Harry Potter 7

[edyzmedieval]

Anyone here go to Mugglenet forums?

I think more people visited that in the past 72 hours than the number of people who visited the Org in an entire year.

[ShadesPanther]

I think more people visited that in the past 72 hours than the number of people who visited the Org in an entire year.

5 years...

[edyzmedieval]

My BIG gripes.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

- Ron speaking Parseltongue...cheesy
- Ron marries Hermione... that is waaay off the mark
- In the ending, Voldemort fires an Avada Kedavra to Harry, but he doesn't die, and instead, goes to visit Dumbledore
- the epilogue is weird really
- the book is TOTALLY unsuited for kids

And the biggest one of all

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

- the sad thing which is called ENDING. I started reading HP when I was 9 years old, and all this time I really liked the books, and now it's over.

Plus, some characters die, like Fred, Tonks, Remus and even Hedwig and especially Dobby.

[Marshal Murat]

Now comes the flood of fan fiction with

1. Poor writing
2. Bad plots
3. Made-up spells

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

- In the ending, Voldemort fires an Avada Kedavra to Harry, but he doesn't die, and instead, goes to visit Dumbledore

That was actually fairly well explained, and I could understand that happening. My biggest gripe with the whole Voldemort-Harry thing was:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The duel at the end! Both of them only fired a single spell, and Harry's just happens to hit Voldemort's and rebound it directly at him. A longer and better-written duel would have added some depth and would have been much more realistic. Also, this way Harry doesn't even have to kill Voldemort, Voldemort essentially kills himself, though it was by accident. Honestly, just because Rowling wants her hero to be a saint doesn't mean he can't use Avada Kedavra on someone who deserves it.

[ShadesPanther]

That was actually fairly well explained, and I could understand that happening. My biggest gripe with the whole Voldemort-Harry thing was:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The duel at the end! Both of them only fired a single spell, and Harry's just happens to hit Voldemort's and rebound it directly at him. A longer and better-written duel would have added some depth and would have been much more realistic. Also, this way Harry doesn't even have to kill Voldemort, Voldemort essentially kills himself, though it was by accident. Honestly, just because Rowling wants her hero to be a saint doesn't mean he can't use Avada Kedavra on someone who deserves it.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I really did hink that Harry would kill him with Avada Kedavra. But It was the wand unable to kill it's master thing. Well why did it kill Harry fine out in the woods??

[doc_bean]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I really did hink that Harry would kill him with Avada Kedavra. But It was the wand unable to kill it's master thing. Well why did it kill Harry fine out in the woods??

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I think it was because this time he called out for the wand, in the first fight he actually wanted to die so the wand did his bidding ? Essentially the spells collided (like in the Goblet of Fire) but Voldemorts was pressed back immediately and he was hit by both spells ?
I agree the line about the wand not willing to kill the master is confusing and could possibly indicate something else. However, I've long since come to accept the little inconsistencies in HP...

[GeneralHankerchief]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The wand was allowed to "kill" Harry the first time because Harry allowed it to happen (i.e. he didn't fight back) and because it knew Harry wouldn't die because he owned all three Hallows. The second time was when there was actual fighting involved, so that's when it betrayed Voldemort.

[doc_bean]

My BIG gripes.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

- Ron speaking Parseltongue...cheesy
- Ron marries Hermione... that is waaay off the mark
- In the ending, Voldemort fires an Avada Kedavra to Harry, but he doesn't die, and instead, goes to visit Dumbledore
- the epilogue is weird really
- the book is TOTALLY unsuited for kids

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-He imitated it, which I found hilarious. The further along the series goes the dumber/arrogant Voldemort looks and how easier it seems to get to defeat him. He starts off as this big, immortal, nearly invincible wizard and in the end gets blown up by his own wand.
-Their relationship has been coming since book four, at least
-That part is pretty complicated, essentially: Harry did die, in doing so Voldemort destroyed the Horcrux (which was not fully bound to Harry's soul, since he was shielded by his mother's love), that was baby Voldi in the station, the station is the place between life and death, where he could talk to the ghost of Dumbledore, he did however have a tiny connection with life left (the blood bond with Voldemort), harry had united the Hallows and apparently had become 'the master of death', so he could return to life with the Horcrux destroyed. I'm not entirely sure how important the blood bond is though, that part got pretty complicated
-The epilogue indeed doesn't seem to match the tone and writing of the rest of the book, however, it does tie in with the first book. I could have done without it.
-Kids love this kind of stuff ! I thought HBP was worse with all the soul splitting though, but perhaps for reasons most kids could not understand (non-religious reasons at that). The latter books do seem aimed more at adults than kids, but can be enjoyed by both I'd say.

[doc_bean]

I was wrong:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

-That part is pretty complicated, essentially: Harry did die, in doing so Voldemort destroyed the Horcrux (which was not fully bound to Harry's soul, since he was shielded by his mother's love), that was baby Voldi in the station, the station is the place between life and death, where he could talk to the ghost of Dumbledore, he did however have a tiny connection with life left (the blood bond with Voldemort), harry had united the Hallows and apparently had become 'the master of death', so he could return to life with the Horcrux destroyed. I'm not entirely sure how important the blood bond is though, that part got pretty complicated

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

It's actually the blood bond that makes it impossible for Voldemort to kill Harry, but the Voldemort part of him was destroyed by it (since it's dark magic it can destroy a Horcrux).
Harry was the master of death because he had indeed united the three Hallows, but that he came in possession of all three doesn't seem to have him the master of death, rather he got because he WAS the master of death all along, the one who greeted Death as an equal and accepted it. Ultimately I guess the Hallows where more symbolic than anything else, after all, Dumbledore DID defeat Grindelwald when he had the wand (and was the rightful owner).
Of course, this would imply some sort of reverse causality since the wand came into his posesion through a series of coincidences, yet was destined to do so.


Like i always said, HP books are enjoyable, but don't stand up to well against scrutiny...

I have way too much time on my hands...

[edyzmedieval]

I have way too much time on my hands...

[Dumbledore] Alas, Harry, that is, indeed, the truth... [/Dumbledore]

[Whacker]

OK, halfway through book 6. Starting a bit of a ways into 3 these books really don't strike me as something that would be... appropriate... for younger children.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Ron and Hermione need to friggin' give up and just shag already.

[caravel]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Started well but did seem to drag on in the middle then rush to a quick conclusion near the end. It seemed as if the author almost ran out of ideas and patience and hastily penned through the destruction of the remaining horcruxes in a matter of a chapter or so.

I was disappointed with how the really rather engaging Horcrux story that had been started in the previous book had been accelerated to it's ultimate anticlimax. The first Horcrux, the locket was surrounded by an interesting plot, was hidden in a location that contributed towards the plot of the previous book, clearly required the sword of Gryffindor to destroy it and it's destruction was dramatic. The locket takes most of the book before it can be destroyed, the cup takes quite some retrieving and the idea of the Gringotts break in is interesting, though this is where it all starts to go wrong with the far fetched escape on the dragon. Once they arrive back at Hogwarts the plot and quality of writing nosedives with the poorly put together, and rushed through destruction of the tiara in the room of requirement by the fiend fire. Ron and Hermione are unrealistically absent from the plot later on and then return with the destroyed cup - basilisk fangs, chamber of secrets etc - this takes away from the importance of the sword somewhat, the fang is acceptable against a soft organic book but not against metallic items such as the ring, locket, cup and tiara. Then Neville Longbottom turns up with a sword, which turns out to be the sword of Gryffindor and unceremoniously beheads the serpent - just to get that one out of the way and save a few pages. All far too easy and convenient. I'm not entirely sure how the sword magically made it's way from Griphook the Goblin, last seen in Gringotts, to Hogwarts ending up in Neville's hand... perhaps I missed that bit somewhere?

The way that Voldemort was destroyed did make some sense however. As I understood it, Harry was the true master of the Elder Wand as he had acquired it from Draco Malfoy who had been the previous master. His disarming of Malfoy and taking of his own wand caused the Elder Wand to recognise Harry as it's master, this is why Voldemort's curses against Harry with that wand had all failed - the first killing the Horcrux inside harry and the second rebounding and killing Voldemort with his own curse. It made sense that Voldemort would bring about his own end, though the whole scene of his demise seemed rather contrived.

As to the deaths, they were far too clinical and callous from the author's perspective. Central characters killed off with hardly a mention, especially in the case of Snape, one of the Weasley twins, Remus Lupin and Nymphadora Tonks. Killing off for just for the sake of it just to boost sales with the "who get's killed off?" mania.

I liked the book, and the previous 6 better, but I do think it could have been so much better if the last few chapters had been better thought out and not rushed through to conclusion.

[naut]

I whole-heartedly agree Caravel, it did seem incredibly rushed especially towards the end.

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The way that Voldemort was destroyed did make some sense however. As I understood it, Harry was the true master of the Elder Wand as he had acquired it from Draco Malfoy who had been the previous master. His disarming of Malfoy and taking of his own wand caused the Elder Wand to recognise Harry as it's master, this is why Voldemort's curses against Harry with that wand had all failed - the first killing the Horcrux inside harry and the second rebounding and killing Voldemort with his own curse. It made sense that Voldemort would bring about his own end, though the whole scene of his demise seemed rather contrived.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

That's how I thought at first, but remember the last major duel with the Elder Wand. Grindelwald was an extremely powerful wizard, and the rightful owner of the Elder Wand. At the time, he was about equal with Dumbledore, and yet Dumbledore defeated the Elder Wand and took it from Grindelwald.

Harry, on the other hand, was never as powerful as Dumbledore, and Voldemort was almost as strong as Dumbledore, as evidenced by their duel in book five. Whereas Grindelwald and Dumbledore duelled for a long time, with the one who did not have the Elder Wand winning in the end, Harry and Voldemort each send one curse, and Voldemort just dies. You'd think that Voldemort could at least have put up some resistance, seeing as he was much stronger than Harry.

[doc_bean]

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I was disappointed with how the really rather engaging Horcrux story that had been started in the previous book had been accelerated to it's ultimate anticlimax. The first Horcrux, the locket was surrounded by an interesting plot, was hidden in a location that contributed towards the plot of the previous book, clearly required the sword of Gryffindor to destroy it and it's destruction was dramatic. The locket takes most of the book before it can be destroyed, the cup takes quite some retrieving and the idea of the Gringotts break in is interesting, though this is where it all starts to go wrong with the far fetched escape on the dragon. Once they arrive back at Hogwarts the plot and quality of writing nosedives with the poorly put together, and rushed through destruction of the tiara in the room of requirement by the fiend fire. Ron and Hermione are unrealistically absent from the plot later on and then return with the destroyed cup - basilisk fangs, chamber of secrets etc - this takes away from the importance of the sword somewhat, the fang is acceptable against a soft organic book but not against metallic items such as the ring, locket, cup and tiara. Then Neville Longbottom turns up with a sword, which turns out to be the sword of Gryffindor and unceremoniously beheads the serpent - just to get that one out of the way and save a few pages. All far too easy and convenient. I'm not entirely sure how the sword magically made it's way from Griphook the Goblin, last seen in Gringotts, to Hogwarts ending up in Neville's hand... perhaps I missed that bit somewhere?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

I thought the evolution of the horcrux quest mirrored the way Voldemort destroyed his own soul/self to make them. The first Horcrux was the diary, which was extremely powerful and dangerous and capable of 'resurrecting a new Tom Riddle'. The second one was the ring, hidden in a place not many would find, capable of killing anyone who puts it on, it ultimately was the reason Dumbledore died. The third one was the locket, also well hidden and well guarded, yet wasn't cursed in the way the ring was cursed, it did almost kill harry and like the diary, seemed capable of resurrecting it's own Voldemort (the locket is arguably a more dangerous/better Horcrux than the rind, but we do find out about it sooner too). The cup was hidden in Gringotts, a place deemed impossible to rob by common means, yet was not protected by 'dark magic' like the previous two items. The tiara was hidden in the RoR, perhaps because Voldemort was arrogant enough to assume he was the only one who could enter the room to retrieve something (he must have realised people could always use it to hide stuff, yet they never seemed to have retrieved what they had hidden), an incredibly arrogant assumption and weak protection. Nagini was an animal and thus generally considered unfit to make into a horcrux, yet he did so anyway. With each additional horcrux he created he became less human, but more arrogant and careless, convinced of his own superiority.

The sword of griffindor was never really needed to destroy a horcrux, they should just destroy them beyond (ordinary) magical repair. Dark magic fits this definition very well (Snape was capable of 'curing' or 'countering' dark magic, but almost everyone else said wounds caused by dark magic don't heal, even Snape couldn't fully reverse the effects), the fiendfyre thing was rather cheap, but also not totally a deus ex machina. Same with the basilik fang.

I agree that the pacing wasn't brilliant but I didn't think it was in the other books either (book 1 and 4 were worse imo).

But like I said, HP isn't good because of it's solid plotting and consistent world, it's good because of the characterization and the sense of adventure.