sistermagpie | Deathly Hallows

I feel weird writing this post, because I don't really feel like posting, yet it seems like I should, and then I think--what, do you imagine the public is waiting on pins and needles for your words? Get over yourself!:-D

Anyway, I didn't much like it. Perhaps my feelings will change, but stop here if you don’t want to read any negative stuff. I don't have any rants prepared or anything or want to harsh anybody's buzz. (But misery also loves company!) I was talking to someone who's asked me what I needed from the book, what I wanted to happen or what would have made me satisfied, and the truth is, I don't have an answer. I don't have a list of prescriptive criticism, or think things were done badly, or should have been done a different way.

Well, except one little thing, which couldn't be helped. When that white doe showed up I never doubted for a second it was Snape's Lily!Patronus (cause she's a lady!James!). We'd seen Arthur's and Kingsley's Patronuses talk, and oh, how I wanted that beautiful sparkly stag to come up to Harry and tell him to get this Quest going already in Snape's sarcastic voice.

I've never loved these books the way some do--which should not be taken as a criticism of people who do. I just mean that I know there are people who re-read the books over and over as comfort, and that's not something I ever did. I didn't ever want to re-read to spend time with these people or in this world. There are other books I do feel that way about, books that other people find meh. Basically, I felt like JKR was writing a story of good and evil, and life and death, that resonated with her and satisfied her, and felt like a triumph for her--just not me. So I was a bit left out of the story, objectively even seeing characters doing good, brave things, and just not sharing much in the emotions. More than once I felt like I was seeing more story outline/structure than story so that it seemed very contrived (a couple of times Harry himself seemed to admit it) and made it feel like nothing was building to anything.

What it mostly made me do is go over all the ways I was reading it wrong, making my issues more central than the author really considered them. I don't think I was ever so off as, say, a Harmonian banking on the Hippogriff o'love or anything like that, and some things that happened I did predict (Snape/Lily, obviously, and DDM!Snape). But in general I think I was reading Rowling a bit too much like a Tolkien fan, and maybe too much as a Jungian (not that I'm any expert on Jung, but I was reading from my own idea of his stuff). And I think when JKR said that she was Christian and if she talked about her faith we'd know the ending, I immediately began interrogating from the *wrong* Christian perspective and got that wrong too.

Contrary to what some may have thought at times-or not-I don't hate the good guys. Still don't hate them, just still would not want to spend time with them or re-read the books to spend time with them. The characters I liked the most I think less of now or am just kind of confused by, which is unfortunate. I find Harry affectionately naming his child Albus Severus downright creepy--but that wasn't the first time in the book where that kind of thing happened.

Not sure what I predict fanfic-wise. I wonder if people might not start writing some interesting stuff. I did at one point think how I wanted to take a favorite character and put him in a different story.

Oh, also I've been dreading the epilogue for years, because I've always hated epilogues. Even when I was too young to know the name for them I hated them. Some books I guess can make a case for them being appropriate. HP is really not one of them that I can see. There was no reason I could see for needing to see these people married with children. The one good thing I read about it was after it was leaked, before I read it, and I read a comment where someone said the epilogue read like any cliché H/G fic...or any cliché post-war H/D fic.;-)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Also in these times of mistrust in religion to show Slytherin house in a light where nearly all aren’t intent on evil, when clearly Salazar Slytherin would be identified with as being of Middle Eastern persuasion and at the time that his house was set up would have been a Saracen is not thought through well enough, she needed a gentle prod from a good beta. She also can’t have it both ways; Regulus could not have been a good if no one good comes from the house of Slytherin. But just by the law of averages there had to be some who went into Slytherin house who was not bad.

In several incidents JK negates her messages from the other books with regard to such things a choice, inclusively and not judging people on anything but the facts. In Kreacher’s Tale we have one of the worst examples where she delivers a sermon cloaked in Hermione’s garb not only has she stopped being the objective observer but she offers no solution, as Hermione launches into a crass discourse on slavery in which she denies those who she wishes to free the right to chose to be bad and before someone jumps on me I do not condone slavery but nor do I simplify it as crassly as it is done here.

In all this is JK updating Lewis, not Tolkien because Tolkien had a tighter rein on his work; JK has become sloppy in hers’.

I have so many thoughts running through my head, but this is your journal and I have hogged enough of it. So I Just wanted to say I have to agree with you the book has left me wondering, what happened to the books I have been reading and could someone please come back and finish those because this is a poly juice potion soaked book, that should go by the title of Harry Potter and the Bleeding Obvious Ending.

Thanks for posting! I like that you mentioned something that hadn't been, but has always been a bit obvious...the way Salazar Slytherin sounds so obviously foreign compared to the more obviously Anglo-Saxon names of the others. Why is that? After OotP I did a post about how the Slytherins were beginning to sound like Jewish stereotypes--by which I didn't mean they were supposed to be standing in for Jews at all, just that the collection of traits that made up the fictional villainous Jew seemed like the same ones that went into Slytherins. And ultimately I felt the same way at the end of the book, as if Slytherins were the ones who weren't Christians or something, so might be capable of earthly loves and obsessions but couldn't share in the real bounty that everyone else did.

the way Salazar Slytherin sounds so obviously foreign compared to the more obviously Anglo-Saxon names of the others. Why is that?

I had at first thought it was simply a visual symbolism Slytherin would be seen as East, Ravenclaw North, Hufflepuff South and Gryffindor West and there house colours seemed to mirror this, cool blue of the North for Ravenclaw making them masters of the mind. The bright sunny yellow of the Southern sun bringing the growth and warmth. The green and silver of the rising sun as it ascends from the sea on the East cost of Britain aligned with the rising ambition of the house for Slytherin and the scarlet and gold of the fiery setting sun in the West for Gryffindor, but then I thought I had it wrong and dropped the idea.

But I always thought Salazar was a Saracen because of the when you look at the history of their time in Britain, the Saracens that came here sometimes as prisoner, more often then not as body guards for Patrons. Went on to do a great deal to improve society and life in here. Certainly all the medical and herbal knowledge came from the Saracens, but they were anti-intermarriage for the very same reasons as the Jews but they would allow marriages that made powerful alliances. They were more then capable of fighting their corner but they were equally subjected to a reverse form of prejudice, which is exactly what the purebloods are subjected to in this story. After all for one an egalitarian society to evolve in which all our equal, you have to suppress someone else and thus you become and unequal society again, with the former oppressors become the oppressed.

She equally painted Slytherin as mad, Bellatrix had to be mad, Mrs Black had to be mad and then martyrs to the cause, Regulus, all how Christians see Muslims and that is just far to religious for my taste, even though I had a feeling this was what we would get.

Wow, the idea of Slytherin being "foreign" never occurred to me before! I always equated it with "slither," which I'm sure is deliberate on JKR's part, and that has quite an Anglo-Saxon sound. In fact, I just looked it up:

[Middle English slethren, variant of sliddren, from Old English slidrian, frequentative of slidan, to slide.] (http://www.yourdictionary.com/ahd/s/s0478200.html)

Gryffindor, on the other hand, has a French ring to me: griffon d'or. So one could make a case for that being the "foreign" house, I suppose!

Actually, I meant the Salazar part of his name more than the Slytherin part. Godric, Rowena and Helga all sound more Anglo-Saxon to me while Salazar sounds Eastern.

Oh, I see what you mean. I guess I didn't put too much weight on the "Salazar" part because wizards, especially purebloods, seem to have a history of choosing non-Anglo-Saxon names for their children. But you definitely have a point about how readers might see it, even on a subconscious level.

I felt the same way at the end of the book, as if Slytherins were the ones who weren't Christians or something, so might be capable of earthly loves and obsessions but couldn't share in the real bounty that everyone else did.

I thought it was hysterical that JKR said in an interview once how much she hated the end of Narnia and the 'problem os Susan' when it's basically a recreation (only worse, since it's a quarter of the world rather than one person) of that.

(And even funnier, she said she didn't like it because it was anti-female sexuality, when obviously her books keep sexuality fairly limited as a whole - you're allowed to kiss one or two other people, then you marry asap - but especially for women, who don't seem to get to enjoy sex on the same level as guys, who are just sort of acknowledged as needing to be the classic dominant male. Hermione can make out with Krum and Ginny with Dean or Michael, but you never get the sense that they're doing this because they want to explore their sexualities - they're doing it to attract the sexual attentions of other guys because their world doesn't work in such a way that they can be sexually aggressive themselves and say 'Hey, Harry, want to go out with me?' or whatever.
And obviously, there are these constant stereotypes of girls who seem like they might be interested in boys but not on a serious 'I selected him as my soulmate in grade school' level, as well as ones who chase boys rather than allow boys to chase them - the Veela, Lavender, Parvati, Cho, the nameless girls who follow around Harry, Cedric and Krum. I mean, Susan being the one who wants to stay at the silliest stage in life and is only interested in lipsticks, nylons and invitations is pretty much a Lavender or Pansy, neither of whom do much better in Rowling's world than Lewises.)

Deathly Hallows

Re: Big confused post, it has to be I am sorry for Snape!

Re: Big confused post, it has to be I am sorry for Snape!

Re: Big confused post, it has to be I am sorry for Snape!

Slytherin Etymology?

Re: Slytherin Etymology?

Re: Slytherin Etymology?

Re: Big confused post, it has to be I am sorry for Snape!