# Harry Potter- Discussion with spoilers



## Bill4728 (Jul 19, 2007)

I'm opening this so we can discuss the book and it's plot. 

Don't read on if you don't want it spoiled

PS I do know that there isn't anything to discuss yet.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 19, 2007)

Hermione dies - or maybe it's Ron.


----------



## 3kids4me (Jul 19, 2007)

Steve...are you quoting from the Onion again or did you somehow get your hands on an advance copy?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 19, 2007)

Not The Onion.  This version has both Ron and Hermione surviving, and Hagrid as well.  Not sure if it's the real deal, because I heard the last word in the book was "scar" and this manuscript does not end with "scar".  

So take it for what it's worth.



> His eyes flew open wide in time to see the little cottage just as he’d imagined it with his parents standing on the stoop. They were both very young, only a few years older than Harry at best, and he vaguely wondered if they remained stuck at the age of their death in the afterworld or were merely called forth the way Harry envisioned them.
> 
> “There you are, Padfoot, you old dog. Who is she this time? You haven’t been ‘round for weeks,” James Potter said, clapping Sirius on the back. Even his voice sounded very much like Harry’s.
> 
> ...


----------



## Mel (Jul 19, 2007)

JKR has apparently said that it WAS supposed to end with scar, but only recently she changed it.  She also has said that 2 characters she had not intended to kill off will die in the final chapter.   I'm not reading the above, but it could be credible - we'll know in a little more than 25 hours (east coast) some folks will know a few hours sooner.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 20, 2007)

Mel said:


> JKR has apparently said that it WAS supposed to end with scar, but only recently she changed it.  She also has said that 2 characters she had not intended to kill off will die in the final chapter.   I'm not reading the above, but it could be credible - we'll know in a little more than 25 hours (east coast) some folks will know a few hours sooner.



In the manuscript I have there are two deaths in the last chapter - characters that I certainly wouldn't have expected.


----------



## wise one (Jul 21, 2007)

It is now after midnight on the east coast and I have my copy.

The final sentence of the epilogue is "All is well."


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 21, 2007)

wise one said:


> It is now after midnight on the east coast and I have my copy.
> 
> The final sentence of the epilogue is "All is well."



My manuscript is not the final version then.  Mine ends with "frightened to death".  My wife's copy will be delivered today.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 21, 2007)

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Not The Onion.  This version has both Ron and Hermione surviving, and Hagrid as well.  Not sure if it's the real deal, because I heard the last word in the book was "scar" and this manuscript does not end with "scar".
> 
> So take it for what it's worth.



Got the book today.  Finished reading it already.  Unless I really missed something the passage you quoted wasn't in it at all.


----------



## LisaH (Jul 22, 2007)

Luanne said:


> Got the book today.  Finished reading it already.  Unless I really missed something the passage you quoted wasn't in it at all.


No wonder we haven't seen you posting all day long


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 22, 2007)

Luanne said:


> Got the book today.  Finished reading it already.  Unless I really missed something the passage you quoted wasn't in it at all.



I'm very dubious about the authenticity of the MS I downloaded.  After reading parts of it, it just doesn't have the detail and richness in the prose.

More significantly, the word "hallows" does not occur anywhere in the MS.

Right now I'm pretty sure that it was written by someone who is an avid Harry Potter fan and a skilled (but not at the level of Rowling) writer.  My guess is that writing the MS I have would have required 1000 hours or more.  It boggles my mind that someone would do that for no financial gain and no personal recognition.

I can understand why someone might consider it a personal challenge to take the clues and information provided by Rowling and write their own Rowling-like Book 7.  I can even see websites where there might be contests to see who would can write the best pseudo-Rowling follow-up.  I'm just don't see, though, why someone would put forth the effort involved for the relatively paltry gain from anonymously putting it on the internet 48 hours before it would be shown as a fake.


----------



## BarCol (Jul 22, 2007)

got the book at 10:00 a.m. Saturday at Costco finshed reading it last night - yes it did tie up a bunch of loose ends and the ending scene was pretty good and epilogue  is one of those nice "ahhhhhh" type endings..so I can be happy.....


----------



## Luanne (Jul 22, 2007)

LisaH said:


> No wonder we haven't seen you posting all day long



I _do_ have my priorities.    This morning we went to see the newest Harry Potter movie, on an IMAX screen with a 3-D ending.  Very impressive.  Older dd has finished her copy of the book as well, so now she and I have to huddle in corners and whisper when we want to talk about it since the other family members haven't finished the book yet. :whoopie:


----------



## wackymother (Jul 23, 2007)

I finished it this morning. I didn't look at this thread because I didn't want to see any spoilers. 

I'm a children's book editor, and that sample above is laughable. 

The new book is fantastic--very richly detailed and among the best written of the series. The way that Rowling ties up all the threads is truly masterly. She has a tremendous, tremendous gift.


----------



## Ekaaj (Jul 23, 2007)

Hi there,
I have a question for all of you die-hard (obviously!  ) fans.  I'm not a fan of Harry Potter; have never read any of the books, although I do know what they are about, and have a general idea of the stories.  Just was never interested in that subject matter, really - no matter who the author.

My question is, I always thought they were meant as children's books - is that not the case?  Seriously, I mean absolutely no offense, I just always pictured the stories as geared for children.  My husband loves _The Lord of the Rings_ trilogy, and some of the writing in those stories is somewhat more adult; often above a young child's understanding.   Are JK Rowling's stories comprehensible to kids, but also entertaining to adults?  (And no, I don't think that all books must be geared towards one or the other - not meaning to start a debate on that.)  I'm just curious about the entertainment value to both children and adults.  Do kids like both the books _and _the movies?  (I did notice that in the above example of LOTR, many more "kids" and teens seemed to like the movies, as opposed to the books.)  What about adults?

Anyway, I was just curious, and this seemed as good a place as any to ask the question.  I'm glad people seem to be enjoying the new book, as well as the discussion.  I do love reading - a good book is a great find!


----------



## wackymother (Jul 23, 2007)

Yes, the Harry Potter books are appealing to adults as well as children. So are the movies. The books are more sophisticated than the movies--especially the first two movies, which were very kid-oriented.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte (Jul 23, 2007)

As the series has progressed the books (and movies) have become darker and starker.  While the latter entries are not adult, they are certainly not fare for small children.

The comparison with Lord of the Rings is apt for the later books in the series.  In fact, I would say that that the later entries in Harry Potter have a higher terror quotient than LOTR.


----------



## Bill4728 (Jul 23, 2007)

Ekaaj said:


> Hi there,
> I have a question for all of you die-hard (obviously!  ) fans.  I'm not a fan of Harry Potter; have never read any of the books, although I do know what they are about, and have a general idea of the stories.  Just was never interested in that subject matter, really - no matter who the author.
> 
> My question is, I always thought they were meant as children's books - is that not the case?  Seriously, I mean absolutely no offense, I just always pictured the stories as geared for children.



When the first Harry Potter  came out it was not listed a just a childrens book. They became childrens books when the second book was the top selling book for >15 weeks and the industry didn't like to have to say the #1 book was about a 12 year old. So at that time they made the unwise choice to classify all the Harry Potter books as "children books".  So now because it is a "childrens book" they don't list it on the best seller list at all. 


The first book was magical but almost all the books since then are much more young adult to adult reading and not children at all.


----------



## Ekaaj (Jul 23, 2007)

I see!  Thanks for the clarification, everyone!


----------



## Bill4728 (Jul 23, 2007)

No one is talking about the book so I'll start.

I loved how Neviell became such a heroic figure!!  He was the only one to step foward when they all thought Harry had died to say he would not follow Voldemort not matter what. He killed the snake with the sword. ( which worked out better than a wand)  It was great seeing him mature thru the whole series of books.


Also I loved at the end Harry, who always was the only one to call Voldemort by his name,  stopped callinghim Voldemort and started calling him "Riddle". It really pissed Voldemort off to be called Riddle. (Also that was what Dumbledore also called Voldemort.)


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 23, 2007)

Bill4728,

I liked that Neville became strong and heroic also.  But how did he get the sword?  I thought Griphook took it after they escaped from Gringotts.

Thought the whole book was great.  Was glad with the ending- didn't seem too corny.  Would've liked to see Umbridge suffer a bit more.

How will they ever make a movie of this?  It's so action packed I can't imagine it at all.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 23, 2007)

tlwmkw said:


> Bill4728,
> 
> I liked that Neville became strong and heroic also.  But how did he get the sword?  I thought Griphook took it after they escaped from Gringotts.
> 
> ...



The sword topic was kinda dropped at the vault - never said Giphook took it, only that he had it in his hand at one point. But I think it didn't matter if Giphook took it or it was left in the vault. The sword belonged to Godric Gryffindor and therefore would come to the aid, thru the Sorting Hat (once again), when a true Griffyndor needed it. So Neville puilled it out of the hat to kill the snake.

My confusion is what happend to George Weasly? We know Fred died but I lost track of George. And something was mentioned about the incident with George Weasley...? I probably missed it when my eyes were reading too fast!


----------



## Luanne (Jul 23, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> My confusion is what happend to George Weasly? We know Fred died but I lost track of George. And something was mentioned about the incident with George Weasley...? I probably missed it when my eyes were reading too fast!



George lost an ear near the beginning of the book, when the "7 Potters" were being moved.

And I have a question.  For some reason this is fuzzy.  Who was the traitor, the one who gave away when Harry was going to be moved?  Was it Mundungus?

Dh hasn't finished reading yet.  I can hardly wait for him to tell us that he was correct about Snape all along.  Of course he also didn't think Dumbledore was really dead.............


----------



## wackymother (Jul 23, 2007)

Bill4728 said:


> When the first Harry Potter  came out it was not listed a just a childrens book. They became childrens books when the second book was the top selling book for >15 weeks and the industry didn't like to have to say the #1 book was about a 12 year old. So at that time they made the unwise choice to classify all the Harry Potter books as "children books".  So now because it is a "childrens book" they don't list it on the best seller list at all.




This is not quite correct. The first Harry Potter book was published, both here and in the UK, as a children's book. The US publisher is Scholastic, which is exclusively a children's publisher. 

The first Harry Potter book quickly went to the top of the New York Times best-seller list. At that time there was only one list, with both adult and children's books. 

When Harry Potter began to outsell every other book so that it dominated the NYT best-seller list, OTHER publishers--publishers of adult books--asked the Times to establish a second list exclusively for children's books. The New York Times did, and now Harry Potter books appear there.


----------



## justnosy (Jul 23, 2007)

*Harry's wand*

I must have missed something (reading too fast maybe??) - why was he able to repair his wand (with the Elder(?) wand) since even the wandmaker said it couldn't be fixed?


----------



## wackymother (Jul 23, 2007)

Because the Elder Wand is like the father of all wands, the master wand. Harry's wand couldn't be fixed by human hands, but it could be fixed by this one all-powerful wand, handled by its true owner.


----------



## wackymother (Jul 23, 2007)

Luanne said:


> And I have a question.  For some reason this is fuzzy.  Who was the traitor, the one who gave away when Harry was going to be moved?  Was it Mundungus?




Yes, it was Mundungus. But Snape, working with Dumbledore, has enchanted him (can't remember the name of the spell). It's explained in the part, fairly near the end, where Harry is using the Pensieve to watch Snape's memories.


----------



## Bill4728 (Jul 23, 2007)

George was there at the end with the Weasleys (He was OK except for the ear)


----------



## Luanne (Jul 23, 2007)

We also saw the newest Harry Potter movie this weekend.  We were trying to figure out if some of the characters who are fairly prominent in the books (but not so much in the movies) will be brought into the later movies.  For instance, Charlie and Bill Weasley haven't been seen in the movies.  Charlie was mentioned, when the dragons were brought for the tri-wizarding tournament.  But Bill hasn't been mentioned at all.  And with his promenance in the last book, I'm not sure how they could cut him out entirely.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 23, 2007)

Luanne said:


> George lost an ear near the beginning of the book, when the "7 Potters" were being moved.
> 
> And I have a question.  For some reason this is fuzzy.  Who was the traitor, the one who gave away when Harry was going to be moved?  Was it Mundungus?
> 
> Dh hasn't finished reading yet.  I can hardly wait for him to tell us that he was correct about Snape all along.  Of course he also didn't think Dumbledore was really dead.............



I remember about the ear and that George was there when they assigned battle tasks...but when all the Weasleys are around dead Fred (and named as being there), George is not mentioned (or that is what I missed reading) and I'd have though his twin dying would have made him a chief mourner...

The "traitor" was Snape.. on Dumbledore's order - as for Snape not to know the true date of the move would have put Snape in danger of being blown as a double agent. Snape put the 7 Harry Decoy idea in to Dung's head (can't recall if it was a Confundus or an Imperius spell). This was explained thru Snape's memories when Harry watched them in the Pensieve after Snape was killed.


----------



## 3kids4me (Jul 23, 2007)

Okay, so since I'm not a Harry Potter reader, I read the Wikipedia version of the last book (ducking).  Here's my question:  Didn't the author say that her last book would keep anyone from writing an unauthorized sequel?  If Harry and Ron have kiddies going off to Hogwarts, doesn't that scream sequel?  

Sharon


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 23, 2007)

I thought Dudley was going to be the one who gave away the date of the move because he acted very strangely when they were leaving- kept asking where Harry was going and wanted to go with him.  Also acknowledged that Harry had saved him from the Dementors.  I guess Dud wasn't so bad after all.

I was very glad that Hagrid and his brother were in at the end.  Felt very bad about Dobby though.  Loved Luna's role.


----------



## Bill4728 (Jul 23, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> I remember about the ear and that George was there when they assigned battle tasks...but when all the Weasleys are around dead Fred (and named as being there), George is not mentioned (or that is what I missed reading) and I'd have though his twin dying would have made him a chief mourner...



When Harry walks in and see all the Weasleys around Fred it says that George is kneeling at Fred's head.


----------



## EAM (Jul 23, 2007)

*Deathly Hallows*

I had expected "deathly hallows" to mean a Rowling version of the communion of saints.  And though that is not the correct meaning, I found it interesting that Harry received so much support from various characters who had passed from this life, who were, in effect, a Rowling version of the communion of saints.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 23, 2007)

Bill4728 said:


> When Harry walks in and see all the Weasleys around Fred it says that George is kneeling at Fred's head.



You are right! Hubby brought the book home with him and I double checked that part - thanks! Guess I was skimming there rather than reading


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 23, 2007)

EAM said:


> I had expected "deathly hallows" to mean a Rowling version of the communion of saints.  And though that is not the correct meaning, I found it interesting that Harry received so much support from various characters who had passed from this life, who were, in effect, a Rowling version of the communion of saints.



I think she pulled from alot of different "sources" for story bits. I mean, what other famous story do you think of when you read about a young lad pulling a sword from an object...? But I say this not as critism at all! Just acknowledgment. I loved all the books and think Rowling did a great job ending the series...if this IS the end  

By the way, what's with Ron & Hermoine's kids' names?? Rose and HUGO? where did THAT come from?


----------



## Lee B (Jul 24, 2007)

I dunno where those names came from, but I'll be on the lookout in my next read of the series.  JKR sure knows why those names:  She has back stories that go generations.

I was proud of Neville, too, and expected that he would turn out to be heroic.  My throat got lumpy when Harry went into the Forest to die.  I expected Professor Snape to turn out to be trustworthy and wasn't disappointed.  JKR made him even more human and more heroic than I would have thought possible.  Dumbledore also was better revealed than I had expected.

I adore J.K. Rowling.  She's just fabulous.  She DID write for children, but she knows that children can handle a lot of scary stuff in a book because a lot of their young lives is scary, too.

I urge anyone who thinks that the subject matter is not interesting to give Book 1 a try.  I read it shortly before the first movie opened, then went right back to the library until I read every one that was out.


----------



## debraxh (Jul 24, 2007)

tlwmkw said:


> Bill4728,
> 
> I liked that Neville became strong and heroic also. But how did he get the sword? I thought Griphook took it after they escaped from Gringotts.
> 
> ...


 
Well DH still has the book, but I discussed the sword with DDand she confirmed it was the Griffendor one, not a Slytherin.  I guess it just reappears magically when needed by someone deserving.  Since Griphook was at the final battle I guess he could have brought it with him..

I agree about the movie. To capture the action and close the gaps it would have to be at least 4 hours long. It will be interesting to see what they do with it.

I believe it was the best book of the series and except for a small portion about 1/3 of the way in (when they were camping and around the time Ron left) it moved very fast. Although the ending was a bit la-dee-dah to me, I think Rowling did a wonderful job telling the final chapter. It was very satisfying that the loose ends were all tied up.


----------



## debraxh (Jul 24, 2007)

3kids4me said:


> Okay, so since I'm not a Harry Potter reader, I read the Wikipedia version of the last book (ducking).  Here's my question:  Didn't the author say that her last book would keep anyone from writing an unauthorized sequel?  If Harry and Ron have kiddies going off to Hogwarts, doesn't that scream sequel?
> 
> Sharon




Hey, that's better than the people we saw in Costco on Saturday.  I spotted at least 2 people going over to the stack of books, picking one up, reading the end, then putting it back.  I hadn't finished it at that point so stayed away in case they starting broadcasting the end to those in the area!

And I think she specifically meant a continuation of the Harry vs. Voldemort story.  I agree she's left an opening for a new series on further "adventures at Hogwarts".  I would say that it would never fly, but for someone with her talent she just might be able to pull it off.


----------



## debraxh (Jul 24, 2007)

Ekaaj said:


> Hi there,
> ... I do love reading - a good book is a great find!



Indeed it is.  So, perhaps you should start with the Sorcerer's Stone?


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 24, 2007)

*Just for Fun*

Want to take a stab at what the 5 basic laws of Gemp (was it Gemp - I don't have the book right now) prohibited being conjured from thin air?

We know food is one as Hermione said that. I add on wealth/money, shelter, and magic itself (ie: can't wish for more wishes). I can't come up with a 5th.... unless it's life itself.

Anyone else have a thought?


----------



## KforKitty (Jul 24, 2007)

Just finished and it was a cracking read.  I had guessed quite a bit of the storyline myself.  I knew Snape was loyal to Dumbledore and had killed him under orders - I posted such after book 6 was released.  However did not guess it was the love of Harry's mother that made his do Dumbledore's bidding.  I also thought Harry was an unknown Horcrux and would have to 'die' for that bit of Voldemort's soul to be destroyed.

Was sad at the death of Dobby but pleased that Harry, Ron and Hermione lived.

Kitty


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 24, 2007)

I saw someone reply to my other post and say Neville got the sword out of the sorting hat (which was Godric Gryffindor's hat) like in the Chamber of Secrets, but how is that possible since Griphook now has the sword?  We know they lost the sword and that's why Ron and Hermione had to go and find the Basilisk teeth to destroy the other horcruxes.  Did the sword magically leave Griphook to come to a Gryffindor in need?

I agree with you Kforkitty- it was a cracking good read.  I also predicted some of the plot points but there were still many that I didn't expect.  Rowling is good at surprising you that way.


----------



## tim (Jul 24, 2007)

In the Epilogue, Teddy Lupin is kissing Victoire, a cousin of Harry Potter's kids.  Who is Victoire?  I'm guessing she is the daughter of Bill and Fluer.  What do you think?


----------



## Mel (Jul 24, 2007)

Yes - exactly!  The sword was enchanted to always turn up for a "true gryffindor" in need. In the pensieve chapter, Dumbledore tells Snape to make sure when he leaves the sword for Harry (ends us as Ron), that he must leave it in such a way that it is taken in such a way to show a true need, and to show courage.  Despite what the goblins may think, this is a powerful magical item, and as such, much like the elder wand, it chooses whether to recognize its owner.  In use by someone other than an owner it recognizes, it is likely just a plain goblin-made sword.  Maybe better than a typical sword, but without its magical powers.

JKR did not explain everything that I expected - I don't recall someone using majic late in life, as was apparently promised.  We didn't really get James and Lilly's backstory - we still don't know what their professions were.  We don't know what they did to "defy the Dark Lord."  If Lily hated James that much, what happend in year 6 to change things  (I'm assuming year 6, since James became Head Boy)?

There is room for a Star Wars situation here - not another Harry Potter story, but a James Potter, or Lily Evans story.

On the other end, there were a few loose ends too - and again room for an "Albus Severus Potter" book.  And one thing Harry doesn't quite get right.  He didn't have to kill Draco to defeat him, and Draco wasn't defeated using the Elder Wand.  Harry can bury the wand, and die of natural causes, and still be defeated by someone.  Hope nobody gets any ideas


----------



## Luanne (Jul 24, 2007)

tim said:


> In the Epilogue, Teddy Lupin is kissing Victoire, a cousin of Harry Potter's kids.  Who is Victoire?  I'm guessing she is the daughter of Bill and Fluer.  What do you think?



Yep, that's my thought.


----------



## KforKitty (Jul 25, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> Want to take a stab at what the 5 basic laws of Gemp (was it Gemp - I don't have the book right now) prohibited being conjured from thin air?
> 
> We know food is one as Hermione said that. I add on wealth/money, shelter, and magic itself (ie: can't wish for more wishes). I can't come up with a 5th.... unless it's life itself.
> 
> Anyone else have a thought?



One magic law is certainly that you can't resurrect someone who's died.  Voldemort cheated death because of the horcruxes and therefore his soul lived on.

Kitty


----------



## wauhob3 (Jul 25, 2007)

I know its minor but what was Petunia supposed to "Remember" that she paled and kept Harry in their home? I thought we'd find out in this book. Is just that she loved Lily as a little girl and that she wanted to go to Hogwarts herself?


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 25, 2007)

wauhob3 said:


> I know its minor but what was Petunia supposed to "Remember" that she paled and kept Harry in their home? I thought we'd find out in this book. Is just that she loved Lily as a little girl and that she wanted to go to Hogwarts herself?



This was answered in Order of the Pheonix, at the end. Petunia was reminded that she had entered into an agreement (probably magical but not specified) with Dumbledore when she took Harry in as a baby. Her taking Harry in then sealed the agreement and also sealed the magical enchantment, generated by Lily's sacrifice, aroud Harry as long as he could call that place home. Dumbledore said he put his trust (in old magic) in Lily's blood - which meant Petunia. Petunia agreed and couldn't change her mind when the going got tough.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 25, 2007)

Mel said:


> JKR did not explain everything that I expected - I don't recall someone using majic late in life, as was apparently promised.  We didn't really get James and Lilly's backstory - we still don't know what their professions were.  We don't know what they did to "defy the Dark Lord."  If Lily hated James that much, what happend in year 6 to change things  (I'm assuming year 6, since James became Head Boy)?
> 
> There is room for a Star Wars situation here - not another Harry Potter story, but a James Potter, or Lily Evans story.
> 
> On the other end, there were a few loose ends too - and again room for an "Albus Severus Potter" book.  And one thing Harry doesn't quite get right.  He didn't have to kill Draco to defeat him, and Draco wasn't defeated using the Elder Wand.  Harry can bury the wand, and die of natural causes, and still be defeated by someone.  Hope nobody gets any ideas



I think what Lily and James did to defy the Dark Lord was just to fight against him. And they escaped from him 3 times (as did the Longbottoms), which was stated in the Phrophecy. Exactly what those escapes were is never recounted. Nope, no idea what they did as their professions.

It said in either Pheonix or Half Blood Prince that Lily started liking James after they left school and James lost his big head/ego.

I too had to read over the Elder Wand transfer process several times. I think this was probably the one weak link story line in the whole book for me. Yes, Harry would have to go thru the rest of his life and never get defeated  - peiod. Apparently the actual use of the Elder Wand is not a requirement (aka what happened between Harry and Draco)...and there is another opening for another story. Harry does get defeated and therefore the Elder Wand is up for grabs again (so to speak).

What about Rowlings claim that she is done writing for good? If this is true, then someone else would have to take over writing the stories. It's certainly been done before!


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 25, 2007)

*So How Many Horcruxes?*

Voldemort was shooting for 7. Did he really make 8 by mistake?

1) Diary
2) Ring
3) Locket
4) Cup
5) Diadem
6) Harry
7) Voldemort himself (technically not a Horcrux but counts as one of the resting spots for pieces of his shattered soul)

8) Snake?? because Voldemort didn't know Harry was a Horcrux.

Do you think this should have been addressed within the story? How having 8 vs. 7 maybe changed things? Voldemort weaker? Or how 7 wasn't really a magic number anyway and 7 vs. 8 vs. 2 vs. 15 didn't matter? Rowlings just picked a good number to hunt down to keep the story moving/interesting? Too few would not give enough action, too many would be long and ultimatley boring...?

Sigh...I need to get a life! LOL!


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 25, 2007)

wackymother said:


> Because the Elder Wand is like the father of all wands, the master wand. Harry's wand couldn't be fixed by human hands, but it could be fixed by this one all-powerful wand, handled by its true owner.



I think it was maybe because the Elder Wand was supposedly Death's wand (in the fable) and only Death's wand has the power to undo death (of an inaminate magical object that is). It was said that maybe the wand (and the other Hallows) were made by the brothers themeselvs and the legend grew up around that, but maybe the legend was true after all. We are talking about a magic world after all!


----------



## Luanne (Jul 25, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> What about Rowlings claim that she is done writing for good? If this is true, then someone else would have to take over writing the stories. It's certainly been done before!



There was something in our paper this morning where she said she is going to write a kind of Harry Potter "encyclopedia" that will give additional background information on the characters as well as what they did after the 7th book.  She said it's pretty much already written as she has the information in the notes she's been keeping all along.


----------



## wackymother (Jul 25, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> Voldemort was shooting for 7. Did he really make 8 by mistake?
> 
> 1) Diary
> 2) Ring
> ...




See, here's the thing. Everybody is saying that Harry was a Horcrux but I don't think he was. Yes, he had part of Voldemort's soul, and Voldemort had part of his, and we knew that several books ago, but their relationship is distinct from the Horcruxes and the way they were created and hidden. 

Nagini the snake was a Horcrux--they know he is. 

So Harry's not, Nagini is, and you still get seven.


----------



## Bill4728 (Jul 25, 2007)

The Horcrux wasn't Harry but Harry's scar.   And since Voldemort himself can't be a Horcrux that is seven.


----------



## ailin (Jul 25, 2007)

What was the wailing, ugly thing that was on the floor when Harry was talking to Dumbledore after he had "died"?  Was it the parts of Voldemort's soul that had already been destroyed?

I read somewhere that why some people become ghosts after they die and not others will be revealed in this book.  Was it?  Did I miss that?

I read a bunch of the spoilers posted online before the book came out.  I thought one was real because the chapter titles looked right.  That one said Beatrix killed Ron.  So I read the entire book up until Beatrix died thinking that Ron was going to die.  That serves me right for reading the spoilers!  :rofl:


----------



## Patri (Jul 25, 2007)

Finally finished it so can chime in here. Thought the ending was just right. Even if Harry stayed dead, it would have been okay. I was happy that he did not have to do everything to save the day. Neville was there, and all the others who came charging in even after Voldemort took control. Harry just wasn't that good of a magician ever, which was fine. But he was an upright character. Hermione and Ron had their strengths too. 
I don't really want to see a sequel. I suppose one could be that Draco tries to do something bad. He never turned out remorseful. Why was he the rightful owner of the Wand? All of a sudden he was at Harry's side at the final duel. And I also couldn't figure out who the whimpering creature was. AND who raised Teddy?

One more thing - did anyone cry? I did not. It was never sad to me, though comforting to see his parents. But I've met two women who cried at the end.


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 25, 2007)

Patri

Harry got the wand because Draco Expelliarmused the wand from Dumbledore (at end of Half Blood Prince on the tower) and then Harry took Dracos wand at Malfoy Manor. The weak link is that Harry took Dracos original wand and not the Death stick so how did the wand "know" that Harry was now it's master (it was locked up in the vault with Dumbledore).

The screaming baby thing was Voldemorts soul- he had torn it so many times that it was now just a horrible baby thing and not a complete soul. Deformed by murder/evil I guess.

I would assume Teddys grandma raised him since Tonks and Lupin said they left him with her before the battle (Ted Tonks already killed on the run).

There were seven horcruxes.  Voldemort himself isn't counted- so Harry was the seventh.  Dumbledore had said at one point that Voldemort meant to make a seventh but thought he hadn't because he was interrupted by the curse destroying him when he tried to kill Harry. The book seems to say that Harry himself was the horcrux and not the scar.  Also prior to the book coming out some people thought the scar would be gone at the end but if you read in the Epilogue he rubs the scar and says it hasn't bothered him for 19 years.

Didn't cry- but was the most sad at Dobby's death- more so that any of the humans funnily enough.  Also I thought they said 2 characters died in the book- well I count many more major characters than 2.  Moody, Ron's brother, Lupin, Tonks, Dobby, Snape, Voldemort, Colin Creevy, etc.  I felt it was a few too many- especially considering a lot of children will be reading this. I suppose she felt it should show how bad the death eaters really were.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 26, 2007)

*My Take on the Horcruxes*

What I remember is Dumbledore saying that Voldemort wanted his soul in 7 pieces...to get that magic number. The 7th piece had to reside in Voldemort's body. So 6 Horcruxes and the 7th in Voldemort. And Dumbeldore said a piece went into Harry when the killing curse backfired.

Diary, ring, locket, cup, diadem, Harry, Voldemort, snake = 8.

Dumbledore said the snake was probably one since Voldemort didn't know/count Harry as one. And I think the snake probably was one indeed.

I think Harry could be one without breaking the rules as Dumbledore said a living being could be a Horcrux (like the snake and by extension, Harry) but it would be unwise to trust a piece of soul into something that can act and think on it's own.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 26, 2007)

*Love is the Answer*

I also thought it was interesting that love played a bigger role than the obvious.

Cissy Malfoy twice defied Voldemort because she loved her son Draco more than Voldemort...once when she went to Snape for the unbreakable vow and then at the end when she said Harry was dead and he wasn't, just to be able to get into the castle to find Draco. Bellatrix, who had no choldren, was always happy to tell others how she would have sacrificed her children for Voldemort and how proud they should be to do so...but the fact is, most (but alas, not all) parents will defy/fight ANYTHING to save their child.

Here's a question I have: at the end Phineas shouts out along the lines of "Let's not forget the role Slytherins played"... and what role was that?? I didn't see any of them (except Cissy Malfoy as noted above) fighting on the good guy's side...? What did I miss there?

I didn't cry but did get choked up when the parents/villagers and the house elves swarmed in at the end of the battle. Reminds me of the scene in Chitty Chitty Bang-Bang when that happens at the castle at the end too...hmmm...coincidence? Another English tale incorporated


----------



## mayson12 (Jul 26, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> Here's a question I have: at the end Phineas shouts out along the lines of "Let's not forget the role Slytherins played"... and what role was that?? I didn't see any of them (except Cissy Malfoy as noted above) fighting on the good guy's side...? What did I miss there?



I assumed he was talking about Snape. Also, Professor Slughorn was fighting and Phineas' portrait helped Snape and Dumbledore by going back and forth between Grimmauld Place and Harry/Hermione on the run.


----------



## mayson12 (Jul 26, 2007)

I hated when Fred died.  Fred and George were almost like one character because they were so close.  It was hard to imagine George alone.

Snape's death and whole story was so sad.  He loved Lily his whole life and no wonder he couldn't stand looking at Harry because he looked just like his most hated rival James Potter whom Lily chose in the end.  When Snape's dying and he tells Harry "Look at me".  It was the nearest I was to tears, going back and re-reading that scene after knowing the whole story.  He wanted to die looking into Lily's eyes.

On another note.  Was anyone else surprised that Lily and James were only 21 when they died?  I knew they were young, but wow.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 26, 2007)

mayson12 said:


> On another note.  Was anyone else surprised that Lily and James were only 21 when they died?  I knew they were young, but wow.



Yes, I was surprised.


----------



## Lee B (Jul 26, 2007)

tlwmkw said:


> Didn't cry- but was the most sad at Dobby's death- more so than any of the humans funnily enough.  Also I thought they said 2 characters died in the book- well I count many more major characters than 2.  Moody, Ron's brother, Lupin, Tonks, Dobby, Snape, Voldemort, Colin Creevy, etc.  I felt it was a few too many- especially considering a lot of children will be reading this. I suppose she felt it should show how bad the death eaters really were.



I think she said that two characters ended up dieing that she had not planned when she started the series, yet one or two were saved that she had planned on dieing.  This morning on the Today show (she'll be on there again tomorrow Friday and an NBC special Sunday evening) she said that Mr. Weasley was one that she had expected to die in Book 5.

Don't forget that Hedwig didn't make it, and I don't think I'm the only reader who considered her to be an important character.  I think her death early on was a literary warning that deaths will happen here.

JKR has said that children should know that life does not work out perfectly.  I agree that they can better handle real loss if they read of it in literature or see it in other media.  She did end those characters whose deaths were kind of okay, like Remus Lupin would not have had a very ideal life going on, and he died a hero with his new wife, who would want to go on with him too.  Moody had spent a full and exciting life already.  Snape was a tragic hero of literary proportions who fulfilled his existence by serving Harry without Harry's even knowing it (until the end).  Dobby was truly a full-time hero whose life would be boring going on.  Plus, of course, he was a fictional device - no such being exists (small comfort, I know).

One could argue that Fred lives on in George and further, JKR might say, his excellent sense of humor will serve him well into the hereafter.

Regarding her future writing, JKR said that she would indeed be writing more, but she thinks that she will not involve the magical world.  The Potter Encyclopedia would not require a lot of writing because she has boxes of notes that she can edit together.  I'm hopeful that while working on that project she will be inspired with another tale from that world.  Whatever she writes, I'll buy.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 26, 2007)

Lee B said:


> I'm hopeful that while working on that project she will be inspired with another tale from that world.  Whatever she writes, I'll buy.



This is just about what my dh said.  He thinks it would be a shame if she doesn't continue writing.


----------



## OkUSooner (Jul 26, 2007)

*Harry not the Headmaster of Hogwarts*

 The one thing I wanted to see at the end, besides Harry being married with
children, was Harry being the Headmaster at Hogwarts.  I loved the name of the children.  Thank you JK Rowling for not killing off our beloved Harry.


----------



## tracie15436 (Jul 26, 2007)

*Just finished it!!!*

Great book.  Dissapointed that Mrs. Weasly used the word Bitch in what is "supposed" to be a childrens book...glad that Snape actually got to be a good guy...and both sad and happy that this is the final book -   Good bye Harry!  See you on the big screen!


----------



## Luanne (Jul 26, 2007)

tracie15436 said:


> Great book.  Dissapointed that Mrs. Weasly used the word Bitch in what is "supposed" to be a childrens book



Actually, I thought it was perfect.  Definitely what I'd say to someone trying to take out one of my daughters.  Of course my kids are older and I know they've heard that language before.


----------



## wackymother (Jul 26, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> Here's a question I have: at the end Phineas shouts out along the lines of "Let's not forget the role Slytherins played"... and what role was that?? I didn't see any of them (except Cissy Malfoy as noted above) fighting on the good guy's side...? What did I miss there?



That was the point--the Slytherins did NOTHING. They were on the wrong side and they're always on the wrong side, then they try to pretend that they were on the right side all along. It's part of them being complete slimeballs. Phineas is trying to rewrite history.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 27, 2007)

wackymother said:


> That was the point--the Slytherins did NOTHING. They were on the wrong side and they're always on the wrong side, then they try to pretend that they were on the right side all along. It's part of them being complete slimeballs. Phineas is trying to rewrite history.



Uhhh, what about Snape?


----------



## Patri (Jul 27, 2007)

*


tracie15436 said:



			Great book.  Dissapointed that Mrs. Weasly used the word Bitch in what is "supposed" to be a childrens book QUOTE]
		
Click to expand...

*


tracie15436 said:


> I agree. Totally did not fit. If anger justifies swearing in this series, there could have been some in all seven books. Lots of people had family members or loved ones in danger.
> However, I did enjoy that she had such spirit and got in the thick of things.


----------



## wuv pooh (Jul 27, 2007)

wackymother said:


> That was the point--the Slytherins did NOTHING. They were on the wrong side and they're always on the wrong side, then they try to pretend that they were on the right side all along. It's part of them being complete slimeballs. Phineas is trying to rewrite history.



Don't forget, I thought it was Phineas who overheard where they were camping which allowed Snape to send the Sword and his Patronus to lead Harry to the sword.  A lot of them were on the wrong side, but they also played a key role.


----------



## KforKitty (Jul 27, 2007)

mayson12 said:


> ISnape's death and whole story was so sad.  He loved Lily his whole life and no wonder he couldn't stand looking at Harry because he looked just like his most hated rival James Potter whom Lily chose in the end.  When Snape's dying and he tells Harry "Look at me".  It was the nearest I was to tears, going back and re-reading that scene after knowing the whole story.  He wanted to die looking into Lily's eyes.



I never realised this at the time I read it that Snape wanted the last thing he looked at before he died to be Harry/Lily's eyes but I think you a right about this.  How sad.

Kitty


----------



## wackymother (Jul 27, 2007)

Luanne said:


> Uhhh, what about Snape?



But they don't know that Snape was really "good." Only Harry knows that at this point.


----------



## wackymother (Jul 27, 2007)

wuv pooh said:


> Don't forget, I thought it was Phineas who overheard where they were camping which allowed Snape to send the Sword and his Patronus to lead Harry to the sword.  A lot of them were on the wrong side, but they also played a key role.



Seems like a stretch to me. Phineas is a tool.


----------



## Luanne (Jul 27, 2007)

wackymother said:


> But they don't know that Snape was really "good." Only Harry knows that at this point.



That was more in reaction to your comment that Slytherin were slime and always on the wrong side.


----------



## jme (Jul 28, 2007)

*What if Harry HAD died....?*

OK, if Harry HAD died, how would YOU have justified it, if you had been JKR? 

The reason i ask is because, right up until the release of the final book, i was trying to justify it myself, JUST IN CASE Harry did die, and i would have to live with it.....so, in pre-release desperation, i was going thru many, many scenarios in my own mind, trying to convince myself all would be well...

As i pored over the whole of the series in my mind, every word and every scene, and every bit of foreshadowing, I could have seen it going either way........the only real comfort, to me, would have been because of one scene, early on in the first book (and movie) , when Harry, in front of the mirror of ERISED, made it known that what he desired MOST was "to be with his mother and father"... (that scene really stuck with me, and I kept going back to it many times during the books and movies!!!) 

.....so, had he died, he would have somehow achieved that which he had always desired most, so it would have somehow been rectified in my mind, and would have even made sense. 

Of course, NOW, I am glad that Harry didn't die, as to me, the hero should prevail and not die, but I guess he could have died and also been ultimately happy too, with his friends "happy", or at least understanding, with the blow softened. Again, thank goodness he didn't, tho....(Many heroes in many tales have died, from Achilles in Homer's Ilyad to Shakespeare's many characters...)

(I just want to say THANK YOU to JKR for what she did with the whole Harry Potter series.....I am in a perpetual state of dumbfoundedness at the fantastic imagination and creativity that she had. It may be one of the most wonderful creations in all of fictional literature, and that's saying a lot. )

So, what do you think?...If Harry HAD died, how would you have justified it?      Marty (jme)


----------



## wauhob3 (Jul 28, 2007)

JME-If Harry had to die to stop Voldemort then so be it but I didn't think she'd kill him off. 

To all JK gives some more details in this interview. There's supposed to be a special Dateline about HP on Sunday night too. 

http://video.msn.com/v/us/msnbc.htm...&rf=http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19935372/&fg=


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 28, 2007)

wuv pooh said:


> Don't forget, I thought it was Phineas who overheard where they were camping which allowed Snape to send the Sword and his Patronus to lead Harry to the sword. A lot of them were on the wrong side, but they also played a key role.


 
That's what I read, too.  It is in the part of the book where Harry is looking into Snape's thoughts in the Pensieve.  Speaking of which, if Harry had not witnessed Voldemort killing Snape, and also had not reached him in time to recover the memory, he would not have known about being a horcrux, that Snape was on his side, etc etc etc.  Seems a pretty vital part of the story to be left to chance.  But Harry did say to Dumbledore's Army (book 5) that his successes were a combination of luck and that he nearly always had help.  That, to me, is one of the key points of this series, it takes everyone to conquer tyranny.  We cannot put all our hopes in one person or one army.  I loved, loved, loved that everyone comes together at the end to fight--the students, their parents, the townspeople, the Order of the Phoenix, the house-elves (lead by Kreacher!) and even the centaurs.  With the centaurs, I think Rowling made a statement that you can't sit on the side-lines forever.  Sooner or later the fight comes to you and you will be forced to pick a side.

I liked that Harry was not the smartest, cleverest kid on the block but rather showed perserverance, grit and valor.  We can all do that.  It is a great lesson for children and adults alike.  In the first book, Dumbledore tells Harry it is not our abilities but rather our choices that determine who we are.  I loved that Neville comes into his own.  Again, not the brightest light in the chandelier but rather the one with a big heart and determination.  I loved that he overcame his timidity as that has been an issue in my life that I have had to work at.  

To me, this series is not about a boy-wizard coming of age, fighting an arch nemesis.  I don't think these books are "about" magic.  Certainly Rowling has skillfully woven a fantastic fantasy world in which to tell her story but the story itself is about overcoming tyranny in many of its forms including, classism, racism, slavery and totalitarianism.  I couldn't help thinking from the very beginning how much Voldemort and the Death Eaters resembled Hitler and the Nazis (as well as other similar groups throughout history and present today as well).  Rowling's tale includes the infiltatration of governments, propaganda, the taking over of education, etc.  We've all seen these things happen in real life.  The fantasy quality of the story just makes it easier to read but I felt as though I was reading a history text--or today's newspaper.  She includes resistance fighters (the DA and Order), she has kidnappings and family hostage taking to keep people quiet.  Even the horcruxes can be seen as "sleeper cells" that must be destroyed as well as their orginal source in order to truly end the evil.  We may not have wands or send our children to Hogwarts, but we do live in the very real world that Rowling has recreated with fantasy.  I think that this series will endure the test of time and that college courses will be developed around it as similar courses have been created for Tolken, etc.  This is a very timely work. 

There were so many themes that I could relate to.  One was in the discussion of horcruxes, how becoming attached to the material things that housed them could allow them to overcome you.  What a statement about materialism!  That's one I will be discussing with my dd in her attempt to clean out her clutter ("but, Mom, each thing I get rid of leaves a hole in my heart!")  It's also one that is affecting our ability to help my father in law who can not realistically care for himself any longer.  We are trying to persuade him to move in with us but he says his house is "sentimental" to him.  It's killing him--or at least preventing him from getting adequate care.

Of course, my favorite is that a mother's love is so powerful it extends through time.  Likewise, there is power (magic in the books) in the willingness to give one's life for others.  

I had an aikido sensei teach us that uke (the attacker) will always show you how he wants to be defeated.  Rowling discusses this, too.  I was very gratified that Harry used Voldemort's own actions to take him down.  In the end, Harry won by disarming him not by attacking him.  That is very aikido.  Voldemort destroyed himself. Loved it.

I do have a question about the elder want that I haven't been able to resolve.  If it is supposed to render its master undefeatable in battle (dueling) how did Dumbledore win it from Grindenwald in a duel?

And what happened to Luna?  I wish Rowling had told us about her in the epilogue.  I was hoping to read that she was honored in the wizarding world's equivalent of National Geographic for discovering a herd of crumple-horned snorkacks.  

I liked that Harry seemed to be a regular man at the end--not the minister of magic or headmaster, etc.  I liked that he seemed able to claim a life of normalcy (or at least as much as is possible for someone of celebrity).  He earned it.  He had the family he never had.  That was very tender to me.  And naming his son Severus showed he had learned to forgive as well.  That showed character.

All in all, this is my favorite series.  It is timely, it is clever, it is deep.


----------



## Lee B (Jul 28, 2007)

Well written, Rose!

Maybe it was because I also trained in Aikido that I noticed how repeatedly when someone attempted to hurt Harry he benefited from it.  For example in the first book, Draco tried to show up Harry with Neville's remembrall, and it got Harry onto the Quiddich team.

The Japanese word for the attacker is "faller" and the word for the one being attacked is not "victim," it's "thrower."  I could write all day on how much I got out of Aikido, and very little of it had to do with physical fighting.

Thanks for reminding me about it.


----------



## wauhob3 (Jul 28, 2007)

Excellent post Rose and I agree with the points you made. 

To answer some of your questions here's part of the JK interview.

Harry, Ron and Hermione 
We know that Harry marries Ginny and has three kids, essentially, as Rowling explains, creating the family and the peace and calm he never had as a child.

As for his occupation, Harry, along with Ron, is working at the Auror Department at the Ministry of Magic. After all these years, Harry is now the department head. 

“Harry and Ron utterly revolutionized the Auror Department,” Rowling said. “They are now the experts. It doesn’t matter how old they are or what else they’ve done.” 

Meanwhile, Hermione, Ron’s wife, is “pretty high up” in the Department of Magical Law Enforcement, despite laughing at the idea of becoming a lawyer in “Deathly Hallows.” 

“I would imagine that her brainpower and her knowledge of how the Dark Arts operate would really give her a sound grounding,” Rowling said. 

Harry, Ron and Hermione don’t join the same Ministry of Magic they had been at odds with for years; they revolutionize it and the ministry evolves into a “really good place to be.” 

“They made a new world,” Rowling said. 

The wizarding naturalist
Luna Lovegood, the eccentric Ravenclaw who was fascinated with Crumple-Horned Snorkacks and Umgubular Slashkilters, continues to march to the beat of her own drum. 

“I think that Luna is now traveling the world looking for various mad creatures,” Rowling said. “She’s a naturalist, whatever the wizarding equivalent of that is.” 

Luna comes to see the truth about her father, eventually acknowledging there are some creatures that don’t exist. 

“But I do think that she’s so open-minded and just an incredible person that she probably would be uncovering things that no one’s ever seen before,” Rowling said. 

Luna and Neville Longbottom? 
It’s possible Luna has also found love with another member of the D.A. 

When she was first asked about the possibility of Luna hooking up with Neville Longbottom several years ago, Rowling’s response was “Definitely not.” But as time passed and she watched her characters mature, Rowling started to “feel a bit of a pull” between the unlikely pair. 

Ultimately, Rowling left the question of their relationship open at the end of the book because doing otherwise “felt too neat.” 

Mr. and Mrs. Longbottom: “The damage is done.”

There is no chance, however, that Neville’s parents, who were tortured into madness by Bellatrix Lestrange, ever left St. Mungo’s Hospital for Magical Maladies. 

“I know people really wanted some hope for that, and I can quite see why because, in a way, what happens to Neville’s parents is even worse than what happened to Harry’s parents,” Rowling said. “The damage that is done, in some cases with very dark magic, is done permanently


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 28, 2007)

wauhob3 said:


> Mr. and Mrs. Longbottom: “The damage is done.”
> 
> There is no chance, however, that Neville’s parents, who were tortured into madness by Bellatrix Lestrange, ever left St. Mungo’s Hospital for Magical Maladies.
> 
> “I know people really wanted some hope for that, and I can quite see why because, in a way, what happens to Neville’s parents is even worse than what happened to Harry’s parents,” Rowling said. “The damage that is done, in some cases with very dark magic, is done permanently


 
Realistic but, oh, so sad.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 28, 2007)

EAM said:


> I had expected "deathly hallows" to mean a Rowling version of the communion of saints. And though that is not the correct meaning, I found it interesting that Harry received so much support from various characters who had passed from this life, who were, in effect, a Rowling version of the communion of saints.


 
In book 6, the cave chapter is a version of the Garden of Gethsemane.  In it Harry plays the part of the angel who comforts Dumbledore while he drinks the bitter cup.  And while he drinks it, he experiences intense mental suffering of past wrongs.  Then they must cross the lake of inferi (death or hell).  I found that parallel very interesting.  Makes me wonder how much religious training Rowling has in order to incorporate these concepts into her work.  I don't think it would have even occured to me.  I am amazed by her imagination and ability to work a story.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 29, 2007)

Thought this was funny.  A friend of mine who is an English professor gave me a copy.
http://harrypotterwars.ytmnd.com/
My favorite line is at the end re composer John Williams.

Also love the YouTube spoofs.

Don't forget to watch the NBC Dateline special tonight.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 29, 2007)

*Dolores Umbridge*

Her fate did not come up in the NBC special.  What do _you_ think her fate should be?  What would be the appropriate punishment for her?  Confinement to Azkaban?  Public service (what kind)?  Any ideas?  Of all the characters, she is the one that most irritated me--even more so than Bellatrix.


----------



## Mel (Jul 30, 2007)

tracie15436 said:


> Great book.  Dissapointed that Mrs. Weasly used the word Bitch in what is "supposed" to be a childrens book...glad that Snape actually got to be a good guy...and both sad and happy that this is the final book -   Good bye Harry!  See you on the big screen!



The thing is, they were never meant ot be children's books.  The first book was meant for young adults, and they become progressively more challenging with each book.  The only reason they are listed as children's books is because children started reading them, and then the "top 100" list makers decided they didn't want these books topping the charts among other "more serious" literature.

I found the quote to be perfect - what would you expect a mother in that position to say?  Almost anything else would have been contrived and poorly written.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 30, 2007)

I was more startled by the frequent use of "effing" this or "effing" that than I was by the b-word.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 31, 2007)

Rose Pink said:


> Her fate did not come up in the NBC special.  What do _you_ think her fate should be?  What would be the appropriate punishment for her?  Confinement to Azkaban?  Public service (what kind)?  Any ideas?  Of all the characters, she is the one that most irritated me--even more so than Bellatrix.



Delores Umbridge also irked me alot. I guess it's becasue I see her more as the "usual evil" I have to deal with in daily life...power hungry little people who get a kick out of ruining someone's day just because they can. People that get joy out of other's misery - and more joy if they themselves cause the other's misery. Shriveled souls. Bellatrix was a socio/physchopath and therefore not someone we come into contact with normally (thank God!) and her insanity we can use to downplay (not the right word but I hope you understand what I mean) her crimes.

I'd like to see Delores in a job where she had to be kind and helpful every moment of the day - THAT would be slow torture for her kind of person.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 31, 2007)

Rose Pink said:


> I was more startled by the frequent use of "effing" this or "effing" that than I was by the b-word.



That was what I thought too. Alot of "effing". And I am not English so I don't know where the frequent use of "bloody" falls into the rank of naughty words, but there was alot of that too, especially in book 6 (I think. Ron used it alot).

I am not saying Rowling did this, but... I understand that movies will put in a few swear words in order to get a PG-13 rating as that rating draws more movie goers than a G or PG rating does. Go figure.


----------



## wauhob3 (Jul 31, 2007)

Expedia says Dolores Umbridge went to Azcaban for crimes against Muggleborns. Actually Expedia has a lot of what happened 19 years later some of it they are quoting JK Rowlings and in others not but it makes for a fun read at least until we get the encyclopedia.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 31, 2007)

jlwquilter said:


> I'd like to see Delores in a job where she had to be kind and helpful every moment of the day - THAT would be slow torture for her kind of person.


 
Oooo, are you a bit of a sadist, too?   Well, I guess so am I because I agree with you.  Azkaban is too easy for The Toad.


----------



## EAM (Jul 31, 2007)

*Religious and literary allusions in Harry Potter series*



Rose Pink said:


> In book 6, the cave chapter is a version of the Garden of Gethsemane.  In it Harry plays the part of the angel who comforts Dumbledore while he drinks the bitter cup.  And while he drinks it, he experiences intense mental suffering of past wrongs.  Then they must cross the lake of inferi (death or hell).  I found that parallel very interesting.  Makes me wonder how much religious training Rowling has in order to incorporate these concepts into her work.  I don't think it would have even occured to me.  I am amazed by her imagination and ability to work a story.



I had not noticed the parallels. I have a feeling that there are far more literary, mythological, and religious allusions in the Harry Potter series than I have noticed.  I noticed the allusion to Jane Eyre at the beginning and wondered if the series might end with Hogwarts burning down with Voldemort and at least one Death Eater inside... Also, only a worthy person could pull out the Sword, as in the Arthurian legends, although the Sword would emerge from a hat instead of a stone.

What other allusions were striking to the members of this group?


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 31, 2007)

You may find this site interesting.   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hero_with_a_Thousand_Faces


Here is an excerpt: 

_In the monomyth, the hero starts in the ordinary world, and receives a call to enter an unusual world of strange powers and events. If the hero accepts the call to enter this strange world, the hero must face tasks and trials, and may have to face these trials alone, or may have assistance. At its most intense, the hero must survive a severe challenge, often with help earned along the journey. If the hero survives, the hero may achieve a great gift or "boon."_


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 31, 2007)

Rose Pink said:


> Oooo, are you a bit of a sadist, too?   Well, I guess so am I because I agree with you.  Azkaban is too easy for The Toad.



Haha!   I don't consider myself to be vindictive but do believe in what goes around comes around...and sometimes you are lucky enough to see it happen. Both on the good side of things as well as the bad.


----------



## jlwquilter (Jul 31, 2007)

*A small mistake or slip up??*

I just started reading the book again. I know I was too excited to really read every word the first time thru  

Here is something that caught me the first time thru but I ignored it to continue on.

Harry and Hagrid get to Tonk's parent's house. Harry wakes up on the couch and Ted is there. Harry askes after Hagrid and Ted says the wife is looking at him now. Then Ted goes on to say that he's taken care of Harry's busted ribs and arm and asks if anything else needs attention. Now, how did Ted take care of those things? He's a Muggle! Rowling is so percise with words that if the witch wife had done the mending, I think she would have had Ted say that.. "My wife took care of your injuries and is now looking after Hagrid"...that kind of thing.

So...is this a small oops?


----------



## tlwmkw (Jul 31, 2007)

jwquilter,

How do you know Ted Tonks is a muggle?  I don't recall that being mentioned.  And if he were then why did he go on the run with Dean and the goblins? I thought he was not a pure blood but not a muggle himself. Maybe I'm wrong here but I'll look back and see if they mention it anywhere.


----------



## Rose Pink (Jul 31, 2007)

I think Ted is the son of muggles just as Harry's mother was and as Hermione is.  In one of the books it talks about his wife being the sister of Bellatrix and Narcissa.  She is disowned from the family for marrying beneath her social status (ie pureblood).


----------



## mayson12 (Aug 1, 2007)

I started reading book 5 again, and when Tonks introduces herself she tells Harry that her Dad's muggle-born.  But that doesn't mention anything about whether he's a wizard or not.  Like someone else pointed out Hermione's muggle-born and she's a brilliant witch.


----------



## pcgirl54 (Aug 1, 2007)

I just finished the book and had little sleep for the last three days in between work and commuting.

 Rose Pink you are so right about the analogies to real life. There are many lessons in her books. A mother's love is not to be reckoned with. Characters in the book just like real people have flaws and need to make decisions that take us down the right path or lead us downward. Who would have thought Dumbledore was arrogant and ignored his sister? 

I thought Snape was going to be portrayed as the good guy who helped Dumbledore but I was surprised about his connection to Lily.

Loved the Hallows and how it all came together. Liked the fact that Dudley felt remorse in the end.

I expected Harry to die and thought the storyline was wonderful except for the boring camping part. Loved that all the people came together to fight Voldemort.

I also want to thank my Children's Literature Professor at Providence College for making us read Harry Potter  6 years ago. It has been a delight to be 50+  yrs old and still feel the magic and wonder of a child in a world where there is so much stress.

I finished the book in the wee hours of the morning and just hugged the closed book for awhile. It was a wonderful adventure and Rowling deserves all the joy and acclaim for writing this series and getting so many people of all ages across the globe to read and fall in love with Harry Potter.


----------



## wauhob3 (Aug 1, 2007)

Here's a link to an interesting chat with JK Rowling :whoopie: 

http://www.mugglenet.com/app/news/full_story/1156


----------



## jlwquilter (Aug 1, 2007)

*Ah...You guys are right*

And Ted Tonks is not a Muggle, but a Muggle born wizard. I interpreted what Tonk's said about her dad wrong.  She said he was Muggle born and I thought she meant a pure Muggle.

Rowling: 1      Jlwquiter: 0


----------



## Luanne (Aug 1, 2007)

wauhob3 said:


> Here's a link to an interesting chat with JK Rowling :whoopie:
> 
> http://www.mugglenet.com/app/news/full_story/1156



This was great.  What I love is that she knows what each and every one of her characters did, and is doing, since the end of the book.


----------



## Bill4728 (Aug 1, 2007)

*Happy Birthday Harry Potter!!*

I know I'm a day late but:

 Happy Birthday Harry Potter!!


----------



## "Roger" (Aug 1, 2007)

I am not a Potter reader nor have I read this thread (so maybe this has already come up or maybe this is common knowledge), but I was amazed to hear that Rowling is the first person to become a billionaire based upon her writings. Incredible. I have to dolf my hat to her (if I wore a hat).


----------



## wauhob3 (Aug 1, 2007)

"Roger" said:


> I am not a Potter reader nor have I read this thread (so maybe this has already come up or maybe this is common knowledge), but I was amazed to hear that Rowling is the first person to become a billionaire based upon her writings. Incredible. I have to dolf my hat to her (if I wore a hat).



Perhaps it's your turn to check out Potter mania and you won't even have to wait between books. I think it's fantastic she's gone from being poor to a billionaire based on her talent.


----------



## jlwquilter (Aug 2, 2007)

*Remus*

What do you all think of how Remus was portrayed early in the book? Cold, distant and dismissive of Tonks now that she's pregnant and he's apparently freaked out in a major way over it. I was surprised and disappointed that he was portrayed in this way. I thought it was out of character for him.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Aug 2, 2007)

It seemed to fit to me. He hadn't wanted her to fall in love with him in the first place because of his affliction, didn't feel it was fair to her (per conversation with Mrs. Weasley, I believe) and he is worried about the baby having his werewolf trait. I think it is also a plot device to allow Harry to assume a more grown up role and give advice to one of his mentors.
Liz


----------



## jlwquilter (Aug 5, 2007)

*Harry and Voldemort are (distant) cousins*

Did anyone catch this? I just did now on my 2nd time thru the book. It's in Chapter 22, after they leave Xeno Lovegood's and are discussing the Hallows. Voldemort is decended from the middle Perevell brother (how Gaunt got the ring/stone) and Harry is decended from the youngest brother (how his dad got the cloak). Once again Rowling puts out all the clues but allows the reader to put them together.

Oh, and on pg. 345, is the clue to Harry having a piece of Voldemort's soul in him. It's so much easier to find these clues after having read the book once!


----------



## jlwquilter (Aug 5, 2007)

Liz Wolf-Spada said:


> It seemed to fit to me. He hadn't wanted her to fall in love with him in the first place because of his affliction, didn't feel it was fair to her (per conversation with Mrs. Weasley, I believe) and he is worried about the baby having his werewolf trait. I think it is also a plot device to allow Harry to assume a more grown up role and give advice to one of his mentors.
> Liz



Yes...but Remus DID marry her and did have relations with her, she got pregnant after all. And he's such a responsible/honorable character to suddenly take action to ditch it all and run away. Certainly your take on it does work and I agree with it...and I also now think that it was another way for Rowling to show that essentially decent and good people do not always act in a decent or good way. And since Harry's thoughts are the only thoughts we can "see", Rowling had to make Remus act on his thoughts in order to make them "visable" to us...we couldn't witness a totally internal struggle Remus had on this topic, which would be perfectly understandable.


----------



## jlr10 (Aug 5, 2007)

We were one of those in line at midnight, making a special trip in Kona during our vacation.  My son and I both loved the book.  We are now going back and rereading the prior books.  They make interesting reading as you can now see all the foreshadowing that was written from the very beginning.

One of my favorite parts was Snape's patronus.  Lily had been dead for years and she still was the best thing in his life, even though it brought him pain.  This was the same thing as Tonk's patronus changing once she fell in love with Lupin.  It made her unhappy, but it was still her heart that showed through.  I agree that Snape wanted to look into Harry's eyes so that the last eyes he saw were Lily's.  I also think, and that he disliked Harry not so much because he disliked James, although he hated James, but because Harry was the son of Lily, the son he wanted but James got, and because Snape caused her death by bringing Harry to the attention of Voldemort.

I also enjoyed the part where Kreecher changed from a dirty complaining house elf to one who couldn't do enough for Master Harry and his friends, and came to fight Voldemort when it got tough.

As far as Mrs. Weasley swearing, if you read the book the kids swore constantly, but Rowlings did not put all the words in the book.  I think her swearing was an integral part of the story.  It showed that even the most kindhearted giving people have a limit and once it is crossed you had better get out of there way.-Also this was my son's favorite line in the book.  What can I say he is 17?

Definitely a great series, which we completely enjoyed


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada (Aug 6, 2007)

I was fine with Mrs. Weasley saying "bitch", I think I would have said a lot more than that if someone was threatening my child. I wonder if what we call swearing, "effin this" is more common or considered less offensive in Great Britain. I know it would be a problem if I was to read this book outloud in a public school, (which I probably wouldn't do anyway, although I might read the first one if it was OK with all the parents).
Liz


----------

