I finished last night. I'm sad that the series is over.
I thought the way Voldemort died was kind of anti-climatic. I wanted Harry to kill him personally, with the killing curse. Neville cutting off Nagini's head was awesome though.
I actually liked the way Voldy died--he killed himself in a sense--bringing about the very thing he most feared. And I think because he used the horcruxes that he had no real soul left to enjoy immortality. So by pursuing dark magic to live forever he destroyed his own chance at eternal life.
i finished this one wednesday, went through a few days of withdrawal and then caved into my addiction and started re-reading book 6. i have a feeling that i'm going to end up starting the whole thing again, right from the beginning. there is so much you miss, especially when you read the books so quickly.
a few quick notes about the last book:
the room got pretty dusty when:
neville came back as a total badass. i love how he really came into his own.
mcgonnegal and the students rallied around harry, totally ready for battle
fred... RIP. i'm glad george wasn't around to see that happen, otherwise the scene would have been unbearable. i love that percy was there and heartbroken.
when harry accepted his fate to die, i really thought he was going to be gone. j.k. did a great job of making that inner turmoil of facing death come through. also, everyone he loved walking with him, helping him through it, was very touching.
i was a little surprised that:
dumbledore was truly dead. i'm glad she kept him dead, but i expected him to be around in some fashion, even if it was just through a picture.
malfoy didn't end up being a (semi) good guy. i thought for sure that when they were caught and taken to the malfoy's house, that draco would say that he didn't recognize harry.
one big question, and tell me if i just missed it in somewhere:
how the hell did neville get the gryffindor sword? didn't the goblin take it?
i finished this one wednesday, went through a few days of withdrawal and then caved into my addiction and started re-reading book 6. i have a feeling that i'm going to end up starting the whole thing again, right from the beginning. there is so much you miss, especially when you read the books so quickly.
a few quick notes about the last book:
the room got pretty dusty when:
neville came back as a total badass. i love how he really came into his own.
mcgonnegal and the students rallied around harry, totally ready for battle
fred... RIP. i'm glad george wasn't around to see that happen, otherwise the scene would have been unbearable. i love that percy was there and heartbroken.
when harry accepted his fate to die, i really thought he was going to be gone. j.k. did a great job of making that inner turmoil of facing death come through. also, everyone he loved walking with him, helping him through it, was very touching.
i was a little surprised that:
dumbledore was truly dead. i'm glad she kept him dead, but i expected him to be around in some fashion, even if it was just through a picture.
malfoy didn't end up being a (semi) good guy. i thought for sure that when they were caught and taken to the malfoy's house, that draco would say that he didn't recognize harry.
DD is dead, but he does have a picture in the headmaster's office.
I thought Snape's chapter and Ron's chapters were best (Silver Doe and The Prince's Tale). I was so mad at ron when he took off, but his torment with the horcrux was well written. And snape...just great stuff there. And telling harry to look at him so he can look into "Lily's eyes" as he dies...yeah, that was pretty great.
one big question, and tell me if i just missed it in somewhere:
how the hell did neville get the gryffindor sword? didn't the goblin take it?
He's a true gryffindor, and the sword will always appear from the hat for a true G-man (according to Chamber of Secrets). The goblin got screwed over...which I thought was great. But yeah, that was cool because it showed how much of a G-Man Neville really was...
It took me a bit to get into this one, but once I did, stayed up late for three nights and finished last night. Wonderful book, and a worthy conclusion to a classic series.
I have to wonder if J.K. Rowling will attempt anything else? Her own shoes will be mighty hard for her to fill. She'd almost have to completely switch genres.
It took me a bit to get into this one, but once I did, stayed up late for three nights and finished last night. Wonderful book, and a worthy conclusion to a classic series.
I have to wonder if J.K. Rowling will attempt anything else? Her own shoes will be mighty hard for her to fill. She'd almost have to completely switch genres.
She said she will attempt a more adult series and maybe another children's series but has said she's "done enough in the wizarding world." Her own shoes are enormous and I can't help but think whatever else she does will get panned at some level....the Harry Potter series was lightning in a bottle...just a great story and concept and world she created. Doing that twice is damn near impossible...but, I'd buy her next genre of books. She's made me happy for nearly a decade, not many people other than my family I can say that about.
Great line! Although I can't even say that about my family...
Yeah, I think of people like Harper Lee, or Ralph Ellison -- such astonishing debut novels that they basically never published another thing, perhaps paralyzed trying to match themselves. There are many good writers who are always going to be unfavorably compared to their best work -- John Irving, Pat Conroy... in Rowling's case, she wrote seven fine, compelling books which is more than most well-regarded authors can claim. Even people who write a good series rarely sustain across volumes as well as she has.
Her books are really timeless -- what's more, I truly think she has introduced an entire generation to the wonders of READING as a distinct form of entertainment. I know my Grandson only became an avid reader when he discovered the Potter series. Now he loves to read all sorts of books.
Rowling might be tempted to write under a pseudonym, as others have done, just to sidestep her own long shadow.
Her books are really timeless -- what's more, I truly think she has introduced an entire generation to the wonders of READING as a distinct form of entertainment. I know my Grandson only became an avid reader when he discovered the Potter series. Now he loves to read all sorts of books.
Yes, I agree. Not only reading in general, but the length of the books. These kids "growing up Rowling" will not be intimidated by lengthly books as a lot of kids my generation were. We always encourage reading with our kids, but the fact that my daughter has been read to/listened to audiobook of all the series is a big deal. She has actually started to read the first book herself. Oh, and she's not yet 7. JK really has allowed younger readers to find the magic in books...something I was lucky to have as a kid basically living at the library instead of being a latchkey kid.
Rowling might be tempted to write under a pseudonym, as others have done, just to sidestep her own long shadow.
I liked how they resolved Voldemort v. Potter. I admit to skimming the last very last chapter so I could get some sleep. I was saddest over the deaths of Dobby and Fred. I was creeped out by Snape having a doe patronus until this thread explained it. I am trying to think what my patronus would be. I loved Harry calling Moldy Voldy Riddle. Freaked Moldy Voldy out.
I think Ralph Fiennes is a bad cast as Moldy Voldy. Not scary enough.
So, there is a bit of a debate about something in the book that alludes to a very, very mature theme:
The question is out there as to whether JK is alluding that Dumbledore's sister Ariana was raped by the three older Muggle boys, while others say "no, these are books that kids read, she'd never do that..."
I think it IS her intention to allude to a rape, but just as she writes things like "made an obscene gesture" or "cursed under his breath" she lets the reader fill in what that is.
She is clever at this, because it allows younger people to read/listen to the books and create their own ideas of what happens when a person "curses" (darn?) while older people can understand broader context.
And, as a father of 3 from 0-7 I can tell you straight away that the ONLY thing I would ever get thrown in jail for would be the murder of someone who molested/raped/kidnapped/killed my children. If they got jumped and beat up terribly, that's one thing and I'd get the police involved, but the line is crossed at sexual assault and there is no coming back.
I think JK most definitely intended people to assume she was raped and traumatized by the muggles...without saying it directly, she provided enough context clues for this father to understand and feel for the Elder Dumbledore and to understand...and also show that Albus understood too.
To younger children they can take away that "something very bad happened..the muggles hurt her very badly." To older people, we know what that something is.
What do you guys think about that scene? It isn't said directly, but the feel, the reaction of Harry and Hermione and the circumstances lead me, at least, to feel she was suggesting that she was raped, sending DD's dad into a rage and earning him a life stint in Azkaban.
A great ending to an unbelievable series of books.
You have to wonder how much of the final plot J.K. knew back when she wrote the first book.
While driving to/from NYC two weeks ago, my wife finally decided to start Book 1 of the series. I was driving and there wasn't much on the radio, so I had her read the book aloud. Dumbledore's defeat of Grindlewald was mentioned on the back of Dumbledore's chocolate frog card along with Nicholas Flammel, but I don't recall ever reading about him again throughout the series.
At that point, I hadn't yet started reading DH, but I knew instantly that the Grindlewald battle would be referenced; however, my guess was that Harry would research this epic battle and use whatever spells Dumbledore used against Grindlewald in his upcoming fight with Riddle.
In the end, I'm glad I was wrong, but I can't help but wonder how much of the Deathly Hallows plot line J.K. planned out nearly 17 years ago.
A great ending to an unbelievable series of books.
You have to wonder how much of the final plot J.K. knew back when she wrote the first book.
While driving to/from NYC two weeks ago, my wife finally decided to start Book 1 of the series. I was driving and there wasn't much on the radio, so I had her read the book aloud. Dumbledore's defeat of Grindlewald was mentioned on the back of Dumbledore's chocolate frog card along with Nicholas Flammel, but I don't recall ever reading about him again throughout the series.
At that point, I hadn't yet started reading DH, but I knew instantly that the Grindlewald battle would be referenced; however, my guess was that Harry would research this epic battle and use whatever spells Dumbledore used against Grindlewald in his upcoming fight with Riddle.
In the end, I'm glad I was wrong, but I can't help but wonder how much of the Deathly Hallows plot line J.K. planned out nearly 17 years ago.
