Yeah, I just finished the book after 8 straight hours of reading.



Things that I thought weren't very well explained:


-Harry coming back to life. It was explained, but it was kinda iffy and kinda didn't make sense to me. Voldemort couldn't kill him because Harry's blood + protective charm of mother was in Voldemort's blood, thus even if Harry died, as long as Voldemort lived, Harry wouldn't die? If this is true, it would seem like if Harry was killed, his death would be "pending" until Voldemort died, thus removing that protection, and Harry would have dropped dead as soon as Voldemort died.

-I want more details on the Resurrection stone There was a mention that the figures it brings back are basically Inferi.

-Instead of storming Gringotts, Harry should have just used the Sorting Hat to get the sword

-What happened to Death Eaters, etc. after Chapter 36?

-Did Malfoy ever become "good"?

-Why do Harry & Ginny have so many ****ing children?

-Who's kid is Victoire?

-Why is it suddenly ok to use the Unforgivables left and right?

-What happens to Hermione's parents?


-If the Elder Wand is supposed to make its master invincible ... how the **** did Dumbledore defeat Grindelwald?


-Who is that non-magical person who under extenuating circumstances can produce magic?



Post more, I ran out of ideas.

Voldemort should, by rule of thumb, be able to come back then, right?

I think it's only one way, because the part of Voldy's soul in Harry was destroyed. So his connection to Harry was severed, but Harry's connection to him wasn't severed. So if he lives then Harry lives, but not necessarily vice.versa.


Edit-- Also, didn't Rowling say that Harry is not a Horcrux? @_@

The Malfoys didn't really become good. It was more like they became neutral and were, more or less, forgiven for their crimes.

Harry and Ginny are horny mother****ers.

I assumed Victoire is Bill and Fleur's kid. It was mentioned that Victoire was a cousin to Ron's chilluns.

Unforgivables are more forgivable when you're in a war and you are fighting for your life?

Harry was not an intentionally formed horcrux, he was a Horcrux by accident.

Why are we using spoiler tags when it is warned in the title that spoilers are contained within?!



I read it in around 8 or 8 and a half hours.

Character development was ace. I loved that Dumbledore and Snape didn't magically become perfect people; they were fallible individuals who were essentially good at heart.

Mrs. Weasley rocked hardcore and so did Neville.

The ending was confusing but I think that that was because so much was happening all at once. I'm going to pick up the book again tomorrow and read it more thoroughly; maybe it'll flow better when I'm not rushing through it to figure out what the **** happens.

It pissed me off a bit that they more or less skipped over the death of the Lupins. Plus, Tonks is an idiot for rushing into danger and dying when she just popped out a kid.

The bit about Petunia wanting to go to Hogwarts could have been elaborated on as well.

Also:



As far as I can remember, this wasn't even touched on.

It was a constant reminder to Snape. He had to look at Lily's eyes every day.

I just want to say first off, that I thoroughly enjoyed the book, but I was disappointed by the ending. The epilogue was cheesy, I didn't care for the chapter after Harry is 'killed', and honestly, I think it would have been a better ending for him to have just died. The chapter where he realizes he must face is death was really beautiful...

That said, I still love it. Especially the Snape backstory... I always knew he was good.



-One of Harry's resurrected friends said that they only existed for him... I think the mention of Inferi was speculation by Grindelwald of what they could do with the stone.

-Gringotts is the safest place to keep something you want hidden... except maybe Hogwarts. Also, they might have figured that since it was already out of the hat, it couldn't be pulled out again.

-I assume she does what she said she'd do if they won- that is, fetch them and repair their memories.

-I never quite understood the Elder Wand stuff. They said you had to kill the previous owner to claim power of it... but Grindelwald had stolen it, and Dumbledore didn't actually kill Grindelwald, so I'm not sure. And why did Harry say towards the end that Draco was the owner of it?

-What?

The reason the Elder wand was Harry's was because at the end of HBP Malfoy disarmed Dumbledore therefore allowing him to wield the wand (but obviously never does). Towards the end of this book Harry defeats/disarms Malfoy - hence the wand goes to him. The fact that Malfoy never actually used the wand is neither here nor there, all the Elder Wand cares about is who defeats who it would seem.

"-Instead of storming Gringotts, Harry should have just used the Sorting Hat to get the sword"

They went to Gringotts for the Hufflepuff Horcrux. They got the sword from the forest of Dean.

-If the Elder Wand is supposed to make its master invincible ... how the **** did Dumbledore defeat Grindelwald

The Elder Wand is just a really good wand. The "invincible" part is part of the legend. The Elder Wand obeys its master perfectly (like when Harry repaired his own wand). But since Dumbledore was a pretty skilled duelist, I imagine that gave Grindelwald only enough advantage to last for a while longer against Dumbledore.

Err, sorry, I meant get the sword back.


Vin, Rowling said (and it was made a big deal of on fan/speculation sites) that some non-magical character could/would perform magic late in life under extenuating circumstances.

Dumbledore's sister? She could technically be defined as nonmagical because she refused to go to school and be raised as a witch. The magic she performed late in life (disregarding the fact that she had unintentionally performed magic more than once) could be the magical outburst that killed her.

Ehh kinda iffy I think

(And it was either Albus, Aberforth, or Grindelwald who killed her)


On another note, the whole Harry/Lupin argument was unresolved and mended out of the blue with no explanation (other than yay baby happy)

I seem to remember Rowling saying something about finding out why some wizards become ghosts and some don't, as well, but that wasn't in the book either

Lupin realised that Harry was right and went to stay with Tonks. That's why he made him godfather. Harry helped him make the right decision.

Yeah, half the stuff she has been reported to say wasn't in the book...

You know, I think in her original outline, Harry died. Then she made up all this Deathly Hallows stuff to save face. I'm almost positive she had the idea that Harry must die to kill Voldemort from day one.

Only that the Hallows didn't have anything to do with his coming back to life.

Then what was the point of them?

I'm gonna re-read that chapter.

I think either Albus or Aberforth said that he was almost positive that none of them had killed her. I assumed that it was her own unstable power that killed her...? Might be wrong.

The Hallows are important because they are a temptation to all wizards and Harry had to resist that temptation. They caused Grindelwald to go bad, Dumbledore to nearly go bad, and Voldemort sought the elder wand to achieve a greater degree of evily-ness.

I think Vin is right, though. While I think it reads well, the plot line definitely doesn't seem like it was her original plan. I almost think it would have been better if Harry had died but she probably changed it because too many people would have been pissed.

The fact that Dumbledore's "Remember my last" remark was never explained kinda further proves that JK deviated from her original outline.

why is it that people expect every single thing to be explained. in real life, you dont always have an explanation for why a specific thing happened to you, so i dont get why everything in a book (or movie for that matter) should be wrapped up by the end.

Because people who read HP, or even just reading HP puts you into that "explain everything" place because they're not written like most literature. It's a very contrived and foreword story. Not that this is BAD, but it certainly isn't intended to leave much to the reader. It's supposed to be well developed, explained, and tested. Otherwise it wouldn't be that immersion fantasy anymore. *It'd be good fantasy.

* an opinion. Not a flame bait.

You have to understand that you're dealing with nerds.

Any kind of nerd wants to have a thorough understanding of their obsession.

Plus, nerds argue for fun.

Kirby have you even read the Harry Potter series? It's not that we want it all explained, we just want it to make sense.

Anyway, the more I think about it, the stupider the ending seems. Aside from Deathly Hallows for which the book is named but never really do anything, what's up with the Elder Wand? How does the ownership of it change? And why should Malfoy, and then Harry have gotten ownership? Malfoy didn't defeat Dumbledore, he was already dying and Malfoy just disarmed him with Expelliarmous. If that's all it takes for a wand to change allegiance, shouldn't the DA's wands all be jumbled from practicing on each other? And why then should Harry have earned the Elder Wand from Malfoy for simply disarming him of an entirely different wand?

It definitely seems like JKR altered her original plans, and failed get the pieces to fit together quite right. I still like the book. It's fantastic right until the end. But then...

These are things that are either specifically contradictory or something that JK Rowling SAID she'd explain, but didn't.

I think that's all it takes for the Elder Wand to change allegiance - and all those DA wands would've been handed back, and they were never taken in menace.

Just a thought.

Hello and welcome to my thread.

:p

The Hollows are important because Harry decided not to go after them. He made that choice when he decided to speak to the Goblin first.
It's important for him that he made the decision for sacrifice and not for power. That's what discerned him from Voldemort, Grindelwald and Dumbledor.

The cloak itself was important because it kept him save throughout the books.
The stone gave him courage for his last sacrifice.
And Malfoy did beat Dumbledor. It's true that he could only do it because Dumbledor was already weakened, but what's important is that he did it. Next Harry beat Malfoy. He robbed him of his power by taking his wand. After that the Malfoys had no chance of ever rising again in Voldemorts ranks. They were truly beaten.