Sin City

I thought it was pretty good. I had no idea what was going on until about 2/3 the way through...so much jumping around and character overlap...having never read the comics may have set me back a bit...but I expect I would like it more the second time around since I won't be struggling to keep up with the plot. I was actually thinking about buying it. Maybe I should and I can use it to seduce you, Bert.

Harry Potter

I think it's interesting that you all assume Harry is going to survive his encounter with Voldemort and come out whole.

Once more on Potter....

Well said Nick. You make sense regarding Harry/Luke not defeating Voldemort/Emperor with strength but something else, and in order to really defeat the embodiment of "evil" it would certainly take something besides or instead of strength (like the mercy I somewhat jokingly referred to). Think of shitty action movies where the good guy wins by killing everyone else but is still good because he is the one the camera is focused on. I just don't get the sense Harry can survive a fight with Voldemort long enough to pull out a goodness/love trump card.

I thought about one more slight disappointment about books 1-6. I don't feel like the table is set for a true showdown, like when the #1 and #2 football teams in the country square off for a championship game. Remember when Nebraska got into the BCS title game instead of Oregon? Everyone knew Nebraska wasn't that great and would be crushed, which they were. I had hoped to close book 6 and say "Awwwww shit! It's on now!" Voldemort goes in to the Rose Bowl as wire-to-wire #1 and Harry is...#19. On the other hand, it is pretty cool when an underdog dethrones a heavily favored champ ("miracle on ice," Oklahoma beating FSU...or Ohio State v. Miami in 2002...remember how much better Miami was...OSU didn't have a chance...not enough speed...and that Kellen Winslow...dang). I just feel strangely stuck in some limbo between these two possibilities, and I can't really explain why.

Nick, I, for one, love (most) long posts, but could you break up some paragraphs? My crappy eyes keep getting lost in the middle.

Alas...

Law homework prevents me from attempting a decent commentary on Harry Potter. Perhaps I shall get some time soon and make up for my first.

Sin City

It's been a while since this movie came out, but I wondered if anyone saw it and had any thoughts.

Surprisingly, I liked it, and upon a second viewing I liked it even more.

Thanks E-money

Eric has ably pointed out Potter flaw's which were much less formed in my mind as evidenced by my weak post Nick jumped on and flogged. It's good to see that you still derive some malicious pleasure at my expense.

Nonetheless, Nick, I think I agree that it will be more of a suprise if Book 7 does not satisfy. Glad you are enjoying the Helprin. It would do you all good to try some out. I highly recommend Memiors from Antproof Case and Soldier of the Great War.

Moog dies

The pioneer of progressive rock's signature sound has died.

Somewhere, Keith Emerson and Rick Wakeman are playing somber electronic dirges to ease Robert Moog from the shores of this life. Backwards and upside down.

Harry Potter the Hero

Eric takes a hard swing at the series’ namesake protagonist, and while I don’t want to shoulder the task of rehabilitating Harry Potter as hero, I just feel like pouring more words onto this blog, as that seems to get John’s goat.

First, let me say that to a large extent I agree with Eric. Harry Potter hasn’t yet reached the stature of any of our more well-known titular heroes. But to be fair, his understanding of the prophecy and his fate has been evolving over the course of many books, and while I’m not sure when he knew that he would be facing Voldemort with the fate of the world on the line (book 4 or 5, I suppose… sometime after Voldemort became embodied again) he has only just at the end of Book 6 come to terms with the idea that he must face Voldemort. So let’s be fair to the kid, and wipe the slate clean of any previous slackings—if he spends his time in Book 7 guzzling Butterbeer and playing Quidditch I’ll jump on the E-train line of thought, but let’s at least give him the chance to buckle down now that he knows what’s at stake.

Yes, in a world full of strange and fantastical things, Harry is kind of a lackluster character. At times Ron and Hermione (and other members of the supporting cast) are much more interesting, and Harry is merely the spoke of the wheel around which they all revolve. By comparison, his father seems a much more engaging character—a rougish, swashbuckling wizard, perhaps (I imagine James Potter rendered in film or on stage by… wait for it… Timothy Dalton!). If I can make the following point without reverting to psychoanalysis, I’ll win myself a cookie: Harry is a flat protagonist because he serves as the vessel on which the multitudes of readers who are children project themselves. A child reading this book has the nearly-blank slate of Harry to exist in a marvelous world of wizardry, to be chosen for the sports team at the most important position, to inherit a ton of money, to get attention and have stalwart friends. As adults (or… nearly so) we (the posters to this blog) are suitably disappointed by this rendering. It could be that in her construction of Harry, Rowling has been too accurate to the model of the modern teenager, attributing Harry with few worthwhile traits to aspire to.

Growing up without his parents (and then learning of their murderer) should have been a soul-forging type of experience of Harry, and it really hasn’t been. He’s not driven by revenge. I still maintain that Harry’s heroism has and will stem from the same vein as Frodo’s—noble spirit, bravery, and perseverance. It became clear to me in Book 6 that Harry, if not exactly a hero himself, is the anti-Voldemort, in the sense that both came from similar beginnings (no parents, lots of raw talent) and from there diverged along wildly different moral paths. But Lt. Columbo Harry is not. The various mysteries that speckle each book are never solved in time by Harry.

I think its silly toss stones at Harry for being a mediocre wizard—or rather, for not being as accomplished a wizard as you all would like him to be. That characterization is unfair. Harry is consistently right behind Hermione (sometimes far behind… but still ahead of most of the other students) in his studies. In a Hogwart’s ranking, I challenge you to name a student more accomplished than Harry other than Hermione.

I wonder why it is so important that Harry be a very powerful wizard—other power wizards have been killed by Voldemort before. I think it’s pretty obvious that Voldemort won’t be beaten by tossing around a few curses or attacks spells here or there. Luke wasn’t going to beat the Emperor—it took something else. Likewise Harry won’t be defeating Voldemort by use of his wand alone. Eric’s analogy is fun but overly simplistic—it implies that there is a singular method to achieving the desired end (i.e. throwing strikes, Harry’s training in Book 6 was to understand Voldemort and his origins, and it’s a lesson that Dumbledore saw as especially important, more important even than learning curses and Defense Against the Dark Arts.

For those who are upset that Harry’s not the greatest role model for children, I sympathize. But if you’re fretting because he’s a so-so wizard and seems at this stage incapable of realistically defeating Voldemort, then might I humbly suggest that you’re getting ahead of yourselves?

In Revenge of the Sith, George Lucas plainly did not deliver the goods, even though many of us had held out hope after the dismal Ep. 1 & 2. There are many more reasons to expect that Harry Potter 7 will turn out good—the real surprise would be if it falls flat and does not satisfy.

I really liked the book as well. Sadly, I was fooled by Snape’s deception and was shocked by his dastardly deed. You all make good points about his remaining ambiguous.

Though I enjoyed reading it and can’t wait for the next one, I have a major reservation about the series which only became more pronounced after this installment. Harry Potter is a lousy protagonist. He’s a swell kid who can readily summon a patronus...and that’s about it. He is not a compelling hero at all and doesn’t deserve to have his name on the front of seven books. Here’s why.

A hero (it seems to me—this isn’t intentionally based on any critical framework) needs to have some exceptional quality to earn his/her hero/heroine status. It can be strength, courage, intelligence, perseverance, maybe even luck to some extent, but it has to be some advantageous quality that sets him apart from his peers and adversaries. I will sort these into special skills/abilities, character traits, and moral qualities. Harry just isn’t exceptional enough in any category to be a good hero.

First, Harry is a good wizard, but not a great one by a long shot. He has a reputation for greatness at defense against the dark arts, which is based largely on the aforementioned and woefully overworked patronus charm. The "love" thing is retarded and the end of book one sucked, in my opinion. He is totally inept at occlumency, a skill which would be indispensable in the struggle against Voldemort. His OWL scores were above average, but not even good enough to become an auror, much less the title “chosen one.” He is deplorably mediocre at potions, which seems to be one of the most important subjects for a wizard. He does have unusual skill as a quiddich seeker, which, in conjunction with $1.09, will get him a cup of coffee in the war against Voldemort. He has come up with some clever solutions to problems (jamming the tooth in Tom Riddle’s book, for example), but more often he relies on someone else’s thinking and advice.

Strength or skill aren’t the only ways to be a hero, though. When other heroes have lack some applicable skill, they often make up for it with a character attribute, such as perseverance or work ethic. Harry is a lazy piece of crap. While this book shouldn't be a tract on the importance of doing your homework, you guys are too hard on Bert. Not only is Harry not a model student, he is inexplicably careless. He knows his past and throughout the series has at least some idea about the showdown in his future, yet this fails to motivate him in an meaningful way, which would be to work harder...not because it's the "right" thing to do, but because he and everyone else he loves will be killed if he doesn't. In book after book he would rather whack off with Ron and roll his eyes at Hermione than, say, figure out what the next Triwizard clue means before the day of the trial (and studying for OWLs doesn’t count—even the most lazy-ass college students get religion during finals week and cram). I can’t speak for you guys, but if I knew the fate of the world depended on my ability to strike out Barry Bonds sometime during the 2007 season, I’d be spending every waking moment out back pitching at my tire swing. If I were lucky enough to be attending a pitching boarding school where Nolan Ryan and Roger Clemens were my teachers, there’d really be no reason for me to not hone my skills to perfection. But Harry, who goes to such a school and has a work-horse ace in his dorm to work out with (Hermione), is content to half-ass his way through most classes (oh, but he really loves defense against the dark arts, the little dear) and stew with immature, unfocused anger (“Oooh, that damn Voldemort!”). A real hero who was a better-than-average wizard with a prophesy might actually study potions and charms harder on the off chance Voldemort doesn’t appear as a dementor in the last book.

Finally, a hero can win the job with some outstanding moral attributes. I give him credit for taking Luna to the party, but he blew her off constantly in book 4. Aside from being a nice boy, Harry fails on this count as well. The laziness outlined above is a moral taint, but he doesn’t even always take the high road: he spies on his enemies and even tries to use an unforgivable curse (which fails laughably) at the end of book 6. If his stupid "love" thing is to be meaningful, it would have to be something like mercy or Christ-like loving his enemy (someone else rightly noted how he felt for young Snape and Tom Riddle). But to have mercy, one must have power over another. For example, when Luke is about to kill Vader, he casts his lightsaber away and realizes his victory over evil. It is impossible for me to conceive Harry holding Voldemort's (or anyone else's) life in his hands because he is such an average wizard. It would be more likely to have Harry saying to Voldemort, who is standing with his boot on Harry's bleeding neck, "Aha! I've got you right where I want you. I won't kill you because it would be wrong!"

Luke Skywalker had the destiny thing going, but he was exceptionally gifted with the force. Bilbo Baggins was honest and clever. Frodo was pure hearted and brave. Bruce Wayne trained for years to become Batman. Neo (heaven forgive me for using a Matrix reference) was a savant at manipulating the program. Paul Atredies had the strategic cunning to get in with the Fremen. But what does Harry Potter have? He is like Forrest Gump: always in the right place at the right time. Harry’s victories are more often the results of someone else (Hermione, Dumbledore, winning the Triwizard tournament because bad guys are pulling strings) or dumb luck (getting Snape’s potions book and winning the felix felicis, receiving invisibility cloaks and ultra fast brooms from mysterious benefactors, priori incantatem, getting the marauder’s map from the Weasleys). Even in this last book, what did Harry actually do? Oh, right, he followed instructions and kept giving Dumbledore goblets of green potion. He couldn’t fight off the zombies and he didn’t even remember to pick up the friggin’ locket after the potion was gone.

After this book, it is clear Harry is only ¾ the wizard Hermione is (witch...whatever), 1/100th the wizard Snape is, and 1/1000 the wizard Dumbledore was. So, now that he’s dropping out of school (!), what is he going to do when he has to fight Snape and Voldemort? I’ll tell you what. He’ll play with himself for 100 pages, find some gadget under a park bench that happens to be a horcrux-melting talisman, kill Voldemort, be honored with a parade, and become the new defense against the dark arts teacher at Hogwart’s on the strength of his ability to use the expelliarmus spell.

Finally, you guys are all wrong about one thing. The book is totally anti-Christian. In chapter 16, Harry confronts the propagandist Minister of Magic for lying to the public about the War on Voldemortian Terror and imprisoning innocent people without due process. Clearly, this is thinly-veiled anti-Bush slander, which can be shown to be anti-Christian by the following syllogism:

1. Bush (W), the choice of believers and voters with morals, consults directly with Christ (C), who gives divine authorization for whatever the administration does.
2. The novel Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (H) opposes the administration’s policies.
3. To oppose the administration’s policies is to oppose Christ himself.
4. Therefore, the novel opposes Christ and is thus anti-Christian.

The argument can be symbolically rendered thus:

1. C ) W
2. H ) ~W
3. ~W ) ~C (corollary of 1)
.: 4. H ) ~C (2, 3 h.s.)
Q. E. D.


Other than that, it’s all good. For the record, I rank them in the following ascending order: 5, 1, 2, 6, 4, 3.

Re: Mr. Governer

Whoa, I support ANYBODY named Grendel. F-ing awesome. Rage against the machine brother.

Octopus

I am not talking about some rinky dink zoo Octopus. Obviously, between a normal sized shark and octopus, a shark is much scarier. However, a giant octopus would be the most scarcy thing imaginable, with giant, numerous suckers, 8 long and powerful tentatcles, a fierce and powerful beak, the ability to dispense large amounts of ink, and a just plain fearful appearence. No contest.

Mr. Governor

Governor Taft pleaded no contest to criminal misdemeanor charges for failing to report various golf outings and gifts over the course of the last several years. He is, of course, the first Ohio governor ever indicted on criminal charges while in office. His former Cheif of Staff, Brian Hicks, has also been indicted on similar charges. Columbus is just a mess with the coin and MDL scandals, Taft's problems, and seeming GOP indifference, largely. It is difficult to gauge just how bad this will play with the electorate. I would be very concerned, save the fact that the Ohio Dems are disorganized and don't have a lot of money. That said, nobody is going to vote GOP if they think they are electing a criminal. Some of the Republican brass supports defending Taft vigorously with the reasoning that if Taft goes down, everybody goes down. Others favor isolating Taft to perform a kind of damage control.

Hard to say what the right thing to do for a Republican legislator is at this point. Some statewide candidates have come out and called for his resignation, others are mum. From what I know at this point, I don't see why Taft should not finish out his term. He was duly elected and his missteps don't seem to match up with the Ohio Constitution's requirements for impeachment. I don't really like impeachment as a rule, althought I did favor it for President Clinton (barely). I did not support the idea of a recall, as in California however.

The real issue, I think, is how this will affect the '06 races. Currently the Republicans control all 5 statewide offices and have a 22-11 majority in the Senate and a 61-38 majority in the House. Based on the current makeup of the Legislature and the way the districts are apportioned, I see it as extremely unlikely that the Legislature would overturn in either Chamber. The real danger is in the statewide offices. Ted Strickland, now a US rep from Southeast Ohio, is a serious threat to take the Governor's office. He is pro-gun, leans conservative on other things, and has been able to raise funds so far. The primary is his to lose at this point. From my point of view, the only viable candidate that the Republicans have is J. Kenneth Blackwell. He is well ahead of Petro and Montgomery in the polls, and has been able to raise a significant amount of money, always his bugaboo. (although a lot of it has come from out of state). Additionally, Blackwell has gotten a Tax and Expenditure Limitation Amendment on the ballot for Nov. '06, hoping to pull in some fiscal conservatives. Blackwell is anti-Establishment and has a reputation as a maverick. This will help him avoid the Columbus scandals and would prevent conservative votes from bolting to Strickland if Montgomery or Petro were the nominee. That is my personal view, others may disagree. Blackwell is not popular in Columbus, but it is now clear to everyone chances are he will be the nominee. No man can say how things will go, but a Blackwell-Strickland race will be fierce.

The second most important race is Attorney General. Republicans vying for the spot are State Senator Tim Grendell, and most likely, Franklin County Prosecutor Ron O'Brien. Shameless plug here for clearly the best candidate. Senator Grendell is running on his abolition of the proposed parking fee in state parks, his work to kill E-Check, and his eminent domain work in light of Kelo. He has introduced Senate Bill 167 to put a mortorium on all eminent domain takings with the intention of transfer to a private works or company until December 31, 06 in order to give the Legislature time to develop a reasoned, measured response to the Kelo problem. Ron O'Brien will be responsible for any future prosecution of the Governor or any other officials, that is part of his campaign strategy to be sure should any more scandal or problems come to light. (Which is likely). So far the only annouced Democrat is Jane Campbell's legal counsel, but there is a scad of other possibilities.

As far as the other races go, there are probably a lot of candidates that have not yet announced, and most of them are lesser known. I sense a big shakeup in Columbus, which isn't neccessarily bad. Columbus Republicans have run into a lot of the same problems that DC Republicans have had, and that is they have been in power for over a decade, they spend to much, they tax to much, they are too relaxed. This is partly because not all of the Republican party is conservative, and partly because much of the Columbus Establishment seeks to isolate some conservative, anti-tax types. I

Taft has been an ineffective, detached Governor who loves to tax and spend. However, I am not sure if sufficient conditions exist for him to resign. I fear or believe that more will develop along this line with the various scandals in Columbus as time goes on. We will see.

Bob Taft

Is a real jackhole and should resign and crawl into a deep, wet hole, and never emerge again. Jarrod and everyone else: agree or disagree?

Dear Square,

Sorry--I didn't mean to be harsh. Well, maybe a little bit. But I am sorry. We all know your taste in literature is top-rate, even if I think you're a little off in the thoughts on Harry Potter 6.

Case in point: I'm reading Helprin's Winter's Tale, and it's fantastic. Far and away the best thing on my reading list thus far. Thanks for getting me this book, Bert.

thanks

you guys are harsh. take it easy on me, I was just trying to start the conversation for you.

yours,
the square

WOW...

OK Nick,
Just finished your own book on the Harry Potter books. First, I think she did a good job keeping Snape ambiguous in this book. I don't think we are any closer to knowing where his true allegiance lies (I suspect it is with himself). Yes, he killed Dumbledore (EVIL!), but he was under the binding of the Unbreakable Vow, in which he promised that if Draco for some reason could not fulfill his duties, that Snape would. He does let Harry off in this book when he could have killed him, as well as saving him in other books (Good), but he also says in Book 6 that Harry is the Dark Lord's to kill and that no one is to kill Harry but Voldemort. So, I am not sold one way or another with Snape. I think we will find him to act in his best interest at the time, which is why I like him as the double agent.
As far as adults go, I agree with you somewhat. I think that, in the end, Harry has to fight by himself, or with Ron, Hermoine, Neville, Luna and Ginny along, but I think that the story could be cool with adults fighting as side stories. For example, Lupin and George fighting Greyback or Tonks and Moody fighting side fights with key Death Eaters or Hagrid and Grawp going aginst the giants; things that need to be addressed, but not necessarily by Harry. I definately agree that Harry has to fight Voldemort without adult aid as well as Bert being a square. I would offer Fred and George as prime examples against Bert's stance of "hard work makes a good wizard" being just wrong. They didn't even finish their schooling and they are a pair of fantastic wizards. Even Hermoine comments on how their prank magic is actually briliant and we get the impression that they didn't do a solid day's worth of hard work while they were at Hogwarts (Quidditch aside). I think we've seen constantly throughout the books Harry's having some sort of natural instinct or luck that is, shall we say, enhanced for lack of a better word, by his friends. In the first book, Harry would never have made it to Quirrel if Ron and Hermoine hadn't been there, but he also manages to elude the advances of a possessed, fully trained wizard while being not only a first year student, but having only that year learned that magic existed. In the second book, he gets help from Dumbledore via Fawkes; in the third, Hermoine helps him save Sirius; the fourth Dobby, amongst others, helps him get through the triwizard tourney; the fifth he has Ron, Hermoine, Neville, Luna and Ginny (I think). The sixth ends with Ron and Hermoine vowing to be with him every step of the way. The whole series has Harry eeking out victories using some sort of natural ability combined with timely help from friends and a good deal of luck, not just hard work.
I'm gonna stop now as I don't want Nick to think I am competing with him in some sort of longest post contest. That could only end in hours of sitting here reading his verbose responses.

Can you tell...

...that I've figured out how to post to this blog from work?

Huzzah for circumventing the system!

Squid vs. Octopus vs. Shark

The squid's pretty scary, especially giant ones that can take down whales. But the shark's got that whole "nature's most efficient killer" thing going on. It's commonly pointed out that sharks as a species are ancient, and haven't evolved much in the course of millions of years (I'll let the science people determine if this is the case)--so the shark bears the weight of eons when its pitted against fresher ocean beasts like the squid and the octopus. That tips the scales a bit.

Octopusses (octopi?) aren't scary at all. There was this one at the zoo who would hide in a rocky corner and whenever he came out, squirted ink at his reflection. His name was Marigold.

Re: Harry Potter

Wow, Bert. I disagree with pretty much everything you said on Harry Potter.

First, I think the idea that Snape could still be working against Voldemort carries some water. Dumbledore was notorious for insisting that people follow his instructions—notice his insistence that Harry force him to drink the entire potion at the end of Book 6. I don’t think it makes sense for Dumbledore to have told Snape, “Kill me so that you may further gain Voldemort’s trust,” but rather may have said something to the effect of, “Under no circumstances show your true allegiance until such time as X,” or some such thing. It would have been implicit between the two of them that pact was meant to be kept even to the death (of either Snape or Dumbledore). Keep in mind how many times Snape has been protective of Harry or saved his life since the beginning of the series. Sure, this could have been all a ploy to gain Dumbledore’s trust in order to stage the final coup. But also notice how Snape dealt with Harry at the end: deflecting his attacks and not fighting back. I’m convinced that there’s more to Snape yet than we have been allowed to see. This doesn’t necessarily mean that he’ll turn out good… but the chance is still there.

Secondly, not only is your idea of another adult (or group of adults) aiding Harry just plain wrong, its bad story-telling. Why has Rowling written two long books ending with the deaths of Harry’s major adult guardians: Sirius Black and Dumbledore? It’s obvious. Rowling is removing those adults that still have the power to stand between Harry and Voldemort, setting up the final showdown. Sirius and Dumbledore are gone for the same reason that Gandalf was removed from Frodo—the hero must face the villain (or evil) by himself, or sometimes with the aid of his contemporaries. What good stories do you know of where the hero confronts the villain/evil with his tutor/instructor/guardian at his side? Shea Ohmsford faces the Witch King alone, Luke faces Vader (and then the Emperor) alone, and I’m sure after how many more thousands of pointless pages Rand will face the Dark One alone. This is the design straight out of Joseph Campbell, and it works for a reason: it makes compelling stories.

Sure, it’s going to be lame if Harry defeats Voldemort with “love.” But I know Rowling is aware of this problem, so I’m at ease: remember that Dumbledore cautions Harry to take special note of “love” even as Harry is rolling his eyes. I’m sure Rowling put that line in there because, as a reader, I was rolling my eyes too, and I’m certain Bert was as well. Rowling knows what she’s doing. She won’t allow the series to descend into corniness in the final chapter.

But I’m also certain that as lame as using “love” to beat Voldemort seems to Bert, a simple wizarding duel seems equally lame to me. Clearly, Harry would have no chance here—unless Book 7 were a Rocky-esque wizard-training-every-day borefest and Harry emerged from the montage the best wizard of all time. That wouldn’t be any fun. Imagine the ending to that Book: after exchanging quips, Harry blasts Voldemort with a curse or some such. The end. Sorry, but no thanks.

And… damn, Bert, but you’re a square. “Hard work makes a good wizard”? Hermione not doing it for you? She’s the example of hard work you’re looking for—complete with the necessary consequences of the extremes of that attitude that exhibit themselves in her personality. Harry’s example is not in his hard work, nor his natural ability, but in his noble spirit (or what Dumbledore insists on calling “love,” perhaps—same thing). He does not shun Luna like the other children do. He befriends other good souls Ron (despite his station) and Neville Longbottom (despite his doofusness) and is generous with his inherited fortune. In Book 5 after entering Snape’s memories he shows empathy for him, and in Book 3 refuses to allow Sirius and Remus to kill Peter Pettigrew (i.e. Bilbo’s pity). And, moreover, walking the line of mischief has been an underlying theme for the entire series—Dumbledore himself walks this line just as Harry, Ron, and Hermione do. The previous generation of troublemakers, James Potter, Lupin, Sirius, and Pettigrew, were the same way. Your claims of “laziness and cheating” are unjustified. The one example that could be called cheating that I can think of is Hermione cursing that other kid (I forget his name) so Ron could become Goalkeeper. If you’ve got your panties in a twist because Hermione lets Ron and Harry copy her homework, well, then I’ll say you’re nitpicking, or you have too much faith in the educational power of mindless busywork, and too little respect for the intuitive and sometimes clever ways children find to rid themselves of it as quickly as possible.

Moving on to other things, I didn’t think that Snape as the Half-Blood Prince was disguised particularly well, or at all, even. Let’s see… good at potions… who do we know that’s good at potions? Knows Dark Arts spells? Hmm… Added to this, after every line that mentions Harry wondering who the Prince is, there follows shortly after a seemingly innocuous reference to Snape. Every single time. Rowling is winking in Snape’s direction the entire book.

Looking back on 6, I’m struck by how convincing the creation of Voldemort from the substance of Tom Riddle is. Evil does not rise suddenly from one split second decision (ala Revenge of the Sith) but has a long history leading up to it’s culmination. It started a generation before Riddle was born, and once you mix in some tragedy (his parents) it becomes a very real portrait of a villain. Rowling puts George Lucas to shame.

I really enjoyed the idea of Horcruxes, but I had to wonder—did Rowling have this all in place in her mind when she wrote Book 2? For a series that has held up with remarkable consistency through each installment, I was curious to see if this holds up all the way through.

I’m hoping that Harry’s friends (his contemporaries, not the adults) play a larger role in the last book. Hermione, Ron, Neville, Ginny, even Luna. I was surprised at Draco Malfoy’s reluctance to kill Dumbledore at the end of the book—I think more surprises may be in store for him. I’m sad that it seems that Hogwart’s may play a lesser role in the last book, but leaving it behind might just be a part of growing up.

After some consideration, I have to say I liked 3 and 4 better for the plot twists and action than this one, but I enjoyed this one much more than 5, which I currently hold to be the weakest link in the series.

One last question: Is the Dumbledore in the painting in the headmaster’s office in Hogwart’s the same as the Dumbledore who just died? Or just a moving (and sometimes speaking) copy? In previous books Dumbledore exchanged quips with the other paintings of previous headmasters—can Harry go to the office to have a conversation with him? Seems too easy to me, but I must confess I don’t really understand how that magic works.

Harry Potter

I too was suprised that Snape killed Dumbledore. I thought Snape would turn out to be a good guy. He still could I suppose, but it would be a stretch to say that Dumbledore was telling Snape to kill him because going to die anyway with through Snape's occlumency skills. The only evidence for this may be how he handled Harry when he was running out of the grounds w/Malfoy and the death eaters. Perhaps, Dumlbedore had to die and Snape killed him to gain Voldemort's and the death eater's trust. Doubtful.

I think there has to be another adult character to help Harry. It could be that he has come of age now for the last book, but Harry is lacking in wizarding skills. It would be lame for him to take out the horcruxes and Voldemort with Love. So I think to make it good there must be an adult or group of adults, but there is no adult character left really that the reader has much attachment to. Lupin perhaps. It is a children's book, however, so the child must be heroic. I just don't think it is as good w/Harry wizarding it up himself even w/Hermione and Ron. Hermione seems to be the best wizard at this point.

I thought cheating and laziness on the part of Ron and Harry are bad examples as far as children's books go. Hard work makes a good wizard not Harry's amazing ability to love his dead parents and Sirius.

I was also suprised that the Half-blood prince was Snape. I guess I'm just dumb and should have seen that coming on reflection, but I thought it was Tom Riddle's book. That was a pretty good twist.

So, Snape is super powerful and is really on Harry's side, thus he becomes the guiding adult.

Probably not, but the kid wizard can't do it himself or the book will suck.

Alright...

Bush sucks...republicans are jackholes...boo for christianity. anyone still reading this thing?

Re: Harry Potter

Since I have already discussed the book at length with John, I await everyone else's reactions before I lay out my ideas. There HAVE to be things to say about this book, other than it being fantastic (#2 after GoF).

Harry Potter

Well?????? What the crap people? I wait and wait and wait and what do I get? An octopus post and a short article about the Stones hatin Bush (Japanese Star Wars is always a winner). Cripes!!!!
I thought the book was fab, though the death of Dumbledore was surprising (to me at least - I had that pegged as a mid-book 7 event). I think I was also fairly surprised that Snape was the one who did it - I really thought she was playing up his being a Death Eater, especially with Dumbledore's undying trust. Speaking of which, I thought that was a pretty flimsy pretense for Dumbledore's trust of Snape. Anyways...your thoughts (epecially interested in the horcrux issue)?

Celebrity Silliness

Say it ain't so, Mick.

A new look at Star Wars Episode III: The Backstroke of the West

Episode III, as translated into Chinese. And then back into English. Simply astounding.

Harry Potter

Might be my favorite book thus far. I'm finished as well. Feel free to spoil.

Crazy ending...whew

Octopus

In relation to a species, I can't think of anything more scary than a giant octopus with giant tentacles. Freakish animals they be.

Done...

...I finished a few days ago. Sorry, I forgot to check this thing for a while. I'm ready when you are.

Re: In the meantime...

Question:
By big, are we talking relative for the species or just the same size of each? If relative to the species, then I think I am going to have to go with a giant squid. A giant "colossal squid" to be exact. If these things are big enough to maul sperm whales at a normal size, I think the prospect of a gigantic one is frightening. Especially with the beaks and the hooks.