Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Hottie...

Jul 17, 2009 22:02

I can't believe no one is saying anything about it! I was in heaven until I cried. only a couple of things bugged me(wtf was w/ the attack on the Burrough?) We had a blast being in line for 8 hours.

oh yes, the password I've used forever...works...Did LJ just not recognize me for awhile?

Leave a comment

Comments 5

von_derkenstein July 18 2009, 02:29:28 UTC
I really liked it--I'm just afraid to say that as an English major, my analysis lead me to believe the most important person in the story was Snape.

Reply

selwynsnape July 18 2009, 12:52:07 UTC
Well, he does share title credit this time. Harry can't be in the spotlight ALL the time. You need "evil" for good to fight.The problem was, you weren't supposed to know til the end of the book. And I am certainly not complaining the Severus got so much screen time.

Reply

von_derkenstein July 18 2009, 19:15:15 UTC
Let me clear this up:

I have no problem with the idea that Snape is the most important character. In fact, to me it is incredibly meaningful--and I would daresay that if you took the story as a whole--from the pre-Sorcerer's Stone time line to the end of The Deathly Hallows, you'd see that much of the actual tragedy falls not upon Harry, but on Snape.

I think that Snape is actually the tragic hero. You know that the entire episode of him killing Dumbledore and joining Voldemort was an act; that he was working against him. Snape's mission was to protect Harry--no matter how much he may have detested Harry or his father, James, his mission was fueled by his love for Lily.

To me, this is the most meaningful aspect of the story. Sure, Dumbledore did commit the most selfless act imaginable when he sacrificed his life; but he did it as a result of his own greed. His own vanity. He had good intentions, but you have to ask yourself: Knowing Dumbledore's history--what really compelled him to fight on the side of good?

Reply

selwynsnape July 19 2009, 13:13:39 UTC
I totally agree w/ you about Snape. Most people would have just turned their wands on themselves by now. I always knew he was good inside, even if he was a snarky bastard on the outside. Even had a "bet" w/ one of the former counselors at school. She thought he was just basic shit. I WIN!
:)
As far as Dumbledore, I think he was inherently good too. He could have easily turned dark early in his life. He just made some, all-too-human mistakes along the way. He's not God. And making sacrifices "for the good of the many" was a mantra he spewed to everyone else...At least he wasn't a hypocrite.
Gees, now I have to go read Deathly Hallows again. I only read it once, when it first came out...

Reply


telvia July 18 2009, 18:57:46 UTC
Haven't seen it yet :( Ryan and I plan to see it sometime next week or the week after, when he gets back from Kansas.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up