elanor_x ([info]elanor_x) wrote,
@ 2007-07-26 15:54:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
Current mood: contemplative
Current music:Deathly Hallows
Entry tags:dh, hp

My thoughts and questions about DH. *spoilers - not under the cut!*

We bought the book at 8:30 pm on Saturday and I have finished reading it at 5:30 Monday morning. I fervently hoped it would resemble more the first 4 books than OoTF (Death to Caps Lock!) or HBP (Cheesy Romance). Somehow it feels different from others and I can't rank it. Like with HBP there were likable and not chapters. However, with HBP the solution would be to simply cut chunks of the book, and here I don't even know what the problem is. A huge part of it it's that it's the final HP book and I imagine with dread and aching void the day, when [info]deathtocapslock  will cease to exist, after rereading the entire series. If we don't pick another book, we'll degenerate as a community, which after all those years [I joined you yet at the previous com] of waiting for Fridays and been used to seeing more or less the same people, humorously discussing books together is hard for me to imagine. It’s like losing a friend in a way. 

 

Since it's the last book I decided to use the final opportunity and post as many chapter recaps as I will manage. I’ll be brief here and hopefully develop the ideas in my recaps.

 

Here is a list of things that I loved [those getting emotional reaction out of me], things I didn’t like and unanswered questions, hoping that my lj friends will make the matters clearer, if possible.

SPOILERS AHEAD!!!

*

*

*

PROCEED AT YOUR OWN RISK!!!

Loved:

 

- Kreacher’s Tale, even though his new attitude towards Harry was strange to read and felt like fan fiction.

Did you notice that Kreacher was happy most of his life, led house-elves into the battle and got a new owner he loves (Harry), while Dobby, A Free House-Elf, was miserable in slavery because of hating his owners, ostracized by his own kind in freedom (doubt whether other house-elves would listen to him as they did to Kreacher) and wound up dead (like Sirius by the family he betrayed)? Harry’s children will have Kreacher, a proper house-elf, not a freaky one.

- Snape’s death was the only death in this book, which made me feel something. I couldn’t hold my tears. Afterwards, read spare-change here:

“It just hit me that Snape wanted Harry to look into his eyes as he died because he wanted the last thing he would see to be “Lily’s eyes.” Poor little Snapey.
You know, I kind of want Snape to be still alive. *sad* You are still the awesomest character ever, Snape. Even if your backstory is crappy.”

And cried more.

 

- No Ginny! Yay!

 

- Harry’s going to be killed in the company of the dead, visible only to him since they were part of him. “The Forest Again” is an incredibly strong chapter.

 

- Most of “The Prince’s Tale”, Specially

Lily not believing D “could ever been friends with Gellert Grindelwald”;

D not resisting the temptation of putting on the ring because of his deep remorse and dying as a result;

Snape’s horror at the revelation that Harry was raised to die and his answer “Lately, only those whom I couldn’t save” to D’s question: “How many men and women have you watched die?”

 

-  D’s and G’s friendship and G’s remorse in the end. G intrigued me since the first book and, based on one of JKR’s interviews, I was sure we would never see him again. The only thing lacking for full happiness is Maya writing a fic about them. [I don’t mean slash, but it would be fine for me too]. J

 

  - V destroying both his body and soul to create Horcruxes. Now we know where his good looks went at last. The description of his eyes rattling like a trapped cockroach is great. Wouldn’t be fascinating twisted, if he had his mother’s eyes too, knew it and symbolically decided to put them in her locket?

 

- Hermione telling the goblin (?) that they were raised in a Muggle world and thus with different prejudices.

 

- Goblins having different views of property than wizards and the Polyjuice Potion designed “for human use only”, thus not working on Hagrid. I started getting the impression that we’re dealing with different species here, not with strangely looking humans.

Didn't like:

 

- V's "What is this?" to Harry's advice “try for some remorse, Riddle” sounded horrible, making V seem retarded, as if he didn’t understand the dictionary definition of the word. I understand the scene is supposed to be highly symbolical, but on the most basic, not symbolical level it made me cringe. In the whole fandom only I seem to find something to complain about it. What did you think?

 

- Reading the book, I felt myself constantly haunted, which was a good thing, conveying H’s life on the run. However, even fantasy should be believable to enjoy it, and Trio’s incessant escapes from V himself [on the way to the Burrow, from Nagini, from Malfoy Manor when V was coming, twice at the final confrontation] were hardly feasible. In GoF Harry escaped once due to his wand, in OoTF D & Order members fought for them and saved them, and here the Trio escape DEs and V freely? Almost in every chapter?

 

- Logical lapses: V seized power and Arthur Weasley goes to work as usual? And Ginny goes to school? Why weren’t all Weasleys held hostage and executed one by one until Harry showed up? OK, may be V keeps low profile, but it felt strange. There are other points too, like Ron’s fake Parseltongue.

 

- Liked the tale of the three brothers itself [I love fairy tales], but not how it was used in the series. The concepts of Deathly Hallows and of wand ownership had to be introduced in the former books, for the end not to feel like cheating.

[info]la_onzaasked a question, which proves imo that JKR made up DH only in the last book: “if Harry's invisibility cloak is a legendary artifact that gives "constant and impenetrable concealment," how come Mad-Eye could see through it?” Of course, you could say that the eye was very special too, but I don’t buy it was as special as the 3 legendary gifts of Death.

 

- All Slytherins leave the castle and are too cowardly or/and pro-V to fight.

 

- Snape did the right choice because of his love for Lily. So, I guess, if he fell in love with Slytherin beautiful girl, he would gladly continue killing those faceless people. Or, like somebody wrote in Russian HP forum, if another Dark Lord rose, it would be fine, unless he would kill Snape’s grandmother or something.  

[info]ptyx made me feel better about it by her post, saying that his love for Lily changed him.

 

- Peter’s way of paying his life debt was anticlimactic after waiting for it since book 3.

- Remus and Tonks subplot was utterly redundant.

 

- The same for Hagrid and his giant brother. Why did she tell to keep him in the OoTF movie?

 

- Ditto about The House-Elves Liberation Front. The book ends (!) with Harry happily contemplating how his house-elf will make him a sandwich!

 

Questions:

 

* What is the ultimate moral lesson of HP series?

*Why did Snape have to die? Hasn't he suffered enough? Can only death bring redemption in Rowling's eyes?

* Why couldn't Harry have comforted the Voldemort-baby? What would happen, if Harry tried to touch / help the baby V? Who was this child – the bit of V’s soul still left in his body?

* Do we know that after death V will suffer for eternity as a small child, not understanding why he is suffering and who he is?

And the less important ones:

*Whom did Draco marry?
*Where Harry, Ron and Hermione work?
*Snape became D's spy only because of his romantic love for Lily. Should I understand that without her he would have been 100% evil? What does JKR want to say about love and morals / choices by this?
* Did Peter pay his life debt to Harry only but stopping for a second?

* A silly question, but G interested me since book 1: Do you think he really felt remorse?
* Why did Remus & Tonks have to die?

 

A few good links:

 

From andromakhe I got those 2 links:

If My F-List Wrote DH – a funny summery of the book.

Missing from 'Harry Potter' – a real moral struggle

Explains some readers’ dissatisfaction with the books and the secret of Snape’s appeal [hint: Not "the bad boy syndrome”, Rowling].

From Pandagon: Relatively short, funny summery of the DH.

Maya's parody of OotP.




(27 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Spoilers
[info]andromakhe
2007-07-26 04:46 pm UTC (link)
I think you should cut your post from the point where you list what you liked. Otherwise, there's the stuff about Kreacher, which I think is a spoiler. The links look okay to keep visible (not behind cut), but maybe there should be a spoiler warning for them so people don't click them accidentally.

(Reply to this)


[info]ellecain
2007-07-27 09:06 am UTC (link)
OMG, yes! That line where Harry shouts about "remorse" was even cheesier than the "you'll never know love or friendship' from the OOtP movie. I cringed too - you weren't the only one!

And yeah, good point about Lily not believing Dumbledore could be friends with Grindelwald. It's like - Hello? Weren't you friends with Snape? Or did she forget him as soon as she got married to James? It does not make sense.

Nice work, spotting that Mad Eye could see him under the Cloak - bet JKR had forgotten that. Consistency errors made this book baffle me! She should've just got an editor, for Merlin's sake!

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]elanor_x
2007-07-27 06:00 pm UTC (link)
She should've just got an editor, for Merlin's sake!
I have heard that her editor viewed him/her(?)self more as cheerleader than as critical editor. Am not sure whether it's true, but so are the rumors on the lj. When did her books become widely popular? Not after the GoF by chance? That would explain a lot.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]aasaylva
2007-07-27 10:11 am UTC (link)
I very much agree with what you said about your concern for future Deathtocapslock - we'll see where it goes.
As to your questions (and I'm curious to see what others will come up with):
1) Moral of the HP series
Maybe I'll get a different impression when I've read the book a second time, but my first take is, that it's a very odd mix of Christian and Warrior-culture morals. This has been suggested before and it still seems to hold true:
- Christian: Harry doesn't need to sully his hands or split his soul. He vanquishes Voldemort without killing him.
- Warrior-culture: when Voldi is not concerned directly, Harry is much less fussy - Cruciatus for someone who spits someone in the face? What next? Avada kedavra for someone who hits on Ginny? This attitude ties in seamlessly with the narrator's voice's sympathy for (false) Moody who tortured a student for attacking from behind. Everything is warranted in a spirit of chivalry. Very germanic... Which made the whole Christian motif as stated above ring false to me. Not in itself, but in context with this very cavalier attitude in "normal" life.
So, the only moral I can deduce is a very fishy "Love conquers death" - ultimately too vague to be satisfying IMO.

2) Why did Snape have to die?
I'm being a bitch here, but I think, she wanted a safe way for Harry to come to terms with him without really having to come to terms with him, if that makes sense. It's easy to forgive someone who is never going to bother you anymore. And it just fits with the general idea of book 7 to reduce Slytherin to imperceptibility - they are either dead (Snape)or completely passive (Malfoys, especially Draco - I've never read a bottom!Draco in fanon who was SO passive) or dissolve within the good guys (Slughorn).

3) The "baby" at King's Cross
I think this is Rowling's version of purgatory or even hell. Presumably, Voldi could have made it to purgatory (meaning suffering as depicted by Hermione earlier in the book by realizing what he had done), but he refused to do so when Harry offered him this one last chance. So he didn't, meaning he passed his chance to reunite his soul-pieces which alone would have provided an afterlife for him. Thus, this baby ( = the piece that had been inside Harry) is condemned to be severed from the rest for all eternity and thus will suffer in the state it is in now, because there is no way for change anymore.
But I have no idea what would have happened if Harry had touched it - "by law" nothing should have happened, because it is past redemptability. But maybe love is the answer in this case as well.

7)Would Snape have been 100 % evil without Lily?
Seeing the awful cheesy and clichéd way JKR depicts roamntic love in general: maybe yes.
But I'm prepared to give her the benefit of the doubt in this case, saying I don't think Snape's love for Lily was of the purely teenage puppy way (oooh she is so cute with that long hair...), but something deeper. She fascinated him quite some time before they even hit puberty and the way she is described seemed to me just as a symbol of life in general. The carefree happy way of jumping from that swing, her looks, her way to interact both with Snape and Petunia. I think, she was a promise of life and sanity (in its most wholesome meaning, comprising body soul and spirit) which he sorely lacked and tried to get through her. In this way, she has a religious dimension for him, a sort of personal saviouress (is that a word?), a saint.
So, yes, he would have drifted into evil without Lily OR SOMEONE WHO HAD THE SAME EFFECT ON HIM. In fact, the contact with her gave him enough strength to get through all those years, just by memory!

10) Why did Remus and Tonks have to die?
I've read that obviously it was an afterthought. JKR felt she had to kill off a father and decided to off Remus instead of Arthur. Ties in with the way Remus and Tonks were written since book 6 - in a throwaway way as if she didn't want to bother with these characters anymore, which I thought was a shame - there was such a lot of potential to both of them.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-27 10:26 am UTC (link)
it's a very odd mix of Christian and Warrior-culture morals

It might not be as odd as all that, actually. The American Christian Right does have a history of preaching "love your neighbour as yourself - BUT STOMP HEAVILY ON ANY BASTARD WHO TRIES TO HARM YOUR NEIGHBOURHOOD!" =]

Also, Catholicism (at the very least; I'm not sure about other varieties) considers "good" to equal "furthering life," so killing is the most horrible thing imaginable. However, hurting without killing another matter - after all, death is evil, but pain is good and makes us better people. People who went to Catholic schools tend to complain that the nuns weren't exactly shy with the physical punishment.

Christianity isn't as cute and cuddly as people tend to think. There's plenty of room in it for a warrior culture if you want one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]elanor_x
2007-07-27 06:19 pm UTC (link)
I very much agree with what you said about your concern for future Deathtocapslock - we'll see where it goes.
I thought about reading other books, which will be well known so that people will have access to them [the best possibility is free on-line texts], interesting and with likable, yet flawed characters, like The Three Musketeers, so that we'll be able both love and snark at them. I visited other on-line communities, rereading Dracula and Jane Austen's novel, but without snarking it wasn't nearly as much fun. :)

a safe way for Harry to come to terms with him without really having to come to terms with him, if that makes sense
It makes perfect sense. I too had the same thought (before reading your answer).

I've never read a bottom!Draco in fanon who was SO passive
LOL. JKR went there first.

Liked your thought about Lily's significance for Snape. As for Remus and Tonks, I think the books would only be better without Tonks at all and without Lupin in HBP & DH. Do we know who killed them? I think it isn't written in the book, but I have got a nice theory - Bellatrix murdered Tonks (and probably Lupin) before being killed by Molly, thus fulfilling V's wish from the first chapter.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]indongcho
2008-02-20 08:15 am UTC (link)
I agree with you about Snape. It's much easier for Harry to accept that Snape was on his side now that he's dead. If he'd lived, Harry might have actually had to be mature enough to accept that someone he just plain old doens't like is (somewhat) good. Respecting a memory is much easier than respecting Snape when he's actually there snarking at Harry.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-27 10:18 am UTC (link)
What does JKR want to say about love and morals / choices by this?

I think for JKR, there are only three reasons to do something - because it's the (genuinely, objectively) right thing to do, because you serve your own self-interest at the expense of everything else, or because you have an emotional reason.

This is a deeply Christian way of looking at things. You can only understand the concept of "good" by being saved, and if you are, then you might make a mistake here and there but you're basically going to do the right thing. If you are not saved, then you will not necessarily be a beast in human form who is motivated by entirely selfish reasons. It is still possible for you to be motivated by, say, your love of your family. But genuine moral will always be beyond you.

So yes, Snape would have happily served any Dark Lord that didn't harm any of the people he cared about. He is, symbolically, a heathen who does good things for his own reasons - worthy of sympathy and maybe even gratitude, but also at the end of the day someone who has turned his back on God.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]ptyx
2007-07-27 01:17 pm UTC (link)
JKR's latest statements on Snape make me believe you're right!

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-27 05:50 pm UTC (link)
I'm almost afraid to ask.

What did she say?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ptyx
2007-07-27 06:03 pm UTC (link)
OMG. I was sure you had read it. Here's a transcrip of the interview:

Today Show: "Was Snape always intended to be a hero?"
Rowling: *gasp of shock* "Is he a hero? You see I don't see him really as a hero."
Today Show: "Really?"
Rowling: "He's spiteful, he's a bully. All these things are still true of Snape even at the end of this book. Um...but was he brave? Yes, immensely."
Audience Member: "If Snape didn't love Lily would he still try to protect Harry?"
Rowling: "No, he definitely wouldn't have done it. He wouldn't have been remotely interested in what happened to this boy."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]elanor_x
2007-07-27 06:32 pm UTC (link)
But even with this interview what you wrote about Snape's love for Lily changing him is still true. If he didn't have this love, it certainly wouldn't change him, right? :)
Besides, after 7 books imo we shouldn't pay attention to what the author says, but to what is actually written in the canon and speculate and make our own theories. Snape is a complex character and there are many ways of looking at him. He can be both spiteful and a bully, and still be a hero in our eyes. Not all heroes have to be unnaturally good, selfless people.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]ptyx
2007-07-27 06:40 pm UTC (link)
I totally agree with you. That's why I said yesterday that I didn't care for what JKR said, because I have my own interpretation. But I still find it hard to understand how an author can be so wrong about what she wrote (LOL).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-28 02:08 pm UTC (link)
I think that she has a certain amount of power of observation, so she knows more or less how people behave, but she has absolutely no compassion or empathy, so she has no idea why they behave that way.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-28 02:07 pm UTC (link)
(*groans*) Ah, that's the Rowling I've come to know and despise from the bottom of my black, malice-filled heart.

Fuck you, Rowling. You created Snape. You do not get to pass judgement on him. If you didn't want him to be an ass, you shouldn't have created him to be one.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]indongcho
2008-02-20 08:19 am UTC (link)
Spiteful and a bully? Why does that sound like it could apply to a certain hero from this series?

*sighs*

Before DH I'd thought that maybe Snape had actually become a Death Eater in order to act as a spy for Dumbledore. You know, if he was a spy for Dumbledore. I don't mind love being a motivating factor, but when it's the ONLY motivating factor.... The way Rowling treats it, it's like she thinks that nothing else motivates him.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]elanor_x
2008-02-21 07:17 am UTC (link)
Why does that sound like it could apply to a certain hero from this series?
Did you mean Harry, Hermione, Ginny, the twins or even Ron?

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]slinkhard
2007-07-27 04:28 pm UTC (link)
But genuine moral will always be beyond you.

Isn't JKR's particular faith Church of Scotland (basically Calvinism)? Because one of the basic ideas there is that some people are selected by God to be saved and others damned, and it's all predestined, afaik. Only the elect (the saved)'s sins can be atoned, the reprobate (damned) can't.
Elkins did a post on Calvinism in HP and how it clashs with the 'choice' them, focusing on Harry as the elect, if you haven't read it. It's very good:
http://www.theennead.com/elkins/hp/archives/000149.html

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)


[info]elanor_x
2007-07-27 06:37 pm UTC (link)
Thank you. I have read most of the essays long ago and have already forgotten them, so now I can reread with pleasure. It's a pity Elkins doesn't write the essays any longer.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]baeraad
2007-07-28 02:03 pm UTC (link)
Well, that would also explain why JKR seems to have nothing but contempt for every single one of her characters, even the ones she profess to like. According to Calvinism, people pretty much suck, one and all.

I had forgotten that article. :) I agree, it's very insightful.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]ptyx
2007-07-27 01:33 pm UTC (link)
What is the ultimate moral lesson of HP series?

I confess I'm totally lost here.

Anyway, great post! You have probably read [info]rexluscus's wonderful post on Snape by now. I'd also like to rec you [info]morgan_d's review on DH. (I'm sorry I can't post the link here, but LJ is too slow, it's driving me mad.)

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]elanor_x
2007-07-27 01:59 pm UTC (link)
No, I haven't. Thank you for the links.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]lachlanm
2007-07-27 10:25 pm UTC (link)
eleanor_x: * Why couldn't Harry have comforted the Voldemort-baby? What would happen, if Harry tried to touch / help the baby V? Who was this child – the bit of V’s soul still left in his body?

* Do we know that after death V will suffer for eternity as a small child, not understanding why he is suffering and who he is?


I don't think Voldemort's going to be a small child for eternity. What Harry saw wasn't Voldemort; it was the piece of Voldemort's soul caught in his forehead. And even if it had been the whole Voldemort, when Voldemort was Babymort he only looked like a baby. Babymort was in full possession of his faculties and well aware that he was an evil overlord, so I wouldn't consider him a real baby.

As far as "no help is possible" is concerned, though, I found it kind of creepy. On the one hand, it was probably too late to help him. On the other hand, that's basically been Dumbledore's position on Voldemort since he was eleven.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


(Anonymous)
2007-08-24 11:48 pm UTC (link)
that voldemort baby fore-head soul thing is so sad.

i can't help but feel sorry for him, even after all he's done...

(Reply to this) (Parent)


[info]indongcho
2008-02-20 08:21 am UTC (link)
If I was pinned down and asked to choose a religion, I would choose Hinduism over Christianity anyday (or another religion with similar reincarnation). It's much less...cruel to get as many times as you need to figure things out, rather than being sent to eternal hellfire if you screw up once.

(Reply to this) (Parent)


(Anonymous)
2007-08-11 08:44 pm UTC (link)
As I've mentioned elsewhere, the moral lesson of Harry Potter is:

1) You must never, ever aspire to anything beyond your station, you must never do anything except what others expect of you.

2) There are far worse things than dying. These things include parenthood, and being prevented from killing one's enemies.

3) Your life ends after you leave secondary school.

- Dan Hemmens

(Reply to this)


[info]templar1112002
2007-08-30 05:12 pm UTC (link)
Hey there, I'm catching up with flist after a long hiatus and found this entry of yours. Great post, and I'm afraid that I'll need a second read of the book, because while I liked it in general terms, I still need to analyse it. I think that I agree with all your questions, that is, like you I expected some resolution for all those threads and I'm a bit disappointed with the final package. It kind of felt rushed to me, it wouldn't have hurt to have a more detailed epilogue either.
Snape's plot thread was totally disappointing too, I still can't believe that Harry would name one of his kids after him, especially when Snape had been so mean to him and the cause of his parents' death, if somewhat unwillingly. Nope, can't feel his pain and JKR should have at least shown a "compasionate" side in Snape's character at some point in the series for me to believe that latest development. Anyways, I'm rambling here. Thanks for this post, it put me back on track with HP discussion.

(Reply to this)


(27 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…