posted July 24, 2007 03:44 AM         

Do NOT read on - we don't want to ruin the end for anybody...

THERE WILL BE SPOILERS!!!! - You've been warned!

But I'm impatient and must discuss without censoring myself

posted July 24, 2007 05:45 AM         

But oh WOW - what a read!!!!! I was lucky enough to receive a copy the day before the book officially came out - one of my naughty friends dropped the pdf file into my inbox on Friday morning. It's facinating - still got all the spelling mistakes and everything!!! (Blimmin' hackers can get their hands on anything these days!!!)

Overall? I loved it! There was a fair few things I'd have changed but I can live with what it is!!! How about you guys?!?!?!

posted July 24, 2007 07:27 AM         

Thanks for starting this thread, cat71. I didn't know whether it was too early to start discussing it. Still, mugglenet has already begun to allow discussions so that should count a bit.

Big questions on many minds ...

1. What were Lily and James' occupations?
   
2. What did Dudley see when he was attacked by dementors exactly?
   
3. Who were the people (2?) who were supposed to discover magic or something magically related later in life?
   
4. How did the sword get back in the Sorting Hat?
   
5. What was the exact, clear cut significance of Lily's eyes?
   
6. What do Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione grow up to do?
   
7. Who was Victorie?
   
8. Whom did Draco marry?
   
9. *added* What role did Fawkes play in book 7 ... didn't Jk say/hint he would be important?
   

posted July 24, 2007 07:31 AM         

1. Still no idea.
   
2. I think it might have had something to do with the way he treated Harry all his life which is why we were explained his remorseful actions/words in book 7.
   
3. I think Dudley was one, realizing that magic can be good. The other might have been Petunia ... some have said Voldemort but I don't think he actually learned any lessons. Maybe it was Percy, realizing that it isn't always about following the status quo/rules, that magic (and life) should be about doing what's right no matter the odds.
   
4. My theory is that, regardless of goblin claims, the sword really was Gryffindor's. When the Sorting Hat was enchanted, I believe he (or all of them together) must have been the one(s) to make it so that "help would always be given" at Hogwarts ... through the hat. He must have cast a spell so that any true Gryffindor and Hogwarts "loyalist" would pull out his sword in times of need. So, even though Griphook stole the sword back, it was actually the magical property of Godric Gryffindor through the Sorting Hat, Hogwarts and/or the Headmaster and perhaps the person to whom it was granted at the time, for that time. Thus, when needed, it was automatically returned to the Sorting Hat to be pulled out again. Not sure how Dumbledore's Will worked out with giving it to Harry. That's sketchy because did he really have the authority to do so? See, if it was Harry's because of the Will, why was Neville able to pull it back out? Doesn't make clear sense unless "ownership" outside the Sorting Hat or the castle is temporary.
   
5. Hubby and I discussed this a bit as it wasn't ever plainly stated. We think it was so important because it was a constant reminder to Snape of who Harry was. Indeed, without her eyes, Harry was just about a replica of his father. It would have been even more difficult for Snape to keep his promise/play his part if it weren't for the fact that every time he really looked at Harry, he saw Lily. For the record, I always stood behind Snape. Didn't doubt him for a second, much to my hubby's and many friends' long lived consternation. And I shed buckets of tears when I read "Albus Severus" and "probably the bravest man I ever knew"! Getting teary eyed again just thinking about it. I Snape, flawed, brokenhearted and all.
   
6. I wish we knew! Omg, how I wish we knew! JK said only one student would go on to teach at Hogwarts and we know that was Neville. So what did the rest of them do?! Hermione must have gone on with S.P.E.W. somehow, possibly expanded it for all magical creatures. Ron? Gringott's perhaps? Always was fond of treasures but that's a stab in the dark. No idea what Harry's been up to the past 19 years. Anyone have a clue? I wanted him to work at Hogwarts but alas. The next hope was Quidditch but if so you'd think he'd have made some mention of it somehow to his kids getting on board the train. And Ginny? I'd like to think she stays/stayed at home with the little ones and now does ... what? Perhaps she and Harry work together at something? Gah! So frustrating.
   
7. Bill and Fleur's daughter is my guess. It sounds like a French name and she'd have most likely been born not more than a year or two after Teddy which would make her the right age and give her the relation of cousin.
   
8. I don't think it was Pansy because surely JK would have referred to her by name. So who is the elusive Mrs. Malfoy? A muggle perhaps? And the name Scorpius was probably fitting but made me squirm.
   
9. *added* The only thing I can think of is when they refer to phoenix tears again. Am I missing something?
   

OK. Sorry. See? I just can't not think about it. I'll stop here for now. Please, I want to know what everyone else is thinking! Yes, I am a bit overexcited.

posted July 24, 2007 08:16 AM         

Now, we know Helga's cup was owned by Hepzibah Smith. Handed down as an heirloom. Salazar's locket was also an heirloom, handed down to the Gaunt's and in their possession until it was pawned by Merope to B & B's, to be purchased also by Hepzibah Smith. Seems like the theory is a bust. Then, Rowena's diadem was stolen by her daughter and subsequently lost ...

How could these objects have (1)been magically powerful and/or aids to Hogwarts and (2) why weren't they held at the castle?

As to the first question, we know Voldemort didn't want just anything to be a Horcrux. Yes, we've speculated the reason for the choices of those 3 objects was because Hogwarts was his first true home ... but think about his behavior at the end of book 7. He could have waged relentless war on the castle but he pulled back. He wanted allegiance. He wanted to rule. He wanted Hogwarts and all that came with it. Mighty handy if your soul lives on in the magical aids the castle has ensured in case of a revolt, no? The diadem was in fact hidden within the castle. Also, Hepzibah Smith said she knew the cup at least had magical properties but hadn't herself looked into it.

As to the second question, we never did find out just where Gryffindor's sword had been the whole time before Harry pulled it out in CoS, did we? Perhaps that's one reason why JK made Griphook steal it back. To let us know that, no matter where the object in question was, it would return when needed to the Sorting Hat.

Gryffindor's sword was to aid the brave ... an indestructible (or nearly so) goblin wrought sword to aid in battle.

Ravenclaw's diadem would have been to aid the clever ... worn on the head, could it have been meant to enhance mental prowess somehow? An aid to a superb magical mind?

Hufflepuff's cup would have been to aid the steadfast and hardworking ... perhaps an elixir of some sort could be called upon to help in an exhausting endeavor? Or one to provide healing to one who exerted him/herself on behalf of the castle?

Slytherin's locket would have been to help the cunning and ambitious ... perhaps an effect to win over the hearts and minds of those you wish to gain to your side while you wear it? Hypnotic, like a snake ...

Sadly, just theories. We may never know if there was any further significance for sure. We've seen just how great Godric's sword is. Imagine if those objects, some of the few only known relics of the founders four, would have been left unsullied by Voldemort.

Also ... consider where Voldemort chose to hide his Horcruxes. The ring from his magical ancestors was stored in the house his mother lived in. The diary was left with Lucius. Nagini he kept with himself and even sent her out on missions. So far, no exceptionally great magical protections for his soul pieces. These objects also hold only personal significance for Voldy. Nagini seems to be in the middle ... his pet, his aid, a bit of himself truth be told but also a connection to Slytherin due to his Parselmouth abilities. Then comes the locket. How heavily guarded did he keep Slytherin's locket! And in a cave where he tormented other children when he was young! Bridging his childhood and his aspirations, perhaps? We don't know (or I don't remember exactly) where Hufflepuff's cup was prior to being given to Bellatrix. However, then it was guarded at Gringott's ... the only safer place being Hogwarts. Why not Hogwarts? He only made it in with the diadem that one time ...

Seems like an awful lot of trouble to go through for only those particular pieces when the other ones are handled almost carelessly. Coincidence or not? And if Hogwarts really wasn't any more significant than as his first real home ... why didn't he focus more on Slytherin type objects. Seems he wanted to make Hogwarts his home again ... with Slytherin House topping all.

PS Harry can't count because Voldy didn't know, naturally.

Okay, really, I'm stopping now.

posted July 24, 2007 08:42 AM         

I will read your posts properly and add comments but firstly I just want to say that overall I found alot of this book to be contrived, obvious and frankly just not as intriguing or gripping as the others - my favourite book is still Order of the Phoenix, followed by Azkaban and my favourite film is still Azkaban. When I was reading Deathly Hallows it felt to me that the writer was bored now...??? Just me?

posted July 24, 2007 09:26 AM         

Lady Grey did say she stole the Diadem to be more intelligent then her mother – so mental prowess, yes, maybe even psychic abilities!

posted July 24, 2007 09:36 AM         

1 - Dudley showing remorse towards Harry
2 - Ron and Harmione's first kiss
3 - Ron calling Draco 'a B*****d!'
4 - Mrs Weasley getting tough at the end, "Not my daughter, you B***h!"
5 - The 'three' returning to Grimauld Place for a while
6 - The final battle at Hogwarts - had to be there didn't it, let's face it I think Hogwarts is what has captured the mass conciousess heart more so then Harry Potter, who doesn't wish they got that magically written letter in green ink on their 11th birthday?!
7 - Professor McGonagall - you go girl!!!
8 - Snape having Lily's Patronus (again I'm being a smarty pants, but guessed it!)

I'm sure there are more - I'm trying not to be too harsh.

posted July 24, 2007 10:04 AM         

The only other known relic of Gryffindor's was the Sorting Hat. And remember when Voldemort finds out about the sword in book 7? He veritably freaks knowing that Harry has/could have it. He must have known or assumed it was one of the few things that could have destroyed his Horcruxes. Why? How powerful were those objects meant to be and who knew? Dumbledore, clearly. Who else?

I think you're right! Making those objects Horcruxes didn't destroy their properties ... but for Voldemort alone?! As "headmaster", if someone else had pulled, say, the diadem out to battle him, they'd have the Horcrux "curse" affect them (like the ring withered Dumbledore's hand) and eventually killed them. But what if Voldemort could still use the objects without harm? Can you just see that evil dirtbag sitting on his "throne" (headmaster's office), wearing the diadem like a crown (and who cares if it looks like a tiara if it's that powerfully magical), the locket around his neck, the cup in one hand and the sword in the other if he'd ever acquired it? Without Harry, he'd have added his heirloom ring for prestige to Slytherin house, not to mention Nagini's presence. The diary, of course, was already lost.

It seems the sword was the one object he didn't get his hands on. I, too, wonder why. Where was it? If he intended to make his final Horcrux with Harry's death, though, what was the object he meant to use? Did he have to have it on him during the murder or was it enough to have it in his possession? He sure didn't mean to make Harry one and that was more of a backfire than a lack of an object. Could Voldemort perhaps had found a way to turn the sword, too? Who would know? He wasn't a trusting being and sure didn't tell anyone exactly why they were guarding/looking out for these objects.

We know a murder is required for a Horcrux. Also a spell for soul "implantation" into the object ... which Slughorn didn't know or refused to expound upon. But could that spell have been performed after the murder? Could Voldemort have temporarily kept a piece of his split soul with him somehow and then implanted it in the object later when he was safer and had more time and/or what he needed at hand? Maybe he intended to get Gryffindor's sword for that purpose ... had a lead on it or someone searching it down for him. Would seem Borgin and Burke's would be the way to go for antiques. Can't be a coincidence Voldemort worked for them after Hogwarts. I don't think he had the sword in his possession at the time of Harry's death, though, otherwise Quirrel would have been sent after it. Unless the sword (and maybe the other relics?) return somewhere "safe" and unknown to others as designed by the founders if the person in possesion of the object at the time dies without passing it on some way to another person. That would explain the sword's mysterious whereabouts ... a safe, unknown place of keeping it magically returns to in the event there is no one to watch over it. And if that was the case, why would Voldemort have even bothered to mention it to anyone? He would've known it was just a waste of effort when he returned as he didn't plan to make more Horcruxes and he wouldn't be excited to share his "failure".

I still think he must have known something about it, understood it's significance, because of his reaction to it in book 7. Perhaps he thought it was lost to all and thus not a threat? He was one to underestimate precisely those things that were dangerous to him. No one was supposed to have gotten as far as him and all that.

posted July 24, 2007 10:18 AM         

quote:

---

I will read your posts properly and add comments but firstly I just want to say that overall I found alot of this book to be contrived, obvious and frankly just not as intriguing or gripping as the others - my favourite book is still Order of the Phoenix, followed by Azkaban and my favourite film is still Azkaban. When I was reading Deathly Hallows it felt to me that the writer was bored now...??? Just me?

---

I don't think she was bored exactly but I did get the impression that maybe some of it was rushed?!?!

Eleanor, (I was called that for a week after I was born until my mother changed my name! I wish she hadn't!!!), you've raised some very interesting points. Isn't it frustrating that we will possibly never know the answer for sure?!?!

That's interesting about Fawkes too. JK did say that he would play an important role in the final book, but I can't honestly find where!!!

I also can't get over Fred's death. No, no no! In my opinion it would have made far more sense to kill off Percy - the prodigal son, who returns after seeing the error of his ways only to be killed in battle, protecting his family, thus rendering him forever a hero. Although I can understand why she killed off Fred - the eternal joker, who died with the laughter still etched on his face (a scene from many a great film), I just can't come to terms with it at all. His poor twin, George!!!

posted July 24, 2007 10:22 AM         

It would be nice if some of them worked for the Ministry as the Ministry could use them but I'm not sure they'd be willing to work there after all the failings and misery attributed to the Ministry. Or maybe that's just my personal bias, lol. They would do that organization some real good, I think. Weren't we supposed to find out who the new Minister would be? Scrimgeour, then Thicknesse the phony but who next?

A bit disappointed with Ginny ... expected her to show some amazing power at the end. Molly was good enough, though. I cheered a bit loudly then, lol.

I also liked Teddy being born and Harry being Godfather. I was sad that Lupin and Tonks had to go but I always knew Lupin wouldn't make it through the series. And Tonks? How she would have stayed behind I wouldn't have understood. Ted Tonks had passed but Andromeda made it so Teddy is a lot like both Neville and Harry. An interesting mix.

Where was Luna in the Epilogue? Anybody?

Expected to hear a bit more of Narcissa redeeming the Malfoys a bit.

So glad Hagrid made it! Thought for a moment there he'd gone down and was horrified because I figured, besides the Weasleys, he was the one parental figure Harry would be allowed to keep.

And Fred! Gosh, I knew one of the Weasleys was going down but Fred?! It was too sad and thus perfect. Arthur, Ginny, Bill and George had been attacked so we'd suffered for them already. Molly had that foreshadowing boggart event with the family members and Harry getting it so I knew she wouldn't be going ... also her brothers died the first time around so I figured it would be one of her sons. JK said Ron would survive. That left Percy, Charlie, and Fred. If she'd killed Percy off we'd be bitter ... he's the "world's biggest prat" and I think we'd resent feeling sorry for him as he's not loved enough/important enough to be a martyr. If Charlie had gone, who would've really cared? Sad for the Weasleys and move on. But Fred! That was the gut wrenching, tear jerking loss.

Besides Dobby. Long live the memory of the greatest house elf the wizarding world has known!

And what ever happened to Kreacher? Griphook? Which of the centaurs survived? Grawp?

AHHHH!

posted July 24, 2007 10:24 AM         

quote:

---

D – did it even explain how Neville got the sword, and did he have to know it had to be ‘that’ sword to kill Nagini (snake) or did he somehow just get the sword and without knowing just do the job. Also are we supposed to assume from Neville’s act the connection between Neville and Harry i.e. that Harry was only the ‘chosen one’ because Voldemort chose to go after him and not Neville or was this ‘chosen one’ decided by the whole family geneology of the Peverell deathly Hallows thing?

---

Excellent possibility!

quote:

---

A bit disappointed with Ginny ... expected her to show some amazing power at the end. Molly was good enough, though. I cheered a bit loudly then, lol.

---

Agreed. I think JK should have worked harder to make Ginny more worthy of Harry's affection's in the end. She just ended up seeming a bit mediocre for the eventual wife of 'The Boy who lived'. Molly was great though!!!

posted July 24, 2007 10:37 AM         

Voldemort put the hat on Neville's head to try and make them all Slytherin and I guess Neville showed some real loyalty to Hogwarts and Gryffindor at that moment. He must have asked the hat for help in his mind. That's how Harry did it in CoS. And Neville, thinking Harry was dead, remembered what Harry had told him about Nagini. (I love the intuitiveness of Harry and even Dumbledore refers to that strength in him!) So there went our hero Neville and shocked us all by doing what seemed to be the insurmountable task of destroying that particular and last remaining Horcrux.

I do believe what Dumbledore said about the prophecy concerning Neville and Harry. Voldemort chose Harry. He marked him as an equal ... now we know that one of the reasons Harry was so powerful, particularly against Voldemort, was because he had a piece of Voldemort's soul within him. But that doesn't mean it couldn't have been Neville. Both were crucial to the triumph of good over evil. I think the choice Voldemort made showed more about his psychological make up than anything else ... he chose the half blood, the orphan, as his greatest threat. And remember Dumbledore's words to Harry ... "it is our choices, Harry, that show who we truly are, far more than our abilities."

posted July 24, 2007 10:58 AM         

Oh and I also want to say I didn't like the references to the Locket behaving like the ring in Lord of the Rings, I almost expected Voldemort to start rubbing the Elder Wand gleefully saying "My Precioussss" Oh Lord!

posted July 25, 2007 06:37 AM         

Snape chose the dark arts for a long time ... something which Lily detested. And we can't gloss over the mudblood comment and the ensuing fight which showed very clearly just why Lily turned from Snape. He wasn't the little boy who was her best friend anymore.

And I don't think, from what we've read, that Lily ever liked him as more than a friend. Snape fell at first sight but it was unrequited. Tragic makes good reading, in the end.

James liked Lily from the start and I think Lily also liked James early on. It was a Ron/Hermione kind of love/hate thing. Just the way she reacted to him in that pensieve trip when Harry saw James tormenting Snape shows what was bubbling underneath Lily's anger.

I do wish JK had gone into more detail regarding the why-James-and-Lily-ended-up-together thing. But then, all the details I want would probably fill another few books, lol.

And I do love Snape. But it would have been so unrealistic that he would've taken Harry into confidence and they would've "shared and hugged and everything was better". Gagging noises over here on that note.

Snape was a flawed man ... which is why I think he was such a fabulous character. Dumbledore was too perfect even though I still adore him. We fell for Dumbledore immediately and had to learn to see him as imperfect, which was a bit hard. But Snape. We had to learn to love Snape in spite of all his many flaws from the beginning. He was broken ... messed up childhood, evil father, abused mother, "unattractive" (greasy, slimy haired, hook-nosed and all that), angry, self-conscious, nerdy, and interested in the dark arts. His feelings for Lily and his actions because of those feelings are the only things that redeemed him. And we saw how he insisted Dumbledore not reveal the "best parts" of him.

In the end, I think the way he died and his truth was shared was perfect ... from a literary standpoint. He was "safe" ... his good side would never be shoved in his face and humiliate him by showing his weakness. We had the, in hindsight, gut wrenching moment of him looking into Harry's eyes moments before he passed.

Everyone in the books who had turned against him ... well, I can't say there was a more fitting way for them to realize how wrong they were and I know their remorse must have been terrible.

And everyone out here who held out against Snape for what? Over a decade and a half? Yeah, neener neener neener, in your face. Yes, it's immature but I don't care. How anyone could've not seen the good in Snape is beyond me. It's like people who thought Harry would end up with Hermione. What were they reading? It sure wasn't HP. (Not talking about the 7 year olds here, btw. I mean the adults.)

posted July 25, 2007 06:59 AM         

I didn't really want to see Lily return Snape's love, but just wanted more info on how she and James got together - but yeah agree with you on most of what you said here, it would've taken alot more books I guess.

posted July 25, 2007 07:40 AM         

I really don't think I'd have been happy with any number of books, though. The world was so wonderful and something we all wanted to be a part of. The characters are real to a lot of us. Her words have become part of the modern vernacular. So many people have literally grown up alongside the series.

"The Harry Potter novella, seemingly never ending, each book a few years of his life until he dies." It would probably get old eventually but heck, she could've wrapped up their whole lives in another few books seeing as the greatest threat is gone. But then, their children would've captivated us ...

Her world was just too good, too convincing, too much unlike our world and a tease of what many would like to be real. I've never known a love/hate relationship with literature before ... not deep-seated like this. Even LoTR had a real sense of closure no matter how much more we wanted to know. That's what's missing. Closure. Not for the characters but for us.

posted July 25, 2007 09:29 AM         

She certainly captured something in the mass consiousness, and I have to say I for one am grateful for her opening up the world of spirituality to a whole generation. It just seems to be one of those things whose time has come - there is a sea change in the spiritual consciousness of our times and she had the right idea at the right time