved the honor.
Why did Riddle let Harry do a bad guy monologue?
He was scared of Harry, and Riddle is adorable when he’s scared.
Dirty Harry made Voldie’s wand prematurely shoot out of his hand, without even having to use his own wand, but that of the emasculated Draco.
Heh. I don’t know why I didn’t think of it that way. Harry totally fucked Voldemort with Draco’s dick.
The Taboo against the Dark Lord’s name I was not expecting, but it was neat.
That was one of the things that genuinely spooked me. It was bizarre to see Harry saying “You-Know-Who” like the rest of the plebes.
I guess Bellatrix deserved the disgrace, but I don’t think Molly deserved the honor.
I don’t know. I hate it when characters are one note, and Molly’s been too one-note, in a really bad way, for me for a while. I like characters, not archetypes.
I hate it when characters are one note, and Molly’s been too one-note, in a really bad way, for me for a while.
Oh, me too. I don’t think Molly ever stopped being one-note, even when killing Bellatrix, that’s my point. The whole thing played like a joke.
Harry dropped the stone at his feet as he removed the retconned invisibility cloak, revealing himself where he stood. His mother and the Marauders vanish, but from that point, no mention is made of anybody moving. After Voldemort’s curse Harry may have crumpled upon the stone, which is the best way I can think to rationalize his conversation with Dumbledore, while the gruesome flayed infant shard of Voldemort’s soul that had so long occupied Harry’s scar lay dead, dying, or resurrected.
Magic is so capriciously powerful that any first-rate world-builder, like JKR, must invent rules to limit it. She is careful not to break the rules. I was so happy to see that it was Aberforth’s blue eye watching Harry from the mirror, for example. She is happy to let the reader imagine that Harry is dead, having joined Dumbledore in King’s Cross. It’s more in keeping with the conventions she’s established that Harry can have a last Sccoby-Doo explanation from Dumbledore by twisting several expectations at once, and showing that Harry has indeed mastered death.
Aberforth was an amazing character. I forgot to mention how much I liked him. He was exactly what I thought he would be: one of the few people unwilling to kiss Albus’s shiny white ass.
Well, we all know Harry can’t go on to become an Auror, because otherwise there’s a greater than 100% chance that he’ll be disarmed at some point, and then the Elder Dick will continue to wreak havoc in the Muggleverse.
Hmm… Albus Potter and the Elder Wand? No. Too early to speculate about bad fanfic/tacked-on sequels.
Snape would have had plenty of time to stammer out his defense with Harry’s wand pointed at him.
I was thinking about this at lunch (I know, sad, isn’t it?) and I know why Rowling didn’t do it that way. Snape keeping his secrets until his death was meant to be an example for Harry so he could make his final sacrifice without having his need to be a hero (correctly diagnosed by Snape) come to the forefront and ruin everything. If Harry and the others hadn’t witnessed Snape’s death, everyone would have continued thinking that Snape was a traitor and a murderer, and Snape was okay with that if it was necessary for him to do what needed to be done.
Wow, am I glad they cast Alan Rickman as Snape — he’s about the only actor I can think of who’ll be able to pull it off.
The whole thing played like a joke.
I can definitely see that, but at least it had Mrs. Weasley overpowering this person who has been built up as this extremely powerful, ruthless person. But I do see how it was contrived.
The thing that truly bugged me about the battle after Harry was “killed” was that it seemed like everything was one-sided. No real casualties to speak of for the good guys, and Death Eaters were dropping like flies. It seemed very implausible, since the protection Harry gave to the other people by his death was simply a protection against Voldemort. Also, Voldemort definitely seemed ludicrously stupid that you have to wonder how he managed to survive anything he hadn’t thought all the way through, though it makes sense that a completely evil™/i> person couldn’t understand what power there was in doing good, and therefore didn’t think that way.
Overall, I liked the action of the book, and the character development for Neville and Snape, as well as Dumbledore, were sublime. I just kinda wish Snape could have survived, but that was basically impossible given how she set up the story arc.
You know what really made me lose my shit with Voldemort? He couldn’t let Snape die with any kind of dignity. Even Harry got a quick and painless AK. Nasty fucker. I know, I know, it had to be that way, but still.
page 703
“Nobody spoke. They seemed as scared as Harry, whose heart was now throwing itself against his ribs as though determined to escape the body he was about to cast aside. His hands were sweating as he pulled off the Invisability Cloak and stuffed it beneath his robes with his wand. He did not want to be tempted to fight.”
“I was, it seems. . . mistaken,” said Voldemort.
“You weren’t.”
“Harry said it as loudly as he could, with all the force he could muster: He did not want to sound afraid. The Resurrection Stone slipped from between his fingers, and out of the corner of his eyes he saw his parents, Sirius, and Lupin vanish as he stepped forward into the firelight. At that moment he felt that nobody maatered but Voldemort. It was just the two of them.”
“the illusion was gone as soon as it had come. The giants roared as the Death Eaters rose together, and there were many cries, gasps, even laughter. Voldemort had frozen where he stood, but his red eyes had found Harry, and he stared as Harry moved toward him, with nothing but fire bwteen them.
When? In the snack with Sirius, Remus and Pettigrew?
If in the snack after Nagini had bitten him, the point was he wouldn’t have listened.
Also JKR has borrowed several different themes throughout HP one was that Harry had to pretty much remain “pure” with no death commited by him to mark his soul.
For all his blustering Riddle was through out the series, insecure. If he thought Harry knew something he didn’t, have more powerful magic than he, he’d listen.
Come on, Harry just came back from the dead and survived a second AK thrown at him by Riddle. If I were the bad guy I’d wonder and want to know wtfs up.
I have a comment in moderation that quotes directly from the book regarding when the cloak came off, when the stone was dropped and if Harry moved, or not.
I don’t know about playing like a joke. As a mom it rang true to me.
Plus I like the idea of Molly who is basicaly the cool but frumpy mom, who always can find room to set an extra place at the table being able to put the moves on Bellatrix and win. (sniff, it kinda gives me hope, sniff, sniff)
clytemnestra, you’re right. As I read more carefully, I can see that he dropped the stone as he removed the cloak and stepped into the firelight, and continued forward until blocked by the fire itself. It was everybody else that stayed rooted to the spot.
If I really wanted to cling to my pet theory, that he is lying upon the resurrection stone, I could claim that it’s even more likely that the force of the curse knocked him back upon it, rather than making him crumple on the spot.
Harry’s non-death is, I think, more supportable than dead and resurrected Harry. As I wrote over at Kevin Drum’s, The only thing that died in that green flame was the scar-horcrux, taking the gratuitously creepy form of the state Harry would have been in had he not had his mother’s protection when first cursed by Voldie.
Harry is the boy who lived, not the boy who lived, died, and came back to life. That would invite comparison to an even more preposterous story. Once the fundies sieze on this point, I expect JKR may take some heat for “turning Harry Potter into some sort of perversion of the Christ figure.”
Kevin Drum’s? URL please
In his talk with Albus he wasn’t dead and what did die or was dieing was the horcrux of Harry and the soul piece he was carrying . . . wasn’t that what that whimpering mass under the chair was all about? A part of Riddle’s divided soul?
A part of Riddle’s divided soul?
Yes, which is why Harry later implores Voldemort to not be such a wankstain, since he realizes that what he saw when he was dead was what Voldemort’s soul had been reduced to, and once Voldy was dead, that was all he had left as a soul.
Ken - re:Kevin .. never mind, found it
Reading your page 703, clytemnestra, which appeared after my reply to you, I noticed that he saw his deceased allies vanish out of the corner of his eyes as he stepped into the firelight. Did they truly vanish, or did they get only as difficult to see as he had been until he stepped forward? Is he master of the stone and able to use its power whether or not he still touches it, just as he is the master of the elder wand even if he and Draco never touched it? Why am I trying to second-guess an author as if magic served anything other than the needs of narrative?
I just can’t see Harry having died at all. If he is visited by Dumbledore’s ghost while knocked out, it would be the first time anything remotely like that happened in the series. I think his recent employment of the stone justifies his conversation with Dumbledore. I suspect JKR left explicit justification for the ability of Dumbledore to relay more just-in-time exposition ambiguous, so as to to leave the reader with the belief that Harry was dead, dying, or in some limbo state. He does appear to be in a limbo state, because Dumbledore implies that if Harry would like, he could just get on a train and go on, but earlier, when asked point blank if he is dead, Dumbledore replies in the negative. The choices at this point, are all Harry’s, because, being in possession of all three of the Deathly Hallows, he has mastered death, which is different than dying and coming back to life.
Okay, for a bit I was getting worried that Harry had dropped the stone in the woods way before he got to where Voldy and the Death Eaters were (meaning, like, a mile or so before). But he only drops it right before the confrontation.
I still think that Harry survived because he was in possession of all three of the Deathly Hallows — not literal, physical possession, but that’s not necessary by the rules that Rowling set up, or Harry wouldn’t be able to use the power of the Elder Wand to survive. It’s about who has rights to the object, not who has it in their possession (which is why the sword shows up in time for Neville to use it — as a Gryffindor, he has a right to the sword that is superseded by the goblin’s physical possession of it). That’s also why Voldy can’t fully access the power of the Elder Wand — he has it in his hand, but he’s not the proper owner.
That’s also one of the reasons that Harry leaves the stone laying in the woods — since he’s the proper owner, no one else can use it anyway, even if they find it.
I suspect that they only got difficult to see. As you reading the “long march” and Albus’ discussion with Harry they are all talking about current events, meaning that they are and have always been with him.
I suspect you have to be touching the stone just as you must “touch” the cloak.. the wand is different because as Olivander stated “the wands choice the wizard” so in a sense they(wands) are sentient. The other two Hallows are not.
arg
“the wand chooses the wizard”
Why am I trying to second-guess an author as if magic served anything other than the needs of narrative?
Because if an author is any damn good, s/he will have already figured these things out and will be able to convey them to the reader. I’m pretty sure that the answers are all in there — hell, Neville’s action at the climax pays off something that happened in Book 2. It’s only a bad writer who decides, “And then magic happens and fixes everything!”
After JackGoff’s comment confirming for clytemnestra that what Harry saw with Dumbledore was the dying horcrux shard of Voldemort’s soul that would be all he had left (if he didn’t make some different choices, like remorse), I have to ask, which of those two separate possibilities is it? I agree with Mnemosyne (with just about anything!) that JKR has to have conveyed these things to the reader to be any damned good (and I have already conferred upon JKR the degree of world-builder, first class).
We all agree that if anything died, it was the shard of Voldemort’s soul that enabled Harry access to the subjectivity of Voldemort (once he learned in the Ministry of Magic in book 5 to stop trying to force himself into Harry’s mind). That, however, is probably not the flayed infant, an echo of what got plopped into a cauldron in book 4, that Harry and Dumbledore discussed at King’s Cross (Xtian enough? This was the first book I can recall anybody, especially Harry, uttering the phrase, “Thank God.”). When Harry recovers, he learns that Voldemort has also only just recovered from the confrontation. Wherever it was Harry got knocked to by the AK curse, Voldie was knocked there too.
At King’s Cross, Harry looked ready for his Equus closeup with access to robes, while Voldie had looked better. It was not just because of Harry’s right of possession of the maguffins that kept both of them alive (excellent point about why Neville earned it no matter how much Griphook coveted it!). Voldemort’s Flaw in the Plan of mainlining Harry’s blood (suffused with the magic of his Mother’s sacrificeTM) had both of them returning to consciousness, if not from death. If it was death from which Harry returned, wouldn’t that make Voldemort a dead and resurrected villain?
In the end, Voldemort was a victim of magic in which he had placed his trust, while Harry trusted his friends, mentors, and adopted family first. The person in whom he had placed a lot of trust was Dumbledore. Did not Dumbledore qualify as a master of death prior to Harry? Can Dumbledore be summoned merely because a young wizard happened to fall upon a magic stone? Probably not. Dumbledore had had possession of the cloak, the Elder Wand, and the Stone, and encouraged Harry to claim ownership of them. They spoke together in a place to which only those two had access, as magical peers; Harry and Albus, Masters of Death. Which metal band will record the album of the same name?
Another mark of an author who is any damned good, is the ability to create narrative with sufficient complexity that a degree of ambiguity of interpretation is possible, forcing the reader to participate in the creation of the world with the author.
Sorry Ken but Albus did not have possession of all three hallows at the same time. Harry got the Invisibility Cloak in book 1 — Harry took ownership of the cloak which really never belonged to Albus as he had borrowed it from James. The lins of possession of the cloak is from James to Harry with no stop in between for Albus -
I think there has to be a will in there some where because I know I just argued against my position 3 or 4 comments ago.
But whatever that line of possession is, Albus did not have the stone until book 6 when Harry already had had the cloak for 6 years.
If then, Dumbledore was never a Master of Death like Harry, he was at least already on a first name basis with HE WHO SPEAKS IN ALL CAPS AND LIKES KITTENS, having been introduced by Snape. DD was, after all, only a guest at Harry’s party, no matter whether his attendance was mandatory by virtue of Harry’s having been in contact with the stone, or if DD crashed Harry’s après vie party. While DD can be longwinded in his explanations, Voldemort got back to his feet long before any Death Eater started wondering whether sufficient time had passed for him to be clinically dead. By now, I’m just sticking to my position that neither Harry nor Voldie died in Aragog’s old Lair, they were just knocked out, under circumstances of some fairly complex magical transaction, the nature of which just teeters on the brink of being discernible without coaching from JKR outside of the given text.
Voldy knocked out in Aragog’s old lair? when?
The clearing where Voldie and the Death Eaters waited for Harry was the same place Ron and Harry had encountered Aragog in Book 2, only all the spiders were assaulting Hogwarts. Ostensibly, they had returned home with Hagrid, who may have been happier to see Death Eaters keeping the place spider-free than he otherwise would have been.
Aragog’s lair was where they were when Voldie thought he’d successfully AK’d Harry, but he was knocked to his feet at the same time, and for the same length of time, as Harry, coming to only as Harry did. If Harry died and came back to life, big deal, so did Voldemort.
I think that Molly killing Bellatrix is only “one-note” if you buy into the idea that women’s bravery is lesser than men’s if it’s in defense of their children. If you assume that Molly was just acting on maternal instincts, then it’s “one-note” but we have to remember that Molly is a Gryffindor just as much as Harry, Ron, Hermione and Neville. What she did was BRAVE– Bellatrix was the most dangerous person in the room at that time, given that everyone was protected from Voldemort. True, Molly didn’t know this, but she killed her nonetheless. And for me, I think it was much better that Molly defended Ginny, rather than a patriarchal figure like Harry or Mr Weasley– much more poignant. Also, it was great to see the Mother-Figure in the role of active defender rather than as a passive sacrifice.
From personal experience (by virtue of his being a horcrux, and thank you JKR, for not shirking any of those implications) Harry knew with certainty that Voldemort suffered from severe performance issues concerning his wand. He demanded Lucius surrender his, rendering his host a eunuch in his own mansion. He kidnapped or murdered wand specialists to find out whether or not any performance enhancements could be obtained, and went so far as to pry one from a dead man and kill in the hope that it would perform even better.
ROFLMAO
I’m pretty sure that the answers are all in there — hell, Neville’s action at the climax pays off something that happened in Book 2. It’s only a bad writer who decides, “And then magic happens and fixes everything!”
Agreed. In fantasy there is ALWAYS going to be a sense of a deus ex machina because, duh, it’s fantasy, you can in fact make whatever you want happen. But I think JKR has had this planned pretty much from the start, and it works (IMO).
Also, for those calling Molly one-note, I may be biased because she kinda reminds me of my own mom (who would totally face down Bellatrix Lestrange for me), but I’ve never found her so one-note it was bothersome. Also, don’t forget that she lost two brothers to the fight against Voldemort, back in the day, and so has reason to be extra protective of her family.
I’m embarrassed to have to ask this, but what was the Neville connection to Book 2?
what was the Neville connection to Book 2?
The Sorting Hat, in book 2, produced Gryffindor’s sword for Harry when he faced Tom Riddle from the diary in the Chamber of Secrets.
I think that Molly killing Bellatrix is only “one-note” if you buy into the idea that women’s bravery is lesser than men’s if it’s in defense of their children.
Not what I meant. I meant Molly fighting Bellatrix and winning was a change in her character, namely that we only ever saw her in the context of her kitchen or as a doting mother. Pissed off and looking for vengeance was, to me, a welcome change.
Yes I understood the reference to aragog’s lair… it’s the “knocked off his feet” I wasn’t sure of. I had to go back and read that chapter again. It hadn’t stuck in my mind I guess because Riddle being knocked off his feet or even knocked out is speculation on Harry’s part due to what he’s hearing.
It’s the only scene where we see Molly fighting, however once she left the Room of Requirement (telling Ginny to stay there because she was under age - which is the only reason given for her forbidding Ginny from fighting) she was there to fight and probably in the thick of it. Just as Tonks was. We see snippets of the female teachers fighting.
One thing that bothered me and I kept “asking” the book. When everyone was supposed to meet up at the burrow and failed to show - why didn’t Molly consult her clock?
As is my habit I re-read the preceding volume before a movie or another volume comes out (and if I’m reading for a new HP movie I re-read the book it comes from too before it’s release) and I don’t remember that clock being destroyed or damaged. Did I forget something that happened in Book 6?
In Book 5 or 6, Molly stopped carrying it around with her everywhere she went because everybody was pegged at “mortal peril” er, around the clock, so it was no longer useful.
Ah! Thanks Ken
Aberforth was an amazing character. I forgot to mention how much I liked him. He was exactly what I thought he would be: one of the few people unwilling to kiss Albus’s shiny white ass.
Loved Aberforth. Loved him! As for Albus’s shiny white ass… it was made of marble like the rest of that cold-hearted bastard. I’m starting here because this is what made me the angriest. Dumbledore was a lousy teacher who played favorites for no good reason and manipulated to the end and beyond. He threw Snape to the wolves, almost literally, when Snape was a minor in his care. Classic short-sightedness. He saw a boy whose own parents didn’t value him and assumed that the boy was, therefore, worthless. This makes the scene in Book 5 where Dumbledore forced Snape to shake hands with Sirius even worse. Dumbledore had no right to be contemptuous of Snape for his mistakes - the same mistakes Dumbledore had made years earlier with less reason. If there’s one thing that comes through in “The Prince’s Tale” it’s that Snape was isolated more and more as he grew older.
“Pity the living, and, above all, those who live without love.” Easy to say, you hypocritical fucker.
Ahem. Second thing that pissed me off? The continuation of the house system. Despite all evidence to the contrary and a few bones thrown by JKR, it seems clear that students fall into neat categories: Heroes, Braniacs, Chumps, and Pariahs. Ugh.
I thought that the whole Almost Dead subplot was pretty good, though. I liked that even when Harry (who was at his most likeable in this book) realized that Dumbledore had raised him like a pig for slaughter, he was able to shrug it off and move beyond the personal. The scene of him walking to his death was really well done.
The bit with Severus and Lily as little kids was great. I wanted more and I’m sure there are 1,000,000 fanficcers who agree with me.
Great imagery! The graveyard! The silver doe! Poor Bathilda! How they’re going to cram all this into a movie I don’t know.
I didn’t mind the epilogue horribly, but it was unnecessary. It didn’t give much away and it didn’t tie up many loose ends. And, of course, it’s clear that Slytherin is still the Pariah House, no matter what anyone says. Sigh. Of course, we see that in addition to having a eulogy, Snape also got to be memorialized as a second name. I’m sure that would make it all worthwhile, or would have it Snape hadn’t died without so much as an “attaboy” or the chance to say, “Psst! Minerva! I’m on your side so don’t hate me.”
Ron was… less obnoxious than usual. I still don’t think he’s any match for Hermione. No hint that she’s done anything with her life other than producing children. To be fair, there’s no mention of the boys’ careers either, but of course they’ll have them because that’s the default setting.
I suppose it’s not impossible that Voldemort is recovering from hyperventilating after a long drawn-out villainous maniacal cackle in celebration of knocking Harry to the ground with the killing curse, but I don’t see Harry’s conclusion as speculation as much as the only reasonable inference possible. All the Death Eaters have crowded toward V, in silence, while Bellatrix is repeating “My Lord…” at V until he declines any help. Had V remained standing in triumph over his most important adversary, would not all the Death Eaters been cheering and leering around Harry while V rolled Harry’s head around with his foot just as he had done to Cedric back in Book 4 (or was that only the movie)? Something was clearly wrong. Harry asked himself if Voldemort had been knocked unconscious also, and some narrative voice answered that it seemed as if that was the case. By now, Harry no longer thought he was dead, but that he had been unconscious, and that V had been also.
I originally saw the flayed infant as the Voldemort soul shard that was now separated from Harry by the killing curse, and after this discussion I have to agree with JackGoff who made me think of it as how what remained of Voldemort’s soul appeared to Harry while both of them were unconscious.
I originally saw the flayed infant as the Voldemort soul shard that was now separated from Harry by the killing curse, and after this discussion I have to agree with JackGoff who made me think of it as how what remained of Voldemort’s soul appeared to Harry while both of them were unconscious.
Oh, I’m sorry for not making it clear, but I also think that the flayed baby that Harry sees is the shard of Voldemort’s soul attached to Harry, but I also think Harry realizes that an equivalent shard is what is left of Voldemort’s soul that Voldy is still in possession of, if that makes any sense. I think the shard that Voldy has remaining is of the form similar to either the flayed baby or the creature he existed as in GoF before he used Harry to regenerate his former body.
And, of course, it’s clear that Slytherin is still the Pariah House, no matter what anyone says. Sigh.
I don’t think it’s so much the “Pariah House” as the asshole house. Draco, for one, never seemed like a total outcast except to the extent that he made himself one by running around boasting about being a Pureblood.
Still, I would have liked to see at least a few Slytherins fighting the final battle to point out that they’re not eeeeevil, just selfish and self-centered. Maybe have Draco get a few shots in, or at least trip up a few Death Eaters.
Of course, we see that in addition to having a eulogy, Snape also got to be memorialized as a second name. I’m sure that would make it all worthwhile, or would have it Snape hadn’t died without so much as an “attaboy” or the chance to say, “Psst! Minerva! I’m on your side so don’t hate me.”
Yes, but … that was how Snape fully expected to die. He was a deep cover mole, after all. He never expected to survive and be exonerated. That was part of his heroism and what Harry learned to respect.
And it sounds like you’re assuming that Harry didn’t tell everyone (including McGonagall) that Snape really was a hero after all. I think it’s pretty clear that he did, or he wouldn’t have named his son after him.
Still, I would have liked to see at least a few Slytherins fighting the final battle to point out that they’re not eeeeevil, just selfish and self-centered.
I think JKR probably felt that Horace Slughorn filled the role of the token “good” guy Slytherin in the final battle.
What Albus did re: Harry, he had to do.
Once Voldemort acted on the prophecy the die for Harry’s life was cast. It would have been the same if he had chosen to go after Neville. The die for Neville’s life would have been cast.
Albus knew this and basically made sure Harry had the tools by which to defeat Riddle.
You see a manipulative bastard in Albus. I see someone who recognized that once the initial prophecy was put into motion the best he could do was make sure the “chosen one” (which Harry really was since Voldemort had chosen who was to be his executioner when he went after the Potters and not the Longbottoms) was protected, lived and could defeat the evil.
Harry was a marked man from the time Voldemort tried to kill him in his crib. The scar was the literal physical marking of this “Marked Man.”
There’s even a scene of it in the book. Harry tells Voldy at the final battle that Snape wasn’t his man and why. So, even though he doesn’t live to see it, Snape is vindicated at the end. And McGonagall was there for it, she was fighting Voldy before Harry started on him.
Still, I would have liked to see at least a few Slytherins fighting the final battle to point out that they’re not eeeeevil, just selfish and self-centered.
That would have been enough for me. It really bugged that the Slytherins were all bad, the Ravenclaws less so, then the Hufflepuffs, then the Gryffindors. It’s clear that Slytherin is still the Pariah house because little Albus is afraid that is he’s sorted there his parents will stop loving him. He didn’t pull that out of thin air. I hope Scorpius is sorted into Hufflepuff.
Dang. This is going to make a fanfic writer out of me.
And I realize that Snape probably didn’t expect a reward and Harry already revealed him as a hero to the audience before Voldemort was killed but this was all after Snape died. His own life was awfully bleak with only a few moments of happiness or near-happiness, as far as we know. In a way, this is brilliant if JKR’s point is that life is unfair. The Screwing of Severus Snape (as the unwritten book in my mental library is titled) is all about life being unfair and then some.
What Albus did re: Harry, he had to do.
Did he really? All the secrecy, the manipulations, the string pulling… all necessary? He couldn’t have intervened to prevent the Dursley’s from maltreating Harry? He couldn’t have done his best to teach students good values, treat them impartially, and build a force against evil in any form? He couldn’t have thrown Severus a bone by mentioning his own dalliance with Dark Magic?
I don’t buy it, but I actually like that JKR made Dumbledore a bastard. He may have been a good man in the “for the greater good” sense, but he was addicted to power and wouldn’t stop treating the world as his personal chess set despite his professed humility at the end. This is good, actually, because without Dumbledore’s arrogance, there’s no story at all.
I’ve learned not to go back and change my first answer on multiple-choice exams, so I may have to apply a rule of following the first hunch in trying to decipher scenes dripping with so much ambiguity. I think ambiguity is a feature, not a flaw, because it’s what makes reading an activity rather than something passive; the reader is forced to participate in creating the world with the author’s guidance. Then, we can surface out of our respective immersions and compare with each other our experience of the narrative.
DD tells Harry it’s all happening in his head, and that dying Voldie soul shard is there also. Being the wizard with the right to possess the Deathly Hallows (thanks, Mnemosyne, for that insight) lets me suspend my disbelief in Harry’s ability to witness the sorry state of Voldie’s soul (yech! JKR is a good writer to keep this atheist following along and accepting, for the sake of narrative, all the rancid 19th century spiritualist metaphysics upon which her world is structured) while having a calm chat with a dead wizard who is decidedly not a ghost. Dumbledore tells him it’s all happening in his head, even though DD’s info was not there previously. So, Harry gets a visit from DD while being bothered by his scar for the last time.
Ultimately, it doesn’t matter whether Harry’s touching the stone or if Voldie is also unconscious. Still, you’d think Voldie would understand by now that attacking Harry is bad for his own health. Why didn’t Voldie try having a lieutenant attack Harry? Wouldn’t that have worked? It’s a glaring omission from any of the Death Eaters’ considerations, that. Does anybody remember any text about Voldemort fearing damage to himself if Harry is destroyed?
BTW, I quite enjoyed the rest of the book too. I’ll stop obsessing over this bit now, probably.
Another instance of JKR being well aware of the trope of the wise counselor and turning it on its head. Well done.
yech! JKR is a good writer to keep this atheist following along and accepting, for the sake of narrative, all the rancid 19th century spiritualist metaphysics upon which her world is structured
That flayed, whimpering baby… there’s an image that will stick in my head for years to come. There’s a lot of moments like that in this book, actually. Like you, I don’t normally have patience with the metaphysical (one reason why the fact that all Snape’s redemption comes after his death rankles) but JKR does it well. I thought it very odd that while Harry and Albus are chatting away in the railway station Harry keeps looking at the baby while Albus insists they can do nothing. Again, how does he know? Who died and made him King of the Afterlife?
His own life was awfully bleak with only a few moments of happiness or near-happiness, as far as we know. In a way, this is brilliant if JKR’s point is that life is unfair. The Screwing of Severus Snape (as the unwritten book in my mental library is titled) is all about life being unfair and then some.
It’s partly that, but it’s also partly her theme about how the choices we make shape the people we become, even if we start off with a deficit. You have Harry and Voldy, two orphan boys who make very different choices (though there’s the hint that Voldy has some hereditary insanity due to inbreeding going on), and you have Harry and Severus, two boys with ultra-sucky home lives who make different choices.
And that’s what makes Severus a hero — he chooses to do better after he sees what his bad decisions have cost him. It’s a constant struggle for him to make the right choices, but in the end, he succeeds.
About the part with unity and all…
It’s weird: Rowling drops some heavy hints that unity within Hogwarts is what they should be striving for, but then for some reason decides that it’s only unity between Ravenclaw, Hufflepuff, and Griffindor that really matters. Voldemort, of all people, was the one that truly wanted to unite the houses, by making everyone Slytherian.
And one last thing on the same theme before I go into my staff meeting: that’s why Harry has the whole speech at the end where he tries to get Voldy to express some remorse. Even at this late date, Voldy can say repent and go to jail instead of having to die. But Voldy refuses to regret any of the choices he’s made, and that’s why he dies (and goes into a very nasty afterlife as a flayed baby, but that’s a whole different thing …)
Even at this late date, Voldy can say repent and go to jail instead of having to die.
Which, like Albus not playing god all the time, is a reasonable enough course of action but makes crappy fiction. I’m a little nuts on the book right now because none of my friends who are reading it are finished yet (Argh!) so I have lots of rants built up. Also, I’m a middle-school teacher, and practically every teaching or discipline scene in the HP novels makes me flinch. Lecture-style teaching - flinch! Corporal punishment - flinch! Tacit permission to bully - flinch! Sorting hat - flinch. The epilogue was no exception and they hadn’t even got to the damned school yet.
I am still having some trouble with the “right” to the hallows thing. sorry to backtrack on this post. I reread the scene where Harry disarms Draco, and he does it by pulling three wands out of Draco’s hands. I guess it surprises me that two hallows are hereditary whereas one involves the “free choice” of a wand who chooses its master and yet, the wand doesn’t really seem to choose at all. I can see if he had disarmed Draco with Expelliarmus, that would have been a feat of better wizardry. But just grabbing it while he’s distracted? Gives Harry possession of Draco’s wand, but not exactly mastery over Draco, which is how the Elder Wand would need to choose him. I guess the distinction bothers me because in this series there is a lot of importance given to rightful owner v. possessor (for example, Griffendor sword, “he’s nicking sirius’ stuff!”, etc).
Maybe the Elder Wand follows different rules precisely to highlight why you shouldn’t wish for a tool of ultimate power? Because the nature of it is such that it only knows force, not “right”?
Just obsessive speculation, i guess
I dunno sniper…most of the good teacher thought Corporal punishment was distasteful, and if I remember correctly, the best teachers were NOT lecturers. The only people who did straight lecturing was Binns (who no one listened to) Umbridge (evil) and Lockhurt (incompetent). Flitwick, McGonall, Lupin, heck even Snape (although he did worse than lecture, he did nothing from as near as I can tell) all did practical teaching.
I guess it surprises me that two hallows are hereditary whereas one involves the “free choice” of a wand who chooses its master and yet, the wand doesn’t really seem to choose at all.
I’m not sure that the other two are technically hereditary — after all, the reason that Dumbledore can’t use the Stone is that Voldy put a curse on the ring it was mounted in, not because it will only work for the hereditary owner. (I think … hmm, may have to doublecheck the book when I get home.) Dumbledore returns the cloak to Harry because it’s his by right (previous owner was Harry’s father) but I don’t think it’s implied that it’s because of his hereditary right to it.
I think you’re right about the Elder Wand though — part of the reason it’s cursed is that it recognizes physical force as a valid way of obtaining it, which is why it has such a nasty history of sneak-murder of its owners (ie the original owner having his throat slit in the middle of the night, etc.) The reason Voldy’s tomb-robbing and Snape-murdering doesn’t work is that he hasn’t taken it from the correct owner, and he’s too impatient to actually figure it out.
That’s one of the things I like about this book, actually — the whole aura of “Voldemort is infallible and the most powerful wizard EVAH!” takes a serious beating. He’s extremely talented with curses, but clearly other people (like Snape) are more talented than he is in other areas. Which is his downfall — he assumes that his area of expertise can automatically overcome anyone else’s expertise, and it’s just not so. Remember, the non-wizard-raised Voldy is just as ignorant of the story of the Deathly Hallows as Hermione and Harry are, but he doesn’t bother to do the research to find out. Lazy lazy lazy.
I’m sure there were Slytherins fighting in the last battle. I’ll have to go back and check, but really, the only ones we know by name are Draco, Crabbe, and Goyle, the three who have already chosen to be Death Eaters. We’ve had six books to know a dozen plus Gryffindors by name, and a dozen of Ravenclaw and Hufflepuff together.
Clytemnestra, who were the second set of people who should have been in the epilogue? George, of course, is the first set. Bill/Fleur? I can’t see it. Victoire, their daughter, is seventh year or maybe sixth - she wouldn’t want them hanging around while she was snogging Ted Tonks II.
Well, there was Blaise, and Pansy, and Millicent.
Well, there was Blaise, and Pansy, and Millicent.
See, I thought that Pansy had led a mass walkout of the Slytherins before the battle began. Maybe I misread — I’ll have to check.
Sniper -
you and I both know that “Sage on the Stage” is still used in most of the schools throughout the world, so this shouldn’t be a surprise or a shock to you.
Actually searching my memory the first acts of corporal punishment were first presented in book 5 (except for Filch always wanting Dumbledore to use it and he would not)
When Umbridge uses it on Harry he would not let her win and did not tell even Ron and Herminie…. when they found out it was treated as abuse - the movie also addresses it this way.
By the time it is being used in book 7 is it clear that it is evil and abusive - and does not on the whole effect the desired results, a broken student body… infact it fuels their rebelion
There’s a whole lot of lreal life applied thinking there.
Tacit permission to bully - flinch!
You have Harry and Voldy, two orphan boys who make very different choices (though there’s the hint that Voldy has some hereditary insanity due to inbreeding going on)
If Rowling hadn’t gone on about her story being about “choices,” her poor handling of Riddle’s background might not have mattered so much. As it turned out, Tom was never given a choice. He was “funny” from birth, and presumably before. Eleven-year-old boys aren’t rabbit-strangling sociopaths because they’ve chosen to be.
He couldn’t have intervened to prevent the Dursley’s from maltreating Harry? He couldn’t have done his best to teach students good values, treat them impartially, and build a force against evil in any form? He couldn’t have thrown Severus a bone by mentioning his own dalliance with Dark Magic?
He couldn’t have modified Snape’s memory before the fucking prophecy got loose in the first place? He had the kid in his custody, for fuck’s sake; he knew exactly what he had heard, and he let him go. Not that having a Chosen One come along and take care of the Dark Lord problem for you wouldn’t be convenient, or anything.
I’m sure there were Slytherins fighting in the last battle.
I honestly wonder why Rowling doesn’t understand Slytherin’s popularity with fans. Maybe she’s not disturbed that there’s an entire house designated for the Future Oxygen Thieves of Great Britain and Ireland, and that kids get put into it before they’re old enough to know where they are in the first place, but most adults tend to take issue with that kind of shoddy characterization.
I think the Elder Wand works for Harry for the same reason Hermione’s did: the story needed it to.
Antigone brings up a point that i hadn’t thought of . . . most teachers: Tralawney, Sprout, most of the DADA teachers, McGonical, etc. were hands on, learn by doing.
What bothered me most about the whole series (which may speak more to the educational system JKR was brought up in - my husband was brought up in the stoggy, hanger in the shirt, Cambridge system) is that if a student wasn’t doing well there was little, if no encouragement to practise outside of class.
They couldn’t practice all through summer and the only thing remotely like a student formed peer study group was the DA. It is where Neville finally learned that he wasn’t near a squib at all - he could actually do magic, he just needed more time and practise… not the dimissive crap he’d been getting from everyone EXCEPT Barty Crouch JR aka Mad Eye Moody and Sprout.
I also forgot to mention that I got an obscene, unreasonable thrill from seeing Crabbe and Goyle talk for the first time.
sniper -
He didn’t know they would, he apologized to Harry for it. But Harry needed the protection. When the series started he lived under the stairs - there was something appealing to kids who either feel they’ve been mistreated or have been, they connect. Same with the bullying. . . I didn’t read it as much as tactic approval - but something for kids who suffer from bullying to identify with. In their lives it may never be addressed and it may actually have the tactic approval from faculty at the school they attend (I’m thinking of a case in the next town over from mine- the parents were so distraught over the principal’s attitude to the bullying, he even bullied the mother) -
Having someone to identify with is what made the series so popular.
So he was an imperfect great man. . . gee never heard that one before.
Clytemnestra, I’m not ENTIRELY sure that there wasn’t a peer group…there was a Charms club, after all. That being said, the fact that muggle-borns couldn’t practice magic over the summer, but magic-born children could, struck me as a huge injustice, and was called one by Harry and Dumbledore.