Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows (WITH SPOILERS)

[Cuivienen]

I agree with the OP. The entire epilogue just showed how the entire thing was a big cycle. Grindelwald, Voldemort...

The OP seems to be suggesting that is a problem with the book, something with which I could not disagree more. If the book ended, "And Evil Is Destroyed For All Time", it would have been a huge drag on the realism of the series' message. Like The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter ends with the destruction of an evil power but also the acknowledgment that "evil" is not a tangible thing that can be destroyed.

 

[North King]

After reading it, specially the epilogue, I realised that nothing was really fixed at a fundamental level - the entire larger system was exactly the same.

Ah, but can the desire for power by human beings ever really be fixed? I think this exemplifies Dumbledore's philosophy--evil can never really be extinguished; it must simply be fought and fought again.

vulnerable to the oldest trick of them all - the sowing of internal dissension, and in which non-human magical species were treated as inferior, was still unchanged.

However, I sincerely doubt that it remained unchanged for those nineteen years. It never explicitly stated what careers the Trio had, but I strongly believe that Hermione worked for the rights of non-humans. And I have a feeling she was successful.

Far, far too much was dependent on chance. I thought that the liberal use of deus ex machinae in the previous six books was excusable, given that the epic showdown was yet to come, and that Harry was growing into the person capable of actually duelling Voldemort. But when, even in the last battle, you come across very "convenient" twists, it lowers your opinion of the writing as a whole, because then, what was the point of building Harry up as a character at all?

But this isn't really true. The deus ex machinae would never have materialized if Harry hadn't used them as he did. The repeated escapes from Voldemort before the final battle were usually Harry's "fault". Dobby would never have rescued him from that cellar if he hadn't been such a friend to house-elves.

As for the Elder Wand, well... I always knew that magical history would have a big tie in. I suppose there had to be some way for him to bridge the beyond...

In the end, though, I think the strength of the characters was more important than any plot device. When you get down to it, if Harry hadn't been able to face death without fleeing, every deus ex machinae would have been worthless.

Personally speaking I'm not exactly happy with Harry marrying Ginny; was always more of a Harry-Hermione person

I've always been a Harry-Hermione shipper, but honestly, I knew that battle was lost. I just wanted it to be true.

Eh ? Harry marries Ginny ?! Is it just me or doesn't she understand teenagers at all ?

You didn't read past the fourth book? Well, I can see why that whole relationship thing might be a bit out of the blue for you.

I wish there was more to read. I don't need more of Harry's story: we've covered it. I just want to keep reading about that universe....

There's so much left unsaid after the party. What happened to the ministry? How did the magical world heal? How did people treat Harry? I could go on... the epilogue could have covered it, but JKR opted a different path.

Amen!

But the epilogue did have a nice feel to it, really.

So much material for fanfiction... Alas, that's a nasty pool to fall into; even if I wanted to delve into it, Rowling stole the plotline of the fanfic that I was going to write. *shakes fist*

seeming like a "real war", portraying a sense of desperation, etc.

That was the first reaction I had to the book. Voldemort (for most of the story) had no opponent, and that really showed strongly. Without Dumbledore, the Wizarding World fell with frightening speed.

The Ministry visit was chilling.

Yes but in what way did Snape love Lily Potter?

The fragments that Snape showed Harry are possibly an only small part, in any case there couldn't be any x-rated scenes in the book anyway. So it's certainly a possibility that Snape could be Harry's real dad.

No offense, but I think you managed to read the book and not take any of it in.

On another note, I have to say that Mrs. Weasley killing Bellatrix was... fun to read.

 

[Gilder]

The OP seems to be suggesting that is a problem with the book, something with which I could not disagree more. If the book ended, "And Evil Is Destroyed For All Time", it would have been a huge drag on the realism of the series' message. Like The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter ends with the destruction of an evil power but also the acknowledgment that "evil" is not a tangible thing that can be destroyed.

We're not expecting it to be destroyed for all time, but them to actually actively do something to stop it from happening again.

 

[North King]

We're not expecting it to be destroyed for all time, but them to actually actively do something to stop it from happening again.

So I suppose destroying an evil dictator, saving thousands of Muggleborns from unjust persecution, stopping the deaths of potentially millions of muggles, and allowing good to triumph just isn't enough... Just because they never explicitly stated the precautions that were going into effect doesn't mean they weren't going into effect; it means that the precautions would have probably been a needless distraction from the narrative drive.

 

[Pontiuth Pilate]

Things I liked:

1. Bathilda Bagshot. The scariest scene Rowling has ever written.
2. More focus on the trio and their adventures. I loved the first half of the book.
3. More focus on the politics and how Voldemort was manipulating the wizarding community into a sort of pureblood fascism.
4. "Crush-on-Lily"-Snape turned out to be right!
5. And so did Harrycrux.

Things I disliked:

1. The epilogue. It was like really bad fanfiction, and didn't tell us what happened to all the other characters. It should have been in a narrator's voice (just like book 1 began) and told us what happened to EVERYONE - or, c'mon, at least the Weasleys, Luna, Neville, Hagrid, McGonagall, Kingsley, the Dursleys, etc.

2. The Dumbledore subplot. I was expecting something to do with switched/mistaken identities which has been a theme in ALL the books but it turned out Rita Skeeter was just... right? I don't like how Rowling tore down DD for no reason.

3. Things we thought were mysteries (such as the two accounts of the eavesdropper contradicting, or the missing 24 hours) turned out to be writing mistakes and will never be explained.

4. Things we thought were big mysteries (WHY are Lily's eyes so important) turned out to be small and obvious mysteries.

5. Snape was good all along. Sorry, I was totally ready for a redemption scene, but not for Albus Dumbledore to ask someone to tear their soul with murder as a favor. That is an absolute contradiction of canon Dumbledore views on death and murder. Also, the explanation of Snape's goodness (both the scenes themselves, and the decision to have it be told thru pensieve) were fumbled a bit.

6. There was no "big mystery" behind Harry's survival after all, not more than we were told way back in book 5 anyway. Instead we got this random Hallows plot the only point of which was to hand Harry an unbeatable wand so he could kill Voldy.

7. Voldemort was really dumb. Like, "Hide my Horcrux in a room that's clearly filled with junk other students dumped there yet which I think only I even know about" dumb.

8. The way Wormtail figured into the story was just pathetic.















All in all I think Rowling did best in books 3 and 4 and then something went badly wrong. Her books are mysteries first and foremost. The books where she wrote actual plots with twists and revelations - like Pettigrew being the secret keeper and Barty Crouch's escapades with Winky (and to a certain degree, the Ginny/basilisk thing) - are the best. Books 5 and 6 had no such twist, and book 7 was just strange in a Matrix:Revolutions-y "He killed the other dude but you're never going to really understand why (but here, watch this inexplicable train station scene, it will explain everything)" way.

I have no clue why she'd feel this way, but it really felt to me as if about halfway through Order of the Phoenix, she wanted to have nothing to do with HP ever again and started going autopilot.

Still, I'm gonna read the whole thing again

 

[emzie]

I believe Kingsley became the interim Minister of Magic after Voldemort died; I also think Harry continues to have a semi-legendary status since when he brought his children to King Cross' Station there were some kids staring at him.

Not like that. I want to know how. Harry's story is fascinating, but equally fascinating is the world in which he lives. Just like PP, I loved the politics Voldemort used. I loved the storyline outside Harry. I love the characters. I just love that world. I want to know everything. I want to see JKR's notes. I want her to write that encyclopedia....

 

[emzie]

Ugh, who was the character that does magic 'late in life' that JKR mentioned in 1999? I can't figure it out!

 

[aussieboy]

Personally, I like that Rowling put Dumbledore off the pedestal he was put on for most of the series. It shows that even the best of men are nowhere near perfect, but it is how they overcome their imperfections that makes them who they are.

Also, I like how Harry, once he knows about everything, gives Snape his due, after all the animosity between the two throughout the series.

Then, of course, there's the background of Wizarding England under Voldemort's bootheel. The way he assumed power, the rounding up of Muggleborns, it is reminicient of what Hitler did with the Jews... Bonechilling - enough to make the pre-Thicknesse Ministry seem tame.

 

[GoodEnoughForMe]

I thought that a lot of the early conflict scenes were rushed; in the span of a few paragraphs we'd go from calm, to battle, to ZOMG they're somewhere else now. I also thought little things like having Harry and Hermione say their real names in the ministry in front of people without anyone noticing were weird...

Biggest flaw though was probably the fact that Rowling really had to rely on luck to get Harry out of his predicaments. And the final scene with Voldermort was rather.... lacking, not to mention Voldermort was essentially an idiot in this book.

Still, I thought the actual build-up to the climax was nicely handled, and the character's were all for the most part well crafted and believable, if not necessarily predictable. I always thought that Rowling really seemed to have more of an emotional attachment to her characters than anything else in the series. And while Hermione had some Spiderman 3-itis (chronic crying) I felt that they were all rather human.

Better than 6 for sure, but not the best in the series.

Personally, I like that Rowling put Dumbledore off the pedestal he was put on for most of the series. It shows that even the best of men are nowhere near perfect, but it is how they overcome their imperfections that makes them who they are.

Harry has a much bigger pedestal. Any mistakes he made are completely out dwarfed by his actions and lavish compliments by those around him.

Edit: And everyone successfully predicted Snape and Dumbledore role, for the most part.

 

[Strider]

I liked the book overall, but have to agree that the final battle with Voldermort was lacking. Also, when Harry was "killed" and was talking to Dumbledore.. what was the point of the thing groaning that they kept mentioning (and ignoring)? Was that suppose to represent Voldermorts soul?

I really don't see how this particular book could be considered a "childrens book." A lot of the earlier ones (1-3 for certain... possibly 4 and 5) would have been suitable for children, but the amount of death, torture, and other things inside of this book kind of took it out of that category.

I've always been a Harry-Hermonie person also... the thought of him marrying Ginny was just... weird. However, I did LOVE the way she handled Snape and how he loved Lily Potter. That was a stroke of brilliance.

Some things I didn't like though.. Fred Wesley and Tonks dying. I could see Lupin and Mad-Eye... even expected Mad-Eye to die (although, not THAT early), but why Tonks and Fred? I don't know, but killing them off just didn't seem... right.

Also, she never does explain what happens with the Dursleys at the end. Dudley was finally becoming decent too!

 

[aelf]

Like The Lord of the Rings, Harry Potter ends with the destruction of an evil power but also the acknowledgment that "evil" is not a tangible thing that can be destroyed.

You compared Lord of the Rings with Harry Potty

 

[Wha'wasthat???]

Ugh, who was the character that does magic 'late in life' that JKR mentioned in 1999? I can't figure it out!

I have a feeling that it is Molly Weasley. Sure she did household magic for years but she never outright duelled with anyone.

 

[dutchfire]

Anyone else had "Arbeit macht frei" flashing through their mind when they read about "For the Greater Good" on the entrance of Nurmgard?

 

[xfactor99]

I believe Kingsley became the interim Minister of Magic after Voldemort died; I also think Harry continues to have a semi-legendary status since when he brought his children to King Cross' Station there were some kids staring at him.

Yet another reason to hate the epilogue: Harry's kids are confused as to why everyone is staring at them. You mean to tell me after 11 years they don't realize their dad is uhh, famous? Yeah, sure

That's like a conspiracy theory The fact that Harry looks exactly like James Potter, minus the green eyes, surely wouldn't change a thing since James and Severus look quite alike you know.

Random note: James Potter was an complete jerk. Kind of the Draco Malfoy of his time at Hogwarts, if you ask me.

The whole Harry Potter series is a masterpiece (yes, I sound like a broken record) on par if not greater than Star Wars and Star Trek in creating a "culture" of its own. If only Harry hadn't gotten with Ginny....

Oh, I don't think Harry Potter will be forgotten anytime soon. It has a rich and unexplored universe, legions of fans, and has become a pop culture phenomenon. I very much doubt the last of Harry Potter we will see is the 7th movie (in 2010).

And yeah, the way Harry/Ginny was written was pretty much terrible. Although it was pretty obvious what she was going to give him for his birthday present until Ron barged in

Still, I don't understand how J.K. Rowling felt it was suitable to give the main character and his romantic pairing not a single meaningful conversation throughout the penultimate novel. There's no depth to the relationship at all, which is quite a shame.

Then, of course, there's the background of Wizarding England under Voldemort's bootheel. The way he assumed power, the rounding up of Muggleborns, it is reminicient of what Hitler did with the Jews... Bonechilling - enough to make the pre-Thicknesse Ministry seem tame.

You would think Voldemort would 1) simply exterminate all Muggle-borns instead of locking them up in Azkaban 2) go after the families of his biggest enemies (how is it no order member ended up dead during this time, wow, that's pathetic) 3) do a much better job of solidifying his rule on the wizarding world, which we see him do nothing of the sort.

Instead, he spends his time obsessing about getting a bigger and better wand to kill off the kid he's equally obsessed with, Harry Potter. And as Pontiuth Pilate mentioned earlier, what kind of ****** hides a valuable part of their soul in the Room of Requirement.

Anyone else had "Arbeit macht frei" flashing through their mind when they read about "For the Greater Good" on the entrance of Nurmgard?

The World War II parallels were really laid on thick in this book, huh? Godwin's Law is going to be referenced to in a lot of Deathly Hallows discussions...

I liked the book overall, but have to agree that the final battle with Voldermort was lacking. Also, when Harry was "killed" and was talking to Dumbledore.. what was the point of the thing groaning that they kept mentioning (and ignoring)? Was that suppose to represent Voldermorts soul?

I really don't see how this particular book could be considered a "childrens book." A lot of the earlier ones (1-3 for certain... possibly 4 and 5) would have been suitable for children, but the amount of death, torture, and other things inside of this book kind of took it out of that category.

It was the 1/7 of soul of Voldemort inside Harry that also died when Voldemort killed Harry. (Another part which made Voldemort look really ******** - Voldemort manages to destroy one of the last parts of his soul remaining, while not eliminating Harry because of an earlier blunder he made which kept Harry alive as long as Voldemort's body was intact. Then he sends Narcissa Malfoy to "confirm" whether Harry's dead, instead of doing the smart thing and just blasting his body into oblivion, another colossal blunder which eventually ends with his (final) death. As you can see, Voldemort did a great job!)

This point has been noted to death, but an unusual development of the Harry Potter series is that it grew along in conjunction with its' audience. When I read the first Harry Potter book, I was about 8 or 9 years old, and at the conclusion I am now about to turn 17. The books have slowly developed in tone, style, and theme in that near-decade, and the passage from child to adulthood that Harry goes through is something that will be felt by the the core audience of Harry Potter readers. Good stuff.

 

[Mongoloid Cow]

Whatever happened to Fawkes? Who, never having used magic before, used magic later in life? What happened to Kreacher when Harry didn't return to Grimauld Place, and why did he turn up at Hogwarts later?

It was good. I was expecting something worse after the OotP and the HBP, so it was a pleasant surprise. Still the final duel, and in many ways the final battle too, sucked arse. Voldy was so stupid - are we supposed to believe he actually managed to take over? It was good when Harry marched out alone with the ring and the ghosts to die, but the whole train station thing didn't make any sense and it was downhill from there. I was certain that Hagrid would have been killed off.

And the epilogue sucked. I suppose JKR just wanted it clear how it all ended for fan-fiction, but still it sucked and wasn't done very well.

 

[Nobody]

How come voldemort did drop dead when the snake died, wasnt that the last part of his soul?

 

[Shylock]

Anyone else had "Arbeit macht frei" flashing through their mind when they read about "For the Greater Good" on the entrance of Nurmgard?

She was getting careless with her naming. Xenophilius is easy to decipher for anyone who knows a bit of latin (Foriegn/strange lover) for example. Nurmgard sound like Nuremberg.

Speaking of, the Muggle-born registration smacked of the Stalinist purges and the Holocaust. I was thinking of the song "Angel of Death".

Luna is my favourite character and it made me feel sick a little bit to read she'd be captured by hostile forces. Would have liked to know what happened to her afterward.

Remember when Molly called Bellatrix a . .. .. .. .. .? I threw up the horns as I read that.

 

[Wha'wasthat???]

How come voldemort did drop dead when the snake died, wasnt that the last part of his soul?

I'm assuming you mean didn't? And the answer is no - The last part of Toms soul was always inside Tom

 

[Truronian]

I thought the romances didn't really make much sense... Harry and Ginny appeared completely unable to talk to one another - not really a brilliant quality in a couple, while Ron and Hermione just wasn't really very believable. I just hope JK doesn't go into romance novels.

 

[dosed150]

I thought the romances didn't really make much sense... Harry and Ginny appeared completely unable to talk to one another - not really a brilliant quality in a couple, while Ron and Hermione just wasn't really very believable. I just hope JK doesn't go into romance novels.

i thought that was because harry broke it off for a while because he thought voldemort might try to get to him through her but once he was dead things could go back to how they were