May Two-Four.

Oct 16, 2005 23:59

All right. OK...

So now what?

Now, this. )

halfbloodprince

Leave a comment

Comments 58

widor_toccata October 17 2005, 19:58:26 UTC
i get the feeling sometimes that rowling uses harry's stupidity as a conduit to explain to other, slower/younger readers whatas going on

and the monster roaring thing? oh how i laugh. this shud b metaquoted, sum1

Reply

mike_smith October 17 2005, 21:59:52 UTC
i get the feeling sometimes that rowling uses harry's stupidity as a conduit to explain to other, slower/younger readers whatas going onI think you're right. I've long wondered about the whole "This is a children's book/No it's not" debate, which was one of the reasons I started reading this one, to see for myself ( ... )

Reply

jim_smith October 18 2005, 00:58:09 UTC
You know what the Half-Blood Prince mystery reminds me of? The stories in that new Showcase Presents Superman book. They pretty much give you all the clues in the first two or three pages, then about halfway through Superman does something curious and the captions are all "Can you guess what Superman is up to?" and it's not especially hard if you think about it. The only reason those stories ever stump me is because I'm not used to getting all the clues up front and don't notice them until I get to the end--it's almost like I enjoy them because I overthink 'em.

Reply

widor_toccata October 18 2005, 01:04:06 UTC
One of the problems with the Half-Blood Prince "mystery" is that it was originally part of the second book. After an early draft, Rowling decided that the story would work better later, and moved it here. The story was taken out of the book with a strong mystery (who/what was attacking students inside of Hogwarts?) and put in one that barely has anything that resembles a plot. If she'd just kept the identity of the HBP as C-level filler in a more compelling story, the lack of suspense wouldn't have been so apparent, because the attention would have been diverted elsewhere ( ... )

Reply


flaxenescapee October 18 2005, 03:28:23 UTC
OMG YOU BROUGHT IN THE SUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUPLEX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Reply


Re: the Half-blood Prince linda_lupos October 18 2005, 12:20:15 UTC
What kept throwing long-time readers of the series off, though, was the fact that it was the half-blood Prince. Nobody had really expected Snape to be a halfblood, because he was a Death Eater, and Voldemort's supporters are big on pure blood and all. Also, it's generally assumed that to be a Slytherin is to be a pureblood and vice versa.

*Realises she has just given the OMGBIGTWIST of the end away* Ah well, it's not as if you hadn't guessed anyway...

Reply

Re: the Half-blood Prince pacoman October 18 2005, 12:27:15 UTC
Well yeah, but earlier in this book, Hermione mentioned how the Death Eaters allowed half-bloods into their ranks so long as they renounced their Muggle heritage (which doesn't say much, as apparently less than 1% keep ties to their Muggle heritage).

Reply

Re: the Half-blood Prince linda_lupos October 18 2005, 12:31:37 UTC
She did? Call me stupid then because I missed that point.
(Not that it kept me from guessing it was Snape from the moment the Prince's handwriting was mentioned - small and cramped just like Snape's in Book 5. But anyway...)

Or maybe Rowling's tendency of putting plottwists in is finally getting the better of her and now everybody is expecting some weird plottwist to turn up, except that this time it didn't. As far as suspence related to the title of the book goes, HBP might be the weakest in the series as it's fairly easy to guess who the Half-Blood Prince is.

Reply

Re: the Half-blood Prince seductivedark October 18 2005, 12:58:04 UTC
I missed it, too.

(which doesn't say much, as apparently less than 1% keep ties to their Muggle heritage).

Including Hermione.

Reply


aberranteyes October 18 2005, 17:53:59 UTC
Also, I think you're being unfair to River. As I understand it, her non sequiturs generally have something to do with the story, even if that something isn't immediately obvious to the other characters, or indeed to the audience. So that convo would probably have gone more like this:

SNAPE: Mal never told you what happened to your father...
RIVER: My father threw me into the sun. I was made of chocolate, but the chocolate melted.
SNAPE: No. I am your father.
RIVER: You may be right, I may be crazy, but it just may be a lunatic you're looking for.
SNAPE: Blast it, this earthquake knocked over my lunchbox.

Reply

Disclaimer: Movie hasn't yet premiered in my country pacoman October 18 2005, 17:57:27 UTC
So what, River is the middle ground between Luna and Drusilla?

Reply

Re: Disclaimer: Movie hasn't yet premiered in my country aberranteyes October 18 2005, 18:03:18 UTC
Something like that, yeah.

Reply

mike_smith October 18 2005, 18:23:21 UTC
As I understand it, her non sequiturs generally have something to do with the story, even if that something isn't immediately obvious to the other characters, or indeed to the audience.

And Superman doesn't usually say "taste it, bitches". What's your point?

Reply


_kneebiter October 20 2005, 05:25:15 UTC
For what it's worth, my theory for the last several books is that exposure to magic causes profound damage to the brain. This explains most of the more comical stupidity (not knowing how bus routes work?) as well as why everybody isn't magical by now: there's survival value in not being magical.
Come to think of it, since brain action is electricity-based, and magic is known canonically to interfere with electricity...

Reply

_kneebiter October 20 2005, 22:59:39 UTC
That's giving JKR waaaaaaaaay too much credit. I'm sure we're really just supposed to find those "Einstein" moments charming, without questioning the logic behind any of it. This is the same writer under the delusion that a nickname like "Phlegm" is the height of cleverness, so I'm wary of crediting her with writing anything complex after that.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up