Harry Potter and the Deatly Hallows - spoilerish for those who live under a rock

Jul 27, 2007 10:00

So, Soph, I assume you have read the last book by now, judging from your comments? Let's discuss!!! It took me a while to get over this book. I just didn't know what to say for a while other than that I really loved it.

For some reason, my expectations for the last book weren't that high, I couldn't believe JKR would manage to pull all the loose threads together, answer all the questions that were still out there - but then she did, and how she did it. The book was so filled with content and information that it took me much longer to read than usual, even though it was much shorter than OotP. I guess it will be hard to film. But I disgress.

Tonks and Remus died. Now, I really didn't see that one coming. Apparantly, Remus dying was the trade off for Arthur Weasley staying alive in book five, because "a father had to die". Well, if that was the case, I think she'd better have killed off Arthur. Remus wasn't really established as a father when he died, the whole thing was rushed. Now, if he would have been killed to have all the Marauders dead, I could have appreciated that. It all doesn't explain why Tonks had to die, too. Did we really need another orphaned child, even if he was Harry Potter's godson? Poor Andromeda, she lost her husband, daughter and son-in-law all at once and she has a sister who is nutters.

Harry lived. Well, that wasn't a surprise, really. But in chapter 34, when he returns to the Forest, I did have a short moment of doubt, thinking: "She wouldn't really do that, would she?". I loved the scene in which his dead parents, Sirius and Remus are there to console him.

Dumbledore/Snape plot. Wow. Just wow. I didn't expect so much of the story would eventually focus on Dumbledore and his past dealings. I never thought he was the twinkling do-gooder that he appeared to be before, but this really surmounted anything. Still, I expected to hate him there for a while, but found I couldn't. He was too human at the end.

Now, Snape, I liked the fact he turned out to be "good" at the end, but the whole unrequited Lily love? Was kind of too much for me. I mean, a silver doe?! Yet, I wished he'd stayed alive. Dumbledore was rather nasty towards him. I wonder what potential Snape would have had, if Dumbledore hadn't played him the way he did.

What else? Hermione was just kick-ass. I'm not sure I buy that someone her age would truly manage to send her parents away like that, but on the other hand, Hermione has shown rather ruthless tendencies before, when it was for "the greater good". Actually, that Dumbledore/Grindelwald motto could have been that of many characters in the book. I wonder if Hermione saw that, too?

Now, Ron acting like an ass. I was never a great Ron fan, but I didn't dislike or hate him for running away and acting the way he did when he left Harry and Hermione. They did have to go through a lot in a short time, there was no plan, things looked desperate - he's only seventeen, and I can see how that could overwhelm anyone. It was realistic, which is why I liked it. And the way he came back was perfect, too.

The Malfoys sticked to their motto until the end, didn't they? We serve no one other than ourselves. I thought Narcissa was ambivalent at least towards Voldy since book six, and the moment with Harry in the forest was perfect: She knew Voldemort was finished and decided to preserve her family first and foremost. Liked that. I wished Draco would have had a chance to redeem himself a little in the end. He did seem to hate what being a Death Eater entails. So why didn't he stop fighting at Hogwarts in the end?

This is way too long already, so I won't name anymore scenes right now, but as a general observation: Didn't some parts of the book feel rather fandomish for you, too? I could have done without the epilogue, for instance, it was rather sappy, or with the whole Ron/Hermione kiss in the middle of the battle.
Previous post Next post
Up