HP 6
So I started Harry Potter 6 yesterday around 4 pm. I finished around 4 am. Which explains my general slowness today.
Anyways, observations below the LJ cut as there are plenty of spoilers:
First off, I really liked the book, and especially how they've evolved. Rowling deserves credit for really capturing the essence of maturing through the teenage years. From the sweet kids in book 1 to the snarky teenagers of book 6, she really conveys what it's like to go through the teenage years.
There was a lot more teenage/adult content in here, including casual swearing (no actual cuss words, just relating how the characters are cursing out loud when frustrated), the word "slut" even makes an appearance, and the hand gesture to indicate displeasure, which I think most of us should be able to figure out.
Having said that much, not sure if those changes were "Americanized," as I read the American version. Leia got it for me, and she's a total sweetheart for doing so :) But I know they made some wording changes for the American version vs. the Canadian one, simple wording things like calling jumpers sweaters instead, or calling the Philosopher's Stone the Sorcerer's Stone. So I'm wondering if slut was really what Rowling wrote, or that's the Americanized word for some wonky British word. The Canadian version is the British version. Maybe I'll look at it next time I'm at the bookstore.
Snape being a death eater was so obvious because of the early chapter, and yet, because of previous books, it wasn't. She kept me guessing throughout the first 5 books, so when the obvious plot twists showed Snape would be a Deatheater, I ignored it. It made me think about M. Night Shyamalan, and how he always has a surprise ending in his movies. So you end up looking for the surprise.
But unlike Shyamalan, Rowling actually twists it this time so that the obvious answer is actually what happened. And after looking for the weird twists, you realize you were looking for nothing, and the painfully obvious becomes a surprise in itself.
Having said that much, I'm not convinced Snape is completely evil. That'd be too easy and simple, and so Snape must redeem himself somewhere in book 7, to show some more depth to his character. Plus the unbreakable vow he took, maybe that's why he was forced to help Malfoy because his own life was at stake. Nothing will make readers forgive him for killing Dumbledore, but I think he does something to help Harry in the next book. Just a hunch.
I also wonder if it's the last we'll see of Dumbledore. I'm not expecting him to come back a la Gandolf, but maybe his portrait at Hogwarts plays a role in the next book.
I forgot how much I loved Loony Luna's character. She's my fav recent character by far, and I had totally forgotten about her until she was introduced early in the book.
There was a real reunion feel at the end for Dumbledore's funeral, with everyone coming back to pay their respects. There's lots of little details, like Karkaroff getting killed after going into hiding.
What if Harry isn't the Chosen One? What if it really is Neville? Wouldn't that just be totally bizarre?
There were eerie similarities in this book with the "war on terror." I don't want to politicize a children's book. But I wouldn't be surprised if Rowling got some of the ideas from current events is all.
The new minister is creepy. Fudge was incompetent and annoying, but the new guy...I don't trust him. Plus he's a vampire, and only an idiot would trust a vampire :p
Fleur's character was annoying, but she was supposed to be, and I thought it was done marvelously by Rowling. The scene at the end with Bill in the hospital was one of my fav scenes. She was just totally in-character, the-world-revolves-around-me kinda thing when she's arguing with Mrs. Weasley over why Bill wouldn't want to marry her just cuz he got bitten in the face. Never once had the thought crossed her mind that she would not marry him; rather she became defensive, interpreting it as the family thinking Bill would stop loving her. And her line about how she was beautiful enough for the both of them was totally Fleur. As a writer, I greatly admire that scene specifically and how in-tune with the character Rowling was.
Dumbledore's death sucked, but it didn't really shake me. He alluded several times to how he was old, and how Harry was more valuable anyways. Plus I accidentally read the spoiler beforehand, so it wasn't a surprise.
As for how the Death Eaters got in, that was classic Rowling, just subtle hints that make you go "How did I miss that?" once you're done reading it. She mentioned the vanishing cabinet once or twice only, and never in an important point but rather as description (like when Harry's hiding the potions book and passes by it).
I guess that brings up the big difference between the books and the movies for me, at least the first few. The last movie was pretty good. But in a nutshell, the books are very subtle in the clues they give, the way the story is laid out. After you read it once, you really do wonder how you missed it, and see all the clever lil clues throughout. But the movies, it's blunt, in your face, obvious. Hi, you're a moron, so we'll make it perfectly clear what's going on. I didn't really enjoy the movies cuz of that, though since they switched directors, it has gotten much better.
Sadly, the last book won't be out for a few more years, and Rowling is taking a vacation til the end of the year I hear. I can't wait to read it though.
Anyways, observations below the LJ cut as there are plenty of spoilers:
First off, I really liked the book, and especially how they've evolved. Rowling deserves credit for really capturing the essence of maturing through the teenage years. From the sweet kids in book 1 to the snarky teenagers of book 6, she really conveys what it's like to go through the teenage years.
There was a lot more teenage/adult content in here, including casual swearing (no actual cuss words, just relating how the characters are cursing out loud when frustrated), the word "slut" even makes an appearance, and the hand gesture to indicate displeasure, which I think most of us should be able to figure out.
Having said that much, not sure if those changes were "Americanized," as I read the American version. Leia got it for me, and she's a total sweetheart for doing so :) But I know they made some wording changes for the American version vs. the Canadian one, simple wording things like calling jumpers sweaters instead, or calling the Philosopher's Stone the Sorcerer's Stone. So I'm wondering if slut was really what Rowling wrote, or that's the Americanized word for some wonky British word. The Canadian version is the British version. Maybe I'll look at it next time I'm at the bookstore.
Snape being a death eater was so obvious because of the early chapter, and yet, because of previous books, it wasn't. She kept me guessing throughout the first 5 books, so when the obvious plot twists showed Snape would be a Deatheater, I ignored it. It made me think about M. Night Shyamalan, and how he always has a surprise ending in his movies. So you end up looking for the surprise.
But unlike Shyamalan, Rowling actually twists it this time so that the obvious answer is actually what happened. And after looking for the weird twists, you realize you were looking for nothing, and the painfully obvious becomes a surprise in itself.
Having said that much, I'm not convinced Snape is completely evil. That'd be too easy and simple, and so Snape must redeem himself somewhere in book 7, to show some more depth to his character. Plus the unbreakable vow he took, maybe that's why he was forced to help Malfoy because his own life was at stake. Nothing will make readers forgive him for killing Dumbledore, but I think he does something to help Harry in the next book. Just a hunch.
I also wonder if it's the last we'll see of Dumbledore. I'm not expecting him to come back a la Gandolf, but maybe his portrait at Hogwarts plays a role in the next book.
I forgot how much I loved Loony Luna's character. She's my fav recent character by far, and I had totally forgotten about her until she was introduced early in the book.
There was a real reunion feel at the end for Dumbledore's funeral, with everyone coming back to pay their respects. There's lots of little details, like Karkaroff getting killed after going into hiding.
What if Harry isn't the Chosen One? What if it really is Neville? Wouldn't that just be totally bizarre?
There were eerie similarities in this book with the "war on terror." I don't want to politicize a children's book. But I wouldn't be surprised if Rowling got some of the ideas from current events is all.
The new minister is creepy. Fudge was incompetent and annoying, but the new guy...I don't trust him. Plus he's a vampire, and only an idiot would trust a vampire :p
Fleur's character was annoying, but she was supposed to be, and I thought it was done marvelously by Rowling. The scene at the end with Bill in the hospital was one of my fav scenes. She was just totally in-character, the-world-revolves-around-me kinda thing when she's arguing with Mrs. Weasley over why Bill wouldn't want to marry her just cuz he got bitten in the face. Never once had the thought crossed her mind that she would not marry him; rather she became defensive, interpreting it as the family thinking Bill would stop loving her. And her line about how she was beautiful enough for the both of them was totally Fleur. As a writer, I greatly admire that scene specifically and how in-tune with the character Rowling was.
Dumbledore's death sucked, but it didn't really shake me. He alluded several times to how he was old, and how Harry was more valuable anyways. Plus I accidentally read the spoiler beforehand, so it wasn't a surprise.
As for how the Death Eaters got in, that was classic Rowling, just subtle hints that make you go "How did I miss that?" once you're done reading it. She mentioned the vanishing cabinet once or twice only, and never in an important point but rather as description (like when Harry's hiding the potions book and passes by it).
I guess that brings up the big difference between the books and the movies for me, at least the first few. The last movie was pretty good. But in a nutshell, the books are very subtle in the clues they give, the way the story is laid out. After you read it once, you really do wonder how you missed it, and see all the clever lil clues throughout. But the movies, it's blunt, in your face, obvious. Hi, you're a moron, so we'll make it perfectly clear what's going on. I didn't really enjoy the movies cuz of that, though since they switched directors, it has gotten much better.
Sadly, the last book won't be out for a few more years, and Rowling is taking a vacation til the end of the year I hear. I can't wait to read it though.