I've just finished the newest Harry Potter book. (For those who haven't, you can read another paragraph or two of this post before any spoilers -- I'll warn you.) In short, I think there's a reason these books are so damn popular: they live up to the hype, as so few things in entertainment manage to do.
For those who felt books 4 and 5 were overlong and desperately in need of editing, I will concede that point. Book 6 is shorter and tighter, though it does still have a bit of fluff here and there. (Chapter One, for example -- totally unnecessary.)
Still, by the time I'd reached the end, I'd decided this book was my favorite of the six so far. To get into why, I have to get just a tiny bit SPOILERY, though, so this is your last chance to turn away.
In short, I felt this book was the "Empire Strikes Back" of the Harry Potter books. It's quite dark and very adult for what is said to be a "children's book." (Children may love the series, but their parents buy them because they offer even more to the adults, I think.) Book 6 ends on a quite down note and, more or less, with a cliffhanger. The stage is basically set for book 7.
In what... maybe 2007 sometime? Too bad it takes only two days to enjoy the culmination of a two year wait. (Even less time if you're Kathy.)
6 comments:
SPOILERS! TURN AWAY NOW! I WON'T BE RESPONSIBLE!
Agree re: analogy to ESB. The only thing missing was the carbonite.
In fact, this book was way darker than ESB. None of the characters who were in peril at the end of ESB died, either in ESB *or* RotJ.
And in true Hermione fashion, I now utterly and completely detest Lavender Brown.
MORE SPOILERS! I swear, if you have not finished the book, you do not want to read the following.
I don't mean to be one of those "no -- Darth Vader has to be lying, he can't be Luke's father!" types, but I think there's a tiny, tiny, tiny chance that Dumbledore is not actually dead.
For starters, why write chapter two of the book showing us that Snape was in fact with the Death Eaters and making an Unbreakable Vow with them? That just ruins any surprise about his conversion at the end of the book! Unless it's meant to underscore for us that there's no possibility he could be faking...
At the end Dumbledore tries to appeal to Malfoy not to kill him, saying that Malfoy and his mother can be hidden from Voldemort and the Death Eaters. If they think he and his mom are dead, says Dumbledore, they'll leave him alone. Then Dumbledore dies himself within 10 pages.... hmmm....
Dumbledore has always claimed to have an ironclad reason to trust Snape. And frankly, we never got to hear it. I just can't believe that "I'm sorry I got Harry's parents killed" was it. Feels like there simply had to have been more.
And Dumbledore tells Harry to go fetch Snape specifically, not Madam Pomfrey. For what reason would he do this, other than needing Snape to help perform so prearranged farce? And then Dumbledore binds Harry in a holding spell instead and forces him to stay there immobile and witness the whole thing. Why? Because if Harry had been able to move, he could have done something to interfere with the staged events. Not to mention the fact that having Harry there gives a 100% credible witness to the whole thing that will tell everyone Dumbledore was actually killed.
Like I said... I'm not really sure I believe any of this theorizing. But I have to say, I think the door is open just a crack for Dumbledore to still be alive, unlike with Sirius Black, who was totally unambiguously killed at the end of book 5.
Yeah, all about the spoilers here now. Run!
It's possible, but I think I like it better if he's really gone.
Something about removing the Dumbledore "crutch" suggests to me that we will have less of those frustrating "why can't someone just tell Harry what's going on" moments in the final book. It feels right for Harry (and Ron and Hermione) to grab the initiative for themselves.
It certainly is possible that it was a setup. I've read speculation that Dumbledore used a horcrux of his own, and this is why the debacle at the rock weakened him so much. Sure, that wouldn't save him bodily, but he could advise Harry a la Obi Wan in the upcoming book. That is certainly a very viable possibility.
I mean, Snape did AK him. Or at least Harry was pretty damn sure that's what happened.
I was glad that Sirius stayed dead. Not because I didn't like Sirius (to the contrary, I was very upset when he died in the last book) but I think it gives more of a sense of reality to the war. In my opinion, someone else should have died in the attack. There just wasn't enough of that potion to go around.
In fact, for several pages, JKR didn't mention Hermione post-battle at all. I was sure she was dead, and then they just threw her name in on some random conversation. I was quite traumatized for a moment there.
AHHHHH SPOILERS!!!!
*heh*
Oh, don't get me wrong -- I don't think I *want* for my speculation to turn out to be right. I just think the possibility is there.
I agree with you that watching Harry, Ron, and Hermione take on the final challenges "all on their own" in the next book would be an immensely satisfying conclusion.
I can't see Dumbledore having a horcrux of his own. He spoke of the power of a whole, unfractured soul over a fractured one. Plus, would he have really killed somebody to make a horcrux? I doubt it.
And like you, I was a bit freaked that Hermione had died for a few pages there too. She'd written that "someone inside had died." And then she says that Ron, McGonagall, and a few other -- NOT Hermione -- were battling the Death Eaters. I too pounced right on Hermione's conspicuous absence in that paragraph and feared the worst.
I think I read somewhere that reading Harry Potter can cause you to go blind?....or was it blonde?
Post a Comment