Oatway
The Postless Ones 
What fools these mortals be.
Posts: 0
|
Post by Oatway on Jul 17, 2005 12:53:59 GMT -5
I would, in my own little way, like to discuss the series of phenomena that have been this series, and also the latest book in itself. Have you not read to the end of the latest book (and hopefully through all the others) and are afraid of anything being spoiled, you should leave now.
You're still here... Good. The latest book, in my mind, was by far and away Rowling's best, as I have stated multiple times on this (and another) board. You may or may not agree with me when I say the first three books were mediocre, leaning towards good, and that the next two (four and five) were good. I would like this to be the first area of discussion. What do you think it was (if anything) that Rowling improved? Do you think completely opposite to myself, and think that she has only become worse? Why?
Now, I shall attempt to put down my thoughts on the issue. Rowling started out with a fairly clichéd story, the young protagonist who is in a crappy environment with dead parents finds out he has extraordinary abilities. Her characters all seemed to reflect this sense of a cliché. There was the brainy person, who overachieves, and the best friend who isn't as good in school, but does sound like he'd be more fun to be around. Since then, the characters have evolved away from that; Hermoine is no longer the all-knowing ever-clever young lady. She does, in fact, do some very stupid things; like taking the man-bull to the Christmas party, and cheating for Ron during the tryouts. She also has a foray into the realm of hypocrisy. Ron, true to form, hasn't changed all that much, but in fact, it is that he hasn't changed which has evolved his character. If anything, he is far more dense than he was, at least relative to those around him. And finally, Harry has moved on from the whiny little prat I hated from the last book. He has become much more sure of himself, and is far more mature in his actions and words. Finally, Snape; in my mind, the most interesting character in this latest book. The ending was given away within the first chapter. Snape is a coward, but he is a clever coward. There must have been some reason for Dumbledore to trust Snape as he did, and perchance we shall see this surface in the next installment. Now, from what we have seen of Snape in HP:6 is that he has either directly or indirectly killed anyone Harry has ever loved...
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 17, 2005 14:34:06 GMT -5
You may or may not agree with me when I say the first three books were mediocre, leaning towards good, and that the next two (four and five) were good. I would like this to be the first area of discussion. What do you think it was (if anything) that Rowling improved? Do you think completely opposite to myself, and think that she has only become worse? Why? No, I totally agree. Rowling's gone from an author of total clichés and cop outs with the first three books to a decent-good author with the fourth and fifth, to writing something quite enjoyable with the sixth. I may actually read it a second time, which is not something I do often with books. I'm surprised you didn't mention the three characters who REALLY went from static to dynamic: Draco, Dumbledore and Snape. I'm kinda pissed Dumbledore died, but at the same time I'm glad he did. Snape was honestly the worst character in the book series before now. I think what was holding back my evaluations of Books 4 and 5 before now was that HP seemed to be transitioning badly to the older realm; Draco still wasn't doing anything more than sheering, Snape wasn't REALLY bad, Dumbledore always seemed correct in his evaluations of a person. And the little face off Draco and Dumbledore had was quite nice and unexpected. |
|
|
|
Post by Zuki on Jul 17, 2005 17:23:06 GMT -5
Well, I guess all the spoilers I picked up at anime club yesterday were true. Now I gotta go get the book. Soon.
And it's all your fautl. ^_^
Looks like it's getting harder and harder for me to dislike people to like Draco, if he's accquiring some three-dimensional, rounded edges. Ah well.
Hmm. We've gotten one significant death per book for the last couple years now. Think the trend will continue?
|
|
Oatway
The Postless Ones
What fools these mortals be.
Posts: 0
|
Post by Oatway on Jul 17, 2005 17:50:51 GMT -5
Aye, Draco is more three-dimensional, but I hate whiny little people who crave gratification from their superiors and who can't even finish a job they've sworn to do, and refused help with.
Dumble-y is better as well, I liked how he was proved so incredibly right when he said 'I am a very clever man, but I can still be wrong, which makes my mistakes ever the more huge' or whatever... I'm very glad he died, and I couldn't be happier that the next book is away from the school. Every book seemed to have the plot outline of: Before school (minor incident) ---> at school (build-up) ---> the climax and ending.
Finally, I did touch on Snape. He went from being the completely two-dimensional clichéd piece of atangonist crap to an extremely interesting character.
|
|
|
|
Post by teriden on Jul 18, 2005 0:14:12 GMT -5
Both characters and writing style have grown a lot--the first book is really a children's story, but you could hardly say the same of this one. (Yay for snogging! Er.) Guess the books are growing up as Harry is.
Four horcruxes, a dark lord, and his assorted buddies... that's a lot to finish off in one book. Wonder if Rowling's planning on writing more-- if Harry's not even going to attend Hogwarts next year, there's no real obligation to keep the story bound to seven books...
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 18, 2005 2:39:32 GMT -5
She could just make a really long book. Also, not each horcrux would necessarily be a major goal if R.A.B. found more of them and Potter gets all of them in one swoop.
|
|
|
|
Post by teriden on Jul 18, 2005 4:43:37 GMT -5
Hmm, perhaps, if R.A.B. got the full Hogwarts-artifact horcrux set (and he'd also probably have destroyed them already, wouldn't he?) Though I doubt anyone would object to more books. 10 million copies of book 6 sold in the first 24 hours, it's insane...
On an entirely unrelated note, that whole Tonks 'n Lupin thing at the end made me happy. Yup.
|
|
Oatway
The Postless Ones
What fools these mortals be.
Posts: 0
|
Post by Oatway on Jul 18, 2005 8:32:49 GMT -5
As you said Teri, the books are growing up as Harry is, which would likely lead to more complex and longer books. Honestly though, the next book could very well be Harry destroying horcruxes from the start; they will be away from Hogwarts which means no description of people getting new books in Diagon Alley, no description of classes or Quidditch and no description of lectures or homework. Harry has a very clear mission ahead of him; kill Volde-y and when that's all over, go back and snog Ginny some more. And R.A.B. didn't sound like he was going to be alive much longer, so I doubt he got through all of the horcruxes.
On the aformentioned entirely unrelated note: Where in the hell did the Tonks and Lupin romance come from!? Am I the only one confused on this issue (well, I know of at least one person).
On yet another (and now more) completely unrelated note: who thinks Snape is evil? Could he have been good (thus earning Dumbledore's trust) but just bound by his oath, and afraid of death? What do you think Harry will do to him?
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 18, 2005 11:55:04 GMT -5
It has been suggested that Dumbledore was telling Snape to kill him, the way he was pleading; so that Draco wouldn't, so Draco would find it harder to kill in the future. Or so that Snape wouldn't die; if he really IS good, then he would have told Dumbledore about the Unbreakable Vow. It's a possibility that Snape is still working for the side of good, though not one I'm going to hold my breath on.
Also, am I the only one who thinks R.A.B. is not a person, but two? The 'A' standing for And?
Question: Is Slughorn supposed to represent that Slytherin was good before Voldemort, or simply that Slytherin can be good in general? Because I'm frankly a little sick of Slytherin, you wonder why the Ministry of Magic doesn't just lock them all up and train everyone in Gryffyindor to be Aurors.
|
|
|
|
Post by teriden on Jul 18, 2005 13:47:17 GMT -5
I think the Tonks and Lupin thing was one of those "we're gonna die so let's go elope" things that Ron's parents said happened the last time Voldemort popped up. Yeah, it was kinda random... but it was cute! ^^;
And there *was* something weird about Dumbledore's death, it feels like there may have been more to the Snape thing than there seemed.
I guess Slughorn's supposed to show that not all Slytherins are automatically evil murderers, 'cuz you can seek power-by-any-means through social networking and such, as well. Or maybe Rowling just wanted a Slughorn-like teacher to pop up, and couldn't really fit him in with any other house. Did he remind anyone else of Donald Trump, or am I just weird?
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 18, 2005 13:55:55 GMT -5
Seemed way too nice to be Donald Trump.
Also, I think the Tonks/Lupin thing is exactly what you described. But someone remind me, WHO THE HELL IS TONKS? I've only read all of the books each once, around the time they came out...
|
|
Oatway
The Postless Ones
What fools these mortals be.
Posts: 0
|
Post by Oatway on Jul 18, 2005 14:21:29 GMT -5
Uhhh, Tonks is an Auror from the last book. Used to be really cheerful, and was a completely different character this time around.
And, aye, I agree that there has to be more to Dumble's death. Slughorn does actually seem like a Slytherin to me, he is very piggish, which is representative of a lust (in this case for power), and he certainly doesn't mind getting his nose a little brown now for a little power later.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 18, 2005 14:44:37 GMT -5
Right, but he's a GOOD slytherin instead of an evil one. Was wondering if they existed, really. He's ambitious, but he's still got a sense of right and wrong.
|
|
|
|
Post by AstralFire on Jul 19, 2005 12:43:31 GMT -5
From the other board:
Ditto. The school format was starting to get a little old since it was always:
Harry's life at the Dursleys: suck.
Harry sees the Weasleys! Yay.
Some incident occurs over the summer.
Hogwarts time!
Conclusion wherein the Defense Against Dark Arts teacher is removed in a spectacular fashi-
Hey, wait a second. You think Dumbledore purposely put Snape in the job? He was aware of the curse actually existing.
|
|
Oatway
The Postless Ones
What fools these mortals be.
Posts: 0
|
Post by Oatway on Jul 19, 2005 13:01:25 GMT -5
But Dumbledore trusted Snape, hence he didn't move against him. I think Dumbledore thought Snape wasn't evil, and as he said, since he is so clever, his mistakes are all the larger and more deadly. He was blinded by his habit of seeing the best in people, and it caused his downfall. Now, Snape may still be good, he might just be a coward who killed Dumbledore to save himself, but I hope Snape is evil... |
|
