Deathly Hallows - Mini Review
Banjo Paterson
b |
i V
g
s
p
o
i
l
e
r
s
p
a
c
e
t
h
a
t
g
o
e
s
f
o
r
a
t
l
e
a
s
t
t
w
e
n
t
y
l
i
n
e
s
+-------------------------+
Mini review
So - this is it? The seventh and final book of Harry Potter. I hold it
in my hands and I am reminded of both a door stop and an old teacher who
used to judge the quality of student's work by the number of pages of an
assignment. If this was the yardstick I'd be using, then Deathly
Hallows would be an A+ - distinction grade - whatever.
But it's not. Unfortunately the book has to hold up as a story, a
continuation of a series, and a wrapping up of all questions raised. It
is by these measures that the book falls short. There are so many
disappointments it is hard to list them. Probably the kindest thing I
could think of was that this was the best fanfic I had read -- it just
wasn't a good author's novel. Where to begin?
The deaths... let's start at the deaths. When a main character dies I
should feel something other than the desire to turn over the page. I
should feel like I have lost someone important. I felt none of these
except for Hedwig and perhaps Dobby, whose death is described
poignantly. Yet none of the other deaths had much effect except for me
to shrug and continue reading.
This is not right. I am the bloke who got choked up when "Wash" from
the SF series Firefly died (I still refuse to believe it!) I am the man
whose bottom lip quivered on the death of... enough. JKR kills some
characters -- characters who I had previously felt for -- and when she
did I felt nothing. The deaths are so poorly composed.
The flow of the plot reminded me of Joyce's novel "Finnegan's Wake" in
that it seemed to resemble flow of consciousness rather than controlled
threads. Harry visits his parents graves -- something we had been told
that was so important that the film maker of PoA was not allowed to
include it -- to find very little.
We seem to jump from one setting to another with very little reasoning
behind it. It is like our heroes are just flotsam and jetsom in the sea
of ink that poses as a well thought out novel.
Other disappointments are the stupidity of the evil doers. I always
think to be an evil doer you would have to be smarter, or stronger, than
your counterpart. So even as our heroes are captured by DE and held in
the Malfoy's manor they manage to make good their escape (and free the
other prisoners to boot). No wonder the death eaters fail. Too stupid.
They broke most of the rules the "IF I were an Evil Overlord.." site
(http://www.eviloverlord.com/lists/overlord.html). They should have
killed the prisoners (except for Harry whom they had orders to leave).
But they didn't thereby breaking the "I will not gloat over my enemies'
predicament before killing them." rule.
I suppose the DE are idiots because their leader, supposedly a great,
dark wizard, is as thick as pig's swill. Why does Voldemort try to kill
Harry with an AK curse at the end when, just 10 minutes beforehand, the
same curse had failed? Why does Voldemort continually state how much
smarter and better he is as he blasts away those who truly are smarter
and better? (thus breaking the evil overlord rule: "I will maintain a
realistic assessment of my strengths and weaknesses. Even though this
takes some of the fun out of the job, at least I will never utter the
line "No, this cannot be! I AM INVINCIBLE!!!" (After that, death is
usually instantaneous.)")
So plotwise the novel fails. The characterisation is weak. I feel
little for the protagonists who are killed off and very little for the
ones who live. I shake my head. This is so wrong. Other characters do
not act according to the way we would expect them. Take for example
Lupin -- a fantastic character in PoA -- who comes across as just a jerk
in this novel (no wonder Snape hated him). Another example is Mrs
Weasly who kills one of the death eaters and swears (hmm, won't be
reading that line aloud to the kiddies. Why does it remind me of Alien 3?)
The epilogue is best fogotten.
Finally, what about all those "important" unanswered questions that JKR
baited us with? Petunia: "I am being shockingly indiscreet" - pah!
Ghosts - weren't we meant to know why some became ghosts and others
didn't (or has that already been answered?) What about the veil and the
voices? Did we ever get into that locked room? What the heck did
Dumbledore mean when he said "Remember my last" to Petunia?
To be fair - we did find out a few things. James' cloak (not bad); the
importance of Lily's eyes (awful explanation); and the glint in
Dumbledore's eyes after Voldemort took some of Harry's blood
(cringeworthy explanation, in my view, and stretches the logic of a few
things, but passable maybe.. I guess..)
My opinion is that JKR wanted to get his book over and done with as
quickly as possible so she can get on with spending her gazillions
without having to worry about writing something of lasting quality.
When I read this I thought of the title of Monty Python's "Contractual
Obligation" Album, except without the panache. Pity, really.
SPB
Moon
> - weren't we meant to know why some became ghosts and others
> didn't (or has that already been answered?)
It's answered by the Nearly Headless Nick in OotP.
> What the heck did Dumbledore mean when he said "Remember my last"
> to Petunia?
The initial letter he left together with Baby Harry on their doorstep
explaining why she ought to take him in.
--
Which came first, the phoenix or the flame?
Banjo Paterson
> Banjo Paterson schrieb:
>
>> - weren't we meant to know why some became ghosts and others
>> didn't (or has that already been answered?)
>
> It's answered by the Nearly Headless Nick in OotP.
>
>> What the heck did Dumbledore mean when he said "Remember my last"
>> to Petunia?
>
> The initial letter he left together with Baby Harry on their doorstep
> explaining why she ought to take him in.
Rich Billionaire
wrote:
>Why does Voldemort continually state how much
>smarter and better he is as he blasts away those who truly are smarter
>and better?
Voldemort is a narcissist with a very limited point of view. He has
delusions of grandeur. He thinks he's perfect and better than he is.
The reason he can't see everything in a totally realistic way is
because his huge, twisted ego won't allow it. That is exactly how real
life narcissists think. Also, since narcissists completely lack
empathy, there are many things (such as love) that they can't
understand. Oftentimes narcissists in real life do make huge mistakes
that get them into big trouble because they actually believe their own
delusions and they refuse to see the flaws in their own thinking. This
impairs their judgment. Delusions are extremely important to a
narcissist and they will maintain them at all cost. If they are forced
to let go of their delusions, they get very depressed.
Banjo Paterson
I am familiar with Narcissism (there was a case here of a parental
murder from a teenager who was suffering it). It's a very likely,
although sophisticated, explanation.
We are told that Tom Riddle was a talented Wizard, so it could well be
the case of his followers being blind to his (many) other shortcomings.
I like the moniker of "Rich Billionaire" though; that did make me smile.
Except for the book being totally woeful, which it wasn't, JKR will
still ka-ching another XXX hundred million pounds into her till from it.
Good on her, too!
SPB
Drusilla
> My opinion is that JKR wanted to get his book over and done with as
> quickly as possible so she can get on with spending her gazillions
> without having to worry about writing something of lasting quality. When
> I read this I thought of the title of Monty Python's "Contractual
> Obligation" Album, except without the panache. Pity, really.
really. The book is not good. Not at all: mediocre. It lacks everything
that the previous had. And many kids will think it's good simply because
of the final fate of the main character but won't bother to see how bad
it's before that.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Rich Billionaire
Neither of you are explaining why you think it's bad.
Justin Alexander
I believe the two most common answers are:
(1) It didn't resolve things the way I wanted them resolved.
(2) It didn't answer every single trivia question I ever had about the
world of Harry Potter.
Drusilla
That's not my case. At least, not completely. Yes, that bothers me, but
that's not all; not just those two points make me dislike it. Perhaps I
am yet not sure why I don't like it, but I do know that I was not as
excited as reading it as with the previous six.
Moon
> (2) It didn't answer every single trivia question I ever had about the
> world of Harry Potter.
Which leaves room for yet another book, maybe some kind of encyclopedia
where everything in the wizard world gets explained.
Banjo Paterson
- Poor characterisation (e.g. characters acting illogically re Lupin)
- Deaths that should have been emotive but were not. Many have said the
saddest death was Hedwig, the owl.
- Poor climax and resolution
- Reads to me like a draft rather than a complete novel
If you have a differing opinion or a better review please write it, as I
should enjoy reading it.
SPB
Drusilla
I agree and I would add:
- It looked rushed. As thought she needed to fit it all in the last 50
pages.
Edward McArdle
Banjo Paterson <n...@nada.nothing> wrote:
Just jumping into the thread...
I enjoyed the book, but
(a) I would like to have found out fairly explicitly what happened to
each of the characters we had met throughout the seven books. Some were
dead, but a lot we heard nothing of. A scene or chapter at the end where
they discuss exactly who is dead.
(b) I was disappointed that some of them were dead. Mostly Lupin and
Tonks. I thought Dobbie's death was well done. (Bad luck for Dobbie, but
good writing.)
(c) while one can read past it, the film may have to have an R rating.
Harry and Hermione, two seventeen year olds, share a tent for several
weeks alone!
(d) I would have liked to hear what happened to all the Death Eaters.
They should at least have got "six of the best". Maybe extended
detention.
--
my URL,
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~mcardle
DaveD
"Drusilla" <gammanormids*erasethis*@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:f80t9i$go5$3...@aioe.org...
Interesting - to me it felt like it was just very well and very fast paced,
a bit like a Spielberg movie (thinking Indiana Jones) with lots of action
(apart from the camping...) and that made it far more exciting, far more
tense, and still I couldn't read it fast enough, a real page-turner! I loved
that aspect of it :)
DaveD
kcala...@yahoo.com
Well, it wasn't the best of the series but it did tie up a lot of
loose ends. However, that epilogue was not very good - you can
definitely tell she wrote it first and all it did was emphasize there
might be more to come. It would have been better to have it closer to
the time of "the end".
What I could not figure out is how he-who-must-not-be-named could have
been that dumb in the end? Didn't he already know that the killing
curse didn't work?
Personally, it was slow then sped up and then slowed down again. The
1/2 way to 3/4 of the way through the book were heart pumping to
wonder what happened.
The thing I liked the most about it, was the fact that the heros
weren't perfect - they had flaws and therefore we could identify with
each and every one of them including Dumbledore, who lived the rest of
his life regretting something in his past - and the bad guys weren't
always just being bad like the Malfoys who were fighting to save their
family or Snape (although I had figured that one out in the previous
book when he could have killed or really hurt Harry but didn't, in
fact kept him from issuing an unforgivable curse to protect him). I
did really enjoy the Prince's tale which tied some strange sequencing
and loose ends.
However, I do agree the deaths near the end were not truly emotive -
not like Dobby's or Hedwigs or even Moody's which never really was
satisfactorily emotionally dealt with. Note however, the tides turned
to the good side when everyone came from everywhere to fight together.
I also thought it was too predictable but this is a children's book is
it not? My son thinks she tried in the last two books (and to a less
extent in this one) to use too much symbolism rather than her basic
style which I tend to agree with. Which is why my favorite will
continue to be PoA which I couldn't put down while I did take a break
from this one twice.
Ultimately, it is a classic series of good vs. evil, coming of age,
and that ordinary people can change things if they truly work
together. Truly meant for the age group it was written for.
----------
There is no beginning to a circle.
Elizabeth B Naime
><spolier space from original post left intact>
>What I could not figure out is how he-who-must-not-be-named could have
>been that dumb in the end? Didn't he already know that the killing
>curse didn't work?
Penultimately, yes; although he does depart from the Evil Overlord
Code long enough to sensibly check the body, which redeems it to a
considerable extent. Of course it's rather lax to let someone else do
the body-check for him -- but that is in character, as he seems to
prefer having his lackeys do things for him.
Ulitimately... do we really know who tried to use which spell in the
Final Duel? We have made assumptions, given that each is a characters
"signature move," but if the Killing Curse did not work as intended,
why assume the Disarming spell did?
To use an Unforgivable Curse, you really have to mean it; but you
know, I do believe Harry could have meant it this one time.
Maybe I'm just a little daft, but I wondered...
--------------------------------------
If you really need to email me, mow the lawn.
Welsh Dog
Maybe JKR wanted to keep Harry 'pure' and to have not killed
deliberately... even Voldemort... so the spell had to bounce so Harry
wouldn't directly have killed him. Especially if 'the other was
Voldemort as Tamar suggested?
Welshdog
--
Australian Opinion http://australianopinion.com
News and views... for people like youse!!
Elizabeth B Naime
>The deaths... let's start at the deaths. When a main character dies I
>should feel something other than the desire to turn over the page. I
>should feel like I have lost someone important. I felt none of these
>except for Hedwig and perhaps Dobby, whose death is described
>poignantly. Yet none of the other deaths had much effect except for me
>to shrug and continue reading.
I just did not feel this way at all. Actually I found Hedwig's death a
little too pat, a bit much of a warning: "I've told the fans that
there will be deaths in this book, and just to prove I wasn't pulling
your wands, I'm going to off the owl!" Mad-Eye's death I did find
shocking. We didn't get all the after-death eulogies which we did with
Dumbledore and even Cedric... everyone was just too stunned and
shocked to really take it in and react to it. To me that seemed very
appropriate. I mean really, if you were to take bets on who would be
the first witch or wizard to die, who would take a bet on Mad-Eye?
As for the later deaths, well, when talking about the book to
relatives who hadn't finished it yet I said "Well, you know, by this
time there is a war on." I would have found it less honest if the
casualties of the final battle had not included anyone we particularly
know or particularly like. You know, if all the casualties had been
wearing red shirts, or had only appeared in this episode...
>The flow of the plot reminded me of Joyce's novel "Finnegan's Wake" in
>that it seemed to resemble flow of consciousness rather than controlled
>threads. Harry visits his parents graves -- something we had been told
>that was so important that the film maker of PoA was not allowed to
>include it -- to find very little.
I wonder if the plan was changed, as the "unexpected magic late in
life" was. Only explanation I can think of as seeing The Symbol at
that point would not have given anything away.
>We seem to jump from one setting to another with very little reasoning
>behind it.
They're On The Run. Again, this made sense to me. I hope that doesn't
mean that I'm too easily satisfied, but there it is. Until they learn
how they were tracked from the Weasleys's they've GOT to keep moving.
Which in turn makes the decision to stay at Grimmauld Place for such
a long time a bit silly. That struck me as being a bit contrived, as
if it's only really done to Develop Kreatcher's Character.
>Other disappointments are the stupidity of the evil doers.
Okay, I'll give you this one. Voldemort has always been a bit of an
Evil Overlord, and he and his cronies go over the top in the sheer
idiocy of that traditional role.
Harry, incidentally, does something similar, when Rowling (who seems
to know better, usually) uses him to "tell them, don't show them" how
he and Fate have put Voldemort in the losing spot. Rather bullheaded
of Harry, who having been dead, seems awfully sure that he is the one
who will win. What, Voldemort can't use the Elder Wand? Boo hoo.
although he would be able to use it had he actually defeated Harry
(and why, I wonder, doesn't a wand -- not the cleverest of magical
objects -- consider that Harry had in fact been fairly defeated when
he died?) I reckon Voldemort will just have to go back to using his
old wand, the one that worked just fine as long as he didn't use it
against Harry, to keep his evil grip on his lackeys.
Everyone Harry died for being protected by his willing sacrifice, all
right, that's a bummer. But hey! How many of those now-immune
Hogwartsians have relatives somewhere who are not, in fact, immune?
There's still plenty of people elsewhere to kill, maim, and torture,
and the Evil Overlord could have his fun making those who are
protected pay via their unprotected relatives, friends, and pet cats.
>Other characters do
>not act according to the way we would expect them. Take for example
>Lupin -- a fantastic character in PoA -- who comes across as just a jerk
>in this novel (no wonder Snape hated him).
In the previous book, he was also being a stupid git about,
essentially, the same issue. Fortunately, he came to his senses in
both books.
> Another example is Mrs
>Weasly who kills one of the death eaters and swears (hmm, won't be
>reading that line aloud to the kiddies. Why does it remind me of Alien 3?)
lol! I didn't see Alien after 2. Actually I found it a bit shocking
but entirely correct. Please note, she DOES swear under extreme
pressure earlier in the book -- after thanking goodness for this that
or the other small favor, when Fred (or was it George? or Ron?) comes
back hole and hale she says "Thank God!" which really is quite
startling coming from Mrs. Weasley. After the maiming of one son and
the death of another, I found it startling (and funny) that her
matronly propriety was finally shattered -- yet also quite, quite
believable. How many of us secretly harbor the faith that if Mom ever
got really, really, REALLY pissed the opposition would be sorry they
ever messed with her children?
Kids too young to deal with the transformation of Mommy into Wrath
Personified In The Defense Of Her Children, swears and all, are too
young to read (or have read to them) anything past PoA.
>The epilogue is best fogotten.
Awwwww. I thought it was sweet.
I really did.
There's just no accounting for taste, is there?
>Finally, what about all those "important" unanswered questions that JKR
>baited us with?
Many were answered, but not all. If I can make myself ignore the
specifically promised revelations (DOES someone perform magic, in
extremis, late in life after being presumed nonmagical? I seem to have
missed it) I am satisfied with some mystery being left. Leaving some
things unexplained is not the same as leaving loose threads. In fact,
as stated earlier, I found her attempts to make sure certain big
puzzles WERE explained in detail to be somewhat... artificial.
>To be fair - we did find out a few things. James' cloak (not bad);
Reading the partial letter, I thought it would have made a great deal
of sense had Dumbledore borrowed the cloak merely to prevent James
from sneaking out of the house and taking unnecessary risks. Harry is
definitely his father's son in this...
And yes, the true nature of the cloak, that was pretty cool.
>My opinion is that JKR wanted to get his book over and done with as
>quickly as possible so she can get on with spending her gazillions
>without having to worry about writing something of lasting quality.
My opinion is that JKR had quite a task laid out for her in writing
the last ever Harry Potter book. Overall I found it enjoyable,
generally well-written, and well-paced. There are some rough spots,
but I find them tolerable.
Louis Epstein
: Banjo Paterson escribi?:
:
:> My opinion is that JKR wanted to get his book over and done with as
:> without having to worry about writing something of lasting quality. When
:> I read this I thought of the title of Monty Python's "Contractual
:> Obligation" Album, except without the panache. Pity, really.
:
: really. The book is not good. Not at all: mediocre. It lacks everything
: that the previous had. And many kids will think it's good simply because
: of the final fate of the main character but won't bother to see how bad
: it's before that.
I wonder how many children who grew up reading Potter will find
they outgrew Rowling's writing along the way.
-=-=-
The World Trade Center towers MUST rise again,
at least as tall as before...or terror has triumphed.
Louis Epstein
:
:><spolier space from original post left intact>
:>> +-------------------------+
:>> b |
:>> i V
:>> g
:>>
:>> s
:>> p
:>> o
:>> i
:>> l
:>> e
:>> r
:>>
:>> s
:>> p
:>> a
:>> c
:>> e
:>> f
He-Who-Must-Be-Called-Ickle-Tommykins is something of a one-trick pony
when it comes to the Killing Curse.
In any case,I gather the in-book reasoning is that the Elder Wand
figured,"hey,I belong to the guy who's trying to disarm the one
who's holding me,so I'll fly into his hands and send that AK backward
instead of forward."
Not that Harry intends to reward the EW for its lifesaving loyalty,
but despite his intentions,his being murdered for it would set off
any number of sequel ideas...
: To use an Unforgivable Curse, you really have to mean it; but you
: know, I do believe Harry could have meant it this one time.
:
: Maybe I'm just a little daft, but I wondered...
:
:
: --------------------------------------
: If you really need to email me, mow the lawn.
-=-=-
Louis Epstein
: does he really play a banjo? Or does he just Patter?> wrote:
:
:>+-------------------------+
:>b |
:>i V
:>g
:>
:>s
:>p
:>o
:>i
:>l
:>e
:>r
:>
:>s
:>p
:>a
:>c
:>e
:>f
Anyone willing to lose to whoever bet on Charity Burbage?
: As for the later deaths, well, when talking about the book to
: relatives who hadn't finished it yet I said "Well, you know, by this
: time there is a war on." I would have found it less honest if the
: casualties of the final battle had not included anyone we particularly
: know or particularly like. You know, if all the casualties had been
: wearing red shirts, or had only appeared in this episode...
:
:>The flow of the plot reminded me of Joyce's novel "Finnegan's Wake" in
:>that it seemed to resemble flow of consciousness rather than controlled
:>threads. Harry visits his parents graves -- something we had been told
:>that was so important that the film maker of PoA was not allowed to
:>include it -- to find very little.
:
: I wonder if the plan was changed, as the "unexpected magic late in
: life" was. Only explanation I can think of as seeing The Symbol at
: that point would not have given anything away.
Probably she just didn't want it seen more than once.
:>We seem to jump from one setting to another with very little reasoning
:>behind it.
:
: They're On The Run. Again, this made sense to me. I hope that doesn't
: mean that I'm too easily satisfied, but there it is. Until they learn
: how they were tracked from the Weasleys's they've GOT to keep moving.
:
: Which in turn makes the decision to stay at Grimmauld Place for such
: a long time a bit silly. That struck me as being a bit contrived, as
: if it's only really done to Develop Kreatcher's Character.
:
:>Other disappointments are the stupidity of the evil doers.
:
: Okay, I'll give you this one. Voldemort has always been a bit of an
: Evil Overlord, and he and his cronies go over the top in the sheer
: idiocy of that traditional role.
:
: Harry, incidentally, does something similar, when Rowling (who seems
: to know better, usually) uses him to "tell them, don't show them" how
: he and Fate have put Voldemort in the losing spot. Rather bullheaded
: of Harry, who having been dead, seems awfully sure that he is the one
: who will win. What, Voldemort can't use the Elder Wand? Boo hoo.
: although he would be able to use it had he actually defeated Harry
: (and why, I wonder, doesn't a wand -- not the cleverest of magical
: objects -- consider that Harry had in fact been fairly defeated when
: he died?) I reckon Voldemort will just have to go back to using his
: old wand, the one that worked just fine as long as he didn't use it
: against Harry, to keep his evil grip on his lackeys.
Except he is dead,unless his remaining eighth becomes a particularly
feeble excuse for a ghost...unable to do anything to anybody but ever
ruminating on Dumbledore's warnings of fate worse than death until and
unless it surrenders and "moves on" to the fate of the thing-under-bench.
: Everyone Harry died for being protected by his willing sacrifice, all
: right, that's a bummer. But hey! How many of those now-immune
: Hogwartsians have relatives somewhere who are not, in fact, immune?
: There's still plenty of people elsewhere to kill, maim, and torture,
: and the Evil Overlord could have his fun making those who are
: protected pay via their unprotected relatives, friends, and pet cats.
But the job's vacant.
Please fill out your application by killing Harry for the Elder Wand
:>Other characters do
:>not act according to the way we would expect them. Take for example
:>Lupin -- a fantastic character in PoA -- who comes across as just a jerk
:>in this novel (no wonder Snape hated him).
:
: In the previous book, he was also being a stupid git about,
: essentially, the same issue. Fortunately, he came to his senses in
: both books.
:
:> Another example is Mrs
:>Weasly who kills one of the death eaters and swears (hmm, won't be
:>reading that line aloud to the kiddies. Why does it remind me of Alien 3?)
:
: lol! I didn't see Alien after 2. Actually I found it a bit shocking
: but entirely correct. Please note, she DOES swear under extreme
: pressure earlier in the book -- after thanking goodness for this that
: or the other small favor, when Fred (or was it George? or Ron?) comes
: back hole and hale she says "Thank God!" which really is quite
: startling coming from Mrs. Weasley. After the maiming of one son and
: the death of another, I found it startling (and funny) that her
: matronly propriety was finally shattered -- yet also quite, quite
: believable. How many of us secretly harbor the faith that if Mom ever
: got really, really, REALLY pissed the opposition would be sorry they
: ever messed with her children?
Yuck...I wanted Bellatrix to be killed by NEVILLE.
Molly's unrepented keep-the-children-in-the-dark attitude in ORDER
still rankles...if there had been the aspect of deceptive persona
of plump naggy housewife falling away to reveal the true identity
of uber-duellist beneath,this would have been more bearable,but
as it was we were asked to accept the uber-duellist-ness as being
AN EXPRESSION OF her plump-naggy-housewifeness.
: Kids too young to deal with the transformation of Mommy into Wrath
: Personified In The Defense Of Her Children, swears and all, are too
: young to read (or have read to them) anything past PoA.
:
:>The epilogue is best fogotten.
:
: Awwwww. I thought it was sweet.
:
: I really did.
:
: There's just no accounting for taste, is there?
It was acceptable in a way.
:>Finally, what about all those "important" unanswered questions that JKR
:>baited us with?
:
: Many were answered, but not all. If I can make myself ignore the
: specifically promised revelations (DOES someone perform magic, in
: extremis, late in life after being presumed nonmagical? I seem to have
: missed it)
No,she decided to leave that out.
: I am satisfied with some mystery being left. Leaving some
: things unexplained is not the same as leaving loose threads. In fact,
: as stated earlier, I found her attempts to make sure certain big
: puzzles WERE explained in detail to be somewhat... artificial.
:
:>To be fair - we did find out a few things. James' cloak (not bad);
:
: Reading the partial letter, I thought it would have made a great deal
: of sense had Dumbledore borrowed the cloak merely to prevent James
: from sneaking out of the house and taking unnecessary risks. Harry is
: definitely his father's son in this...
:
: And yes, the true nature of the cloak, that was pretty cool.
:
:>My opinion is that JKR wanted to get his book over and done with as
:>quickly as possible so she can get on with spending her gazillions
:>without having to worry about writing something of lasting quality.
:
: My opinion is that JKR had quite a task laid out for her in writing
: the last ever Harry Potter book. Overall I found it enjoyable,
: generally well-written, and well-paced. There are some rough spots,
: but I find them tolerable.
:
: --------------------------------------
: If you really need to email me, mow the lawn.
-=-=-
forrest
> I wonder how many children who grew up reading Potter will find
> they outgrew Rowling's writing along the way.
Relatively few. What's to outgrow about narrative drive, knack for
character, snappy dialog and amusing detail?
She's got a talent for enormous plot holes, granted, and DH was released
at least six months prematurely -- but I understand that Tchaikovsky was
a technically poor composer; no one seems to care, though, because he
had the choons.