Comments | deathly_hallow: An in-depth "analysis" about the cover art

your_downfall in deathly_hallow

An in-depth "analysis" about the cover art

Mar 30, 2007 15:18

I had some in-depth thoughts of the covers, and I wasn't sure if I should post them as a comment to the original cover post or as a new post... I picked new post, but apologies if this seems redundant to you.

( The U.K. children's cover )

Comments 15

corabell March 30 2007, 22:54:03 UTC

I like that you touch on the fact that there are no wands on the US cover. It was one of the first things I noticed, and I was thinking along the same lines.

shotgundivorce March 31 2007, 01:04:11 UTC

They are quite clearly Jedi.

your_downfall April 4 2007, 03:11:10 UTC

It kind of strikes me as odd. I sort of thought perhaps Harry's wand and Voldemort's wand would be forced to duel again (Priori Incantatem again, or maybe something different?). Although Dumbledore said in GoF (I think it was GoF) that if the two wands were forced to duel, they wouldn't work properly, so maybe by this point they've chucked them aside and are dueling with the basic magic within them both?

bella_donna428 March 31 2007, 02:53:37 UTC

3. Both Harry and Voldemort seem to be looking in the same direction. Voldemort seems to have his hands out to push something away, whereas Harry looks more like he's going to catch it. I think it's pretty likely that's there's something coming towards them... I think Fawkes might be a good bet there.

OK, I do realize how silly this sounds... but do you think it might be a snitch? That's been in my head since I first saw the cover and noticed that it looked like Harry was trying to catch something. It could have to do with Harry utilizing the skills he knows he's good at (like during the Triwizard), and then I start to wonder why JKR made so much out of Quidditch in general and Harry's talent as a Seeker in particular. It's been pointed out in every book - could it end up helping him in the final battle?

Of course, this is all just idle pondering, and as I said is probably very silly. Fawkes is a good bet. Either way, it just needs to be July NOW so we can read the book! :D

smammers March 31 2007, 05:07:22 UTC

That's a really good point. I think it's unlikely that Harry would need to catch a Snitch while fighting Voldemort, but maybe his Seeker skills will come into play.

your_downfall April 4 2007, 03:14:45 UTC

I think you make a really good point about the Snitch, bella_donna, and also smammers about the Seeker skills. I never thought about that, but it makes perfect sense. Harry's Seeker skills saved him in GoF when he was dueling Voldemort...

"Voldemort raised his wand, but this time Harry was ready; with the refleces born of his Quidditch training, he flung himself sideways onto the ground..." (Goblet of Fire, pg 574, UK edition)

Definitely something to think about!

trousseaux March 31 2007, 12:09:10 UTC

I find the US cover very very confusing, but I do agree with your analysis. (Although I have to say, this is the first one I've seen that didn't look incredibly naff.)

As for the UK cover, my money is on Gringots. Not just due to the money and shiny things, but perhaps Voldermort has put one of his Horcruxes in there for safe keeping? I just don't know why JK would bring up Gringotts so much if it wasn't going to be significant again. We already know precious things like the philosopher's stone can be kept there, and we've been told about the strict security measures. It (sort of) makes sense.

your_downfall April 4 2007, 03:17:10 UTC

Gringotts is definitely a viable option, but it just doesn't make sense to me. I can't imagine Voldemort, the most wanted wizard in the world, striding into Gringotts to put things in his vault, or that the goblins would keep his belongings safe after they knew who it belonged to.

Unless... unless this is one of Voldemort's earlier Horcruxes, before everyone knew he was evil, and there's some sort of magic in Gringotts that prevents anyone but the rightful owner (even the goblins) from getting in, and the protection lasts forever. Hmm...

I do agree with what you say about how JKR wouldn't have made such a big deal out of it if it wasn't going to come up again.

romanticapathy May 17 2007, 03:55:22 UTC

Or he had one of his Death Eaters lock it away in a high-security vault for safekeeping? That would make sense to me, at least.

ssajones May 8 2007, 19:35:24 UTC

I still like the idea that Gringotts holds Slytherin's locket, since in PoA(I think) JK told us the number of Sirius' vault. When I saw the cover I thought that maybe Regulus (since I'm still under the belief that he is R.A.B.) put the locket in there, maybe along with other horcruxes he had discovered.

As for the orb, it simply confirmed my belief that Harry's ability to converse with snakes will be important in the final book.

I agree with you about the armour, it is simply too specific to be anything other that spoileriffic, lol.

ssajones May 8 2007, 19:37:30 UTC

Also, I think the silver stag might be Harry's patronus. Since the inclusion of Harry's ease at producing such magic seems a tad redundant should e no need the ability in the final book.

readygetset June 10 2007, 20:17:17 UTC

In my opinion, in the U.K. cover childrens edition, it looks like their falling into the "Archway", (or in this case, the hole,) and the gold and rubies are falling in with them.
But maybe thats just me, but honestly it totally seems it...

your_downfall June 10 2007, 23:10:41 UTC

Hmm, that's a really good idea... so wherever all the gold and rubies and etc was where there was another archway? Or perhaps they brought it with them? But why...

Guh, July 21 can't come soon enough...