What, are you just now finishing? Harry Potter was so Tuesday.
Keep it up with the attitude missy, and we'll ship you to some former Soviet republic.
In Soviet russian, some former soviet republic ships you!
Soviet Russia, dammit. I killed the joke.
My one claim to fame - I spotted a mistake on page 10. Did anyone else see it?
No. But the bigger mistake I saw was people actually going out and waiting in line at midnight to buy the book. As though Harry had cast a spell so that the words would disappear by morning time.
Well at some places the midnight sale was moe like a party, and I can understand attending a party at midnight.
I didn't do that, being the fuddy-duddy that I am. Being stingy as well I waited for my kids to finish it and read one of their copies.
The mistake was the use of "cite" when she meant "sight." I'm very surprised that got past the proofreaders, although I understand many proofreaders read backwords to catch some of the common errors missed when reading forwards.
For example, the
Paris in the
the spring
error.
Ha! The mistake is site, not cite! "The site, therefore, of Fudge stepping out of the fire once more, looking disheveled and fretful and sternly surprised that the Prime Minster did not know exactly why he was there, was about the worst thing that had happened in the course of this extremely gloomy week."
Tripp is banned!
That Burke discussion is really good and the comments cover most everything I wanted to talk about. A few quick points:
-I assume the effort to make readers care about Tonks means she is dying next book
-Is the sword hanging in the headmasters office authentic? If so, will it be used in a final battle?
-I can't remember, is this the first book in which no form of Voldemort ever appeared in the present time of the book, or was he absent in three also? Presumably, seven will be all Voldemort all the time.
-Was "The Other Minister" trying to set something up for seven, an excuse to bash the American President of Harry Potter-verse (surely not the great and powerful Bush), or just included to make suspension of disbelief easier ("Oh, so that's how the wizard and human worlds intermingle.")
L. wasn't Tripp more "pwned!" than "banned!"?
Just in case he isn't already too ashamed to show his face here again.
A couple of the coolest points I've collected from other discussions:
1) The term Horcrux translates as "Cross of Horus", which is another term for the Anhk, the symbol of eternal life
2) In alchemy, the making of the philosopher's stone involves various chemical processes leading to ultimate purification (eternal life or conversion to gold), which are represented by different colors. The color sequence is black, white, red. Dumbledore's name means white (Albus, as in albino). Hagrid's name means red (Rubeus, as in ruby), and obviously there's Sirius Black. Thus, Harry is going through his own maturation / purification, represented by his mentor who die at the end of each book- Black, then White (Albus), so supposedly Red (Hagrid) will die in book 7.
You know, if you haven't read any of the Harry Potter books, it's pretty hard for the spoilers to ruin this last one for you.
Snape is actually Screwtape, the minor demon.
I have nothing to add, except that the Harry Potter series is pretty marvelous.
Tripp is pwned and banned!
Well, in my defense . . . oh screw it!
If you are explaining you are losing.
I'm pwned and banned.
Thank you, L, for providing the sentence. I was running on memory.
SP - 17
Those are excellent points. I hadn't heard the second one.
I am curious to know how Harry's capacity to love will be the key to him defeating Voldemort.
I am also curious to know the significance, if any, of the pain Harry felt after Dumbledore drank the potion.
Do you think Rowling is already set about what's going to happen in seven vis-a-vis Snape, or is it possible that seven will somehow be influenced by fandom/blogosphere reaction to six? This could happen either in the direction of Rowling wanting to subvert fans expectations or to fufill them. By "is it possible?", what I really mean is, "how likely is it that?", because of course it's possible.
Burke is wrong, she did not spend all that energy making S. ambiguous for no reason. I like the S. is redeemable theory, which you should not look at at all unless you really want to think about what's going to happen in book 7.
Can we all take a moment to admire how much care and attention Rowling has put into these stories? It's really quite impressive.
Is it widely known whether she always intended to write a seven-book series, or if it sort of grew into that after the runaway success of the first book(s)? I don't know much about it.
either way, ac's link is pretty awesome. I haven't read most of these books, but that review/scholarship made me want to.
re: 23 -- you can't observe phenomena without affecting its outcome, right?
She has had the whole series plotted from the beginning. Part of what's so impressive is that you can go back to the early books and find the little things that will be significant much later. (Don't ask me for example.) In one of the interviews, she says that she has backstory written for all the kids at Hogwarts who are mentioned in the books.
Snape is totally a good guy and my hero and I don't care what Rowling says and I am going to marry him when I grow up. And a pony.
Yes, and George Lucas had a screenplay for revenge of the sith tucked away in 1977 too.
By which I mean to say -- it could be true. JKR's overall narrative seems to hold up much better than the prequels did. But others have made that claim before, and been full of shit.
Given the coherence so far (and we are through 6 of 7 books), it seems to me impossible that the story and most of the details weren't fixed in advance.
I think there's some interplay between the two. That is, I think she had the broad sketches lined out, and even some of the details (the meanings of the symbols, names, items, and so on), but some of it has been a discovery of retroactive significance.
Yeah, it's really all coming together.
I like ac's link, although I don't like the darker implications of the H as H component.
since I've only read the first two, I'll have to defer. I just think, as a writer, it would be difficult not to be affected by such pervasive speculation. What if the speculated outcome works better than the one you had imagined? What if someone guesses exactly what you were going to do? It would be hard to resist -- maybe impossible to resist -- tweaking your story in response.
Did she have a book deal before she wrote these? Or was she writing them on spec?
She doesn't have them written, only outlined/plotted. I recall that she shopped the first one around quite a bit.
Text, in the interview, she talks about that a bit, and says that she's sure, given the sheer volume of speculation, that there are correct guesses out there for each of the things she will do. I'm sure that are details that might be affected, but the main story, I'm fairly certain, is set in stone.
ac's guy makes a point about the phonetic meaning behind "Severus Snape," i.e., that it sounds a lot like "severe a snape." I think this is a reasonable inference, given that the name of the death spell he uses to kill Dumbledore (a spell that others use as well) is "Avada Kedavra" (i.e., "I want a cadaver").
And I'm better there are other examples, though none spring to mind.
Oh yeah? Well I'm best that there are other examples.
38: "severe a snake"
39: "betting"
Shh. I'm trying to think of something clever to say at your girlfriend's blog.
Ok, I gave up. Katie Holmes has become unmockable.
Even a wit like Susan's is awed by the bizarre spectacle of TomKat.
I'm sure the overarching similarities to la morte d'artur have been noted somewhere, but I haven't read them.
Dumbledore is really asleep in a tree-trunk somewhere.
Long plane flights make for excellent Harry Potter reading.
I think that everyone is missing the point that Draco is the fulcrum here. Snape takes the unbreakable vow in order to protect Draco. I would be surprised if Snape is doing this for Narcissa Malfoy's sake. Dumbledore wants Snape to kill him so that Draco won't be forced into it. Dumbledore was unable to save Riddle. But I think that he wanted to save Malfoy. It may be that in saving the boy from this, Snape gets to go deeper undercover, but I think the goal of keeping him from becoming a killer is paramount. THat is especially so when Malfoy succeeds in getting the Death Eaters into the castle.
I think I'm wrong too, now. People in that comments thread are pretty damn convincing about Snape. But boy howdy, can Rowling screw that up if it all turns out to be some wonderfully seamless master plan that Dumbledore and Snape had already agreed upon. It's also important that Harry be basically right about most things: he has to finally be the protagonist rather than an extremely complicated plot device when the seventh book rolls around.
So you've changed your reading, Tim? I sticking by my original interpretation, but I admit that I'm very much on the defensive, so maybe it's just stobborness. Or maybe I'm straining the text because I desperately want what you say to be fulfilled: I want Harry to be the hero of his own story, the protagonist, the Captian Kirk as you so wonderfully put it, and I just can't see any good way for that to be the case if Book 7's conflict with Snape is going to be built around one more "all-will-be-revealed" moment.
Russell and Tim, I'm not sure the possible outcomes are necessarily mutually exclusive. As Tim says, a lot depends on how Rowlings pulls it off, but recall Dumbledore's bit about believing in the prophecy being the key to making it true. Harry only needs to believe that he's alone in order to take on the responsiblity of fighting Voldemort, and thereby become his own man. If he does that, and it turns out that Snape had good reason to kill Dumbledore, and Dumbledore wanted to be killed, I don't think Harry is reduced to a pawn in a larger game. And it's possible that Snape and Dumbledore had an agreement but that events overtake their plan, and that Harry is yet forced to make adult decisions with consequences. We'll see :-)