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
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.
No comments:
Post a Comment