Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows discussion thread (SPOILERS)

[jjshabado]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I know that there was some discussion of parsel tongue being used by Ron in this book...on a reread we see that harry used parseltongue to open up the locket. That means it probably would have been pretty fresh in Rons mind as to how he remembered it when back at Hogwarts.

[/ QUOTE ]

Harry using parseltongue was months before Ron used it. Its definitely a pretty big stretch. Not that I care it was convenient for the story.

[/ QUOTE ]

Eh not really...if you heard someone say one word in another language, more than likely you will remember the jist of that word. Thats why it took Ron several times to get an exact word.

[/ QUOTE ]

More than likely you wouldn't. Especially in a language that is completely different from anything he knows.

[GBP04]

One thing that didn't make sense was the Polyjuice 7 Harry Potters seen. Why didn't they have harry fly with his cloak on... isn't that much more safe?

[kevkev60614]

Just caught up and wanted to add some thoughts...

For the first time in the series I was happy with what happened in the book but a little disappointed in the book itself. I didn't think it was as well written as its predecessors; the timing of the writing felt unrefined and goofy in parts, like the editor should've taken a couple more read-throughs. Occasionally in the first half of a paragraph we'd be reading about something mundane and then mid-paragraph something totally out of the blue would happen. Out of the blue things are bound to happen, but they should get their own paragraph. That's pretty much the definition of paragraph. I found myself stopping and going "Wait, what? WTF?" and then having to reread a few paragraphs not because the event was so unexpected but because of the timing of the writing, if that makes sense. Like if you asked me for my phone number and I gave you the first two numbers and then the last five in a rush. Did anyone else experience that?

I pretty much intentionally overlook holes in the plot. I had thought of some of the ones described in this thread but refused to let them bother me. A couple things really did bother me though. For instance I don't care what kind of mood he was in, I couldn't believe that Harry was stupid enough to use Voldy's name out loud after Ron's warning. That was insanely idiotic, and I really didn't think it was believable that Harry would do that.

I thought it was kind of cool that the act of saving Draco ended up saving his life. I suppose Harry could've let him die and then just lied to Narcissa, but I thought JKR may be trying to making a point here.

I wish JKR had broken a mold and made the epilogue three chapters long. I think it takes more than a few pages to get closure on seven full novels. At the very least we should've gotten closure on the deaths in the Hogwarts battle. It would've been as easy as setting the scene with the same characters in the same time at a war memorial or the graveyard where Harry's parents are laid to rest. Last couple of lines could've been "The scar hadn't hurt in 19 years" so JKR made clear that Voldy was long gone and then "Let's get going, kids, your first day at Hogwarts is tomorrow."

Overall, though, I'll remember it as a great book because of the contents. Some of the scenes were really moving: Hermione's torture, Mrs. Weasley defending Ginny against Bellatrix, and of course Harry's march to doom spring to mind. Should be one helluva movie, too.

EDIT: Something I forgot to add. During the battle between Harry and Snape at the end of HBP Snape says something like "Your spells will never get through until you've learned to close your mouth and your mind." I really thought at that point that a big chunk of DH would be dedicated to Harry learning to do just that and become a badass dueler. Kind of disappointed.

[Wynton]

One other thing. Much of the book obviously depended on the idea that Harry could see into Vold's mind, albeit somewhat involuntarily.

Last I recalled about this issue (perhaps in book 5), Vold seemed to be able to control what Harry saw. And he certainly was aware of what Harry saw.

Did there come a time in any book when we were explicitly told that Harry had gained more control about what he could see, or gained the ability to stop Vold from seeing into his own mind? Or are we supposed to assume that Vold simply decided not to make any effort about this mental connection, one way or the other?

Or was Vold under the false impression that Harry only saw things that he chose to let him see?

[Jazzy3113]

I think that in this thread whenever a plothole is brought up there have been some solid arguements proving that it is not really a plothole, so I do not think one has to "overlook" any mistakes. Harry is only 17 in this book and was getting very frustrated and blurted out Vold's name accidently. It is not that far fetched.

As for the connection with Vold's mind. I immediately thought that this was a too convienent way for Harry to access information. But if you go back and read the moments when he is able to access Vold's mind, I think a few things are happening. One harry gets better at Occulemency throughout the book. When there is fear or something at the forefront of his mind he has a hard tim reading Vold's thoughts. At the end of the book he is able to do Occulemcy. He tried for a long time to see into Vold's mind when he had guard duty at the tent and could not. He would only get flashes of insight into Vold's mind when Vold was very angry or happy and lost control of his emotions.
It may be strectching things but it seemed that Vold was vulnerable to harry only when he himself got some mad he lost control. Also, DD states that because they have such a close bond, same blood, harry is a freakin horcrux, etc., that the connection between them would go stronger and stronger.
I agree also that this has the potential for becoming a great movie. I hope the next movies are like the last 10 mins of OotP.

[Jazzy3113]

Why was it so important that Voldemort be the one to kill harry? Why couldnt, for example, DD kill harry one time to kill the horcrux part of him?

[CocoaKrispies]

[ QUOTE ]
Why was it so important that Voldemort be the one to kill harry? Why couldnt, for example, DD kill harry one time to kill the horcrux part of him?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe DD's theory was that if Voldemort killed Harry, he would just kill his part of the soul, and the Blood that they shared would protect (resurrect?) Harry, like it did in the forest. If someone else killed him, I don't think that he'd come back.

[Wynton]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why was it so important that Voldemort be the one to kill harry? Why couldnt, for example, DD kill harry one time to kill the horcrux part of him?

[/ QUOTE ]

I believe DD's theory was that if Voldemort killed Harry, he would just kill his part of the soul, and the Blood that they shared would protect (resurrect?) Harry, like it did in the forest. If someone else killed him, I don't think that he'd come back.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't believe this is it. DD was surprised when Harry survived. And when he's telling Snape the entire plan, he certainly doesn't suggest that Harry will survive.

Anyway, aside from the obvious dramatic problems of having a "good guy" like DD kill Harry, you can rationalize it away on the idea that DD would have put off having Harry die as long as possible, just in case he figured out some alternative or simply to grant Harry as long a life as he could have. Or maybe DD thought Harry was a necessary tool for resisting Vold and getting the other horcruxes.

[Jazzy3113]

Also, when harry comes to after the kings cross scene, Vold is lying on the floor like he is knocked out. Is it b/c a piece of him died?

[Dynasty]

Steven King has been a big Potter fan for a while. Here's an interesting article by him about the series.

Steven King Article