Writing style and structure of DH

Well now the entire series has now come full circle, DH is a great departure from the previous 6 books in writing style. A lot of things repeated such as last minute escapes, epic war sequences from OoTP and HBP and scar memory ventures; but new things have cropped up. Journeys to other places, no Hogwarts until the end of the book and even a fairy tale to talk about in the middle.

So in this thread it's just to discuss how you felt about the story structure of the DH, whether it was just trying too hard to still fit within the 1 school year timeframe; or if it managed to soar within it's self imposed limitations from the previous 6 books. How did you feel the writing style conicide with the two previous installments' darker tones or whether it actually changed how the entire series feels in general? Finally just discuss whether you can feel certain influences, outside-literary influences or other just feel that the writing emulates other creative works.

For me personally I felt that The Tale of th 3 Brothers was something unlike anything JKR has written in the series. It sounded like a fairy tale but more like lore. It don't know if it's because I've been reading a lot of Gaiman's Sandman series, but I got a distinct impression that the story itself felt like something that Gaiman would write. A story that is rooted in history yet twisted into fairy tale...something that is somewhat moralistic but deadly serious at the same time.

As for an outside influence, it's just me but after watching Children of Men directed by Cuaron, I totally imagined the Hogwarts battle where Harry et. al are just running around trying to find the Horcrux was like something out of Children of Men. That entire 20 minute uncut long battle sequence felt like something that Cuaron could direct. Dunno if JKR took a page from his book, but it sounds pretty neat.

I very much so enjoyed the structure of DH. The narrative, descriptions, language, the travel between the many, many locations, the Three Brothers tale, Dumbledore's obituary, the chapter from Rita's book, the many excerpts from the Daily Prophet ... I love it all! :D

The writing is in many ways a lot tighter than the previous two books which made it far less of a chore. Either JK or her editors paid attention to some of the more considered critiques and declared war on adverbs and adverbial attribution.

One thing I noticed JK doing a lot in this book was referring to someone or something anonymously, then referring to it by name immediately afterwards. I can't be bothered to get the book and look for a specific example, but it would be something like this:

"A tall, hooded figure glided towards Harry, densely black, its breath rattling. The Dementor was sucking the warmth from the air..."

Never noticed her doing that so much in any of the other books.

The writing is in many ways a lot tighter than the previous two books which made it far less of a chore. Either JK or her editors paid attention to some of the more considered critiques and declared war on adverbs and adverbial attribution.
I think that has much to do with no longer having to deal with Hogwart's life. No more classes or having to fill in X-Mas time, Halloween Feast et. al. It seemed to me that the previous two books were more filler in the way that an annual event is going to happen and what content JKR is going to put into that particular event. In someways DH seems much like GoF with the lack of quidditch because of the lack of Quidditch she could let her imagination run a bit more wild without the limitations of just the Hogwarts grounds.

I think it was a little forced. But it was still a good book

besides the problem I have with the plot of HP7 (but I still love the book), there's this little bit that I don't understand. Why did Rowling end the book with the phrase "All was well"?? It totally spoils the ending. Harry Potter 7 is not like HP1. The story has become darker. The characters have grown. The world larger, the themes more predominant. "All was well" sounds like a closing line you can find a child's bedtime story, a fairytale. I wish she hadn't done that. The phrase just doesn't justify the evolution of the book.

Did anyone else notice when Jo wrote "So, they apparated to London".. like I mean, did anyone notice to poor writing some of this book had? Like iI mean like 1% of the book, I loved this book, favorite one IMO, but I mean certain parts just popped out, such as when she said how they just apparated to London. Also, isn't it kinda weird how the trio went months, as they said during "A Place to Hide", how autumn fell, and idk months go by, and we're just reading it.. I mean it's kinda poor that she accelerates the timeline really quick and sjust has months go by.

Like, what happened to the Order during those like 4 months? Idk, maybe I'm too critical, it just popped out to me while I was reading, and if I noticed it, (I ignore typos, etc. when I read), it must've been obvious.

Any thoughts?

yeah i did to be honest....i thought that largge portions of the book read more like a childs book than a work of serious fiction to be honest. thats not to say i didnt enjoy it or love the book, but in terms of literary style it seemed to be a step back from HBP and certainly, POA.

As i said, i enjoyed it, and indeed loved the book, but there were bits of it that struck me as being primarily child orientated.

I have to agree with you here. The story was not as well written as JKR's other HP books. It also felt VERY rushed and somehow unfinished.

I feel HP did not get the time he (or we the readers) needed to have closure. It was all a race to get the secrets out and tie up loose ends.

The trouble with that is, the book lost Harry. I don't get a good sense of him in this book. I felt like I was being narrated to death. Know what I mean?

It's a shame the books had to end with this one.

Did anyone else notice when Jo wrote "So, they apparated to London".. like I mean, did anyone notice to poor writing some of this book had? Like iI mean like 1% of the book, I loved this book, favorite one IMO, but I mean certain parts just popped out, such as when she said how they just apparated to London. Also, isn't it kinda weird how the trio went months, as they said during "A Place to Hide", how autumn fell, and idk months go by, and we're just reading it.. I mean it's kinda poor that she accelerates the timeline really quick and sjust has months go by.

Like, what happened to the Order during those like 4 months? Idk, maybe I'm too critical, it just popped out to me while I was reading, and if I noticed it, (I ignore typos, etc. when I read), it must've been obvious.

Any thoughts?

What happened during those four months?

"Harry wakes up. Harry goes to the bathroom. Harry sits there. Harry eats. Harry goes to the bathroom. Harry sits there. Harry goes to sleep."

Pretty tedious. She probably skipped it for a couple reasons: One, the book is already very long, there no point in extending it any and two, it made sense that basically nothing happened for long periods at a time because it made Ron want to leave which was a big part of the book.

yeah definitely more jumbled up than any of the other books, but for the most part youre so into what's going on with harry and co that like you kinda aren't thinking too much abotu what everyone else is up to.

The trouble with that is, the book lost Harry. I don't get a good sense of him in this book. I felt like I was being narrated to death. Know what I mean?

I agree here....harry did seem much more scripted than a naturally progressive character in this series. Personally, i feel this was due to a change of tone (as i said, a regress to a more child like novel) as opposed to anything else. I loved the book none the less, but Harry seemed to have less of a natural character arc in this book. Its hard for me to say it, but some characters didnt get the development they deserved, for what ever the reason and for me this was exemplified in Freds, Lupin and Tonks Death.

Unfortunately I have to agree with you here.
It was an amazing book and very powerful in places and in alot of it, well written. It is still much better than alot of other books I have read but I think by JK Rowling standards it wasn't good.
I think it felt very rushed. I know it had to be because of how much was to be accomplished but I think she could have just added a little more and made it a bit longer.

Also, why wasn't there an ending chapter? After GoF, they had a chapter just to let everything settle in, and I was somewhat dissapointed in the lack of feeling. Also, meena, you're right, in the sense that the book was like a race to get all the loose ends fit, and the secrets filled, I'd rather to still have questions and have a story, than have a book of facts and secrets filled.. nothing really flowed, i mena, what's so good about camping in random forests.. how did they know where they were?

The only thing I noticed is that it seemed rushed. I wish she streched it out a little longer to around 1,000 pages...

omg it's frikkin war, of course they had to leave and be ready to not know anything about the rest of the world for who knows how long!

I'm not really surprised, because I never considered JKR a great writer, or even good. More like average, but she came up with a great story. Not to say I hate her writing, but she's not someone who's been born with an incredible talent (in my opinion), nor has she had the luxury of this series being her third or fourth writing experiment. Weren't these her first books ever? So I wasn't really expecting much, and I've always focused on the plot more than the actually writing, since I wasn't expecting to get much enjoyment out of it.

So I was really surprised that the writing was as poor as I thought it was here. I thought by the last book, she would have improved some. If anything, it was worse. Yes, there were some very powerful moments (the "I am going to die" scene being my favorite). However, it was pretty choppy and rushed, and I feel like there were a lot of things left out. I also feel like there was a whole lot of stuff crammed into one book, and it was way too much. And in many places, it was just lacking emotion.

I think everyone's observations are essentially true. Yet, in a book this long, not every paragraph can be a gem, and sometimes it's okay to sacrifice craft to move the story along. The important thing was that she handled the critical passages fairly well, although there were parts that seemed forced, like she was trying to appeal to a young audience while demonstrating that she's a good prose artist. Very hard to do both.

I very much agree with ASUTillman. I was disappointed that there was no real concluding chapter just for everything to sink in, to see the Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron finally officailly come to be, and to reflect on the journey. Not that I didn't LOVE the book.

I also found some parts were maybe not quite as well written or worded as they could have been, but hey. It can't be perfect. But it was pretty close. :)

i agree that there was something off. and i feel horribly guilty for not being 100% in love with the book...

i also felt like there were certain points she needed to include to tie up loose ends, and the means to get there just fell flat for me. i wouldn't begin to say i know how i would fix it, but some things just felt a little disjointed and convenient for me.

did anyone else think that dudley and kreacher's changes of heart were a little sudden? i mean, i'm glad we got there in the long run, but it didn't feel 100% genuine to me.

I got a feeling that the book was rushed. Especially the last few chapters.

Like I didn't find it too rushed, you know what I mean? Like, there were never months that just went by really (maybe like weeks, IDK?), and if you like read the other books she uses similar passages of time to like go over months that are not that interesting to the plot or where like a lot of stuff didn't happen. IDK

If whatever Harry did was dull, how about Ron and Hermione? Hermione reads, Hermione cooks. Hermione saves the day with her brilliant magic. Ron makes one somewhat stupid remark. Ron doesn't get it right agin. And again. And again. And for variation, Ron and Hermione fall out. As a variation on that, Ron and Harry fall out.

What I am throughout the serious disappointed about, is that so little background is provided wbout why who fancies who. Why have ROn and Hermione fallen for each other? What do they see in each other? Either of them could have at least discussed that with Harry at some point, like any other teenager would with their closest mates.

Not to say that I didn't enjoy the book, too! It was great, lovely new unexpected original elements.

The whole epilouge was terrible. Here we were, just victorious over what was deemed the most important thing in the entire world--beating LV, something we've been aiming for after 6 other novels and it ends by skipping 19 years. We weren't even allowed to revel in the glory with Harry or to grieve the deaths of characters we've grown to know and love. How horrible that was and what a way to end a series that was all about defeating evil. Sure, we defeat it--but who has time to enjoy 10 years of us waiting for it? We were just thrown a bunch of facts and left to our own devices.

It was a letdown.

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.

I've never understood the fascination with the love interests over the years. It is a key element to the books as it is a part of growing up, but this isn't a love story. It only serves the plot as it's interesting and shows maturity, but I think fandom has placed far too much focus on those parts of the story line for years

I'm not really surprised, because I never considered JKR a great writer, or even good. More like average, but she came up with a great story. Not to say I hate her writing, but she's not someone who's been born with an incredible talent (in my opinion), nor has she had the luxury of this series being her third or fourth writing experiment. Weren't these her first books ever? So I wasn't really expecting much, and I've always focused on the plot more than the actually writing, since I wasn't expecting to get much enjoyment out of it.

So I was really surprised that the writing was as poor as I thought it was here. I thought by the last book, she would have improved some. If anything, it was worse. Yes, there were some very powerful moments (the "I am going to die" scene being my favorite). However, it was pretty choppy and rushed, and I feel like there were a lot of things left out. I also feel like there was a whole lot of stuff crammed into one book, and it was way too much. And in many places, it was just lacking emotion.

This is EXACTLY my point. Well said. Actually her first book I really disliked. She began to win me over by book three. This one was a real disappointment. It left a ton of holes and even more unanswered questions.

I did notice a few spots, like this one from the epilogue where she is talking about Draco Malfoy:

pg. 755, Scholastic v.
His hair was receding somewhat, which emphasized the pointed chin.

Wouldn't it sound better/be more concise if it was written as, "His receding hairline emphasized his pointed chin"? I know that just because it sounds better doesn't mean it's right, but... this makes me want to bring this sentence to my high school Composition teacher. :)

Anyway, I really just tried to ignore any "poor writing" I noticed. I still found this book as enjoyable as any of the others.

Other than the Epilogue, which I didn't think was great writing, I thought most of this book was engaging and vivid. I've learned that plot is my favorite part of any book and on that front, JKR can really deliver. Maybe some scenes dragged a bit, but I've yet to read a book without any flaws.

Personally, knowing how everyone in the world was going to analyze and critique every single word she wrote, I admire Jo for being able to write anything of substance. I know I wouldn't be up for the scrutiny.

This is EXACTLY my point. Well said. Actually her first book I really disliked. She began to win me over by book three. This one was a real disappointment. It left a ton of holes and even more unanswered questions.
Well, I always like the books for the plots (it really hooked me on CoS, I adored that book...big snakes, talking to 'em, what's not to love?!), and I still liked the plot of DH, but there was a lot that was a let down. Lots of it felt unsatisfactory - like a cop-out. She went with what was expected, and didn't fully explain certain things.

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.

I have just started to re read it, so you may well be right. I hope so :)

Personally, knowing how everyone in the world was going to analyze and critique every single word she wrote, I admire Jo for being able to write anything of substance. I know I wouldn't be up for the scrutiny.

I have to agree with you here, but she did drag us down this road--lol. I was like this :drool: when I got the book in front of me.

I think there should have been one more book and this one should have taken it's time giving out the secrets while Harry finished his last year at school. Maybe then the writing wouldn't have suffered as she tried to put way too much info in this last novel. It just didn't work the way I think she wanted it to.

The book was 99% gem, and that 1% that wasn't included typos, epilouge, and the rushed feeling. Maybe it's because of the fact that we, devoted Harry Potter fans, always looked towards the next book for satisfaction. now, we have no more books to explain or redeem anything, but alltogether, (excluding the epilouge), the book was a sucess in my mind.

however, this book read more like a "plot thickens!" story, than one with vast amounts of detail and emotion.. it was more like an answer sheet for all the loose ends we had

I never actually looked at it that way, but I think that the plot had to be more scripted so everything wouldnt seem dragged out, things on their end was pretty much like that. It was a war, so they probably didnt do anything interesting other than going on the move.

As much as I loved the book as a whole, there were definite problems throughout. Continuity errors and poor grammar - although I fault the editors more for those things. They hired a "Potterologist" to keep track of all that stuff so you think those kind of errors would have decreased instead of increased.

There were a lot of things that felt like they were just thrown in as a plot device but never properly explained. Snape's story is an excellent example. Snape was a controversial character and debates raged about him over the past two years. There were numerous issues and questions about things he had done that needed to be addressed. Good or bad, those issues should have been addressed. But Jo basically ignored all of that and just focused on Snape's obsession with Lily. We were left with even more questions about Snape and none of the existing questions were answered. And to pull it all together, Dumbledore's character had to be sacrificed. It was bad enough that he had to die, but his memory had to be massacred on top of it in an attempt to make Snape look good. And it didn't work because she didn't address any of those other issues. So we're left with both Snape and Dumbledore looking like bad guys with poor Harry caught in the middle. :no:

The epilogue is rather surprising as well. It just pops out of nowhere. I think Jo should have included one more chapter before the epilogue showing how everyone was dealing with the aftermath of the battle - discussing their future plans, etc... The epilogue would have fit much better if she had done that.

It was brilliant in terms of the story overall and it is definitely my favorite, but I do feel that Jo is capable of much better writing than this. For someone who said she hates plot holes and inconsistencies, I was stunned to see that she had left so many herself.

The epilogue is rather surprising as well. It just pops out of nowhere. I think Jo should have included one more chapter before the epilogue showing how everyone was dealing with the aftermath of the battle - discussing their future plans, etc... The epilogue would have fit much better if she had done that.


I completely agree. The epilogue was a complete change of tone from the rest of the book(granted, after 19 years one would imagine a more relaxed atmosphere.) It was simply too drastic.

For some reason, I was expecting a laundry list of characters and their futures. Something like "Hermione then proceeded to become minister of magic, with Ron as First Gentleman." You know?

Finally, I think she tried to rush in a "King's Cross" theme where there hadn't been in the previous books. Yes, it had been featured as a "meeting new people" medium throughout the series, but did not lend itself to "deeper significance".

Poor editing. And, since OotP, certain quarters have put pressure on Jo that the books not be so long. I think she has cut out a great deal.

Me, I'd have taken a thousand pages, and been happy with it. :D

I think DH lacked in description and was written in a very simple form which I found very frustrating.

The epilogue read as if it was written by a high school fan fiction writer.

... I didn't really think it was written poorly.. Though, there are still a lot of unanswered questions... (like, what did Dudley see when he was attacked by dementors) ...
Some parts were also really confusing, and hard to understand.. (Like, the blood bond between Harry and Voldy.. ... Why Harry came back after he died... and the bond between the elder wand, and the wand Harry stole from Draco)

ok seriously, my question is:

why is it so important to know what did dudley see when he was attacked by dementors?

I mean, I read this question so many times and I don't get it's relevance...

ahahahaha poor writing!! ahah wow guys. Everyone is just angry with epiluge because it didn't say what they wanted it to. So what, who cares if it didn't tell you that harry was an auror it's better then saying harry was a garbage man and closing that door... oh and btw all of the books skip over months at a time. Look at PS/SS it's a fraction of the size of DH but runs over an even longer time span!!! Really, it would be poor writing if JKR wrote about harry sitting around during those months and it would be absolutly pointless. And of course we don't get loads of insight on the other characters romantic insights because the books is through Harry's point of view he is also very shy when it comes to talking about girls with ron. In HBP harry actually made a point not to to talk to ron or hermione about their feelings for each other.

I personally thought Deathly Hallows was the best written book out of the 7, it may not have been everything I wanted (dean/luna instead of luna/neville) but I still have no problems with it. I definatly think DH was the best HP book and I really enjoyed the epilouge. It was all about showing that Harry Finally got what he had always dreamed of, he was finally happy for once in the entire series. I give her lots of props.

Hmm... i think maybe, the writing wasn't up to the usual standard, like when I read HBP I sometimes literally stop just to revel in how ace the sentence I just read was but in DH, it just really isn't that well written, and some of it seemed clunky and not that well put together...

The story did seem unbalanced and it felt limiting to just be stuck with Harry's perspective, expecially when we're hearing about some of the stuff going on elsewhere (rather see Ginny trying to steal the sword than sit in a tent with the trio), I know we've always been with Harry but then again, we've always been at Hogwarts which gives a lot more options...

Also the thing that bothered me most about the epilogue was the fact that it came directly after the battle so we never got to see Harry or Ron or Hermione process what had happened or their thoughts on it, like Snape, the three of them have known him for seven years, thought he was evil as can be and it turns out he's a hero but there's not moment to see what they think about it or how they deal with it... instead we skip to 19 years later and everything is supposed to be ok just because they've married each other and had kids that they've named after people, which just seemed like a slight on the rest of the brilliant world that she created.

The epilogue read as if it was written by a high school fan fiction writer.
Except the high school fan fiction writer could probably do better...

ahahahaha poor writing!! ahah wow guys. Everyone is just angry with epiluge because it didn't say what they wanted it to.
I can't speak for everyone, but that's a broad judgement to be making, and an incorrect one at that. I may not have liked the epilogue (I hated it), but even if the epilogue didn't exist or went differently, I still would have been disappointed. There were many parts of the story that were poorly written, not just the epilogue. Although, the epilogue was the icing on the really bad cake.

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.

I always enjoy the books a second time round... because the first time I'm just rushing to see what happens! On the second read I pick up things that seemed pointless or awkward and realise there is a purpose there. Some of the passages in the book were a bit clunky, and the middle camping bit was kind of long, but I think it was deliberate. I also think JKR's talent lies more with plotting and dialogue than with beautiful prose.

That said, the two pages when Harry is walking into the forest I thought were really stunning... holding the snitch to his lips and saying 'I am about about die'; 'why had he never realised the miracle he was, nerve and brain and bounding heart'; 'It was not so easy, after all, to die'; 'all that remained now was the thing itself:dying.' ; 'Stay close to me,' Harry said quietly.' I'm quoting off the top of my head so I may not have got them exactly right, but I thought that part was beautifully written, brought you fully into the scene and conveyed the mood so sparingly and yet so clearly.

What happened during those four months?

"Harry wakes up. Harry goes to the bathroom. Harry sits there. Harry eats. Harry goes to the bathroom. Harry sits there. Harry goes to sleep."

Pretty tedious. She probably skipped it for a couple reasons: One, the book is already very long, there no point in extending it any and two, it made sense that basically nothing happened for long periods at a time because it made Ron want to leave which was a big part of the book.

Exactly. I felt the time passing by and I felt the frustration and "stuck" feeling. It would take a lot to make Ron abandon them, and it had to be obvious that they were getting frayed. Of course the Horcrux didn't help).

It was slow to start, but I think it was as good as the last few books. it did feel rushed to connect loose ends, but how many threads are already started with complaining that this little gossamer piece did not get resolved anyway? Big job to tie all that up.

That said, the Epilogue? That was definitely more Book 1-3. I would have to go back and read those to be sure, but it was jarring next to the beautiful writing of the last few chapters. I think I remember hearing Jo wrote the Epilogue right with the first book?

it reads like she wrote it with the first book... the whole of the Deathly Hallows seems much closer to the Philosopher's Stone than it does to the Half Blood Prince...

I thought there were some problems with pacing. The middle of the book was a little on the dull side. All in all, however, it was typical Rowling. Not a radical departure from what we're used to.

It did lack humour, though. Hmm.

If whatever Harry did was dull, how about Ron and Hermione? Hermione reads, Hermione cooks. Hermione saves the day with her brilliant magic. Ron makes one somewhat stupid remark. Ron doesn't get it right agin. And again. And again. And for variation, Ron and Hermione fall out. As a variation on that, Ron and Harry fall out.

I'm sorry, but isn't that the point? I mean, they were on the run from pretty much every wizard in the UK, and plus, they had the Horcruxes to worry about. I think, it was just JK's way of letting us know how helpless they were and how cut off from the "outside" world they were.

Bad writing was scattered all over the book. And then it condensed into that appalling annal about Harry and his fifty children.

I thought there were some problems with pacing. The middle of the book was a little on the dull side. All in all, however, it was typical Rowling. Not a radical departure from what we're used to.

It did lack humour, though. Hmm.

The dull part, was in my opinion there to reinforce the helpless feeling of the trio concerning their task.

The lack of humor isn't that unexpected really. After all there was a war going on, and about half of the book, we have only the trio, no one else. So, the loneliness + helpless feeling =/= humor.

But when you have the trio join up with someone else, we do have some nice humor moments. (eg Kreacher).

I'm sorry, but isn't that the point? I mean, they were on the run from pretty much every wizard in the UK, and plus, they had the Horcruxes to worry about. I think, it was just JK's way of letting us know how helpless they were and how cut off from the "outside" world they were.

Exactly it was realistic, a butch of scared 17 year olds just wouldn't be able to go from dark place to dark place and fuifill the quest needed of them that easily, it was a good relaxing calm before the real storm began and it helped to develop their characters and bond alot more than otherwise.

I liked it mostly, aside from the initial pages after Ron's departure, it was all good stuff all in all! :rockon:

It pains me to say that I agree. I think JKR has shown some poor writing in the previous books, but overall I thought they were well-done. Let me just point out before I give my opinion, that I liked this book, but it felt different and is certainly not my favorite. I think the fault lies in the enormous amount of exposition that needed to be said. We have a lot of talking and explaining, which may be necessary, but is not exactly the best reading experience.

One of my favorite parts of the previous books was JKR's wit, not just in her dialog but in her writing style. The narrator was like another character to me, and I felt the wit was lost in this book. However, I don't think it would have fit well with the tone of the book, so I'm not saying it is a fault, it just made it not my favorite.

I think where Jo excels is in characters and where she trips is in action and sometimes plot. I think there was too much plot for one novel. Some things seemed rushed, or conveniently placed. Some things were too coincidental. I felt the wedding should have been longer or completely cut out. As it is it is just sort of thrown in there, and Viktor Krum was really an unnecessary cameo. I thought their excursion to the ministry was sort of boring, and I found the hallows plot coexisting with the horcrux plot to be kind of muddled and confusing.

Actually what I really liked about this book were the chapters that just involved the characters and in which there was no action. As I said above, this is what I think JKR does best. I loved the relationship between the trio in this. Although some may find their time in the woods to be boring and pointless, I actually found it to be the most real part of the book. Here we have 3 teenagers who have no idea what they are doing and they are feeling the weight of the world. I think JKR played this very effectively and I was really sad for them: their loneliness, lack of food, frustration, and disillusionment. I felt betrayed when Ron left and torn apart when he faced the horcrux.

One of my favorite parts in the book was Potterwatch. Again it was very real and uplifting, and I don't think I would have felt the power of it had I not seen Harry, Ron, and Hermione suffer in the forest. Then of course I felt the uplifting feeling give way immediately to terror when Fenrir Greybeck captured them. I was happy to see that Jo didn't hold back. I found the chapter, Malfoy Manor, to be so disturbing. It was absolutely killing me when Hermione was being tortured and it seemed to go on forever. And then when Dobby died, I was so sad, probably sadder than any other character, simply because we got a chance to mourn him. "Here lies Dobby, a free elf" made me cry like you wouldn't believe, even though he was far from being my favorite character.

I loved that JKR showed war very realistically. There were excellent WW2 parallels that I think she executed very well. I felt the state of panic brought on by the military government. The whole Mudblood-Holocaust parallel was also brilliant. The prejudice in the WW was always a theme that I really appreciated in the books and here we see it at its most extreme and most evil.

I think the chapters Godric's Hollow, The Life and Lies of Albus Dumbledore, The Silver Doe, The Tale of the Three Brothers, Malfoy Manor, The Prince's Tale, and especially The Forest Again and King's Cross, fit in perfectly with JKR's best Potter work previously. They felt like the other books, they pulled real emotion from me. However, except for a few excerpts from other chapters, for the rest of the book I felt kind of detached. I still have favorite moments from other chapters, but it's as if we have some of the best JK Rowling work paired with some of her worst work. It's a definite mixed bag for me, and I don't think it's the best in the series, though of course I still like it. And I have to say that I really really bawled when the war was over and Harry saw Ron and Hermione: the only people he wanted to see. It was so emotional because that really felt like the end and that the series was over and our time living with these three characters was really done. I was strangely proud of them and sad to see them go, and that line (sorry don't have my book) just got to me.

yeah i did to be honest....i thought that largge portions of the book read more like a childs book than a work of serious fiction to be honest. thats not to say i didnt enjoy it or love the book, but in terms of literary style it seemed to be a step back from HBP and certainly, POA.

As i said, i enjoyed it, and indeed loved the book, but there were bits of it that struck me as being primarily child orientated.

stole the words from my mouth... The plot was good, the execution IMO sucked :grumble: of course its impossible to write for an audience spanning ages 7-60+ but with this book harry potter has finally earned its "Kids book" rating... there was nothing at all that was overly morbid or dark... maybe JO thought there was and tried to lighten up the book with simple writing? She was wrong in that sense though... higher level writing with lighter plot is much better than childish writing with a dark plot

Did anyone else notice when Jo wrote "So, they apparated to London".. like I mean, did anyone notice to poor writing some of this book had? Like iI mean like 1% of the book, I loved this book, favorite one IMO, but I mean certain parts just popped out, such as when she said how they just apparated to London. Also, isn't it kinda weird how the trio went months, as they said during "A Place to Hide", how autumn fell, and idk months go by, and we're just reading it.. I mean it's kinda poor that she accelerates the timeline really quick and sjust has months go by.

Like, what happened to the Order during those like 4 months? Idk, maybe I'm too critical, it just popped out to me while I was reading, and if I noticed it, (I ignore typos, etc. when I read), it must've been obvious.

Any thoughts?

This was inevitable.

Anyway, to be perfectly honest I felt the same way at first, but only because it was such a huge change to see the kids actually doing magic freely finally. And literally nothing happened in the book in regards to the Horcrux hunting until about February or March, so of course JKR had to speed it up a bit.

You seem to be forgetting whose perspective the books are told from (third person omniscient I know but they're about Harry not the Order.) The first four months the trio just had to hide from Voldemort because literally everyone in the wizarding world was looking for them. There wouldn't have been any way to fill us in on the Order "sufficiently" (although JKR did the best job she could with Remus' appearance at Grimmauld Place to fill everyone in and the Ministry chapter.) It was bad enough she began using Harry's connection to Voldemort as a plot device to find out what Voldemort was up to again without explanation, despite clearly explaining in HBP that he was using Occlumency against Harry. Can someone explain that to me?

As far as the content goes it definitely rates up with PoA and PS/SS (which I think are the two most perfectly written and plotted) but I just wish she had taken out the long months of them doing nothing. These gaps work when they're in a school year, but now when they're in hiding and trying to find Horcruxes the story suffers through events being spread over the same timeframe. You can guarantee they won't do this in the movie. It will feel like the whole book's events play out in a short time.

This is the only part where I feel her writing slipped up. But the greatness of the last three or four chapters totally makes up for it. The Forest Again, particularly, where Harry accepts that he's going to his death and, of course, King's Cross and The Prince's Tale where we got some answers to questions that have been up in the air since book 1.

ahahahaha poor writing!! ahah wow guys. Everyone is just angry with epiluge because it didn't say what they wanted it to.
Thats a bit of an unfair generalisation. Whilst I thought the epilogue was the worst written chapter, it wasnt because it left out anything I wanted to read (I had no interest in any of their lives past Hogwarts). It was just written to a very amature and poor standard.

I'm more concerned with with her disregard for continuity and the foreshadowing of certain events from other books that never occurred:

Ron and Hermione should have been "officially" together from the start. The wedding at least. We've had enough of this **** for the last 3 books.

Where was the Wormtail/Lupin/Greyback redemption fight with the Silver Hand we've all been waiting for? It's as if she's forgotten the whole Maurader backstory since PoA/GoF.

Neville gets no page-time after the death of Bellatrix? Really? He didn't have to kill her, but at least get his emotions on it...

General continuity errors, especially with travel. This has been a huge problem throughout the books. What is the point of Broomsticks/Thestrals/Flu/Portkeys if we have Side-Along Apparition? Couldn't they track Harry's Apparition leaving Privet Drive? How's he able to do it throughout the rest of the book? Didn't he (and Ron) need a liscense?

The Trace is finally given a name/proper explanation... but it's still really badly explained and thought up. Why would they have this "general area" trace, and not just tie it to one person?

What's the deal with the Deluminator? Deus Ex Machina if I've ever seen one...

No mention of the extent of Bill's Werewolf symptoms? No proper Ron/Hermione/Krum confrontation/blessings? Other various small but very needed resolutions to various character conflicts/situations...

NO Slytherins stood up to help in the battle? What? Are we still stuck up on them? The ONLY non-evil, non-(at one time)Death Eater Slytherine in the whole damn series is Slughorn.

Some of the deaths were VERY bad... Lupin and Tonks specifically. Hedwig got more attention from Harry than them.

The ending was hilariously bad... Kills Voldy, wants a sandwitch... Cut to 19 years later? What? No makeup with Ginny? No proper declarations by Ron/Hermione? Dean/Luna? What happens to Teddy Lupin? The Weasly family, minus one? Do they need to finish their schooling? What jobs do they get?

The Epilogue read like bad fan fiction. Ok, we get it... we know they're gonna get married. They named their kids after their dead friends/family? HOW CLEVER. No other questions were answered. The only really good part about it was the Draco scene, as that actually brought some "thanks... but I'm not going to come and thank you" resolution to their whole situation.

So... anyone up for a fan-made "revision" of Deathly Hallows? It probably wouldn't be that hard, just a few well placed and well written paragraphs and changes every so often. The only parts that would need major work are the ending and epilogue.

I feel like this was the best book she has written regarding her writing. The part I felt could have been written better was the Epilogue. It seemed a bit rushed and confusing. Other than that there were very few parts where the actual writing was poor. Great improvement overall!

I notice that many things people are talking about are plot and character errors, remarks on her ideas rather than her writing. Continuity, order, gaps, proper explanations, structured and planned chapters, etc. are what I consider regarding "writing style". Having an idea that is less than satisfactory is different than portraying that idea unsatisfactorily.

It was bad enough she began using Harry's connection to Voldemort as a plot device to find out what Voldemort was up to again without explanation, despite clearly explaining in HBP that he was using Occlumency against Harry. Can someone explain that to me?


I think the reason she gives is that LV cannot stand to be inside Harry because Harry can feel and LV cannot stand to feel anything other than blind rage and hatred. How that works with Occlumency is beyond me though? You'd think the greatest wizard in the world who knows magic beyond Dumbledore himself would get a clue that someone was poking around in his mind.

But then again, there is a piece of himself inside Harry, so perhaps he didn't have a choice?

hey people...i just we feel we are over analysing...
the fact is that we, die hard fans, always want some more...we want to know what dudley saw becoz of the dementors back in OotP and more things...
i think that Jo did not rushed, we did. we read the book so fast because we just wanted to know what whas going to happen...
i loved the book, i loved the epilogue too...it all fits...it is not a love story, it is harry potter´s story..at he beginning we were not told what happened to luna, nor the other...just harry...and that way ended...just harry saying goodbye to his sons in their first day at hogwarts...
it is so obvious that we are going to analyse every nook and cranie out of this book because it is the last one...

and as far as the writing concerns, i never expected Jo to pull a Shakespeare in this last book...we have to remember..it is a book aimed at young people...no high literacy members of the Nobel Prize Association

and after all...Jo said it herself..the book will not please everyone...and that some will absolutely loathe it...so there you go

we want to know what dudley saw becoz of the dementors back in OotP

If you read the Dursleys Leaving chapter again, it's rather obvious to tell what Dudley saw that night through what he says.

fair point... god, it just seems so rushed... and part of me is like why bother putting the Deathly Hallows in at all, we already had Horcruxes, and Voldemorte himself and Snape, and the Malfoys, and Bellatrix and Werewolves and Giants and Dementors and god knows what else to deal with - just seems kind of pointless... would rather of had more time on the storylines we already had

she introduced the hallows so as to explain the elder wand thing and so on

yeah it didnt have that smooth feel to it that the other books had. it just jumped from one thing to another without any transition really. and then the ending just suddenly happened and we really didnt find out what happened afterwards. a funeral scene could have put some more feeling into the deaths and more character development would have been nice(malfoy never really did anything to make up for all the **** he did).

Meh, I agree with who ever said they went into the book with low expectations as far as the writing was concerned. I was all about the story.

However, even unconcerned about grammatical issues, I was still completely taken aback at some junctures by the storyline. What was rushed to me was the "in and outs" involving the characters. Dudley, Kretcher, Snape, Remus, Harry, Ron, Bella, Mrs. Weasley and a few others, had these tremendous moments where they seemed WAY out of character. They all fell back into character afterward, but the rush of change back and forth left you creating many of the "in betweens" that had made the characters act the way they had.

When she accelerated time, I for one WAS wondering what the order was doing, what Remus was doing, what the Ministry was doing, what the Weasley family was doing (with their son running off).

I too would have liked a few 100 more pages to better explain things along the way so you didn't have to stop and figure them out for yourself. I could do it, it was just a pain in the old rumpus after a while.

The epilogue was all right, but totally lacking. And of course I felt like she slapped me in the face when I read the name "albus-severus". THAT required a lot of explanation in my book, I still don't understand it. So yes, more information would have been nice.

The plot was cool over all though. But would have been better if I hadn't had to write a good portion of the story myself along the way, lol.

General continuity errors, especially with travel. This has been a huge problem throughout the books. What is the point of Broomsticks/Thestrals/Flu/Portkeys if we have Side-Along Apparition? Couldn't they track Harry's Apparition leaving Privet Drive? How's he able to do it throughout the rest of the book? Didn't he (and Ron) need a liscense?

This occured to me too and I was really bugged by it. It just seemed so easy! As long as they could apparate and had a stock of polyjuice potion all is well.

As far as the quick passage of time goes we must remember one thing - the books are written in a thrid-person, limited point of view, meaning that it is based on one central character's(harry, of course) thoughts and feelings. Thus others thoughts/feelings are either unknown or shown through dialog and actions. (For instance you will read JK trace Harry's specific thoughts, but will reveal someone elses thoughts by their actions, such as Hermione's resentment to Ron when he comes back). All this to say, she could've written about what happened in those months at Grimmauld Place, and all that really could've been covered was the planning for their move on the Ministry. That would've made it quite repetitious when the details of the plan were carried out and it was basically saying they did everything that had already been gone over in planning. And she couldn't have detailed what was going on outside of Grimmauld Place because the reader can't know any more than Harry knows (other than through speculation).

This occured to me too and I was really bugged by it. It just seemed so easy! As long as they could apparate and had a stock of polyjuice potion all is well.



What about the talking patronusis?? Why use owls (which can be intercepted and searched) when you can send a short message that way? This would've been very nice to have known a few books ago--why bring it up only now?

As far as quality of writing, I think this book flowed and was much more congealed than Half Blood Prince, which I felt had dropped in quality significantly from previous books.
I noticed that there were some continuity problems here and there, though, but I think it is difficult to maintain it over seven books.

One thing that could explain apparation is that we know the ministry was watching Little Whinging. Once Harry is away from there, the likelihood that they could find them, I think is significantly smaller as they don't know exactly where to look.

What about the talking patronusis?? Why use owls (which can be intercepted and searched) when you can send a short message that way? This would've been very nice to have known a few books ago--why bring it up only now?

I think it is mentioned somewhere, I think somewhere in the latter part of book 6, that Dumbledore invented this idea. I don't think everyone knows how to make a patronus talk. I also am not sure if everyone is capable of casting a patronus.

The only thing I noticed is that it seemed rushed. I wish she streched it out a little longer to around 1,000 pages...

There wouldn’t be much to stretch out, though. Much of the book is the Trio (turned into the Duo for a while) travelling from wooded area to wooded area. As uneventful as some of these scenes were, stretching it out only would have made it worse.


I did notice a few spots, like this one from the epilogue where she is talking about Draco Malfoy:

His hair was receding somewhat, which emphasized the pointed chin.

Wouldn't it sound better/be more concise if it was written as, "His receding hairline emphasized his pointed chin"?
I disagree. Saying "His receding hairline emphasized his pointed chin" implies that the reader already knows he has a receding hairline. It was necessary to tell us that Malfoy had was balding, because just jumping into his “receding hairline” would make it seem as though Harry and Ron also are losing their hair, while they aren’t.


General continuity errors, especially with travel. This has been a huge problem throughout the books. What is the point of Broomsticks/Thestrals/Flu/Portkeys if we have Side-Along Apparition? Couldn't they track Harry's Apparition leaving Privet Drive? How's he able to do it throughout the rest of the book? Didn't he (and Ron) need a liscense?
Harry was of age, so they couldn’t track his Apparating. Yes, you do need a license, but you’re also supposed to register once you become an Animagus. As for Side-Along Apparation, I’m assuming you’re talking about the departure from the Dursleys. This is addressed in the book: every tracking charm possible was on Privet Drive, so they’d be able to tell is Floo Powder, a Portkey, or Apparation was used. They (the Death Eaters) didn’t know where Harry was going, so they couldn’t apply the same charms on wherever he went.


What's the deal with the Deluminator? Deus Ex Machina if I've ever seen one...
How so? The Deluminator was used in PS/SS, as well as in OotP. It didn’t just come out of nowhere.

(This is totally off topic, but you’re reminding me of Lost, as “Deus Ex Machina” is the title of an episode, and so is “The Greater Good”, which was talked about constantly in DH. :D)


Overall, I did not find a problem with the writing of Deathly Hallows. I find JKR’s writing to be very descriptive. As I’m getting older, I’m definitely appreciating it more, especially the way she describes facial expressions.

As far as quality of writing, I think this book flowed and was much more congealed than Half Blood Prince, which I felt had dropped in quality significantly from previous books.
I noticed that there were some continuity problems here and there, though, but I think it is difficult to maintain it over seven books.

One thing that could explain apparation is that we know the ministry was watching Little Whinging. Once Harry is away from there, the likelihood that they could find them, I think is significantly smaller as they don't know exactly where to look.



I think it is mentioned somewhere, I think somewhere in the latter part of book 6, that Dumbledore invented this idea. I don't think everyone knows how to make a patronus talk. I also am not sure if everyone is capable of casting a patronus.

I'm almost positive Dumbledore uses the talking patronus in book 4. I don't have my book in front of me but it's when Harry meets Krum in the forest and he's stunned so Harry runs into Hogwarts to get DD and then it says Harry sees something coming out of DD wand and minutes later Hagrid comes looking for them.

I really did not find the writing to be poor or rushed. Although some places were a little awkward, overall it read pretty well. Actually, as I am re-reading, I am picking up on details I missed before. I was reading in such a rush to find out what happened that when I read slowly it seems to flow more smoothly. Overall, I was very happy with the book, but I did want more info from the epilogue, although I liked it a lot.

In regards to the book, yes I did feel the writing was inferior, ESPECIALLY in the epilogue. It read like a middle schooler who'd written it and it had gotten selected to be in the book. I know people were spoiling left and right online so I stayed away, but if I would've read that before I got the book, I would've never believed it was an actual chapter in the book.

I absolutely LOVED this book! The only thing I could complain about is the ending chapter and epilogue....I really wish that JK would have written in Harry and Ginny reuniting, and Ron and Hermione FINALLY becoming an official couple....I mean come on, so many people were just waiting for them to get together (I, personally, was more of a Harry/Ginny shipper, but I know that a lot of people were waiting to read about Ron and Hermione)!

As for the epilogue, there were like 435546546345546657 things left unanswered! What were Harry and co's professions? What were James' and Lily's jobs before they died?

Sadly, I must agree with you. As I was reading DH I kept being brought out of the story by grammatical errors and clunky, poorly written sentences. Some things in the book didn't even make sense the way they had been written and it took reading the sentence several times to understand what JK was trying to say. I found it really odd- knowing how remarkably well written the past 6 books have been and I must say that, in the end, I strongly believe this to be an editorial problem, NOT a problem with the writing. It's JKR's job to get the story down and then it's the editor's job to take that story and make sure there are no errors and that everything is written correctly, in a way that makes sense.
Clearly there was a lot of pressure to get this book out quickly and perhaps that pressure lead to the editors not dedicating enough time to working on the book and making sure it was perfect.
It's sad really, now that the series is over and it's impossible to go back, that the final book was tainted by a problem that could so easily have been fixed if the proper amount of time was given to getting it right. I cannot speak for any of the other fans, but I gladly would have waited another year if I knew it meant that the final book was going to be as perfect as it should be.

What about the talking patronusis?? Why use owls (which can be intercepted and searched) when you can send a short message that way? This would've been very nice to have known a few books ago--why bring it up only now?
Yes! I knew there was something else I was annoyed by... That was also very frustrating.

How so? The Deluminator was used in PS/SS, as well as in OotP. It didn’t just come out of nowhere.
Yes as a light.. not a means of finding your friends.

Quote:Originally Posted by CKSubs
General continuity errors, especially with travel. This has been a huge problem throughout the books. What is the point of Broomsticks/Thestrals/Flu/Portkeys if we have Side-Along Apparition? Couldn't they track Harry's Apparition leaving Privet Drive? How's he able to do it throughout the rest of the book? Didn't he (and Ron) need a liscense?

Harry was of age, so they couldn’t track his Apparating. Yes, you do need a license, but you’re also supposed to register once you become an Animagus. As for Side-Along Apparation, I’m assuming you’re talking about the departure from the Dursleys. This is addressed in the book: every tracking charm possible was on Privet Drive, so they’d be able to tell is Floo Powder, a Portkey, or Apparation was used. They (the Death Eaters) didn’t know where Harry was going, so they couldn’t apply the same charms on wherever he went.

No, I'm talking about Side-Along Apparition (introduced only in HBP) back in, say, CoS. Why would they Flu-Powder to Diagon Alley if the whole family could just Apparate? Why would they Port-Key to the World Cup if they could just Apparate? (btw, I think the Triwizard Cup Port Key worked differently from every other port key we've seen, another error) And don't say it's because Harry and Co. weren't powerful enough at that time or anything, because in HBP (1) it's on the "what to do in a Death Eater attack" list specifically for underage wizards, and (2) Harry doesn't have to do a thing to get the spell to work correctly. It's more that Flu Powder was one of those "Yeah! It's Magic!" things in the early books (much like Quidditch, the House Ghosts, etc) that don't really play into the more serious works.


Quote:Originally Posted by CKSubs
What's the deal with the Deluminator? Deus Ex Machina if I've ever seen one...

How so? The Deluminator was used in PS/SS, as well as in OotP. It didn’t just come out of nowhere.

Except for, you know, the whole amazingly and unexpectedly giving Ron a way to find Hermione thing, without any explanation other than the fact that he could hear her say his name through it.... why didn't that work any other time she said his name, before he left?

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.

I have to agree with you on that observation, although I still feel the middle of the book was a "simple".

The only part I didn't like in DH was after the trio left Grimmauld Place and before they went to Gordic Hollow. I mean, they spend 4 months sitting in a tent thinking, hm...I wonder where we should go? It got boring. No wonder Ron got frustrated and left. I find it a little implausible that they wouldn't try going to Gordic Hollow sonner, seeing it was there only lead. Otherwise, I thought the book was excellent.

Originally posted by creativeamanda
Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.


Me too!


Originally Posted by ASUTillman http://www.cosforums.com/images/gryff/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?p=4652498#post4652498)
Did anyone else notice when Jo wrote "So, they apparated to London".. like I mean, did anyone notice to poor writing some of this book had? Like iI mean like 1% of the book, I loved this book, favorite one IMO, but I mean certain parts just popped out, such as when she said how they just apparated to London. Also, isn't it kinda weird how the trio went months, as they said during "A Place to Hide", how autumn fell, and idk months go by, and we're just reading it.. I mean it's kinda poor that she accelerates the timeline really quick and sjust has months go by.

Like, what happened to the Order during those like 4 months? Idk, maybe I'm too critical, it just popped out to me while I was reading, and if I noticed it, (I ignore typos, etc. when I read), it must've been obvious.

Any thoughts?


Not writing in detail about a time in which nothing much happens isn't a bad thing. That's what Tolkien did, and even though I think he was an amazing writer, the travelling scenes annoyed me sometimes.

DH wouldn't be the first book that she's skipped over amounts of time in. Didn't spring break always seem to go by fast? That's because there was nothing much to write about at the time. The same thing happened here in DH, and I'm happy she didn't go too far into detail about all those months when they pretty much just moved from place to place, not knowing where to go next.


Originally Posted by CKSubs

Except for, you know, the whole amazingly and unexpectedly giving Ron a way to find Hermione thing, without any explanation other than the fact that he could hear her say his name through it.... why didn't that work any other time she said his name, before he left?


Maybe it only works that way for some people, or only when you have real need of it. Like how only some people can pull Gryffindor's sword out of the Sorting Hat.

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.

yeah i actually just started thinking about that and i think you are right but that still doesnt help the fact that the book definately needed a couple more chapters after the death of voldy to explain what happened afterwards.

It was OK. Maybe I still hold this opinion because I haven't reread the book, but i WAS DISAPPOINTED in some parts where it seemed more like a fanfiction than an actual Harry Potter book. I honestly think I was rushed and I am still confused about the discrepincies in the page count. Scholastic said the book would have 784 pages, then as you know it was published with 759.THIS DID [U]NOT[/U Happen with Half Blood Prince or Order of the Phoenix. Where are the extra 25 pages? Check the Barnes and Noble website if you don't believe me. And check the previous books. Something is just fishy here!]

Let me reiterate my first post by saying, yes, Deathly Hallows instantly became my favorite book in the series the first time I read it, overtaking OOTP (which wasn't my favorite until I started becoming a more serious HP fan after HBP). And it still is.

However, everything said in this thread is exactly why I take such utter offense to the statement that J.K. Rowling is one of the greatest writers of all time, which I have heard an alarming amount of times since DH came out.

A lot of the plot points you are complaining about, however, are there for thematic reasons. The Deathly Hallows, which many people felt unnecessary, was the center of the point that Harry and Voldemort are uncannily similar, yet the choices they each made made Harry the epitome of nobility and bravery, and Voldemort the epitome of evil. Besides, the Elder Wand business was necessary because without it Harry couldn't have killed Voldemort in the final battle. I mean really, Harry never learned Occlumency, appears to know basic non-verbal stuff (which we take he has learned between the lines in HBP), is using the same defensive spells he's used since GoF, and actually killed Voldemort with Expelliarmus (which Harry knew wouldn't have worked unless he was the master of the Elder Wand, which he was.)

However, I must say that there are two criticisms I have to somewhat say have a point: the first one being the huge gaps of time in which nothing happens (basically, from the wedding onwards to Godric's Hollow.) I've read it more than a few times, how people note that the climax of each book always takes place in May or June, conveniently right at the end of the school year. Well, since Harry wasn't in school for this book, what was the point? I suppose I can forgive this.

And I'm still hoping JKR explains how Harry could see into Voldemort's mind again, because otherwise it just comes across as a lazy plot hole to explain how Harry never knew about Voldemort's plan to kill Dumbledore in HBP. Dumbledore explains to Harry quite clearly in HBP that Voldemort knows of the connection between him and Harry, and is using Occlumency to limit it.

The book was good and the ending was fantastic. However if I had picked up this book simply to read and not because I desperately needed to know about the characters then I would have stopped reading it.

The middle of the book is insanely slow and monotonous. I missed Hogwarts so much!! Back in the last few books it was fun near the middle because Harry and the others were doing school things and other fun things that immersed me in the world. Deathly Hallows lacked the simple pleasures of the Harry Potter books for me.

I think all the loose ends will be tied with that new encyclopedia.

Any answers for the page count ?

Except for, you know, the whole amazingly and unexpectedly giving Ron a way to find Hermione thing, without any explanation other than the fact that he could hear her say his name through it.... why didn't that work any other time she said his name, before he left?


Or even still, at the Burrow when the ministry fell and she was frantically looking for him? and yeah, one could argue there was too much noise, but still, it felt sorta contrived for me.

I very much agree with ASUTillman. I was disappointed that there was no real concluding chapter just for everything to sink in, to see the Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron finally officailly come to be, and to reflect on the journey. Not that I didn't LOVE the book.

I also found some parts were maybe not quite as well written or worded as they could have been, but hey. It can't be perfect. But it was pretty close. :)

I agree with that.

It definately needed another chapter at the end, for Harry and Ginny, if nothing else. She built up that relationship so much in book 6, but then in 7, it's almost non-existent. They should've at least had something showing them getting back together after the battle, and not just jump straight to them being married 19 years later.

She has never been a great writer, though book 1 was an exception. She is, however, one of the top storytellers out there right now.

I think all the loose ends will be tied with that new encyclopedia.

Not to mention JKR's upcoming webchat.

As many others, I felt it was rushed. The only chapter in the book that felt like a Harry Potter chapter to me was "The Prince's Tale."

It didn't feel very rushed but it had a quickness to it,like it was on fast forward; but the 3 main characters took charge way too early on ( The trio making plans to everything on their own, even though they just graduated and they weren't so "grown up" in book 6. Why wasn't the ministry protected against Polyjuice potions with a charm or something?).

She has never been a great writer, though book 1 was an exception. She is, however, one of the top storytellers out there right now.

Personally, I think book 1 is the most poorly written of all of the books, though I don't criticise JKR for it. It's still one of my favorites, simply because it is undoubtedly the most magical. No fantasy book has ever captured my imagination like PS/SS did, and I (who loathe all fantasy except HP) don't think one ever will. (Though The Boy Who Lived is one of the most beautifully written chapters in the series, if you ask me, when you consider how much JKR worked to fit in foreshadowing that goes as far as DH, introduce characters we will meet later, all the while not revealing too much.) And as you say, she is an absolutely incredible storyteller, I can't tell you the number of times I've picked up a HP book for a 15-minute break from some ghastly homework and ended up reading half the book by the end of the night.

JKR's writing has improved greatly since then, however. On a more technical level, I didn't notice her adverb problem nearly as much this book. People have complained about all the subplots in this, but at least none of them, if I recall, ended up having nothing to do with the plot in the end (this is one of the reasons GoF, superb as it is, is the hardest book in the series to read: there are three subplots that end up having nothing to do with the end, SPEW, the Skrewts and Rita Skeeter, although I suppose the last one was meant to set the stage for OOTP). The primary reason PoA is considered as having one of the strongest plots is that while it had a number of subplots that appeared to mean nothing, they ended up being absolutely essential to the climax (Crookshanks v. Scabbers most notably, and the introduction of Divination was one of the better instances of foreshadowing.) Could someone name me one subplot that didn't end up having anything to do with the actual main plot in DH?

And as for the epilogue, well, that's a love it or hate it thing, and I happen to love it for reasons I have explained an insubordinate number of times and shall not explain again.

Kudos to JKR for keeping us hanging for all these years, but...

I think she missed so many opportunities for loads of action. I really expected a lot of action. I mean, seriously, there is a WAR going on! And Harry having only two friends with him? Everyone thinking he bailed out, and they just up and join him--for what? You mean to tell me that no one was questioning his whereabouts?

Hey, don't get me wrong, I've had a lot of reasons why the book was written as it has been. Lovely story--truly. I LOVE the story of HP, from beginning to end.

It's just that, I keep wondering what I would have done differently, and trying to match it up to my expectations.

In her defense, I'm sure that it has been a long run for JKR. I mean, she's been writing about HP for how long? Then, she has her own reasons for things going this way--no way any of us love HP more than she does.

I just have brought my own expectations to the table, and they were expectations of lots of action, lots of skill, and lots of explanations for the things the characters have done, and revisiting old places that were significant in the other books. (For some reason, I like repetition for significance.) I also expected there to be more of a hunt for the horcruxes, whereas Harry just used his connx with Voldy.

I...I do understand why the plot was such, and it was exciting and fun and interesting and uplifting.

There were moments that I thought, "Ew...that could have been worded better," but I usually write off those moments unless there are a lot of them for the sake of a good plot.

Other times, I wonder why she didn't include certain information or explain some things better, when I can come up with a lot of reasons why something has to be such. Ya know?

Like someone else pointed out, it did seem like the action was missing in the middle, and front- and back-end loaded, instead. I remember another series I read where I was really disappointed in the last book in the series. For the rest of the books, the author kept me literally spell-bound, and the last book was kind of a flop. I expected a lot, because it was thicker, but it wasn't as refined, and I thought it was rather lackluster.

I think this may be a common problem, but HBatDH was still great!

Well from the start the weight of the HP series has lied in it's plot and material, however, the writing has been decent enough not to offend. In this book I thought the plot was a bit poorly structured and distributed.
I personally didn't think it was rushed at all, instead I think some parts dragged on a bit too much. I thought the quality of writing and scene was really chunky, with the epilogue, the wedding and the final duel being of the worst quality. The epilogue's "All was well" seemed REALLY bad and made me think that it wasn't really JKR who wrote it but someone else. The editors did a horrible job. The action scenes basically consisted of describing how 'green and red flashes of light flew everywhere' again and again, and with too many stunning spells.
Ah well. It's over the now. The series is over! Despite its many flaws it still has a place on my book shelf for being some of the most imaginitive books I've ever read.

After Order of the Phoenix was published, JKR became richer than God, got married, and had two more children. Were I in her shoes, with a billion in the bank, a loving relationship to maintain, two pregnancies, and then three children to raise (especially with two of them being babies), I'd probably have lost some of my motivation - my magic - during the writing of HBP and DH too.

At the time, I basically gave HBP a pass because it was billed as the first half of Book 7. But after reading Deathly Hallows, I'm wishing books could be like extended DVDs so I could read the rest of the story. And at this point I don't really care who's responsible -- JKR, for allowing her family and wealth to undo her drive, or her editors, for wanting to cut this and take out that, or both.

Now, the best I can hope for is that whoever RE-writes Deathly Hallows for the movie will manage to end Harry's saga in a more satisfying way than JK did.

Personally, I think book 1 is the most poorly written of all of the books, though I don't criticise JKR for it. It's still one of my favorites, simply because it is undoubtedly the most magical. No fantasy book has ever captured my imagination like PS/SS did, and I (who loathe all fantasy except HP) don't think one ever will.
Oh c'mon, not even Lord of the Rings? :grumble:

This book represents her poorest writing to date. It used to be that I'd say you couldn't make these books into movies because there was something magical and wonderful in every paragraph. That's not the case here at all. A New York Times writer stated that Harry visiting Diagon Alley to buy supplies for the first time in SS was more original and exciting than the duels in DH, and I'd have to agree!

For me her best writing is found in The Letters from No One, The Mirror of Erised, most of POA, and the last third of GOF. Nothing has come close since the end of GOF. I have a theory as to why: after GOF she was too powerful and famous to be edited. No editor could ever tell her what to do after that point in time. Editors are good people, you know--they aren't emotionally invested in your book, and so they can tell you what works and what doesn't.

There's little to no Harry in this book--it's all flashbacks to Dumbledore, Hallows, Marauders, etc. And let's face it--the Deathly Hallows as objects were totally not needed and the way that they were used made no sense--neither did the blood protection, or anything else about the final denouncement.

I know that many will disagree with me, but this book really wrecked the series for me. I had kind of anticipated rereading the series every few years to the end of my days, but now I think that I might give DH one more read, then read all 7, then be done with it. This as the end was just a mess--confusing, convenient escapes, passive Harry, rushed deaths without any real mourning or follow up. Maybe I'll feel differently after a reread, but I doubt it.

I'll admit it, I was disappointed not to be treated to one last vitriol-filled shouting match between Harry and Snape before Harry found out Snape's true loyalties, but the pure beauty of The Prince's Tale made up for it. God I can barely read that chapter, my eyes get full of tears every single time.

And someone above me commented on the "lack of action"? WHAT? Let's see, we actually see literally every Death Eater trying to kill Harry in the opening as he leaves Privet Drive, capped off by two deaths (in the first 70 pages) and Voldemort himself face-to-face with Harry already (while FLYING, no less), a coup of literally the entire wizarding world, which is immediately followed by a DE ambush in a Muggle cafe (one of my favorite action scenes, actually), and then we have our infamous four-month standstill, but...by the time we reach the sheerly epic Battle of Hogwarts, which itself surpasses all the action scenes in the previous six books combined, in terms of how epic it was, and also the escape from the Malfoys (which featured two major deaths in one chapter again...) What did you expect? I thought JKR did a great job of keeping the action frequent, frenzied and epic while still having time for the character and plot development.

Additionally, the next time someone comments on how much COSForums kisses JKR's butt, I shall point them to this thread. I am frankly surprised, I believed that assumption as well.

I did notice a different writing style. But I wouldn't go so far as to say it was bad writing. I think that as fans, we created these elaborate expectations which we, naturally, thought were better than the real thing could be. When our personal expectations weren't met, I think the disappointment set in. It's J.K.'s story, I let her tell it her way and I'm not going to complain.

it feels like a rough draft was printed instead of the final book

I know that many will disagree with me, but this book really wrecked the series for me.

I think that's the essence of why I feel so disappointed by Deathly Hallows. Who'd want to reread the first six books when there's so little in the seventh to look forward to?

There's little to no Harry in this book--it's all flashbacks to Dumbledore, Hallows, Marauders, etc. And let's face it--the Deathly Hallows as objects were totally not needed and the way that they were used made no sense--neither did the blood protection, or anything else about the final denouncement.


I agree with the beginning of your post.

I have some thoughts on the list in the last sentence I quoted though.

The Deathly Hallows were necessary to give Harry a choice. It was new and unexpected, and probably detracted a bit from the plot, since we had little knowledge of the story before. It would have been nice to hear a little bit from another book, like maybe in Book 2 when Harry went to the Burrow and Mrs. Weasley reading to Ginny, or something. Or maybe when Ron saw Harry's cloak, he could have said, "There is a story about these, and others have them, but this one is like none I've ever seen." Then, in a moment when Harry was under his cloak, he could have been hit by a spell, and told Ron about how it didn't do anything to him, and Ron being surprised by the effect.

Anyway, I still think it was necessary that Harry make the choice between the promise of something "fantastic" and doing the more sensible thing and having faith in Dumbledore. Having faith seemed to be a theme in this book.

And then, Harry had to choose to die. Finding and killling the horcruxes was necessary, and Harry had to choose to kill the horcrux within him. Having that distraction of the promise of avoiding death is necessary for him to make his choice. One way promised immortality, and the other, the hard way to begin with, led to certain death.

The blood protection was extremely necessary, but I suppose understanding it depends on the person. I was a little iffy on the fact that Voldy had Harry's blood, which kept Harry from dying completely. It really wasn't discussesd well. But it was definitely necessary to the storyline.

By "final denouncement," do you mean the overthrow of Voldemort? Perhaps you could expound. I had my disappointments in that whole set, but I'm not sure I found anything there unnecessary.


And someone above me commented on the "lack of action"? WHAT? Let's see, we actually see literally every Death Eater trying to kill Harry in the opening as he leaves Privet Drive, capped off by two deaths (in the first 70 pages) and Voldemort himself face-to-face with Harry already (while FLYING, no less), a coup of literally the entire wizarding world, which is immediately followed by a DE ambush in a Muggle cafe (one of my favorite action scenes, actually), and then we have our infamous four-month standstill, but...by the time we reach the sheerly epic Battle of Hogwarts, which itself surpasses all the action scenes in the previous six books, and also the escape from the Malfoys (which featured two major deaths in one chapter again...) What did you expect? I thought JKR did a great job of keeping the action frequent, frenzied and epic while still having time for the character and plot development.

If you're referring to my post, or my post along with other posts, then I will say this:

I never said there was no action. I just think there were a lot of other opportunities for action, better action, and more significance to other books in the series, even amid the action. I like action. :p

There was a hugely FLAT part, wherein which there is usually a building toward the climax. Instead, we started out with a high, hit some lows (lots of them), had a bump or two, then almost nothing. There was hardly anything significant in the romp in the wilderness (although, as I said, I can imagine reasons for it). I mean, Hermione was reading, but we don't get anything out of that fact. Ron left, and Harry and Hermione did little talking at all, about it, which is okay, but I expected some Hermione-reasoning on some important points.

Before even reading, I was expecting there to be more contact with others throughout the book OR massive action on the horcrux-hunt. That is probably the core of my disappointment (which is small, I might add). :whistle: When I'm talking about "action," I'm not just talking about fighting and such, but more contributions to the apex of the story.

The Hallows made an interesting contrast between Dumbledore and Riddle, I think. But as part of the story of Harry, it's just too much--too complicated and not very well explained. You did a better job than JKR did! It's just a total cheat to have Voldemort unable to actually kill Harry--when was he actually really in danger then? The Elder wand and all that--why add something like that in book 7, for pete's sake? I don't think that it was necessary at all. She could have explored her themes about choice in a clearer way--I don't know what way, I'm just saying that the Hallows didn't work for me.

Harry as the willing sacrifice was just too Narnia for me--when Aslan met his death, and mice came after to chew the cords off, and Lucy and Susan smoothed the foam away from his muzzle, and then have that wild ride when he's brought back to life, waking the creatures turned to stone, the big battle after...well, that has obviously stayed with me for 30 years. Nothing at the end of DH is going to stay with me that long--it seemed nonsensical. Hmmm...perhaps it wasn't Narnia enough!

I'm not explaining myself well, or really answering your question--I'm sorry about that. Add to the silly Hallows the absence of Hogwarts and Snape from most of the book, the fact that no Slytherin student ever chose the side of good in JKR's view, and the poorly written deaths/mourning (Dobby being the only exception), and you get a very poor end to a wonderful series. Frankly, after reading this book I have to wonder why Dumbledore wasn't in Slytherin! He sounded like the perfect candidate! Slytherin shouldn't equal evil, and I think that JKR missed a real opportunity to say something real about it taking all kinds to make this world.

yeah i did to be honest....i thought that largge portions of the book read more like a childs book than a work of serious fiction to be honest. thats not to say i didnt enjoy it or love the book, but in terms of literary style it seemed to be a step back from HBP and certainly, POA.

As i said, i enjoyed it, and indeed loved the book, but there were bits of it that struck me as being primarily child orientated.

I didn't like the long terms of no gain, but I disagree in it reading like a children's book. I don't think it's "serious" fiction either.

I've never understood the fascination with the love interests over the years. It is a key element to the books as it is a part of growing up, but this isn't a love story. It only serves the plot as it's interesting and shows maturity, but I think fandom has placed far too much focus on those parts of the story line for years

THANK YOU.

Some fans get so deranged with these ships that they ultimately come to the conclusion that the book is not up to par because Rowling has not assuaged their hunger for silly hook-ups. Fortunately, I have not read fanfiction nor been tempted too so my perception of the book has not changed since I first read it. Harry Potter never was a series on romance. In fact the romance is more of an after-thought and like you said, something to make the books more interesting. Personally, I could do without all those ships such as Harry/Ginny, Snape/Lily (honestly did not see that one coming and was pretty horrified but I understand it was a necessity), Lupin/Tonks etc as the originality of the story is what drew me to the books from the beginning.

the fact that no Slytherin student ever chose the side of good in JKR's view, and the poorly written deaths/mourning (Dobby being the only exception), and you get a very poor end to a wonderful series. Frankly, after reading this book I have to wonder why Dumbledore wasn't in Slytherin! He sounded like the perfect candidate! Slytherin shouldn't equal evil, and I think that JKR missed a real opportunity to say something real about it taking all kinds to make this world.
You missed the point of the entire book! She was trying to point out that people are far more complex than good/evil, Slytherin/Gryffindor. Everyone makes good choices and bad choices, no matter which house they came from. it's unfair to suggest JK never saw Slytherins making the right decisions. They were a product of their environment - cunning and pure blood were encouraged far more than bravery or loyalty, you can hardly blame them for not jumping at the chance to help fight. That's really a character error - the Sorting Hat's and Dumbledore's/Headmasters, not the author's. She has been making it explicit since Chamber of Secrets that Slytherin does not equal evil. It's only the choices those people have made. Perhaps the Sorting hat senses these before sorting and they become a concentrated bunch. But it's certainly not as black and white as you suggest - at least not explicity.

Interesting that you said Dumbledore should have been in Slytherin. Didn't he make the same assessment about Snape, showing bravery and other traits prized by Gryffindor? The point is, these people can't be boxed into "Loyal, smart, brave and cunning" - obviously some will exhibit all of those traits at some point in their lives.

For all her talents as a storyteller, JKR is not a particularly strong writer.

For all that DH is more readable than Order and Prince for the simple reason that Jo (or one of her editors) heeded the more reasoned critiques that she was way too reliant on adverbs in general text and, most annoyingly, speech attribution.

Where DH really falls down are some incredibly blah! sections (like the Sweet Valley Hogwarts epilogue) and deviations from character most notably how Harry's normally good judgement goes out the window in cases like going off alone with Bathilda Bagshot and breaking the taboo (and there was a bit of creaky deus ex machina there).

THANK YOU.

Some fans get so deranged with these ships that they ultimately come to the conclusion that the book is not up to par because Rowling has not assuaged their hunger for silly hook-ups. Fortunately, I have not read fanfiction nor been tempted too so my perception of the book has not changed since I first read it. Harry Potter never was a series on romance. In fact the romance is more of an after-thought and like you said, something to make the books more interesting. Personally, I could do without all those ships such as Harry/Ginny, Snape/Lily (honestly did not see that one coming and was pretty horrified but I understand it was a necessity), Lupin/Tonks etc as the originality of the story is what drew me to the books from the beginning.

I think JKR did a great job steering clear of too much romance in these books, with the exception of HBP. I thought some of that was a little out for me, but figured that was just me.

I think the way she handled the romances was good, overall, though, and probably why I didn't bank on my Lily/Snape suspicion. I certainly didn't think they were best friends, but more that Snape's love was totally one-sided, and more of a selfish lust, which is why he slipped in the "Mudblood!" accusation, because, as I was reading it, he also was angry with Lily for not noticing him and, as he might have seen it, feeling sorry for him.

And when you choose Slytherin at the age of 11, you could never change your mind about it? The fact that there are no Slytherin heroes (Slughorn is too selfish, and Snape is sort of redeemed, but I wouldn't call him heroic) is what keeps the Harry Potter series from being real, timeless literature. Let's say there are no Slytherin heroes under the age of 50--that very glaring error that I've noticed since about book 4 is what will forever relegate Harry Potter to the "children's fiction" section rather than the "literature" section.

I agree that it feel like their should have been another chapter at the end. A chance to see everyone mourning and celebrating, it ended so abrubtly. At times it alos felt like it was written with page count in mind more than story and plot as if she was avoiding it growing to a 1000 pages rather than allowing the chips to fall. There was too much story to tell and too many loose ends to wrap up and it felt like it was forced into a shorter span than it should have been. I really enjoyed the book but...I can't help but feel something was missing.

For all her talents as a storyteller, JKR is not a particularly strong writer.

For all that DH is more readable than Order and Prince for the simple reason that Jo (or one of her editors) heeded the more reasoned critiques that she was way too reliant on adverbs in general text and, most annoyingly, speech attribution.

Where DH really falls down are some incredibly blah! sections (like the Sweet Valley Hogwarts epilogue) and deviations from character most notably how Harry's normally good judgement goes out the window in cases like going off alone with Bathilda Bagshot and breaking the taboo (and there was a bit of creaky deus ex machina there).

I'm going to disagree with your last sentence here--respectfully, of course. :tu:

I don't think the Bathilda incident was deux ex machina, at all. It was creepy and a wickedly good trick on JKR's part. However, as to Harry's lack of judgment, he is about 50-50 on that, and he might have figured, "Well, Hermione's just downstairs."

I'm frankly more surprised at Hermione, and wonder why neither picked up on the smell. :err:

You missed the point of the entire book! She was trying to point out that people are far more complex than good/evil, Slytherin/Gryffindor. Everyone makes good choices and bad choices, no matter which house they came from. it's unfair to suggest JK never saw Slytherins making the right decisions. They were a product of their environment - cunning and pure blood were encouraged far more than bravery or loyalty, you can hardly blame them for not jumping at the chance to help fight. That's really a character error - the Sorting Hat's and Dumbledore's/Headmasters, not the author's. She has been making it explicit since Chamber of Secrets that Slytherin does not equal evil. It's only the choices those people have made. Perhaps the Sorting hat senses these before sorting and they become a concentrated bunch. But it's certainly not as black and white as you suggest - at least not explicity.

Interesting that you said Dumbledore should have been in Slytherin. Didn't he make the same assessment about Snape, showing bravery and other traits prized by Gryffindor? The point is, these people can't be boxed into "Loyal, smart, brave and cunning" - obviously some will exhibit all of those traits at some point in their lives.

I understand what you're saying but for me in the end it felt like the book came back full circle with the whole misconception of the houses. I mean, to not have even one student from Slytherin. Even Slughorn was apprehensive about fighting. And then in the epilogue, with Harry's kid being teased about being in Slytherin, it seems all that happened in the series, 19 years later, and still stigma of being put in Slytherin instead of Gryffindor continues.

Some parts were beautifully written, like the scene at the Malfoy Manor, which was so well done that I started shaking, and some parts were unbelievably annoying.
Their were certain points where it seemed like JKR was severely underestimating her readers' intelligence, and felt the need to throw already obvious things into our faces. For example, the WWII/Holocaust parallel: that has been obvious since book 5, and in the Ministry scenes I really felt like it was being shoved down our throats.
Another example: they way Ron takes off, and then the subsequent Horcrux taunting. By now we all get why Ron's insecure, and we don't need it to be thrown in our faces like that. We have understood since book 4 that Ron has a severe inferiority complex.
In those two instances it was like she had no faith in our collective deductive skills. She should have given her readers more credit.
And of course, the fanfic!epilogue. Oy. Enough said

And Harry tells the kid, pick Gryffindor, you'll get in, totally negating what he said a sentence or two before--that it wouldn't matter.

I still say that Dumbledore as described would have made a good Slytherin. Slytherin is about a lot more than pure blood--it's about ambition, too.

The Hallows made an interesting contrast between Dumbledore and Riddle, I think. But as part of the story of Harry, it's just too much--too complicated and not very well explained. You did a better job than JKR did! It's just a total cheat to have Voldemort unable to actually kill Harry--when was he actually really in danger then? The Elder wand and all that--why add something like that in book 7, for pete's sake? I don't think that it was necessary at all. She could have explored her themes about choice in a clearer way--I don't know what way, I'm just saying that the Hallows didn't work for me.

It's a sad fact to accept, but yes, on paper, Harry just isn't nearly as powerful as Snape, Dumbledore and Voldemort. The Hallows were necessary. Yes, I know this seems a poor justification, it makes it seem as if JKR invented the Hallows because Harry would be otherwise too weak to kill Voldemort, but it all comes down to Harry understanding things that Voldemort doesn't. And would you really have been satisfied with Harry opening the love room at the end, engulfing Voldemort in an inescapable state of remorse, causing him to explode? Because that's what I thought would happen, when Hermione explained all the new details of Horcruxes near the beginning.


Harry as the willing sacrifice was just too Narnia for me--when Aslan met his death, and mice came after to chew the cords off, and Lucy and Susan smoothed the foam away from his muzzle, and then have that wild ride when he's brought back to life...well, that has obviously stayed with me for 30 years. Nothing at the end of DH is going to stay with me that long--it seemed nonsensical.

I have not read the Narnia series, but correct me if I'm wrong, didn't CS Lewis intentionally make that an allusion to Christ? Because the Christian imagery was pretty heavy near the end of the book. And I was able to accept it, even though I am not by any means a Christian person.


I'm not explaining myself well, or really answering your question--I'm sorry about that. Add to the silly Hallows the absence of Hogwarts and Snape from most of the book, the fact that no Slytherin student ever chose the side of good in JKR's view, and the poorly written deaths/mourning (Dobby being the only exception), and you get a very poor end to a wonderful series. Frankly, after reading this book I have to wonder why Dumbledore wasn't in Slytherin! He sounded like the perfect candidate! Slytherin shouldn't equal evil, and I think that JKR missed a real opportunity to say something real about it taking all kinds to make this world.

I actually thought Dobby's death was too drawn out at first. And I, unlike virtually everybody else, did not feel very sad about Dobby, call me heartless. The point of the "poorly written mourning" is that it was intentionally written that way, because we progress from a state of calm but somewhat controlled, breaking warfare in HBP after a Cold War type period in OOTP, to full out, violent, ruthless, hellish, horrifying, total war in DH. I've said it time and time again; that's the reason characters like Hedwig and Colin Creevey had rather pointless, abrupt deaths, they were intentionally made that way to show the hell of war.

You mention how Snape was largely absent until the end. I'll freely admit I was rather impatient that we only saw Snape in the opening chapter and kept impatiently waiting when he would show up. But don't forget that HBP, quite literally, was Snape's book. The question of his loyalties was the most important question facing us in DH (even though I knew he was good because of Lily long before I read it, not everyone is as over-analysing) and of course JKR had to be ambiguous all the way about it, doing her utmost to drop ambiguous clues that could mean he was either good or evil. By the time we reach The Elder Wand and The Prince's Tale, the climax of Snape's story, Snape (in this book alone) has cut off George's ear, been shown to have been guarding the sword of Gryffindor for Voldemort (although if there ever was a DING DING DING moment before The Prince's Tale that Snape was good, it would be when we learned he sent the fake sword to Bellatrix), taken control of Hogwarts in the Headmaster's office, watched a colleague die without the slightest hint of any emotion even while she was pleading for him to save her, etc etc. Not to mention everything he'd done before DH. Do you really think it would have been necessary to include him in more scenes?

As for Slytherin - I will actually defend this. Imagine you're an underage (or even overage) Slytherin student under Voldemort's education. McGonagoll has decreed that everyone either fight Voldemort or evacuate the school. What would you rather do, keeping in mind the Slytherin characteristics - face almost certain death fighting Voldemort's massive army, or look forward to preferential treatment under Voldemort after he takes over Hogwarts?

Just because Snape was sorted into the wrong house doesn't mean everyone else in Slytherin has that ambiguity. Also, remember that Slughorn, who proves himself to be a coward, starts off fighting with the Death Eaters but when the final battle rolls around he is actually duelling Voldemort with Kingsley and McGonagoll. But again, not every student will be as brave as Harry, Ron and Hermione, especially not Slytherins.

Remember Phineas Nigellus' quote about Slytherin in OOTP? Where he said that Slytherins will instinctively act to save their own skin? Yeah.

Have any of you read the book the 2nd time around? I had similar feelings at first, but now after reading it another time, I am thinking it was me rushing, not Jo.


Seconded.

Many good points have been made here, but I disagree with the portrayals of JKR as carelessly writing in a style less eloquant than previous books.

Perhaps I give JKR too much credit, but I felt upon reading this that she had intentionally established the tone which is being described as bad writing. The tension in this book is completely tangible and the faster pace (i.e. fewer lengthy and artistic descriptions) shows this. Also, the trio don't have the structure of the Hogwarts school year to depend upon- they're off on their own with no timeframe for their work, and I feel that JKR reflected this masterfully. What a harrowing adventure, and I think her presentation of it was quite intentional and excellent.

I disagree. I don't see where there were big parts of the books that were written like a children's book. I did think that is was odd how months went by in mere pages though.

JKR made Harry the same kind of sacrifice as Aslan, even if hers wasn't a Christian allegory, but Lewis's denouncement at the end of the Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe puts the end of DH to shame. I'm only comparing the writing and plotting, not references to Christianity.

I think that there's a different between being "poor written" and not living up to expectations. Some people have said they wanted this or that, and I'm not sure if that constitutes poor writing if the book doesn't come out exactly how you imagined it.

On the whole, however, Deathly Hallows is JKR's best written book IMO. SS and CoS are, for the most part, beach reads. They really are incredibly mediocre when it comes to writing. Actually, this was pretty much the case until HBP.

Yes, I know that JKR isn't the best writer in the world. She is a fantastic story teller, but that's one of the reasons that DH surprised me. I would actually go back and read prose (prose, which, by the way, is the one thing that JKR has almost always been terrible at) because I liked them so much, or the imagines were good. There were issues, yes - using "and" too much (sometimes it worked if when the sentances were supposed to be read fast, but most of the time it just didn't work), and using the term 'spread-eagle' I think three times in the span of 6 chapters. It stuck out.

The best part of the book, or at least, the best written part of the book, was the middle. It really gave JKR a time to work on her prose, and it shows. Most of it is beautifully written, and actually made me really feel the character's frustrations with Dumbledore. Similarly, The Silver Doe, King's Cross, and The Forest Again were all written with the same oomph.

The only parts of the book that I found rushed were the deus-ex-machinas (and no, Crabbe using the Fiendfyre is not one, they had the fang, they could've destroyed the diadem easily): Happening to say "Voldemort" and going to Malfoy's Manor (and actually fantastic chapter), the dragon escape (this one not so much, but still), and Voldemort just happening to put the hat on Neville's head. But even then, in the genre of fantasy, it happens all the time, so I can't really fault Jo.

And many parts of the book were more thematic and metaphorical than anything else that has happened in the series. I was happy about this, because the less action, the better.

I really do think, while not the pinacle of literature, that DH is extremely well written (for a fantasy book). It definitely surprised me.

EDIT: Oh, right, and this was after a second read through where I could slow down and take everything in.

It's a sad fact to accept, but yes, on paper, Harry just isn't nearly as powerful as Snape, Dumbledore and Voldemort. The Hallows were necessary. Yes, I know this seems a poor justification, it makes it seem as if JKR invented the Hallows because Harry would be otherwise too weak to kill Voldemort, but it all comes down to Harry understanding things that Voldemort doesn't. And would you really have been satisfied with Harry opening the love room at the end, engulfing Voldemort in an inescapable state of remorse, causing him to explode? Because that's what I thought would happen, when Hermione explained all the new details of Horcruxes near the beginning.

I did have an expectation for the Love Room, but I'm not sure what it was.

Instead, I had in mind that Harry would somehow couple with Voldemort (and he did), but that the final battle would be within the Voldy-Harry body. When Voldemort's soul was finally beaten, they would separate, somehow, and Voldy would be gone--and maybe Harry, too, but that Harry would come back. I guess I was right about that. :)

THANK YOU.

Some fans get so deranged with these ships that they ultimately come to the conclusion that the book is not up to par because Rowling has not assuaged their hunger for silly hook-ups. Fortunately, I have not read fanfiction nor been tempted too so my perception of the book has not changed since I first read it. Harry Potter never was a series on romance. In fact the romance is more of an after-thought and like you said, something to make the books more interesting. Personally, I could do without all those ships such as Harry/Ginny, Snape/Lily (honestly did not see that one coming and was pretty horrified but I understand it was a necessity), Lupin/Tonks etc as the originality of the story is what drew me to the books from the beginning.

AMEN TO THAT.

Before the COSForums opened again, I entertained myself by checking out the Harry/Hermione shipper forums, who STILL insisted that ship should happen and INSISTED it was the most important thing in the series, even going so far as to spoil themselves for the epilogue. God, it was pure comedy gold but I don't think I've ever seen so much stupidity on one forum in my life.

Speaking of the romances, I was very, very pleasantly surprised, as much as I love the canon pairings, to see that JKR handled it PERFECTLY after the assault of romance subplots in HBP: kept it at a bare minimum. I have to admit I was rather revolted at the Tonks/Lupin stuff early on but grew to love it when I realized it was an obvious parallel to Harry, James, Lily and Sirius.

Just one or two really, er, intimate Harry/Ginny scene early on (speaking of which, I liked that unlike Spider-Man 3, this book didn't casually toss aside the "We can't be together" thing) and that was about it. Of course we had the incredibly cliche "last-second romantic kiss in the middle of an epic battle" between Ron and Hermione but I guess JKR had to include something. Speaking of Ron/Hermione I liked the scene right after Ron destroyed the locket, and not just because it made all the borderline insane Harry/Hermione shippers want to throw themselves off a bridge.

\\Also, remember that Slughorn, who proves himself to be a coward, starts off fighting with the Death Eaters

Wait, really? Did I miss this?

[QUOTE=TrueLies;4652669]I very much agree with ASUTillman. I was disappointed that there was no real concluding chapter just for everything to sink in, to see the Harry/Ginny and Hermione/Ron finally officailly come to be, and to reflect on the journey. Not that I didn't LOVE the book[QUOTE]


I feel cheated out of at least one wedding.

Unfortunately, I'm starting to feel that this was the weakest of the books, making more use of weird plot contrivance type things.
Was it just me or did the nature of Polyjuice potion change some? Did DD's portrait show more ability than portrait's were generally believed to have? Could the Ravenclaw commonroom really be the only one convienently with a statue/picture of it's founder in it? Harry's fairly casual use of unforgivable curses even.

Just a whole raft of things that don't sit right

I don't think the Bathilda incident was deux ex machina, at all.

I was talking more about the taboo. The concept of inferi had been established. The taboo thing came out of thin air as an all-too-convenient device. Had it been introduced earlier in the series (and what better excuse for people to get into the habit of saying YKW) fine.

Wait, really? Did I miss this?

Yeah, I think it said Charlie defeated him in a duel then Slughorn was duelling Voldemort shortly after.

Yeah, I think it said Charlie defeated him in a duel then Slughorn was duelling Voldemort shortly after.

I thought that Slughorn was just fat and was running behind Charlie? Now I have to go and find that passage.

This Book Was Very 'Theatricle' To Me.. (Sp?) It Seemed JK Had An Intent To Make This Book A Great MOVIE.. Also, The Epil. Was Unnecessary

I was talking more about the taboo. The concept of inferi had been established. The taboo thing came out of thin air as an all-too-convenient device. Had it been introduced earlier in the series (and what better excuse for people to get into the habit of saying YKW) fine.

Ah, I understand. I think JKR did that throughout the series though. I thought it was a "children's book writer's" device of introducing a new concept and using that concept in the story. Crud...I can't think of an example at the mo' :grumble:, though there are tons of them. Stinks.

Theatricle? Oh, that's GREAT! I'm gonna start using that. :lol:

I was talking more about the taboo. The concept of inferi had been established. The taboo thing came out of thin air as an all-too-convenient device. Had it been introduced earlier in the series (and what better excuse for people to get into the habit of saying YKW) fine.

Voldemort never had the power to enact the Taboo before DH, you forget.

I thought that Slughorn was just fat and was running behind Charlie? Now I have to go and find that passage.

Well it said he "threw him to the floor" or something similar. Similar descriptions are used for Pius Thicknesse, Greyback, and at least one more DE I forget. I think Hagrid was the only one using hand-to-hand combat (which was ownage incidentally).

Voldemort never had the power to enact the Taboo before DH, you forget.



We don't know that. I'm sure a technicality like not controlling the ministry would not stand in his way.

There are a few plot wholes in Deathly Hallows. But I really think this is evident not because she is a poor writer but becuase she wrote seven in depth books. A poor writer couldn't finish the Seventh book because they would have written themselves out of it. Onto JK though. She can develop and create an amazingly creative story but finishing seemed to be really difficult for her. We expected the ending to be as well written and seemful as she created it. I have felt that the last two books were rushed not because of the story but because of the flow facts that needed checked, and editing hat needed done. Onto book seven.

I thought most of the Harry Ginny interaction was written tacky like the kiss for example. Or the Epilogue. Both and many more seemed like fanfiction. BAd fanfiction too. Throw most of Book six into the bad fanfiction aura too.

How come Harry Ron And Hermione only use about four spells they have all those books and they never read them?? What about nonverbal spells??

So many good parts in Book seven to make up for it all. so cheers

I was talking more about the taboo. The concept of inferi had been established. The taboo thing came out of thin air as an all-too-convenient device. Had it been introduced earlier in the series (and what better excuse for people to get into the habit of saying YKW) fine.

Oh, and not to throw out your complaint, because it IS valid, but just to quibble over the last point...

She couldn't establish that as the reason people say YKW, because then the taboo wouldn't work in DH. However, she could have established using a Taboo earlier, but in which case? When has the MoM needed to mark a word as Taboo?

The taboo thing came out of thin air as an all-too-convenient device. Had it been introduced earlier in the series (and what better excuse for people to get into the habit of saying YKW) fine.

What was weird to me about this what how Ron starting fearing (nevermind the whole 'respect' thing) the name all over again when he'd said it casually in the beginning of the book. And then they later find out it was all good cuz the name is tabooed anyway. I also wish it would've been introduced at some point instead of at the expense of Ron, especially since I had been waiting for him to say it since the 5th book.

Yes, Theatricle.. I Seemed To See That During This Book. Probably Because I Was Rushing And Trying To Imagine This.. But Seriously.. The Thing That Stuck On Me Was How Snape 'Justified' His Actions For The Sectumsempra Curse.. It Seemed Soo Liable To Be Just Another Dishonest Statement.. I Don't Know.. It Seemed Well Out Of JK's Writing Range.. Rushed.. And Also..


Theatricle :)

The fact that someone writes that Snape is in the wrong house proves my point. Who says that he's in the wrong house? Only a Gryffindor could do what Snape did? What he did makes him a true Gryffindor? The only language arts/social studies/philosophy classes at Hogwarts are History, and she turns that into a joke; anyone who chooses Slytherin at the age of 11 can never be redeemed--there's no moral complexity to her houses at all; and Voldemort is a cartoon of a villain. Add all this together and you get a fine author of children's fiction--literature it is definitely not. The fact that no one of Harry's generation who ended up in Slytherin is ever portrayed as good is perhaps the most glaring error of the entire series. Heck, 25% of the students have to end up there, it can't all be about choices! In my opinion, 11 year olds want to be cool, why wouldn't everyone pick Gryffindor? The first books were moving and imaginative and wonderful. The series was comfort food--something to reread when you need an escape. Now they aren't even that thanks to a very poorly plotted and written finale.

Voldemort never had the power to enact the Taboo before DH, you forget.



Well it said he "threw him to the floor" or something similar. Similar descriptions are used for Pius Thicknesse, Greyback, and at least one more DE I forget. I think Hagrid was the only one using hand-to-hand combat (which was ownage incidentally).

And now there were more, even more people storming up the front step, and Harry saw Charlie Weasley overtaking Horace Slughorn, who was still wearing his emerald pajamas. They seemed to have returned at the head of what looked like the families and friends of every Hogwarts student who had remained to fight, along with the shopkeepers and homeowners of Hogsmeade.

Charlie overtook Slughorn running up the setps, but they had gathered the troops. No fighting to be had between Charlie and Slughorn.

Yes, Theatricle.. I Seemed To See That During This Book. Probably Because I Was Rushing And Trying To Imagine This.. But Seriously.. The Thing That Stuck On Me Was How Snape 'Justified' His Actions For The Sectumsempra Curse.. It Seemed Soo Liable To Be Just Another Dishonest Statement.. I Don't Know.. It Seemed Well Out Of JK's Writing Range.. Rushed.. And Also..


Theatricle :)

Snape never tried to justify it- Harry saw Snape aiming at the guy's hand and miss, hitting George instead. That was Harry's interpretation, not snape's justification.

I think 'theatrical' is an unfortunate way to see this book. Again, her portrayal of the uncertainty and fluidity oftheir situation was superb.

Yes, Theatricle.. I Seemed To See That During This Book. Probably Because I Was Rushing And Trying To Imagine This.. But Seriously.. The Thing That Stuck On Me Was How Snape 'Justified' His Actions For The Sectumsempra Curse.. It Seemed Soo Liable To Be Just Another Dishonest Statement.. I Don't Know.. It Seemed Well Out Of JK's Writing Range.. Rushed.. And Also..


Theatricle :)

I was just commenting on the spelling (but not making fun). It's going to go in my pile with "ob-stackles" which I picked up from "O, Brother, Where Art Thou?" :lol:

I understand what you're saying but for me in the end it felt like the book came back full circle with the whole misconception of the houses. I mean, to not have even one student from Slytherin. Even Slughorn was apprehensive about fighting. And then in the epilogue, with Harry's kid being teased about being in Slytherin, it seems all that happened in the series, 19 years later, and still stigma of being put in Slytherin instead of Gryffindor continues.
Was it ever stated that no Slytherins were fighting? I don't actually remember.
What's wrong with being apprehensive about fighting? I'd probably be cowering under a desk if I was stuck at Hogwarts. Not because I'm a bad person, I just wouldn't be as brave as some other people.

Yes, that stigma continues, but that's more to do with the stigma of Slytherin himself. It's kind of like an elite school in Germany and one of the houses is called Hitler. Obviously that's never going to happen, but the point I'm making is the parallels between society's perceptions and acceptance of differences. The fact that Harry sticks up for Snape and Slytherins is far more realistic development (considering all he's been through) than the entire wizarding world forgiving and forgetting what Voldemort had been doing (himself acting upon Slytherin's ideals). Does that make sense?

If Ron had just said:

"Just don't say the word, give him some respect. He did bad things to people who spoke his name last time he was in power, that's why they call him 'You-Know-Who' in the first place. My parents told me."

Or something like that, I'd have a lot more respect both for the story (no more Deus Ex) and Harry+Hermione, who until that time always said 'Voldemort,' and after Ron left didn't really have any reason not to.

The fact that someone writes that Snape is in the wrong house proves my point. Who says that he's in the wrong house? Only a Gryffindor could do what Snape did? What he did makes him a true Gryffindo? The only language arts/social studies/philosophy classes at Hogwarts are History, and she turns that into a joke; anyone who chooses Slytherin at the age of 11 can never be redeemed--there's no moral complexity to her houses at all; and Voldemort is a cartoon of a villain. Add all this together and you get a fine author of children's fiction--literature it is definitely not. The first books were moving and imaginative and wonderful. The series was comfort food--something to reread when you need an escape. Now they aren't even that thanks to a very poorly plotted and written finale.

No moral complexity? So Snape fits the bill of an archetypal Slytherin? The variety we see of characters within the houses shows huge complexity and variety, and if we are determined to view the descriptions of the houses not just as guidelines but as a stereotypical fact of personality, sure, there'll be no complexity. But that's not the case.

Lol.. I Wrote It Incorrectly To Relate To The Title..






































And If That Doesn't Hold Up.. I Kinda Forgot... :)

Sure, he seems to stick up for Slytherins, but then tells Albus "just chose Gryffindor, and you'll be fine." Some lesson!

If Ron had just said:

"Just don't say the word, give him some respect. He did bad things to people who spoke his name last time he was in power, that's why they call him 'You-Know-Who' in the first place. My parents told me.

Or something like that, I'd have a lot more respect both for the story (no more Deus Ex) and Harry+Hermione, who until that time always said 'Voldemort,' and after Ron left didn't really have any reason not to.

I'd agree with that only after the word 'respect' is taken out, LOL. It's just so odd in the sense of Ron asking for respect when he has 2 brothers who have been injured, his father almost killed, his sister possessed and himself and his best friends in mortal danger - all due to Voldermort. Couldnt' he just had said 'bad luck' or something? And yeah, Hermione and Harry keep saying YKW after he leaves. I dunno, sorta contrived IMO.

Name a single Slytherin of Harry's generation with any moral complexity--just name one. They are all portrayed as bad seeds to the bitter end. Clearly if you make a choice at 11, that's it for you! Dumbledore could change (Snape never really changed--he just got bitter and stubborn and pursued revenge), but he was a Gryffindor, wasn't he? A Slytherin can't change.

The fact that someone writes that Snape is in the wrong house proves my point. Who says that he's in the wrong house? Only a Gryffindor could do what Snape did? What he did makes him a true Gryffindo? The only language arts/social studies/philosophy classes at Hogwarts are History, and she turns that into a joke; anyone who chooses Slytherin at the age of 11 can never be redeemed--there's no moral complexity to her houses at all; and Voldemort is a cartoon of a villain. Add all this together and you get a fine author of children's fiction--literature it is definitely not. The fact that no one of Harry's generation who ended up in Slytherin is ever portrayed as good is perhaps the most glaring error of the entire series. Heck, 25% of the students have to end up there, it can't all be about choices! In my opinion, 11 year olds want to be cool, why wouldn't everyone pick Gryffindor? The first books were moving and imaginative and wonderful. The series was comfort food--something to reread when you need an escape. Now they aren't even that thanks to a very poorly plotted and written finale.

Voldemort is a cartoon villian? After HBP? He has some amazing backstory, moreso than most villians who are evil and more evil. Yes, Voldemort is evil, but he is also to be pitied.

And I'm not quite sure if I understand what you mean when you talk about houses. Snape wasn't in the wrong house, he was ambitious, but also daring and cunning, able to play as a double agent for Voldemort. There are both good and bad parts of every house, and there are good and bad people in every house. And of course no one in Harry's year stayed. Their parents are all death eaters. :p

And while the earlier stories were imaginative, I would've dare call them moving or wonderful. They were beach reads for children, there's nothing to them. I mean, even as far as children's books go, they're fairly mediocre (SS and CoS).

Sure, he seems to stick up for Slytherins, but then tells Albus "just chose Gryffindor, and you'll be fine." Some lesson!

As choice plays an important role in this series, I think a good lesson can be taken from that. And he doesn't say you just have to choose one house, he said it is taken into consideration.

If Ron had just said:

"Just don't say the word, give him some respect. He did bad things to people who spoke his name last time he was in power, that's why they call him 'You-Know-Who' in the first place. My parents told me.

Or something like that, I'd have a lot more respect both for the story (no more Deus Ex) and Harry+Hermione, who until that time always said 'Voldemort,' and after Ron left didn't really have any reason not to.

Exactly I actually read through the Harry and Hermione portion numerous times just to see if it was said. Why wouldn't they? Or Ron Speaking Parseltongue. Make Ginny do something it could have been plausible relating back to her possesion

If Ron had just said:

"Just don't say the word, give him some respect. He did bad things to people who spoke his name last time he was in power, that's why they call him 'You-Know-Who' in the first place. My parents told me."

Or something like that, I'd have a lot more respect both for the story (no more Deus Ex) and Harry+Hermione, who until that time always said 'Voldemort,' and after Ron left didn't really have any reason not to.

Or even introduce the concept of Taboo in a Voldie unrelated way "Honestly! Haven't you read Hogwarts: A History?"

Name a single Slytherin of Harry's generation with any moral complexity--just name one. They are all portrayed as bad seeds to the bitter end. Clearly if you make a choice at 11, that's it for you! Dumbledore could change (Snape never really changed--he just got bitter and stubborn and pursued revenge), but he was a Gryffindor, wasn't he? A Slytherin can't change.

Moral complexity? Malfoy. He ultimately was redeemed in the end. But most of the Slytherins in Harry's year are children of Death Eaters. That's really not that fair.

Or even introduce the concept of Taboo in a Voldie unrelated way "Honestly! Haven't you read Hogwarts: A History?"

Ooh, maybe Hogwarts could have instated a Taboo. Certainly there were taboo subjects: horcruxes, Chamber of Secrets, off-limit hexes...

And you expect such control in a school. Umbridge certainly wouldn't have been above censorship, even if Dumbledore would have done no such thing.

The fact that someone writes that Snape is in the wrong house proves my point. Who says that he's in the wrong house? Only a Gryffindor could do what Snape did? What he did makes him a true Gryffindor? The only language arts/social studies/philosophy classes at Hogwarts are History, and she turns that into a joke; anyone who chooses Slytherin at the age of 11 can never be redeemed--there's no moral complexity to her houses at all; and Voldemort is a cartoon of a villain. Add all this together and you get a fine author of children's fiction--literature it is definitely not. The fact that no one of Harry's generation who ended up in Slytherin is ever portrayed as good is perhaps the most glaring error of the entire series. Heck, 25% of the students have to end up there, it can't all be about choices! In my opinion, 11 year olds want to be cool, why wouldn't everyone pick Gryffindor? The first books were moving and imaginative and wonderful. The series was comfort food--something to reread when you need an escape. Now they aren't even that thanks to a very poorly plotted and written finale.

here you´ve got your answer...
and yeah..Voldemort is pure evil!

Was it ever stated that no Slytherins were fighting? I don't actually remember.
What's wrong with being apprehensive about fighting? I'd probably be cowering under a desk if I was stuck at Hogwarts. Not because I'm a bad person, I just wouldn't be as brave as some other people.

Yes, that stigma continues, but that's more to do with the stigma of Slytherin himself. It's kind of like an elite school in Germany and one of the houses is called Hitler. Obviously that's never going to happen, but the point I'm making is the parallels between society's perceptions and acceptance of differences. The fact that Harry sticks up for Snape and Slytherins is far more realistic development (considering all he's been through) than the entire wizarding world forgiving and forgetting what Voldemort had been doing (himself acting upon Slytherin's ideals). Does that make sense?

The fact that someone writes that Snape is in the wrong house proves my point. Who says that he's in the wrong house? Only a Gryffindor could do what Snape did? What he did makes him a true Gryffindor? The only language arts/social studies/philosophy classes at Hogwarts are History, and she turns that into a joke; anyone who chooses Slytherin at the age of 11 can never be redeemed--there's no moral complexity to her houses at all; and Voldemort is a cartoon of a villain. Add all this together and you get a fine author of children's fiction--literature it is definitely not. The fact that no one of Harry's generation who ended up in Slytherin is ever portrayed as good is perhaps the most glaring error of the entire series. Heck, 25% of the students have to end up there, it can't all be about choices! In my opinion, 11 year olds want to be cool, why wouldn't everyone pick Gryffindor? The first books were moving and imaginative and wonderful. The series was comfort food--something to reread when you need an escape. Now they aren't even that thanks to a very poorly plotted and written finale.

I'm interested in what you mean by cartoon of a villain. I'm not disagreeing necessarily I'm just not sure I understand. I don't think Harry Potter was intended to ever be "great" literature. Just a fun read.

Or even introduce the concept of Taboo in a Voldie unrelated way "Honestly! Haven't you read Hogwarts: A History?"

Now RON saying that would've been hilarious, LOL!
Even if, of course he'd never read it and never will, but he could follow it up with how he's kidding and he heard his parents mention it as something that happened the first time Voldermort was in power, he tabooed certain words.

lol i love the term voldie..if voldermort exsisted and heard that..we would go INSANE

No moral complexity? So Snape fits the bill of an archetypal Slytherin? The variety we see of characters within the houses shows huge complexity and variety, and if we are determined to view the descriptions of the houses not just as guidelines but as a stereotypical fact of personality, sure, there'll be no complexity. But that's not the case.

Count it up. We have exactly ONE non-evil, non-Death Eater Slytherin. Slughorn. Sure, we have a handful of other "flip-floppers" (Snape, Malfoy, R.A.B., etc), but only one truly GOOD (although looking out for himself, too) Slytherin in the entire series? And NONE currently in the school? Sure, it worked through the eyes of 11 year old Harry, but so did Quidditch, House Points, the Ghosts, and all of that other "magical" stuff from the first books that isn't even present in the later ones. And then she gets all preachy with the "blood doesn't matter, not all Slytherins are evil, etc, etc." Show it then!

Or even introduce the concept of Taboo in a Voldie unrelated way "Honestly! Haven't you read Hogwarts: A History?"

Hogwarts: A History didn't cover the first war, and it seems that Voldemort never took over the Ministry the first time. I agree, it could've been brought up in a better way, but there would be no reason for anyone to talk about a Taboo in the first place given the history. Maybe during PoA, for Sirius? Maybe. But I don't think, when she sat down to write DH, was there any good way to implement the idea of Taboos before they happend. Even Kinsley didn't know they had them.

We don't know that. I'm sure a technicality like not controlling the ministry would not stand in his way.

Yes, I actually think it would. Think about the spell for a minute. Voldemort has placed a spell over the entire wizarding world he controls (I'm presuming the entire United Kingdom, unless Harry, Ron and Hermione left it at one point and I missed it) which makes it impossible for anyone to say his name without being instantly arrested and/or killed. Even for Voldemort, this is an immensely complex and difficult spell to do with the Ministry there, wouldn't you agree? The very fact that he waited until he overthrew the Ministry before enacting it should speak for itself.

Yep, why couldn't Harry have stopped at "then Slytherin will get a good student," why go on to just choose what you want. Because obviously no one would choose Slytherin unless they are evil.

If everyone in current Slytherin is the kid of a Death Eater, who's fault is that? An author who divides poor innocent characters into 4 stereotypes and makes them keep to their own houses.

I liken the taboo spell similar to the trace on underage wizards.

Yep, why couldn't Harry have stopped at "then Slytherin will get a good student," why go on to just choose what you want. Because obviously no one would choose Slytherin unless they are evil.

I doubt the children of Slytherins would agree.

I think the Houses are kind of like personality types, specifically, the MBTI. Okay, you take a test (the Sorting Hat) and you are typed according to your answers. With the Sorting Hat, there is another step: you are placed with others of your particular bents. But even with personality, you have choices in how to act, it's just that some people say, "It's just how I am; I can't change."

I think that the times in the HP series are such that people are going to follow their particular bents, as folks tend to do in times of adversity, rather than acting out of step with their core.

That is to say that everyone is complex, but some of the complexity diminishes in hard times, when we're all seeking survival.

Snape had a reason for fighting against Voldy, but that didn't stop him from joining up, initially. Harry's bent was toward Slytherin, because of the horcrux, but his choice to be in Gryffindor was considered by the Hat, because choices and bents make us, not just a propensity for doing certain things. We always have a choice, but not everyone makes choices to be different from who they think they are.

Yep, why couldn't Harry have stopped at "then Slytherin will get a good student," why go on to just choose what you want. Because obviously no one would choose Slytherin unless they are evil.

If everyone in current Slytherin is the kid of a Death Eater, who's fault is that? An author who divides poor innocent characters into 4 stereotypes and makes them keep to their own houses.


The kids aren't divided into stereotypes. the houses may seem straightforward and stereotypical, but the range of characters within them is anything but.

Sure--the children of Slytherins wouldn't agree under the hands of another writer. What I'm saying is that is how JKR has constructed her world.

Speaking of the Trace, I sure wish she hadn't dug herself into that hole back in Chamber of Secrets. It's stupid... why wouldn't they just monitor which actual person used the spell, instead of the area of effect thing? Why would, for example, Ron not use magic all the time when alone in his room over the summer? Why do they need this "underage magic" law anyway?

It seems like they've explained it about three times in the books, and each time it gets more complex and convulted. And the word "Trace" is used for the first time in Hallows... couldn't think up that one before?

I dont like when a writer use long explanation and take to much time on little detail that, can add to the story for sure, but in the end hasnt really got a big impact. So skiping here and there to focus on whats important is ok! Most Poems are short but resonate alot of things too!

Name a single Slytherin of Harry's generation with any moral complexity--just name one. They are all portrayed as bad seeds to the bitter end. Clearly if you make a choice at 11, that's it for you! Dumbledore could change (Snape never really changed--he just got bitter and stubborn and pursued revenge), but he was a Gryffindor, wasn't he? A Slytherin can't change.

To be fair, there haven't been that many Slytherin characters described - only Malfoy, Crabbe, Goyle, Pansy, Nott and Zabini I can name off the top of my head. And Snape did change, he was by far the bravest character in the series next to Harry, whereas before he switched sides he was a disgusting person who showed a cowardice. Read my first post about Slytherin again. The fact is, just because some Slytherin characters - Draco, Snape and Slughorn - are not entirely Slytherins does not mean everyone is as ambiguous.

And incidentally, Slytherin isn't the only house with moral complexities. Tonks was a Hufflepuff, and Peter Pettigrew of course was Gryffindor, even though it's perfectly obvious he should have been in Slytherin if it was based on your character traits like it was supposed to be. It's arguable that up to DH, Percy should have been in Slytherin too, I wouldn't be surprised if the Hat considered it.

My point is - Sorting proves to be useless by the end of the book, because many characters change. You'll have your stereotypical Slytherins like Crabbe and Goyle, you'll have your epitomizing characters of a house, like Harry and Voldemort for Gryffindor and Slytherin, you'll have characters whose characteristics should put them in one house but whose heart puts them in another (Hermione and Percy), etc, etc.

The kids aren't divided into stereotypes. the houses may seem straightforward and stereotypical, but the range of characters within them is anything but.

EXCEPT. FOR. SLYTHERIN.

Sure we see it all the others... is Luna really a 'wit beyond measure?' But the Slytherin students, except possibly Malfoy after Hallows are all Death Eaters or sympathetic to them. Without fail. Even when she gets the perfect chance to rectify the situation (Blaise Zambini), she just gives him a few "mudblood" lines and he's another waste of a character...

EXCEPT. FOR. SLYTHERIN.

Sure we see it all the others... is Luna really a 'wit beyond measure?' But the Slytherin students, except possibly Malfoy after Hallows are all Death Eaters or sympathetic to them. Without fail. Even when she gets the perfect chance to rectify the situation (Blaise Zambini), she just gives him a few "mudblood" lines and he's another waste of a character...

But Snape and Slughorn DO break that stereotype! Slughorn has no problem with muggle-borns, neither does Snape.

When you say some characters "are not entirely Slytherin" you prove my point. By "not entirely Slytherin" you mean that they chose not to do evil, thus all real Slytherins are evil. There's no moral complexity there.

EXCEPT. FOR. SLYTHERIN.

Sure we see it all the others... is Luna really a 'wit beyond measure?' But the Slytherin students, except possibly Malfoy after Hallows are all Death Eaters or sympathetic to them. Without fail. Even when she gets the perfect chance to rectify the situation (Blaise Zambini), she just gives him a few "mudblood" lines and he's another waste of a character...

It's difficult to be anything but a Slytherin when you are surrounded by it, wouldn't you say?

The kids in Slytherin are still making up their minds about who to be. There are powerful people around them, all the time. It's hard to think something different when you are pressured on all sides, when your friends think such and such. And even if you do think differently, it's harder to break out of going through the motions until you are on your own, more confident, and have no choice but to think for yourself.

When you say some characters "are not entirely Slytherin" you prove my point. By "not entirely Slytherin" you mean that they chose not to do evil, thus all real Slytherins are evil. There's no moral complexity there.


All of the Slytherins we've seen are children of Death Eaters. At least, the major ones. Of course they're going to be evil. They're going to choose to go into the house that their fathers was in, the house that gave rise to Voldemort. We have no idea what the underage Slytherins are like. We do, however, know that Slughorn and Snape, both who exhibit many Slytherin traits, are both heroes.

But Snape and Slughorn DO break that stereotype! Slughorn has no problem with muggle-borns, neither does Snape.

And I think this is one place where JKR expects us to figure it out, that not every Slytherin can be so steeped, even within Harry's contemporaries.

EXCEPT. FOR. SLYTHERIN.

Sure we see it all the others... is Luna really a 'wit beyond measure?' But the Slytherin students, except possibly Malfoy after Hallows are all Death Eaters or sympathetic to them. Without fail. Even when she gets the perfect chance to rectify the situation (Blaise Zambini), she just gives him a few "mudblood" lines and he's another waste of a character...

Oh my god, someone's still whining about the fact that Blaise Zabini wasn't developed further because he had such an awesome name. I really thought this had stopped after HBP.

And while I'll admit Slytherin certainly has the least number of morally ambiguous characters, the ones they do have are exemplary - Snape, Draco, Slughorn.

And I suppose this is relevant to this debate:

Three JKR quotes courtesy of Accio-Quote.org (go to the Hogwarts section)


Not everyone in Slytherin house is hateful. The house is important to Hogwarts to create balance.
The Death Eater children are a small fraction of the total Slytherin population. In fact, some Death Eater children belong to other houses.
The four houses “correspond roughly to the four elements.” Gryffindor is fire, Ravenclaw is air, Hufflepuff is earth, and Slytherin is water.

But Snape and Slughorn DO break that stereotype! Slughorn has no problem with muggle-borns, neither does Snape.

I've already said that Slughorn is the series' sole always good Slytherin. Sure, he plays favorites and looks out for himself, but that's what got him into the house. His potion smarts could have gotten him into Ravenclaw, etc, but it was his slight selfishness and initiative to be well connected that pushed him into Slytherin. Not his hatered of Muggles, nor his family being Death Eaters. Try the same test on every other STUDENT Slytherin we've seen. Can you fit a single one of them into another house?

Not everyone in Slytherin house is hateful. The house is important to Hogwarts to create balance.
The Death Eater children are a small fraction of the total Slytherin population. In fact, some Death Eater children belong to other houses.


It's great that she says that, but... (and I hate to say this) it's not canon. If she wants me to believe that, she's going to have to show me some specific students from Slytherin who AREN'T Death Eathers or sympathizers, and some specific students from other houses who ARE. So far, I haven't seen a single one.

I've already said that Slughorn is the series' sole always good Slytherin. Sure, he plays favorites and looks out for himself, but that's what got him into the house. His potion smarts could have gotten him into Ravenclaw, etc, but it was his slight selfishness and initiative to be well connected that pushed him into Slytherin. Not his hatered of Muggles, nor his family being Death Eaters. Try the same test on every other STUDENT Slytherin we've seen. Can you fit a single one of them into another house?

Untrue; firstly, Slughorn may have had an inkling of why Tom Riddle wanted to know about Horcruxes but decided not to believe it (much like Dumbledore chose to overlook the evil nature of Grindelwald's plan), second off, as I have said, he chose to fight on the Death Eater's side in the final battle, only switching sides at the last moment. Slughorn is probably the most ambiguous Slytherin actually.

second off, as I have said, he chose to fight on the Death Eater's side in the final battle, only switching sides at the last moment.

Quotes please. If you want, you can just look back a couple pages to where someone disproved that to get the full paragraph.

I've already said that Slughorn is the series' sole always good Slytherin. Sure, he plays favorites and looks out for himself, but that's what got him into the house. His potion smarts could have gotten him into Ravenclaw, etc, but it was his slight selfishness and initiative to be well connected that pushed him into Slytherin. Not his hatered of Muggles, nor his family being Death Eaters. Try the same test on every other STUDENT Slytherin we've seen. Can you fit a single one of them into another house?



It's great that she says that, but... (and I hate to say this) it's not canon. If she wants me to believe that, she's going to have to show me some specific students from Slytherin who AREN'T Death Eathers or sympathizers, and some specific students from other houses who ARE. So far, I haven't seen a single one.

Peter Pettigrew is a Death Eater from Gryffindor. Just sayin'.

Crabbe and Goyle have an unyielding loyalty to Draco. They could be Hufflepuffs. Malfoy, you could make arguments towards other houses (his bravery in not killing Dumbledore, intellegence obvious in getting good marks on his Potions OWLs), but Slytherin suits him best, that's why he was sorted there. And we honestly don't know really anything about the other Slytherins in Harry's year to make that call.

as I have said, he chose to fight on the Death Eater's side in the final battle, only switching sides at the last moment. Slughorn is probably the most ambiguous Slytherin actually.

I disproved that in the past couple of pages.

SkasparRollins, you quote many posts here except the point I made about you writing that Drace, etc., "aren't entirely Slytherin" proving my point that according to Rowlings, all Slytherins are bad. "Aren't entirely Slytherin" means that they chose rightly in the end, correct? No real Slytherin could choose the side of good? I'm not trying to call you out here--I'm just really interested in your response.

ETA:
Exactly, thewyvern--we don't enough about Slytherin students to make the call. But we should!!! A good writer would have made the houses morally complex.

And now there were more, even more people storming up the front step, and Harry saw Charlie Weasley overtaking Horace Slughorn, who was still wearing his emerald pajamas. They seemed to have returned at the head of what looked like the families and friends of every Hogwarts student who had remained to fight, along with the shopkeepers and homeowners of Hogsmeade.

Charlie overtook Slughorn running up the setps, but they had gathered the troops. No fighting to be had between Charlie and Slughorn.

...

Peter Pettigrew is a Death Eater from Gryffindor. Just sayin'.

Crabbe and Goyle have an unyielding loyalty to Draco. They could be Hufflepuffs. Malfoy, you could make arguments towards other houses (his bravery in not killing Dumbledore, intellegence obvious in getting good marks on his Potions OWLs), but Slytherin suits him best, that's why he was sorted there. And we honestly don't know really anything about the other Slytherins in Harry's year to make that call.



I disproved that in the past couple of pages.

Oh come off it Hufflepuff's aren't stupid. I would say based purely on the Hufflepuff stereotype that they're the best people, morally speaking. Cedric and Tonks both came from Hufflepuff and both were outstanding.

ETA:
Exactly--we don't enough about Slytherin students to make the call. But we should!!! A good writer would have made the houses morally complex.

Yes, I agree, it would've been nice if some of the Slytherins in Harry's year would have stayed, but I think that JK has proved with Slughorn and Snape that Slytherins aren't inherently evil. I mean... Snape turns out to be the biggest hero in DH. What more do you want?

SkasparRollins, you quote many posts here except the point I made about you writing that Drace, etc., "aren't entirely Slytherin" proving my point that according to Rowlings, all Slytherins are bad. "Aren't entirely Slytherin" means that they chose rightly in the end, correct? No real Slytherin could choose the side of good? I'm not trying to call you out here--I'm just really interested in your response.

ETA:
Exactly, thewyvern--we don't enough about Slytherin students to make the call. But we should!!! A good writer would have made the houses morally complex.

To a huge extent the books are exclusively about Harry. We really only got to see an inside look at Gryffindor. We know relatively little about any other house and it's students.

Peter Pettigrew is a Death Eater from Gryffindor. Just sayin'.

Crabbe and Goyle have an unyielding loyalty to Draco. They could be Hufflepuffs. Malfoy, you could make arguments towards other houses (his bravery in not killing Dumbledore, intellegence obvious in getting good marks on his Potions OWLs), but Slytherin suits him best, that's why he was sorted there. And we honestly don't know really anything about the other Slytherins in Harry's year to make that call.

Yes, as I have said there aren't that many Slytherins introduced in Harry's year. Come to think of it, most of the more characterized students are from Gryffindor. But didn't JKR say she made something like 70 students in Harry's year? I suppose you can't introduce them all.

You mention Pettigrew - who remained completely Slytherin and a coward to the very end. I still contend that the Slytherins fighting on Voldemort's side did it out of cowardice solely.

People keep mentioning the fact Harry wouldn't care if his son was sorted in Slytherin. That, I think is the important part, 19 years later, Harry doesn't feel any ill feelings towards Slytherin even though they fought against him in the last battle.

I'm starting to think the slogan for the DH movie should be "Whose side are you on?"

I think it's pretty obvious what i want. Snape's a tragic character, but I'd hardly call him good. He did what he did for revenge against Voldemort--even Dumbledore recognized that he didn't care if James or Harry died that night.

Yes, as I have said there aren't that many Slytherins introduced in Harry's year. Come to think of it, most of the more characterized students are from Gryffindor. But didn't JKR say she made something like 70 students in Harry's year? I suppose you can't introduce them all.

You mention Pettigrew - who remained completely Slytherin and a coward to the very end. I still contend that the Slytherins fighting on Voldemort's side did it out of cowardice solely.

People keep mentioning the fact Harry wouldn't care if his son was sorted in Slytherin. That, I think is the important part, 19 years later, Harry doesn't feel any ill feelings towards Slytherin even though they fought against him in the last battle.

I'm starting to think the slogan for the DH movie should be "Whose side are you on?"

Pettigrew was a Gryffindor...


And there are 40-42 students in Harry's year. Usually 10 per house, 5 per sex.

I think it's pretty obvious what i want. Snape's a tragic character, but I'd hardly call him good. He did what he did for revenge against Voldemort--even Dumbledore recognized that he didn't care if James or Harry died that night.

I really don't know what you're asking for. How is Snape NOT good? He fought to save the child of the woman he loved, sacrificing everything he wanted to protect him? He learned from his mistakes. How is he not good?

...

All right so I might have been wrong. But what does JKR mean by "overtaking"? Did Charlie just push him out of the way?

Yes, as I have said there aren't that many Slytherins introduced in Harry's year. Come to think of it, most of the more characterized students are from Gryffindor. But didn't JKR say she made something like 70 students in Harry's year? I suppose you can't introduce them all.

You mention Pettigrew - who remained completely Slytherin and a coward to the very end. I still contend that the Slytherins fighting on Voldemort's side did it out of cowardice solely.

People keep mentioning the fact Harry wouldn't care if his son was sorted in Slytherin. That, I think is the important part, 19 years later, Harry doesn't feel any ill feelings towards Slytherin even though they fought against him in the last battle.

I'm starting to think the slogan for the DH movie should be "Whose side are you on?"

Harry wasn't fighting Slytherin, he was fighting Voldemort.

Of course it's about Harry, of course she can't discuss all the students. But she's a poor writer because she sets up the houses as stereotypes with no moral complexity. A better writer would have introduced a few more students--what about a good Slytherin instead of Colin McCreevy? She wouldn't have even needed to add to the word count.

all slytherin's arnt bad
i though snape would have proved that finally!

And there are 40-42 students in Harry's year. Usually 10 per house, 5 per sex.

That's too convenient considering students are marked down at birth.

All right so I might have been wrong. But what does JKR mean by "overtaking"? Did Charlie just push him out of the way?

Slughorn was ahead of Charlie. Slughorn is fat. Charlie overtakes him up the stairs.

Oh come off it Hufflepuff's aren't stupid. I would say based purely on the Hufflepuff stereotype that they're the best people, morally speaking. Cedric and Tonks both came from Hufflepuff and both were outstanding.

Intellegence has nothing to do with Hufflepuff. They would be good Hufflepuffs.

That's too convenient considering students are marked down at birth.

That's how it worked out though, at least in the story. Sure, it's sort of lame, but hey, it's fantasy.

Pettigrew - There should have been a redemption. Killing Greyback with his Silver hand to save Harry and Lupin. She HAD to have had that in her drafts at some point in the story, and it got cut for some reason. It's too bad.

Pettigrew was a Gryffindor...

Yes, that's the point. He's the opposite of Snape, he's a Gryffindor who if the Sorting Hat wasn't a flawed system should have been put in Slytherin. Even though he was in Gryffindor, he matched all the characteristics of a Slytherin - cowardly with a Crabbe and Goyle-like follower's mentality, latching on to whoever's powerful. And note that he never saved Harry's life, it was just the magic of the life debt that caused him to cowardly kill himself.




I really don't know what you're asking for. How is Snape NOT good? He fought to save the child of the woman he loved, sacrificing everything he wanted to protect him? He learned from his mistakes. How is he not good?

You will NEVER hear me say Snape wasn't good, where did you get that impression? As I've said, he's easily the bravest character in the series next to Harry.

Harry wasn't fighting Slytherin, he was fighting Voldemort.

Yes but Slytherin was fighting on Voldemort's side.

Intellegence has nothing to do with Hufflepuff. They would be good Hufflepuffs.


That's how it worked out though, at least in the story. Sure, it's sort of lame, but hey, it's fantasy.

JKR has also said there's 1000 students at Hogwarts so that doesn't work.

What do you mean "they would be good Hufflepuffs" who's they?

I think "Snape not good" was aimed at me! I don't think that Snape's good. He wanted revenge on Voldemort, that was his principle motivation. He was a bitter old man by the end and mostly incapable of love. He wasn't bad, but he wasn't good. He's a character to be pitied--what a sad fate!

I think it's pretty obvious what i want. Snape's a tragic character, but I'd hardly call him good. He did what he did for revenge against Voldemort--even Dumbledore recognized that he didn't care if James or Harry died that night.

He did care for Dumbledore, though.

Yes, that's the point. He's the opposite of Snape, he's a Gryffindor who if the Sorting Hat wasn't a flawed system should have been put in Slytherin. Even though he was in Gryffindor, he matched all the characteristics of a Slytherin - cowardly with a Crabbe and Goyle-like follower's mentality, latching on to whoever's powerful. And note that he never saved Harry's life, it was just the magic of the life debt that caused him to cowardly kill himself.





You will NEVER hear me say Snape wasn't good, where did you get that impression? As I've said, he's easily the bravest character in the series next to Harry.

I was responding to someone else about Snape.

And yes, Petegrew shouldn't have been in Gryffindor from what we know. But I'd go as far to say that Crabbe and Goyle should have been in Hufflepuff. Unlike Petegrew, they never sacrificed their best friend out of fear or ambition.

If the houses are morally complex and not stereotypcial, then why SHOULDN'T Peter have been in Gryffindor?

Peter chose Gryffindor to be cool, and other good kids might choose Slytherin at the request of their parents even if they have different values (they're only 11 after all). Luna fancies herself smart (is she?), so she's in Ravenclaw. I'd argue that there are no "true" anything--no true Gryffindores, Slytherins, etc.