Can we discuss "Deathly Hallows"? SPOILERS included.

I'm sure I'm not the only one who wants to comment, ask questions, and generally discuss the book.

If we make it plain that the thread contains spoilers can we do it?

We can have another one here if you want, but you might also want to read what's already been posted.

The Lounge is too, well, busy.

If that's the hot setup though I'll read those.

It's the last HP book EVAH. Might as well open the floodgates.

It will be more of an encyclopedia where she can go into more detail about each character than she could in the others.

I enjoyed "Deathly Hollows", but I had questions after reading the epilogue and hopefully, they'll be handled in the encyclopedia.

just dragged on and on and on and on.

I mean, it was all Harry, Herminone, and Ron not having any kind of plan and whining about not having a plan.

All of the supporting characters that we have come to love, Neville, Fred and George, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley, Hagrid, Lupin, (and hate, Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle) were relegated to cameos only at the end of the book.

And Snape deserved more than the few pages in which his story was finally told.

THE DEATHLY HALLOWS could have been two hundred pages shorter without losing anything in the telling.

That said, J.K. Rowling's seven Harry Potter books were a wonderful story and will stand the test of time. I'm sure that it will be considered a classic set for children to grow up with a hundred years from now.

It is at least equal to (and in my opinion surpasses) C. S. Lewis's CHRONICLES OF NARNIA series.

Not just his thoughts in the pensieve

But, at least we know...

I agree - too much camping, I think if she cut those types of scenes by half & started the Hogwarts Battle & inclusion of other characters sooner, it would have improved things, but still enjoyed the book.

I don't like fantasy, and I don't care for Harry Potter (my husband made me watch one of the movies which I did out of love for him), but there's been so much hype I just want to know if he lives or dies at the end. Anyone who can tell me, thank you!

you would approve of the theme of the series. There is power, and magic, in love, and love conquers hate and fear.

There are many mythological, archetypal characters and events in the series. One connection that could be made is a "David and Goliath" type situation, with the kid taking on the monster. What makes Harry triumphant, in the end, what gets him through every obstacle, is empathy. His ability to feel compassion for all, even his enemies.

There is much self-examination, recognition of human flaws in even the greatest, and finding of human commonalities even between bitter enemies.

I liked the book. I did feel the plot surrounding Dumbledore's past was a bit confusing, and I wasn't really entralled with it. I have always been perplexed by Dumbledore's legend of this grandest of wizards was not really supported well in her writing. Right from the first book, she had him infiltrate the school attached to Quirell, & Dumbledore didn't know? It seems like he was always the last to know any of the worst things going on right around him. That doesn't equate to a grand wizard in my book...

I was completely bummed she killed Hedwig, it was almost mean. I have always respected her in having the courage to portray the books with the real sacrifice of fighting evil, but the bird? She does write children's books, Hedwig was probably more beloved then many of the human characters. Doby I thought was more appropriate. He loved Harry beyond all people, & him dying in his service fit. Lupin & Tonks were just randomn, if you ask me. Their deathes didn't even occur on-stage. Harry just came back & they had died in the battle.

Neville should have killed Bellatrix. Mrs. Weasly was a odd choice. I could see her wanting to give her a grander role, especially after what her family went through & the death of Fred. It was good she gave the honor of destroying the Snake to Neville. He needed some bigger glory.

Fred's death also seemed a bit too randomn & the way she brought Percy back at the end so quickly felt contrived. Like it was just thrown in...

I thought Sirius might come back. Sirius's death should have been more final, he didn't come back in this book, & it always felt like there was the possibility of his returning. It didn't happen & I felt strung along for nothing...

I know that sounds like a lot of complaining, but overall, I DID like this book.

I liked the Hallows story, I liked the fact that she kept the action going thoughout the entire book. I LOVED that Snape was good in the end. I always loved Snape, one of my favorite characters (probably because I adore the actor who plays him in the movies), & I was touched that he had loved Lily all his life. No wonder he hated James, in fact, James sounded like kind of a arrogant jerk.

I am a stupid romantic, so I liked the Harry/Ginny - Ron/Hermione having families & sending their own kids off to Hogwarts at the end. It was a nice bit of happily ever after.

I am trying to remember all who died - Hedwig, Dobby, Tonks, Lupin, Fred, Scrimegour, Crabbe, Moody, Snape, Bellatrix,Colin Creevy, & Voldermort. I think I might be forgetting someone, but maybe not. She did slash & burn a bit, & I think it might be a wee bit much to take for the younger set, but I guess it would depend on the kid. The series became steadily darker after the first book which had a much more kid's book feel, this one might be a little tough on the younger set, it would have probably killed me until I turned twelve, but then I cried through the E.T., & I mean the ENTIRE movie.

A solid B+ objectively & a A from my heart for the respect I have for this woman writing such an amazing series, & giving us all so much fun.

Thanks Ms Rowling!

Can you tell me if Keith Olbermann was right, and the 6th hidden piece of Voldemort was in Harry's scar, and to kill Voldemort he had to give up his magic powers?

If not, what happened?

Email me if you don't want to tell me in public. Thanks.

Keith was right AND wrong. Harry was indeed a Horcrux--not just his scar, Harry himself. By repelling Voldemort's killing curse, he made himself one, because Voldemort's soul fragmented when Voldemort failed to kill him, and part of it went into Harry (explaining why it was always so easy for Harry to see and know and feel Voldemort's thoughts and vice versa, and why his scar always hurt when experiencing this). But he did not have to give up his magic powers to do away with Voldemort. And in the end, he didn't have to die, either. He just had to be willing to die, to accept death, if allowing Voldemort to kill him was the only way to destroy the last Horcrux.

You've pretty much hit on everything.

I've always been comforted (if that's the right word) by the format of the previous books: Harry's at Privet Drive, something happens and he has an interesting trip to Hogwarts. Then all the school stuff while battling Voldemort. This book was very different in the format. No Hogwarts, to start with.

I a;so found the first part of the book a bit draining but very compelling just the same. A lot of the travel and camping could have been eliminated. The young Dumbledore story was a bit too out-of-character for me to enjoy.

I kept wondering if MadEye was going to turn up. Was he the traitor? I wasn't sure he had really been killed. I guess his eye on Umbridge's door was a good sign though.

I also thought Molly Weasley was a great fighter but killing Bellatrix should have been Neville's revenge.

I wish Snape had lived. His story was so sad and I agree with you: I adore Alan Rickman!

Now, I would have liked to know what happened to the Dursleys. Did they ever reconcile with the adult Harry? Did they go to his wedding? In fact, what about those intervening 19 years? Looks like there's plenty of opportunity for more stories.

I enjoyed it. I wonder, though, what kids think of it.

I also thought Molly Weasley was a great fighter but killing Bellatrix should have been Neville's revenge.

contained a horcurx and that was important.

But having Neville kill Bellatrix in revenge seems to go against the whole premise of the Harry Potter series. They are better than Voldemort and his death eaters.

Molly killed Bellatrix in defense of her and other children. Had Neville killed Bellatrix in revenge for what had been done to his parents, he would have been moving on to the path of hate and destruction.

I'm glad Neville didn't kill Bellatrix. He was perhaps the best of the characters that that Rowling created. He was a good, stand up person who grew into himself and stood by his principals.

Killing Bellatrix would have changed him into something else.

I would have been extremely disappointed if JKR had had Neville kill her, but I was equally disappointed that he was unable to deliver any sort of comeuppance whatsoever. It's not just a neat little ending. It makes sense that Neville would seek her out and try to make sure that she didn't escape again.

I hadn't thought about that.

> Now, I would have liked to know what happened to the Dursleys.

Petunia entered rehab. Dudley entered the Bush administration.
And Mr. Dursley? Well, he finally got to tell the punchline of
the "wrong hole" joke that he started back in HP3.

Tesha

As I was reading Snape's memory I was wondering if Petunia fell in love with a wizard but his family wouldn't let him marry a Muggle so she became bitter toward the wizarding world because of that.

I did see that Rowling is going to write a book about the lives of those in the books.

I got the feeling from earlier books that there was a lot she knew that we didn't yet know about, but would eventually find out. I'm not sure we really got the whole story there. I expected to learn more about Petunia and that maybe she was holding some secrets that would prove crucial to later developments. But that never happened.

and strangely enough, felt that it was too short, almost rushed. I felt like I was reading a second draft rather than a polish product and it needed a few more months.

Much of the information on the horcruxes I didn't even pick up at the time. (Where did it identify the Hufflepuff cup as being a horcrux?) Other information and linkages were there, but I had to go back and reread in order to get them. As if Rowling had the structure in mind but did not take care to make sure her text communicated it to the reader. She's generally pretty good with exposition and background, which made the Deathly Hallows an exception.

Maybe my reading skills are failing, but this was the only experience like this with the Harry Potter series. Anyone else have the same reaction?

I wouldn't be surprised if she was racing to make the deadline. Thee were also some basic errors
in grammar which looked as if the editor was also rushing a bit.

The possibility of something from each of the houses being a horcrux was brought up by Dumbledore
in Half-Blood Prince.

I re-read all the books in the weeks leading up to the release of Deathly Hallows, and I was
surprised to find how much information I'd forgotten already, but it was very helpful to have it
all fresh in my mind when I read book 7.

> There were also some basic errors in grammar which looked
> as if the editor was also rushing a bit.

Real errors in grammar? Or differences between British
grammar and American Grammar (collective nouns being
plural and the like)?

Tesha

Just something I've never noticed in any other Potter books - misplaced particples mainly, and only
on a couple of occasions.

It just added to my feeling that things had been a bit rushed at the end.

I felt very sorry for Snape, even though he was so unpleasant most of the time. He didn't have a happ life.

I was happy to see Percy come back. I've always liked him.

Albus (Potter's second son) becomes a Slytherin and teams up with the Malfoy brat to become the new Voldemort?