Spoiler Alert Thread - Harry Potter 7

Well, I have finished my first reading of Book 7 (I will now read it a second time). I am pleased that I had anticipated the locket - but dismayed that Dumbledor really, really is dead. (I was hoping that Snape really was able to "put a stopper in Death.")

Do you think we will see a new series become available in 2026 - 19 years from now (or, let's see - Book 7 takes place when ? James and Lily died in Oct. 1981 - We know that Harry is born in July of 1980, so if Harry is 17, it must be 1997 - 19 years later = 2016). So maybe another series as early as 2016! Well, we can hope.

What are your general feelings about the series - and the conclusion? Personally, I feel very, very sad.

Just figured something out . . . Harry Potter would be 27 this year. So in 2016, he has a 12 year old son, James, an 11 year old son Albus, and a daughter Lily, too young to go to Hogwarts.

Thinking backwards, James must have been born in 2004. So Harry must have married in 2002 or 2003 - when he was 22 or 23. Albus must have been born in 2005. And Lily might be born this year. (Yes, I know they are all fictional . . . .)

Can't imagine the series is gone for good. Too much $$$ involved.

We all had to reread the last couple of chapters to figure out how the "deathstick" came to be Harry's. It got a little confusing for a while, but now I have it straight.
Marth

It took a couple rereads for me to figure it out too.

Have you seen this link? More info about what's not mentioned in the epilogue.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19959323/

LoraB.

I was very satisfied with the conclusion. Some of what I expected (Snape being a good guy and his death) Some surprises.
My wife had to explain to me how Nigel endded up with the sword of Griffendor.
Didn't J.K. say 2 major charectors would die? Snape and...who? Fred, Lupin, Dobby, Tonks. Hard to figure who she does and doesn't think is a major charector.

Favorite parts: Dumbledore "Of course this is all in your head and why would you think that makes it any less real" (or something like that)
Percy's return, and his joke during the battle that left Fred to die with a smile on his face.
Trelawney bopping Death Eaters on the head with crystal balls.

Doesn't Voldemort count as a major character?

Good point. I was most sad when Dobby and Fred died.

I still have not read any of the books (I let others read it and let me know what happens - worked great in HS) but have seen all five movies. Never read Lord of the Rings either (what HAVE I read?) and just saw those movies and was struck by the number of similarities. Do yoy know if Rowling ever alluded to it as an influence?

I haven't. But I'd assume they are both very schooled in classic myth,etc. (I know JK is)

Lord of the Rings is a very small part of a huge mythology created by Tolkien who felt that England lost its indigenous mythologies with the conquest of the Normans. As a linguist, he start first with the languages - based on Finish, (Quenya or high elven), Welsh (common Elvish), and Anglo-Saxon (language of the Rhohirrum - is an actual dialect of A.S.). Having created the languages, he need peoples to speak them. The mythology is recorded in the Simarilian. It starts with a creation myth and goes from there. Accordiing to this mythology, we are currently in either the 6th or 7th age of the Sun (depending on which tolkien scholar you read) The action in LOTR takes place in the 3rd age of the sun and ends by ushering in the 4th age.

The absolute completeness of the world created by Tolkien (and glimpsed in LoTR) is what is so astounding -languages, alphabets, lineages, histories over thousands of years.

The social world is soooo complete, I can use LoTR to explain social theory. (Have very funny powerpoint slides using images from the films)

Rowlings is educated in literature and mythology - so obviously, she is picking up on the same threads - though her task was different. She didn't intend to create a whole mythology (though she may have succeeded) She intended to write an entertaining morality tale.

Well said!
Is literature your subject? (I forgot)

Well, I have never read any of the books... I saw the movies ... my nephew got book 7.... can't believe it.... he read it and now is my turn to read it.... but ist's takin forever because I have to go back to wikkipedia and read the summaries so I can at least understand.... I read the end already...

Love LOTR absolulty.... my favorite so far!!!

Hey, Kassia - the Simarillion is a real slog to read (like working your way through the Old Testament) but the gist of the stories is amazing.

Dave47 - I'm a sociologist, but I have tons of fun explaining stuff like Durkheim's organic and mechanical societies, Goffman's stigma and his "presentation of self" Weber's concepts of authority, etc. using images of LoTR.

I would send you one of the Powerpoint lectures - but all DG allows is sending images. If you d-mail me an email address I will send you one of the lectures (I think they are very funny - but students who have not seen the film nor read the book probably think I am a little strange!)

Anyway, I had a ball putting the lectures together . . . wish I had professors that were equally as silly.

Michaela, I read the Simarillion... and believe me I was crazy enough to get a piece of paper and take some notes... the same way I have done with the Old Testament!!!! lol.... I like complicated things... and I have read the entire Old Testament at least 3 times... and Genesis, Exodus and the prophets at least 20 times each... yeah I went to seminary and had to do research papers!!!! I enjoyed .... so LOTR was just great for me... I lost all LOTR books when I moved the house... so sad... I lost one entire box of books... but I have all the movies!!!!

I just had no desire to read Harry Potter until now... I think it has to do with my background... I come from a country in which a lot of people practice spiritism - its considered a religion in Brazil - which I have no tolerance for it... I confess its not something I like... it's too scary at times... I have seen things that I absolutly should not... not human sacrifes but animal sacrifices...it's horrible...


and even now... I don't know if I want to invest so much time reading all 7 books... I have Maximun Ride, Bourne Ultimatum to finish it!!!!

Harry has inserted himself into our culture, just like LoTR and Star Wars. No animal sacrifices in HP, except for He who must not be named killing a unicorn and Harry's owl Hedwig buying it in the last book. Bad Voldemort, Bad!
Martha

Kassia, I think you might be more comfortable if you knew that JR Rowlings is a devoted member of the Scottish Church (Prespryterian sp?). When you finish the entire series, you will recognize the influence this has had on her writing. She did not elaborate on this aspect of her life because, apparently, she felt it would give away the ending of the story.

I think you would love these books . . . there is magic, of course - but also an awful lot of common sense.

In the end, the premise of the book is that the best of actions are guided by love and by the pursuit of the good - not ambition, not wealth, nor power, nor popularity.

That explains the shortage of lawyers and politicians in Heaven.

I loved all 7 books from beginning to end. Will be sorry to hear no more of Harry and his friends!! Can't wait to see movie #5. Unfortunately my 6 yr old daughter is not ready, so I'll have to wait till it comes out on DVD!

I read the book in one day - but more from fear of someone telling me the ending than anything else. (Did you guys hear how some guy was standing on a subway platform in NYC and yelling out the ending as people got off the train? LOL! I'm surprised he wasn't beaten up!)

But it was a great book! Even if I hadn't been worried about the ending being spoiled, I would have had trouble putting it down. Like Seandor, I was disappointed that Dumbledore was truly dead.

But that was more than made up for by the fact that Snape was vindicated! He has always been one of my favorite characters, and I felt absolutely betrayed when he killed Dumbledore! I just could not believe it! I kept hoping that it would turn out that he was under the Imperius curse or something.

And then he didn't seem to be a big part of The Deathly Hallows, so I was disappointed... until the end. I was so happy to read the chapter with his thoughts/memories. To me, that was the best part of the book.

HUGE Lord of the Rings fan here. I read the books about 30 years ago, and can't count the number of times I've read them again. Also read The Silmarillion - but only once, lol! It is truly amazing what JRR created, and I don't think anyone can touch him. BTW, I will not see the movies. After 30 years of reading the books, I have a definite image of what characters and places look like, and I don't want that ruined. For instance, I don't want to think of Liv Tyler or Viggo Mortensen while I'm reading it (yet again!). I have MY images in my head, and don't want what someone else thinks the images should be in my head. My son, who also read and loved the books, and for whom I bought the movies, is always trying to talk me into watching them, but I just won't. I guess I'm funny that way...

:)
Dee

Great thoughts Dee. My mother saw the first LOTR movie in jury duty - so watch out! That can be your reason for dismissal.

Dee - I read LoTR when I was 11 and have gone through several paperbacks, until DH bought the hardcover book for Christmas in 1995. I have read it aloud to my children, and DH has read it aloud to me.

I have seen each movie a gazillion times. What is ABSOLUTELY amazing is how well each character matches the book. The only one that misses the mark is Faramir - who in the book is far more handsome.

What is fabulous is the love and care that went into making the films. The documentaries that follow the creative teams show the dedication of the artists, etc. For instance, in creating the costume for Theoden, there was a leather jerkin with this exquisite sun/celtic design. The creators knew it would never appear on screen- it was completely covered by the rest of the costume. It was done to ensure the authenticity of the costume. EVERYTHING in EVERY scene was created specifically for the scene. Every mug, beer stein, sword, picture on the wall, etc. All of Hobbition was built one year in advance and planted with plants so it would look totally natural when filming took place.

Obviously, certain parts and characters were left out - and other things were added. The second film is the one most tampered with. But the over all spirit of LoTR is true.

Seandor, I have indeed heard how true-to-the-book the LOTR movies are, and how much planning and detail went into them. My son, who at 14 has read the books 2 or 3 times and loves it as much as I do, keeps telling me how the movies look just like what he imagined, more or less. And to be honest, I have walked through the family room as the movie has been on the tv screen more than once, and was instantly able to recognize places. For instance, as I walked through one day, I couldn't help myself, and glanced at the tv. "Oh," I said to my son, "that's GOT to be Moria" - and sure enough, it was.

But more than the places, it's the characters I don't want to see, really. I just don't want to think of a living, breathing human being - an actor - when I think of Galadriel or Gandalf or Frodo, or anyone for that matter. I know, I know, everyone thinks I'm weird or uptight or a bit too much into the books, but I don't care, lol.

BTW, I made my kids read the books before I let them watch the movies. I told them the books were just waaaaaay too creative and imaginative to let someone else dictate what they (my kids) should be visualizing. But once they read them, if they wanted to see the movies they could... and they did, lol I guess they're not as anal as their mother, lol!

:)
Dee

P.S. I have to add that I did not have the same reservations with seeing the Harry Potter movies. I guess I just don't think of HP as being on the same level of literature as LOTR. And personally, I think the HP movies are very faithful to the book. Most of the places and people are just like I envisioned - except, I still can't get used to McGonagall being so old. In the very first book I pictured her at about 35 years old for some reason, lol, and I can's shake that! I adore Maggie Smith, though, so that helps me deal with the character in the movie. It was just a bit of a surprise...

Michaela, how do you suppose that Starbucks cup made it into the first movie?

great advice ... thanks... I have been reading a little... actually I am reading 3 books at the same time... lol!!!

Wow - Kass, how do you hold all three?

I think Snape, Hagrid, Trelawney, Fitch, Dolores Umbridge, Ron are all about perfect. Harry & Hermione are a little too good looking and Hermione's hair is wrong. (Aren;t Harry's eyes the wrong color?) That said, it doesn't bother me at all.
I liked the original Dumbledore much better. My wife feels that JK should have made an exception to the all British cast and cast Paul Newman as Dumbledore. She thinks his eyes have the right twinkle.

LOL...

Your wife is right about Paul Newman's eyes, but his english accent would have stunk.
Martha

Dave got me thinking about the individual characters, and how they were cast in the movie. As I mentioned above, in general I think they did an excellent job - most of the characters as just as I imagined.

One character who is even better for me is Snape. I mean, he looks pretty much as I imagined him, but I could never have imagined that voice! The actor makes this such an enjoyable character just because of the way he talks. I could listen to him recite a grocery list and like it, lol!

I can definitely picture Paul Newman's eyes in Dumbledore's face, but not sure if I can imagine Paul himself in that role...

:)
Dee

Paul is more than just a pretty face, but I respect JK's decision to keep it British.
I agree with you about Snape. I've liked Alan Rickman since he was in Sense and Sensibility, one of his few goog guy roles.
I think Hagrid is about perfect too.

Sigh. If Paul is playing an old guy in the movies, I am going to hate it, cause I don't have this old guy image of him. He is old enough to be my dad, though. Sigh. Sigh.
Martha

Doesn't Peter O'toole has a twinkle in his eye? And the right accent for dumbledoor?

I agree about Snape and Hagrid being perfect - and I never read the books! Paul Newman? Hmmm. There must be better choices. Stallone??

Stallone? Yo! Harry! Fugeddaboutit! Paul Newman has the twinkly blue eyes!
Martha

Stallone?! LOL! Too funny!

Hmm, O'Toole might have been a good choice. Gee, for some reason I always forget he's still alive, lol!

:)
Dee

Is he?!! Does he know? I do agree that the first Dumbledore was much better.

I think there were times when he (O'Toole) wasn't sure if he was still alive! What a partier! But I agree he should have been Dumbledore.

Dee,

I have not seen the HP movies nor the LOTR because I DON'T visualize characters in books. I'm not disappointed in the actors, but my brain is frozen by the choices. I didn't think Hermione's hair was wavy, but now it has to be. Did she write the last few books to the faces of the kids who were cast?

I'll read the books when I get around to it... and if I finish the other six. LOTR is different.

xxx, Carrie

I was sad to read the last page of the series too. Did anyone else cry when Harry was walking through the forest with his mother, father, Lupin and Sirius? I taped the interview with JK and watched it once I finished reading the book. She commented on how she couldn't kill Hagrid as she wanted him to walk out of the woods carrying Harry.

I love Alan Rickman and have seen a good portion of his work. I thought he was perfectly cast as Snape. I loved him in Robin Hood [1991] too. Some of my other favorites; Sense and Sensibility [1995] and Truly, Madly, Deeply [1991]. I saw that he will be in the movie version of Sweeny Todd too. Ioved the musical and am interested to see how Tim Burton directs it. How can you miss with Johnny Depp, Alan Rickman and Helena Bonham Carter!