I'm shocked, shocked that this pod of pedants hasn't yet started this thread.

You know you read it. What did you think?

I've been puttering around on a Potter fanfic forum for this sort of thing, in the main, but...

I thought it was good, but it went by too quickly and two damn years 'til the next.

Let's be honest, Dumbledore had to go, especially since Harry seems to have turned into Movie!Spiderman. So that was no big surprise, and no tears were shed.

I'm not even surprised that it was Snape. My impression as I read was very strongly that he's not the bastion of pure evil that Harry seems to see him as, mind you; I want to see if that's supported when I reread the text next weekend.

Draco as partially redemptive is also not a big surprise. (Yes, I do like the Slytherins. This shouldn't be a shock.)

Um. Harry/Ginny is no surprise at all, it's been foreshadowed since book 1. Hermione/Ron, likewise. Lupin/Tonks is somewhat more amusing.

Yeah. It was good, but now I want to read the end.

Worst

Slash

Novel

Ever

In Response to sakuruth (#28536):

I'm not even surprised that it was Snape. My impression as I read was very strongly that he's not the bastion of pure evil that Harry seems to see him as, mind you; I want to see if that's supported when I reread the text next weekend.
I think it's fairly clear that Snape was under orders from Dumbledore to do what it took, no matter what that was. Most of the bit with the fountain was there to reinforce that. And don't forget the unbreakable vow.

The bit after the deed was very much Snape reacting to being called a coward and to Harry not considering the possibility that Snape was under orders and the vow. If Snape had really "turned", he'd have killed Potter then and there.

In Response to zamphir (#28544):

Not everyone agrees with you, oddly enough. Oh, I do, but not everyone.

Then again, one of my arguments in favor of Dumbledore having been right about Snape is thus: Harry has been wrong about Snape since day 1. JKR has set up a very consistent pattern of animosity between them which leads Harry to an irrational mistrust of Snape, and apparently blanks his memory of every single time Snape did something good. To break that pattern by proving Harry right after all (especially when we just got a 'Ha! Harry was right, see?' subplot in HBP in the form of Draco) would be incredibly inconsistent with everything she's written thus far.

Of course, it also doesn't hurt that in interviews, she flat-out said he's got a redemptive pattern to his character.

In Response to sakuruth (#28546):

Not everyone agrees with you, oddly enough.

...

Hey, look!...

Fairly boring, overly predictable, and when I got to the last 1/8th of the book, I looked back and said "The previous 7/8th wasn't dull or dragging, but the story progression was. It could have been done with equal justice in half as many pages." Compare it to the Azkaban book. The story was no more complex, took place over the same length of time, and involved/introduced fewer characters. Yet it took at least twice as many pages to tell it.

I thought there to be a lot of potential with Voldemort memories, and also with the final battle and sneaking into the cave. But they seemed so hastly written and glossed over to make more room for Fleur & Bill repitition.

Weakest of the Potter books I've read (and I had thought the elf-liberation theme/thread to bealmost as tedious as Anne Rand)

In Response to Dynedain (#28581):

Good news for the rest of us [georgerrmartin.com].

In Response to sakuruth (#28536):

I only started paying attention to the books (and I've only read one) until after the movies came out, so of course I don't think Snape is evil. Snape is Alan Rickman! The voice of god can't be evil!

In Response to deerboy (#28582):

Is Martin any good? I've basically blanket-ignored anything that has cover art like Robert Jordan's stuff anymore.

Yes, I'm judging a book by it's cover. Humans learn from pain and identify by sight.

In Response to mcgrue (#28588):

Is Martin any good?

Yes.

This series of books is, in fact, the anti-thesis of everything Robert Jordan and his ilk do.

Stuff happens on every page.

People die, frequently.

In Response to zamphir (#28592):

No 80+ page prologue dealing only with minor characters that are never mentioned again?

I'm sold!

In Response to Dynedain (#28581):

I liked parts of it, though I agree that it moved too fast and had too little substance. I'm seeing some of the substance more now that I'm re-reading it, but still--lots of silly stuff. I didn't think that Slughorn and his "Slug Club" particularly added. His role in proving the memory was important, obviously, and I did think that it was good to have a Slytherin head of house after Snape left who was a decent character. But for the most part, he was a yawn.

I did think that Dumbledore's funeral was well-done, though I would have liked it to reveal some secrets, like whether the barman from the Hog's Head is his brother Aberforth.

I'm not sure how she's going to make the next book work. The idea of Harry, who needed all that help from Dumbledore to find the fake Horcrux late in the book, going on to find the other 4 and kill Voldemort on his own seems like a stretch. Even with Ron and Hermione...though perhaps it will turn out that RAB (Regulus?) destroyed most or all of the other Horcruxes. Still, hard to know what she'll do with it without making a horribly pat ending.

In Response to Llamarama (#28648):

I do love the fact that all the Google Ads on this page (at the meoment) are about Harry Potter. Just a reminder that the subtext for the whole series is Harry Potter and the Marketing of Literature.

In Response to Llamarama (#28650):

First of all, 'Literature'?

Second of all, it's children's "literature".

Of Course it will have a horribly horribly pat ending.

In Response to sakuruth (#28546):

(Sorry for coming into this so late, I was off getting married and honeymooning)

I've heard many arguments for Snape being not-evil, but I think all it takes is one small piece of evidence that, personally, I find irrefutable: Dumbledore would never plead for his life. Never. When he was pleading with Snape, therefore, it had to be pleading FOR him to do it. To redeem Draco, to keep cover, for some other purpose we don't know yet, whatever reason.

In Response to porcupine8 (#28712):

Agreed. In addition, every other time we've seen the killing curse used, the target just dropped dead. Dumbledore was thrown into the air and off the tower. Those unforgiveable curses require the user to truly intend harm or they are uneffective. Methinks Snape didn't really want to kill him and that's why the effect was different. This is also part of the argument that Dumbledore is still alive too.

In Response to themysticalone (#28717):

Those unforgiveable curses require the user to truly intend harm or they are uneffective.

Cite?

In Response to zamphir (#28719):

It's a common extrapolation, based primarily on the speech Mad Eye Moody/Barty Crouch Jr. gives in Harry's first DADA class in GoF. Specifically:

"Avada Kedavra's a curse that needs a powerful bit of magic behind it - you could all get your wants out now and point them at me and say the words, and I doubt I'd get so much as a nosebleed." (Goblet of Fire, American Scholastic Hardcover, ch. 14, p. 217)

The extrapolation, as far as I am aware, is primarily in that JKR never actually says that intent is the only way to provide that magical force. It is, however, a logical extrapolation; if one must expend considerable effort to do something, it can be assumed that one intends to do that thing, or one would not bother putting forth the effort.

If anyone can cite any case in the books which specifies strength of emotion as the source of the magical energy in question, of course, that would be useful.

I was going to add my "Dumbledore's not dead" bit a little earlier, but thought that it would come across as a bit odd. Now though, I'm free to add some more onto this.

I see a couple of possibilities.

As has been said already, it's possible that snape didn't kill Dumbledore. It is drummed into us right through the book that spells can be cast without yelling the incantation. The spell that hit Dumbledore may well have been a non-vocal one, and as Snape has invented spells before, it may even be a new one.

Then, of course we're left with how to explain away the body, the funeral and the fact that Dumbledore's portrait is now on the wall of his study.

It could be that Snape and Dumbledore have switched places. Another heavy hint was given at the beginning of the book when Dumbedore chided Harry for not checking his real identity as per the MOM's instructions.
In this way, Snape has taken the fall for Dumbledore (thus providing the redemptive ending that JKR has talked about) This could be what the two of them were arguing about earlier in the book.

Or it could be that Dumbledore really is dead. Removing him removes the deus ex machina of "Dumbledore is unbeatable, he'll sort it all out" and forces the other characters to rely on their own strengths. Also note that Dumbledore has said in this book that "he is not afraid of death", and may have planned for this to happen.

The thing that was never resolved (and may be the big surprise in the next book) is the death of Sirius Black. I still think that he may be alive. If you read tOotP closely, you'll see that he is killed by Lestrange, and his dead body falls back through the execution portal. What happens when you throw a dead body through such a device? I don't know but it will be interesting to find out.

All in all, the book was better than the last one (have they found an editor who's capable of telling JKR to stop waffling) and I now want to read the last one. Get typing woman!

In Response to Euan (#28722):

The thing that was never resolved (and may be the big surprise in the next book) is the death of Sirius Black. I still think that he may be alive.

If that were true, Harry could use the mirror [goats.com] to find out right quick..

Oh yeah. He got rid of the mirror! HAW!

In Response to Euan (#28722):

Then, of course we're left with how to explain away the body, the funeral and the fact that Dumbledore's portrait is now on the wall of his study.

Magic. DUH!

In Response to Llamarama (#28648):

I didn't think that Slughorn and his "Slug Club" particularly added.

I agree that the club didn't add to the story per se but the same is true in many other fantasy books for better or worse. For me, the "Slug Club" was just another example that even though the magical society is more advanced in some ways than the muggle society, people are people. Examples of normal human nature (i.e. besides good and evil) manifest themselves in the bureaucracy of the ministry, the benevolently greedy and power-hungry Slughorn, and other 'grey' characters such as Rita Skeeter and Barty Crouch Sr. This all makes it easier to relate to the characters in the book. JK Rowling is trying to create a believable universe in which the Ministry is filled with as much incompetent staff as most governments. The "Slug Club" offers a credible explanation as to how some people rise to the top.

In Response to zamphir (#28719):

Roughly:

Bellatrix to Harry: "Never used an Unforgivable Curse before, have you, boy?"... "You need to mean them Potter! You need to really want to cause pain -- to enjoy it -- righteous anger won't hurt me for long." (in 'Order of the Phoenix')

In Response to Euan (#28722):

...the death of Sirius Black.... if you read tOotP closely, you'll see that he is killed by Lestrange, and his dead body falls back through the execution portal.

I'll try not to spoil it for anyone in case my theory is right but trying reading that paragraph in tOotP very closely again.

Hmm... three pedantic posts about Harry Potter in half an hour... there must be a support group established by this stage?

In Response to Spiderbaby (#28729):

even though the magical society is more advanced in some ways than the muggle society,

I really don't think that Rowling is advancing that view.

Almost the only examples of Muggle society she has shown are the Dursleys - and they are held up to be essentially the bottom of the barrel.

I think generally she shows, that with very few exceptions, Wizarding society is actually less advanced - in part due to the crutch.

The Wizarding society she presents is still clinging very hard onto the trappings of a feudal economy, and the social outlook that goes with it.