Jump to content

DRAGONMOUNT

A WHEEL OF TIME COMMUNITY

Harry Potter. Book 7 very weird choices in it


Recommended Posts

Speaking of POV - JKR sometimes switches from POV to POV. Mainly from Harry to Voldy.
But that is explained within the series. Harry has a link to Voldemort, so what we are seeing is Harry in Voldemort's head. Aside from those occasions, we have Dumbledore and McGonagall at the beginning of the first book, the muggle at the beginning of the fourth, and Snape making the Unbreakable Vow at the beginning of the Sixth. That's all that I can think of out of Harry's pov. To do so at the end of the seventh would be inconsistent with what she had written before. So it is a perfectly reasonable choice to remain consistent on the point of povs throughout, rather than ditching it at the end and introducing a lot of them for a very brief period and minimal to no story advancement. It is a perfectly valid stylistic choice. Look at George R.R. Martin. He uses a number of povs, but is quite strict in his introduction of new ones, usually. Aside from prologue and epilogue characters, we tend not to get one shot povs. Martin can and has had events take place off screen - Beric Dondarrion, Robb Stark's campaigns, etc. Rowling was telling Harry's story, primarily, nd the stories of other characters were secondary to that. Quite simply, there was no need for it to be on screen, there was no need for a multi-pov approach to the final battle. Which is not to say that there weren't problems with the last book, because there were. But I don't agree that this was one of them.

 

I think it is one of the problems. She should have kept the story under control in order to avoid this problem with the suddenly dead important characters. I feel that that is one of the weak points. And she could have shown what happened to Remus and Tonks easily. Just shove Harry into the fray for a minute and two. Have Remus shout "Harry, look out!" and then the killing curse would get him.. So, I think she wrote herself into a corner and at the end she couldn't do the story justice. Or?!

 

I still like the general story and there are parts in HP #7 that are really good. Too bad it was a bit of a let-down in the end. I remember reading it the first time thinking it was really good. I guess I read it with the general story in mind. The second time around I read it differently.

 

Back to work

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 77
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

And she could have shown what happened to Remus and Tonks easily. Just shove Harry into the fray for a minute and two. Have Remus shout "Harry, look out!" and then the killing curse would get him.. So, I think she wrote herself into a corner and at the end she couldn't do the story justice. Or?!
Is she could have solved it easily, she didn't write herself into a corner. Rather, she made a choice - to kill them off when Harry didn't see, because people won't always wait until a main character is watching them before they die - that you don't agree with. It's a perfectly valid choice, and while I can see why people might dislike it, I don't have a problem with it, and it is still a perfectly legitimate choice to make.
Link to post
Share on other sites

To regress a little. I claim that JKR is a mediocre writer (not bad but far from brilliant and her prose makes me skim the pages looking for the good parts skipping the pointless crud in between) who stumbled upon one of the greatest/most likeable stories in recent time. If not for her brilliant setup - The Number Three (Harry, Ron, Hermione) - The general story etc etc, she wouldn't have become known at all.

 

Sure, Book 1 and 2 were well crafted childrens books, but then she was the aeroplane that never took off into the more diverse and advanced place called Big Writers Lounge. Crashed and burned where writing technique is concerned compared to heavy hitters such as our RJ and RE Feist.

 

I will maintain my position on her botching the seventh book, she did. Too bad the error in choice on her part was made when she first decided to put 97% of the focus on Harry and 3% on the rest. Bad idea to limit your story telling like that and in my eyes it confirms my belief that she wrote childrens books and stumbled upon the fact that both grown-ups and 10-yeard olds loved her stuff thus launching off (and failed doing so) into adult literature skies.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you just call Raymond E Feist a "heavy hitter" in the prose department?  He writes good stories, but he's nowhere close to the upper echelon from a pure "craft" standpoint

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sure, Book 1 and 2 were well crafted childrens books, but then she was the aeroplane that never took off into the more diverse and advanced place called Big Writers Lounge. Crashed and burned where writing technique is concerned compared to heavy hitters such as our RJ and RE Feist.
Disparaging opinion of Young Adult writing, praise for the writing technique of Raymond Feist. Wow. Just, wow.

 

Too bad the error in choice on her part was made when she first decided to put 97% of the focus on Harry and 3% on the rest.
That's not an error. I fail to see why focusing your story on one person is a bad writing choice. This is because it isn't. The TV series Life on Mars worked very well, and that featured Sam Tyler in practically every scene.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the deaths of the characters was realistic.  If you have an all out war going.  Nobody's going to die gloriously and get to say this one last line before they go and all that kind of stuff.  It's quick, sudden, unwanted, and unexpected.  Death and war aren't great and glorious, and I think she accurately portrayed that. 

 

As to the characters she chose to kill.  It does feel like she drew the names out of a hat... but isn't that also realistic?  Who's invincible?  Who's immune to death?  Noone.  So I feel happy about the way she handled it. 

 

I might could have used a little more closure with a few story points, but all in all I'd say a great ending to a great series. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The Harry Potter saga IS very good. The story is great until she realizes that she has to start focusing on ending it and by ending it she knows her audience is older. The material must fit older readers. The last 3 books are not really suited for young teenagers and to be a bit bold here: I'd say that books 1-4 are early teen novels and books 5-7 are adult oriented. (not too much "boldness" in this statement) ;)

 

Anyway. I say the focus on Harry's POV is unfortunate, still. When the story got all advanced the One Person Focused POV is very limited and sets restrictions on the storyteller - limits the available solutions.

 

R E Feist is very good at his craft, not as good as RJ was perhaps but still up there among the better today. I think.

 

I'll end this post saying: JKR was not up to the task writing an extended and very advanced story. Too many things are wobbly and weak. Among the weakness there are strengths though. She writes wonderful teenage relationship stuff. But the complexity of her tale got the better of her. I think.

 

Must go. Have stuff to do. :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Harry Potter saga IS very good. The story is great until she realizes that she has to start focusing on ending it and by ending it she knows her audience is older.
I think she's known her audience was older for a long time. Especially with the number of adults who read them. I think she was able to handle the increasing maturity of characters and story quite well, albeit not perfectly.

 

Anyway. I say the focus on Harry's POV is unfortunate, still. When the story got all advanced the One Person Focused POV is very limited and sets restrictions on the storyteller - limits the available solutions.
While telling the story from one pov does provide a limit, that's not a bad thing. And a story makes its own demands. It really didn't need povs from Ron, Hermione, Lupin or any of the other members of the supporting cast. Because, when it comes right down to it, the story is not about them, it is about Harry.

 

R E Feist is very good at his craft, not as good as RJ was perhaps but still up there among the better today. I think.
See, you could have mentioned really great writers, like Martin. Instead, you mention Feist, who get tell a good story (and a really awful story sometimes), but is just not in the same league as the true greats.

 

I'll end this post saying: JKR was not up to the task writing an extended and very advanced story.
I disagree. I think she proved she very much was.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think she did an OK job of it. It promised more though. If the POV had been split, lets say 60% Harry and 40% rest, I think JKR would have been able to give the story more depth. Again, I like the story - it is GOOD - but it lacks substance and this I blame, partly anyway, to the limited POV. I also blame the different subplots that never really get any coverage and also the deaths of certain characters (as I have mentioned before :) ). But, she does an OK job of telling the story the way she did. I wanted more, though. ;)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
If the POV had been split, lets say 60% Harry and 40% rest, I think JKR would have been able to give the story more depth.
Depth is not reliant on a number of povs - Book of the New Sun is told exclusively in Severian's pov, and has more depth than Harry Potter could even dream of. But J.K. Rowling is nnot Gene Wolfe. And saying Harry's story should have been told from someone elses pov 40% of the time seems a bit odd to me. It doesn't need others most of the time, any more than the Flashamn Papers need a viewpoint other than Harry Flashman, or Name of the Wind needed viewpoints other than Kvothe when he's telling his story. In fact, it misses the point rather to say it should.
Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that the manner in which those characters' death was presented was dissapointing. It did feel to me like the author was rushing through the events to put an end to the series.

 

Main characters dying isn't a problem for me, I loved it in the Kushiel books (much to my enormous surprise, as I never liked that sort of thing before). But it's the manner in which it is presented that makes the difference in accepting or not, to me.

 

The whole believability of the major fight at the end would be in jeapordy if 'none' of the main characters or side characters had died or been badly wounded. But brushing their death off the way it has been done in some cases was the other extreme in my opinion.

 

The enormity of Snape's double agent role, for instance, was barely touched. You get 6 books of him being shown as the dubious bad ass and then a few pages of 'oh, surprise' and then he's killed. Next.

 

Dobby's death was the only thing that really touched me. While I hate it, that one I think was nicely written.

 

Remus and Fred deserved much better, eventhough I don't mind them being killed.

 

The whole 'let's copy Harry's youth for Remus' kid' thing... I felt was a bit weak.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally thought the book could have been a lot better, you could tell she wanted to put more in there but she had to cut it short. I think she should have made the book into two or three. I thought the seventh book felt very rushed and a lot of things she just kind of threw in there. And could someone please explain to me how in the world Harry ended up with the Elder wand, that confused me to death. I've read that book five times and I still don't get it haha. That was something that felt thrown in there, the way she had Harry get the Elder wand.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the series, but I was expecting a stronger end. Btw, the last battle stunk between Harry and Voldemort : (

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally thought the book could have been a lot better, you could tell she wanted to put more in there but she had to cut it short. I think she should have made the book into two or three. I thought the seventh book felt very rushed and a lot of things she just kind of threw in there. And could someone please explain to me how in the world Harry ended up with the Elder wand, that confused me to death. I've read that book five times and I still don't get it haha. That was something that felt thrown in there, the way she had Harry get the Elder wand.

 

Don't get me wrong, I love the series, but I was expecting a stronger end. Btw, the last battle stunk between Harry and Voldemort : (

I agree with you. The last book wasn't good. Mr Ares will argue that it was and is good. There are plenty of things thrown in there that don't fit or are poorly written. The Elder Wand (and the rest of the Hallows) and I can't get my head around the title of the book either. The Luna Lovegood (might have her last name wrong) story.. and some more.

 

One good part would have to be the "being trapped in the Malfoy Mansion" but not even that came off well.

 

The book feels rushed and incomplete. She just couldn't wrap it up the way the story really deserved to be wrapped up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally thought the book could have been a lot better, you could tell she wanted to put more in there but she had to cut it short.

Why did she "have to" cut it short?
I think she should have made the book into two or three.
I hardly think that's necessary. She should just not have rushed some things so much. After all, Order of the Phoenix was over a hundred pages longer, there was ample space if she felt she needed it. It was not reasons of space or time that left the book as it was, but authorial choice.
And could someone please explain to me how in the world Harry ended up with the Elder wand, that confused me to death. I've read that book five times and I still don't get it haha. That was something that felt thrown in there, the way she had Harry get the Elder wand.
The Deathly Hallows as a whole seemed a bit like a last minute addition. With the Elder Wand, it passes if you defeat the previous holder (something else that felt like a last minute addition, wands changing hands like that). Draco defeated Dumbledore at the end of the sixth book by disarming him, before Snape killed him. As being disarmed wasn't part of the plan, the wand's allegiance transferred to Draco without his (or anyone's) knowledge. Subsequently, Harry defeats and disarms Draco, and thus the Elder Wand passes to him. Voldemort thought the EW had passed to Snape, when he killed Dumbledore, so he killed Snape to gain possession, but the wand had already transferred by that point, as Draco had beaten Dumbledore.

 

The last book wasn't good.
It's certainly a bit uneven, and could have been better.
The Elder Wand (and the rest of the Hallows) and I can't get my head around the title of the book either.
It's the invisibility cloak that bothered me, of the three Hallows. I don't recall there being any mention of them losing their invisibility in time, so the revelation of there being something special about Harry's cloak seemed to come out of nowhere.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for explaining that for me, it made much more sense. I wasn't grasping how Harry had won the allegiance of the Elder wand when Draco didn't even have it in his possession.

 

Why did she "have to" cut it short?

I read it in an interview somewhere, she said that she wanted to include more about what happened to a lot of the characters after the battle, but she just couldn't fit all the information in there... I guess there was just a lot more information or something. That's why she said something about doing an encyclopedia in a couple of different interviews.

 

 

I think she should have made the book into two or three.

I hardly think that's necessary. She should just not have rushed some things so much. After all, Order of the Phoenix was over a hundred pages longer, there was ample space if she felt she needed it. It was not reasons of space or time that left the book as it was, but authorial choice.

I just said that because I enjoyed the series and I didn't want it to end ^.^

Link to post
Share on other sites
I read it in an interview somewhere, she said that she wanted to include more about what happened to a lot of the characters after the battle, but she just couldn't fit all the information in there.
It might be a matter of a huge amount of information, or it might be a matter of her not finding a place for it in the narrative, outside of potted hhistories and infodumping. Like having Harry reminisce at the end, and fortunately have recollections of every minor character from the books. "These days, Lee Jordan was serving hard time in Azkaban for armed robbery, and Dean Thomas worked for the muggle police."

 

I just said that because I enjoyed the series and I didn't want it to end
Ah. I enjoy endings. Works that go on endlessly are less appealing.
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

The first three books were entertaining, but the subsequent books got to have the usual "whitewashing", thats goes on now with anything that become famous. It is clearly evident in the later books, the propaganda, I am sure some shrewd person who is now aware of the worlds biggest crisis will understand what I am talking about.

 

The worst boot-licking propaganda in the history of literature is "Twilight" series. Next comes the later books from harry poter.

 

If you want fact, read this books:

http://www.amazon.com/Death-West-Populations-Immigrant-Civilization/dp/0312285485

 

oh, by the way, I don't live in USA.So there is nothing to be gained by me. I just hate sexual infedility, and promiscuity with a passion. Curdles me inside. God knows why. I believe, western culture is the only culture that can prevent such mindless sex all around. Really quite pathetic.

 

It is Grace and intelligent that separate us from animal, it is grace and creativity that makes life interesting.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

Yes, the four last books felt.. for lack of a better more precise term, controlled. Controlled by something/someone other than the Author. By popular demand, publisher.. who knows. I will not re-read the series again. The complexity JK R aims for feels watered down and confusing. perhaps she should have done more background/character history writing. The movies are different and more entertaining and I will very likely watch them again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

well explained on the elder wand Mr. Aries, i couldn't have done better myself :)

 

 

Sirius

i felt the way she killed him off was rather crappy.  i would have perferred just the AK curse and be done with it.  the only reason the curtain shoudl have been used is if the character were to come back later; like the pergatory scene between DD and Harry.  Sirius had to die though, as did DD and Lupin, also hagrid (as much as i love him) should have aswell.

 

JK said in an interview that HP had to go it alone in the end, with no protectors.  so it made sense to kill them off.  and yes Hagrid is really a protector of Harry in this series, and i believe he's the character that got the reprieve.

 

i loved that it was Bella who killed him though.  the whole Black family history thing, with one of the most wickedest of them killing the only one of the family line not to believe in the "Pure Blood" rubbish.

 

Problems with DH

 

Hedwig -  her death was rather spontaneous, but i guess her use as a character was up.  after ll harry couldn;t really use her for post, and it saved JK the extra line of leaving her in the care of hagrid or the weasleys.  plus it was servering a connection to harry's innocence of the wizarding world, a sort of "full circle" to the first book.  remeber that Hedwin was alway sHarrys connection to the wizarding world over summer break.

 

Madeye - i thought his death was needed, and the way she explained it was rather good.  although logically (if i were voldy) i would have went after hagrid first then madeye.  it disgusts me how she used his eye though.

 

Umbridge - really, she should have left this character with the centors where she belonged.  there was no real justice given to her.  ofcourse, if JK was going for real life, this could be a good example of it.

 

Percy - i agree that i would have rather him die, by a really big faulty Cauldren falling on his big head.....  but atleast he came around to the right way of thinking, i was glad to see amends made there.

 

Scrimourge - not enough was done here...  there could have been alot more added with his charcter and alot more use.

 

Fred - i hated that he died, afterall wasnt taking his ear enough.  but you have to admit that since the weasleys were so close to harry, its surprising only one of them died.

 

Lupin - im sorry, i love the character, but he had to die.  he was the last surviving maurader, and i think fell into the category of "hgarry's protectors"  i do hate that he was "thrown" into the dead pile, but at that point in the story if Harry would have witnessed his death then Harry would have been sidetracked from the ultimate goal of getting to voldy.  he woudl have felt compelled to avenge lupin, sorta like with running after Bella in OoTP.

 

Tonks - was pointless and i think, like most of you, just thrown in there to give birth to the "Teddy-godfather-resemblence-of-harrys-orphaned-story"

 

only one book - it should have been two books.  the battle at hogwarts could have easily been one sort book, about the length of SS or CoS.  that way the ending wouldnt have been rushed and alot more of the plot would have been finished.  the first book would have focused on finding the remaing horcruxes and that entire adventure could have taken a book to do properly.  then from "Malfoy Manor" and on would have been the 2nd book.

 

what i think happened was the resraints she put on herself by selling book rights to hollywood before the saga was even half done.  this not only forced her to shape the direction the story went and to cut potential story lines, but also forced her to push out the books faster.

 

Lucious Malfoy - i leterally detest this character. and though what happened to him was good, it wasn't humilation enough in my opinion.  i wanted Aurthor to off him.

 

Dobby -  i cried.....  more so for this little guy than i did for DD.  i thought his death was rather druel, not the fact that he died...  but a knife in the back.... he diserved more.  btu again, this was a character that needed to kick the bucket, he was one of Harry's protectors, though a self proclaimed one.

 

Kreacher - he was mis-used.  harry could have summoned him at any point and could have used him as well.

 

voldy - the entire book only two encounters between the two of them and only one sappy semi battle.....  as much story that was built between these two charcters, i would have expected atleast 2 battles between the two.  especailly at Malfoy Manor.  infact i don't like how she treated Voldy as a character in the book, especailly in the later "adult" books.  he had the potential to be so much more evil, but she toned him down.  and the last battle was weak, very weak.

 

Hallows - was thrown in to give excuse/explination as to why Harry didn't die.

 

 

but my biggest, most 100% gripe about this book was making harry a flipping horecrux....  omfg, she said she wouldnt, she said he wasn't, but here she made him one anyways.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Without any quotes from the above poster's post (which is a really good post!)...

 

I usually change my mind after having cooled off a bit. Sometimes not by much but still. This has not happened here. ;) The more I think about the last Potter books the more I get the feeling of "corporate literature" - as said above I also believe that She started to write for Hollywood instead for her fans/readers after book 3. 4-5-6-7 are all movie scripts. Shallow weak-in-plot let downs. I didn't envy her as she was writing book 7. How can you live up to all the expectations floating around? How can you do it right?... It turned out she bungled the task. Oh well. I do look forward to seeing the movie!

Link to post
Share on other sites

thanks magnutz.  i'm dort of a HP freak.  i've read the entire series 3 times and listened to the audio books 2 times.  Jim Dale is wounderful :)

 

i used to be part of a sight that nit picked about the series, kinda like the discussion board for WoT.  but seeing that extensiveness of the WoT series, i'm not even goign to being trying to nit pick it.  too many books to shift through for uotes and too little time to do so lmao.  i've even RP'd in the potter world, normally as Voldy and my character Agitha (who is the deamon spawn of Voldy & Bella)  *huggles Aggy and narrowly misses an AK curse*  i do love playing as her 

 

 

and as a fan of the books, i detest the movies, especailly the last one  *glares at hollywood*  but as a glutton for punishment, i will continue to see the last two movies, though only as a matinee.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 years later...

*Bump* Because this thread deserves to be saved. Was about to slide off into Cyber-Oblivion. Also because, almost three years later several relevant questions still haven't been answered. Also because I'm about to reread the series for the first time in a looooong time :)

 

 

Fish

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...