Seventh Harry Potter Book Named

Croakyvoice writes "JK Rowling has today given fans of the Harry Potter books the name of Book 7 of the very popular series via a Christmas present on her site, to get to the name you need to follow a complicated procedure but thankfully the name of the book has been revealed as Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows."

Comments

Christmas

[ggKimmieGal]

I'm so obsessed with Harry Potter. This was the best Christmas present she could give out... short of the book itself.

Re:Christmas

[Woldry]

I'm not a demanding fan. I'd've settled for a hefty chunk of the advance from the new book. That would be enough of a Christmas present for me. :-)

Re:Christmas

[NosTROLLdamus]

DUMBLEDORE DIES

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

heh - I'm 30 and have been listening to to the audio CDs of books 1-6 (Jim Dale narrator) over and over in order for the past several months. It's so much fun to listen to while doing things around the apartment. I think this was the perfect time to get into Potter, as now I get to anticipate the release of book 7, but didn't have to go through this on books 2-6.

Re:Christmas

[Bonker]

heh - I'm 30 and have been listening to to the audio CDs of books 1-6 (Jim Dale narrator) over and over in order for the past several months. It's so much fun to listen to while doing things around the apartment. I think this was the perfect time to get into Potter, as now I get to anticipate the release of book 7, but didn't have to go through this on books 2-6.

The wait for 5 was just amazingly insane. It went 12.3..4.....................5...6...

'Order of the Phoenix' was both amazingly long, worth the wait, and quite a milestone for Rowling as an author. She went from a deus-ex-machina-type denoument in the first book to what can only be described as an epic fantasy battle at the end of the fifth.

If you've seen the bits of the trailers of Movie 5-- well-- they don't really do the work justice, even as good as they are.

Re:Christmas

[Dun Malg]

'Order of the Phoenix' was both amazingly long, worth the wait, and quite a milestone for Rowling as an author. She went from a deus-ex-machina-type denoument in the first book to what can only be described as an epic fantasy battle at the end of the fifth. My god, you can't be serious! Phoenix was one of the most boring piles of tripe I've had the displeasure of reading. It was like being beaten over the head with a book of cliches for 800+ pages.

Re:Christmas

[Broken scope]

Of course It was boring, the book redefined the landscape of the series, or at least it set up for that redefining. It was less action and more mind games and bullshit.

Re:Christmas

[FirienFirien]

Again? That's quite a trick.

Re:Christmas

[Fred_A]

I pretty much gave up after the third or fourth one one (whatever it was called). From what I could see, the stories were all the same : Incompetent but famous Harry Potter gets into some kind of mess, only ever succeeds in getting out of it by accident or when a deus ex machina pops up, ends up failing miserably during the boss level at the end but gets miraculously saved by his friends/teachers/mentors/family/pets. Everyone rejoices. Yawn.

I suppose this is amusing to younger readers, but the terrible story lines are really painful to me. Which is a bit of a shame since the universe of the books is quite fun.

Of course things may have gotten better in the later books, but by now I stopped to care.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see... I'll give you an analysis NOT based on any preview of actual book, just following what we know so far:

Dumbledore is indispensable character in the series. In most cases he is good "spiritus movens" behind the scenes (Voldemort is the evil one). It must turn out he either didn't really die or his death will not prevent his new appearances (she can always pull out some magic artifact or spell that modifies the effect of the killing spell, or that lets him remain present as ghost or something). However, this will pose difficulties in explaining why then Harry's parents are, well, dead without any buts.

Furthermore, it is clearly implied in last book, in the scene when it happens, that Snape killed him according to their (Dumbledore's and Snape's) previous mutual agreement and arrangement (i.e. if Dumbledore is struck by a non killing, forever tormenting spell, which in fact he was) out of mercy, not hatred (Snape is constantly put in position of suspect, only to slap Harry and readers later for being prejudicial, shame on us!). Therefore, Dumbledore, in one form or another, must show up to clear Snape from convictions for his own murder. If Rowling persist to keep Dumbledore dead, it is probably Snape who will take his place as head of anti-Voldemort coalition. However, this leaves Harry without last fatherly protecting figure, which OTOH may be a part of "large picture" central idea unrolled throughout the story: following Harry's stepwise growing up, from a child into an independent, self-sustaining adult (at which point this story starts losing its magic... not 'Wizardly' magic, which is only a decoration and prop for plots, but the magic of childhood) in a fantasy world.

Re:Christmas

[Gilmoure]

Harry's parents are, well, dead without any buts.

Damn! Assless through eternity. Do they even let you into heaven like that? That was one mean bad guy that did that to them.

Re:Christmas

[Thraxen]

Oddly enough you could summarize many, if not most, fiction and video games that way. BTW, I'm not sure about the "everyone rejoices" part. The last few books have gotten darker and darker and haven't had entirely happy endings.

Re:Christmas

[lotsotech]

I totally agree Fred! I can't believe how easily amused all those millions of people that love this series are. Why is it that everyone is so inferior to us? Back to reading stuff that nobody else likes because that means its got to be good!

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

You must have stopped after the second one. Harry does much more under his own power. It's true he'd be lost without his friends -- I've often argued Hermione is the real hero of the books -- but who wants to read about Impervious Hero Boy Who Can Do No Wrong?

Anyway, to me the appeal is the intricate plotting and misdirection. I'm amazed how tightly everything last detail fits together without ever seeming forced.

Re:Christmas

[extremescholar]

Hello, picture in the Headmaster's office, trading cards, etc. He will most certainly be around to give advice.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

Yah. Too bad that on the fifth one, so many plot elements were revealed that illiterate idiots like you would, oh, I dunno, lose interest?

Ooh look! Shiny.

Go back to your basement.

Re:Christmas

[ArcticCelt]

That's more or less my opinion on Harry Potter and each time I forget about it untill I start reading the next book. In the last couple of books, Harry Potter has become some whiny little annoying incompetent but lucky undeserving prima donna. But in the end there is something that I enjoy about those books because I keep reading them all and look ahead to to read the last one. I'll even admit that after reading the last one, I was obsessively looking all over the internet theories and analyses about all the character and possible plot developments. In the end I think I don't like the character "Harry Potter" but I like his universe and many of the plot elements of the story and that's what keeps bringing me back.

Re:Christmas

[u38cg]

We all have our own theories, but it seems pretty plain to me that Dumbledore was on the baddies side (there are hints here and there if you look for them (can you account for his servants at the end of book four?)). Hence, Snape is a goodie. The central theme of book seven is going to be Potter having to actually trust him. Veritas est.

Re:Christmas

[twistedsymphony]

Oddly enough you could summarize many, if not most, fiction and video games that way.

Very true, however that's also why there are only a few books out of millions that are revered as being fantastic works... it doesn't exactly answer the question as to why Harry Potter is considered any better then the many others it apparently shares plot lines with.

Re:Christmas

[kickingandscreaming]

I read the last 2 books with my son. He's read the series multiple times now and general agrees with you Fred. He can't stand the character of Potter and is loudly cheering for his demise. He dislikes most of the characters with the exception of Dumbledore. He says if Dumbledore is truly dead, then Rowling is a fool.

Re:Christmas

[Total_Wimp]

Well, at least we know something we didn't know before. This kinda rules out a cherry, upbeat end to the series, eh?

TW

Re:Christmas

[ggKimmieGal]

It's better because it appeals to a wider range audience (children, teens, adults, and the elderly). It's a fantasy book that isn't too fantastical for people who aren't into traditional fantasy novels (ie. Lord of the Rings, Sword of Shannara, The Magic of Recluce, etc.). It's written with the intent of a younger audience being the main group of readers. What the educated don't realize is that a HUGE portion of the population is undereducated. These books are right at the level of the garbage man, or the guy who pumps your gas.

If you are reading them the same way you read Great Expectations or To Kill a Mockingbird then you are going to be severely disappointed. These books weren't written to be literary works of art. They are written for entertainment. And guess what, they are entertaining. They are cute, fun, emotional, dark, and happy all at the same time. Almost everyone can connect with Harry in some way.

So when you put together wide audience range and entertaining, you have a book that is better than most others.

Re:Christmas

[Stormy Dragon]

Dumbledore is and will remain dead. The mentor has to die in order to force the hero to come into his own.

Re:Christmas

[Cryssen]

Unless you're Dilbert's garbage Man

Re:Christmas

[sasdrtx]

"Goblet of Fire" was a gigantic mess. The major story line is ridiculous and nonsensical.

"Order of the Phoenix" was too long and tedious.

Everything else is great (and the two above have much to recommend them). My theory is that like many wildly successful authors, she became uneditable, much to the detriment of her books. But JKR really is good, and the books are improving since GoF.

Re:Christmas

[twistedsymphony]

THAT, I can completely understand. I always thought the Harry Potter books were meant for children to grow up with, basically adding reading difficulty as they progressed, entertaining for children with a sprinkling of life lessons.

I guess it just frustrates me when people who don't normally read, read these book and start boasting about them like they ARE literary works of art.

Re:Christmas

[OglinTatas]

Here's the thing: Snape was put in a position which couldn't be resolved any other way. He was forced to take the unbreakable vow to protect the Malfoy boy and to help him complete his mission (kill Dumbledore). But the reason Dumbledore trusted him implicitly is because he also asked Snape to take an unbreakable vow to protect Harry at all costs. Once the death eaters infiltrated Hogwarts, Snape had to help Malfoy kill Dumbledore to prevent greater mayhem, to prevent Malfoy's own death, and especially to get the death eaters out of Hogwarts before a confrontation with Harry, which very likely would have led to Harry's death (especially since Dumbledore was killed). When Harry chased Snape, Snape was so much more powerful and skilled than Harry that he could have killed him easily, and there was no reason not to because now everyone knows Snape is a death eater, right? Wrong. Snape wouldn't even let Harry use an unforgivable curse, because that would ultimately harm the boy himself. (Even though Harry already used Crucio on the death eaters. For that offense he is already doomed to Azkaban. But I guess everyone can overlook that because Harry is the boy wonder.)

I say Dumbledore asked Snape to take the vow because I believe they were friends, which makes Snape a tragic figure. He was always hated and misunderstood. Even the girl he had a crush on (Harry's mom) laughed when the other boys would torment Snape, and she even married his chief tormentor. Her protests to stop tormenting Snape were only half-hearted at best. Dumbledore was the ONLY friend Snape ever had, and Snape was forced to kill him. If Rowling makes him the hero in the last book, I will be VERY impressed. As much as I like the books, I only like them because she can spin a good yarn. If she was planning the Snape tragedy from the start, wow. If Snape became a death eater on his own, and who could blame him, while the whole world already hated him? If he chose to be a death eater, then I think Dumbledore ASKED him to take the vow. If Dumbledore asked him to become a death eater to spy on Voldemort, then the unbreakable vow is not needed, Dumbledore has reason to trust Snape, and Snape, in spite of being hated by everyone, and having reason to hate Harry himself, is even more of a heroic figure.

About Harry: Harry IS the final horcrux (or at least the scar on his head is) which makes his hunting and destroying the other horcruxes kind of ironic. We found out in the last book that horcruxes could be living things, such as the snake that embodied Voldemort. When the snake curled around Harry and taunted Dumbledore, telling him that he now has the opportunity to destroy Voldemort forever, I wonder if Dumbledore finally realized that Harry was the horcrux? No one could figure out how Harry managed to survive the attack that killed his parents, the scar was linked to Voldemort (it always hurt when he was around) and it gave Harry powers similar to Voldemort. It was also the scar that the sorting hat wanted to put in Slytherin.

When Dumbledore revealed the prophesy to Harry, we find out that the prophesy could have meant either Potter or Longbottom would be the one to ultimately destroy Voldemort. Dumbledore and Potter did not know why Voldemort had chosen to "attempt to destroy" Harry, but Dumbledore claimed that that was Voldemort's mistake, and the botched attempt was the accident that created Harry and gave him the power to ultimately destroy Voldemort. WRONG! Voldemort's mistake was only in thinking that Harry was the chosen one, his placing of the horcrux was an insurance policy to attempt to cheat fate (and we know from Greek mythology how well that always turns out). Longbottom is the chosen one, he is still the Charlie Brown figure, the one that can't get things right, but who always gets up and tries again. He has been steadily growing in skill and confidence throughout the books, and he will be the one to destroy the final horcrux. The only question is, can the horcrux in the scar be destroyed without also killing Harry?

Re:Christmas

[shotgunsaint]

My theory (well, not mine, but one I've taken a liking to) is that McGonagall is Voldemort's spy in Hogwarts. Reread them, she never does a SINGLE thing to help, and often flubs important jobs- Barty Crouch gets away in GoF, for example.

Re:Christmas

[bkr1_2k]

Thank you. Though I think only the images from pictures in the headmaster's office have that special ability...communication I mean.

Dumbledore is dead. That doesn't mean he's not a part of the next book. He had to die to force the final confrontation between Harry and Voldemort, otherwise it would always be Dumbledore saving Harry from his own fate.

Re:Christmas

[Keyslapper]

I have to disagree. Dumbledore is arguably an indispensable character, but the fact that he showed up in a painting in the Headmaster's (Headmistress', that is) office is fairly convincing evidence that he's really dead.

Aside from that, past evidence has made it fairly clear that Dumbledore wouldn't be one to run away from death. - "To the well-ordered mind, death is merely the next great adventure" (paraphrased).

That doesn't mean he's gone. Remember the painting. That gives us the "Obi Wan" factor. He probably won't speak much directly to Harry - he not being a Hogwarts Headmaster, but he's there, and the painting may well know everything he knew prior to his death - hence the "out" for Snape.

And I don't think Snape is going to take over Dumbledore's position as the behind the scenes "leader" in any way. He's a spy, working for the downfall of Voldemort, of course, but he's the "Bad Guy, working for Good". He'll do what needs to be done to bring down V, even if it means taking out any number of good or bad players in the process (so long as one of them isn't Snape - or Harry). I also suspect Snape took an Unbreakable Vow with Dumbledore to make sure he was willing to do anything including kill Dumbledore.

Snape knows he can't kill Voldemort (yet, Trelawney's prophecy doesn't say Harry will kill him, just that neither can survive while the other lives), though he may or may not know why - nobody knows at this point exactly how much Dumbledore - or Regulus Black (Sirius' brother, probably the one that destroyed the amulet Dumbledore risked his life to get just before his death), would have told Snape.

A couple things I think may come into play in this last book are a couple seemingly minor details mentioned throughout the previous books:
Harry's eyes - Everyone seems to dwell on the fact he has his mothers eyes. I don't know how, but I think it's important.
Voldemort's means of return - in Goblet of Fire, Voldemort uses Harry's blood to overcome the magic protection instilled by Lilly's sacrifice. When Harry mentions this to Dumbledore, his expression suggest an almost victorious feeling, and his response (I don't remember the exact wording) suggests that there may have been a trap of some kind in there. There's also the fact that Pettigrew brought harm to Harry after Harry saved his life in Prizoner of Azkaban. Pettigrew owes Harry a serious debt, and he violated it. That's gonna come back on him hard.

Can't wait.

Re:Christmas

[Bastard of Subhumani]

This kinda rules out a cherry

Posting on slashdot rules out losing it.

Re:Christmas

[Keyslapper]

Harry being the final horcrux is an interesting theory, but I don't think it's just the scar. If he is the last horcrux, I find it likely that Voldemort would have retrieved it from him with the blood he used to regain physical shape. There isn't much we learned about them in book 6, but I suspect they can be used in just such a manner.

I seriously doubt Longbottom is the true chosen one. After all, Voldemort chose Harry. That isn't to say Neville won't be an important figure in the end. He has as much reason to hate Voldemort and the Death Eaters as anyone - more than most, and though he doesn't exactly emanate courage, he's proven more than once that he does posess it in reasonable supply.

Re:Christmas

[Silentknyght]

(some spoliers may follow)

I agree, it seems likely that Harry will still interact with Dumbledore in the seventh book, however I venture that it is exceedingly likely that all interaction will be through the new portrait of Dumbledore that appeared in the Headmaster's Office after Dumbledore's death. I believe we will find out just to what degree the living portraits in JK Rowling's world are able to think, act, and remember.

Additionally, I would venture that Snape's order to kill Dumbledore, the order which came from Dumbledore himself, will arrive at Harry through his own self-realization, and not through Dumbledore himself. This will probably occur at the same time that Snape reveals his reason for his hatred of Harry, as well as the reason Dumbledore trusts Snape. (For a prediction: this is one and the same: Lily Evans. Snape loved her in secret, and Harry represents a continual reminder of the love he lost to his bitter rival, James Potter; moreover, Snape's unwitting assistance in the death of Lily Evans is the reason for his abandonnment of the dark side).

Re:Christmas

[Hillgiant]

Now you know the REAL reason ghosts don't eat.

Re:Christmas

[Mr. Flibble]

I agree with almost everything in your post, except Harry being the final Horcrux. While I have considered it, if you re-read book 6, the act of creating a horcrux is a consious decision, not an unconsious one.

Harry and Voldemort are linked of course, and the reason Harry survived is answered by Dumbledore in book one. Whether Harry survives the series depends on things other than his being a Horcrux. Finally, Voldemort wants the Horcruxes to survive, there would be no point in putting a Horcrux in Harry if he wanted him dead. Because killing Harry if he was a Horcrux, would destroy the Horcrux, and that is contrary to what Voldemort wants.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

A simpler explanation for Dumbledore's return is: he is a Phoenix animus. He will just be reborn, no need for fancy-smancy explanations.

I'm just curious about Sirius' brother. WTF were his initials doing on that artifact?

Re:Christmas

[Verteiron]

My own pet theory is that Dumbledore is a Phoenix animagus. Death would hardly be the end for him.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

The major story line is ridiculous and nonsensical. Don't you mean ridikulus?

Re:Christmas

[MartinB]

Harry's eyes - Everyone seems to dwell on the fact he has his mothers eyes. I don't know how, but I think it's important.

It is - JK has said so. But not how.

Voldemort's means of return - in Goblet of Fire, Voldemort uses Harry's blood to overcome the magic protection instilled by Lilly's sacrifice. When Harry mentions this to Dumbledore, his expression suggest an almost victorious feeling, and his response (I don't remember the exact wording) suggests that there may have been a trap of some kind in there.

You may recall how Granny Weatherwax beat the Vampyres[sic]?

Re:Christmas

[charlieman]

Well Dumbledore should appear in a painting right?

Re:Christmas

[Keyslapper]

You may recall how Granny Weatherwax beat the Vampyres[sic]?

Bloody Hell, that never occurred to me!

Wouldn't it be a hoot if JK turned out to be a Pratchett fan?

Re:Christmas

[Kemanorel]

Think back to the cleaning of the Order's headquarters. They found a heavy amulet with an S on it that could not be opened. For some reason, Regulus decided to go against Voldemort as well and already acquired the amulet. Whether the power was taken from it or it is still an active horocrux is something I do not know. Something tells me it is still active and Kreacher knows where it is.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

However, this leaves Harry without last fatherly protecting figure, which OTOH may be a part of "large picture" central idea unrolled throughout the story: following Harry's stepwise growing up, from a child into an independent, self-sustaining adult (at which point this story starts losing its magic... not 'Wizardly' magic, which is only a decoration and prop for plots, but the magic of childhood) in a fantasy world.

And yet, Pan's Labyrinth http://www.panslabyrinth.com/, does all that far more precisely, lyrically, and ironically, while at the same time reinventing the slasher flick. Far more efficient and effective.

Re:Christmas

[MobileTatsu-NJG]

I think this post COMPLETELY refutes the 'whocares' tag on this story.

Re:Christmas

[OglinTatas]

I can't mod when I've posted, but otherwise I'd give you a +1 Funny. :-)
I like the series, but I'm not a rabid fan--just a nerd. I will eventually read the book, but not preorder or buy it on the first day.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

I pretty much gave up after the third or fourth one one (whatever it was called). From what I could see, the stories were all the same : Incompetent but famous Harry Potter gets into some kind of mess, only ever succeeds in getting out of it by accident or when a deus ex machina pops up, ends up failing miserably during the boss level at the end but gets miraculously saved by his friends/teachers/mentors/family/pets. Everyone rejoices. Yawn.

I suppose this is amusing to younger readers, but the terrible story lines are really painful to me. Which is a bit of a shame since the universe of the books is quite fun.

Of course things may have gotten better in the later books, but by now I stopped to care.

De gustibus non est disputandum

To each his own. I like the series, and I'm excited for this last release.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

I have tolerated every post here so far. But you, sir, have just crossed the line. I am committing suicide. So long.

Re:Christmas

[CrimsonAvenger]

Regulus Black (Sirius' brother, probably the one that destroyed the amulet Dumbledore risked his life to get just before his death)

That amulet was not destroyed. If you reread the section where the kids are cleaning up Sirius' old home, you'll notice mention of an amulet - that's the one they'll be looking for next book, I think. The House Elf has it stashed away, or that old thief has it.

Re:Christmas

[geobeck]

...Voldemort uses Harry's blood to overcome the magic protection instilled by Lilly's sacrifice. When Harry mentions this to Dumbledore, his expression suggest an almost victorious feeling, and his response (I don't remember the exact wording) suggests that there may have been a trap of some kind in there.

Aha! It's the Esme Weatherwax trap! We'll know for sure if Voldemort (Lit. "flight of death") starts saying "I can't be having with that!"

See Carpe Jugulum by Terry Prattchett

Re:Christmas

[Keyslapper]

I missed that.

Great! Now I'm gonna have to go back and reread the whole series AGAIN before I can go on to the last one! :)

I'll bet there are half a dozen other clues in there I haven't noticed. I know the house Harry inherited from Sirius is important, and I suspect it will reappear in the next book (probably early on, since Harry comes of age and can leave the Dursley home), but what else is there (besides the amulet) that's important? I doubt Kreacher will be cooperative, but so long as Harry's careful enough about telling him what to do, the worst he can do is keep the amulet hidden - which would obviously be bad enough.

Re:Christmas

[ggKimmieGal]

Harry Potter makes people who don't read want to read. I would say that's a very good thing! If they really love Harry, maybe they will start to read real literary works of art. Or... maybe they'll just stick to Harry. ;)

Re:Christmas

[Javagator]

Harry Potter has become some whiny little annoying incompetent...

Yea, that. But Harry's most annoying trait is that he keeps interrupting people just before they reveal some amazing clue.

Re:Christmas

[Anonymous Coward]

What are the chances that Snape is the chosen one. He is the Half-blood prince, right.

Re:Christmas

[Bandman]

Did we read the same book?

You suspect that Snape will be leading the OotP or whatever they end up calling the Anti-Voldemort coalition? I think Snape was doing Dumbledore's bidding as well, but I find it highly unlikely that Snape is seen as anything but a bad guy until the end (and even then, maybe post-mortem).

Re:Christmas

[cptgrudge]

There is way more to the Harry Potter books than first might be apparent. Once you start looking, the literary alchemical references abound everywhere. Besides the obvious, such as the non-USA (and original) title of Book 1: Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone , there are many others as well.

While the earlier books are definitely written to target a younger audience, the symbolism within them is still there. It's possible that people have a bias because the books are written with this audience in mind and so are viewed as "just for kids", much like many people (in the US) have a certain view of "Anime" as "just for kids".

So obviously, if they are "just for kids", they couldn't possibly have any more depth to them.

Re:Christmas

[Schadrach]

The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies...and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not...and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives...the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies... That is the prophecy verbatim. Dumbledore had a look of "something like triumph" in his eyes when Harry described Voldemort's resurrection, specifically the blood used. Personally I think the following: 1. Harry is a horcrux. Voldemort planned on using the fragmentation of his soul caused by the murder of the Potter family to create horcrux number 7, but the failed Avada Kedavra spell, in killing his physical form, forced that fragment to go SOMEWHERE. This somewhere is the scar. 2. "for neither can live while the other survives". They will both die in book 7, or neither of them will. No other outcome is allowed. Voldemort could have won at some point prior to his ressurection in book 4 however. Harry cannot simply kill Voldemort because a part of Voldemort would still exist (the horcruxes, most notably the scar, even if it ISN'T a horcrux, is still a part of Voldemort). Accordingly, Voldemort cannot simply kill Harry, as part of Harry would continue to survive (his blood used in the ressurection ritual). Either they will both die or it will be a stalemate. 3. Snape is a good guy. His killing Dumbledore was a mercy killing combined with not breaking his cover for the Order and not breaking his Unbreakable Oath. Between the three, I'm pretty sure he wasn't in a position to have any choice in the scenario. Hopefully when Harry confronts Snape again, Llegimency will be involved, and Harry will understand the truth. 4. A horcrux has been brought up in each book, even if only as a side note. Book 1: The scar. Book 2: The journal. Book 3: Honestly not sure on this one, need to reread the book. Book 4: The snake (Nagini). Book 5: The locket (they found a strange locket none of them could open while they were cleaning; mentioned in one sentence as a side note, but I am going to bet that it is the *real* locket that was originally in the cave in book 6). Book 6: The ring (this one was basically given).

Re:Christmas

[complete loony]

Harry needs someone, at the end, to help him. Think like an under cover agent. Sometimes the only way to spy or infiltrate the enemy circle is to break the law in some way. Snape had to kill Dumbledore so he could be there at the end. If he didn't do it, his true loyalties would have been exposed. Dumbledore knew they were coming to get him, so they used this grizzly situation to promote Snape in the death eaters so he can help Harry at the end.

Re:Christmas

[Keyslapper]

The Ring was Slytherin's, but book 6 also mentions the cup that belonged to Hufflepuff. It is known that Voldemort (Tom Riddle at the time) had access to it. It seemed important to him to have an artifact from each of the house founders to use as a horcrux. Dumbledore stated his opposition to having Riddle in the school in any capacity other than as a student specifically because he didn't want him to have access to the Gryffindor sword. He seemed particularly concerned with it.

Also, I do remember the locket being mentioned in book 4 - I recalled it after it was mentioned in a previous post that is. If it shows up in the next movie, I'll be convinced the Locket isn't destroyed yet. As an aside, it would be an easy target for the cutting room floor, but as a horcrux, it would be a sacred part of the story.

The idea of a horcrux being mentioned in each book is interesting too. I have to admit it seems a little more likely that the last horcrux is Harry now, but I still think there's something else to it.

I really don't think it will necessarily be both or neither dying in the last book. The prophecy says "Either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives." Think about the difference between surviving and living. Up till the first book, Harry wasn't really living, he was surviving. That Voldemort was in the same boat goes without saying. Neither will really be able to live while the other survives, so one has to stop surviving. I think Harry will kill Voldemort (I had forgotten that the prophecy does actually say one must die at the hand of the other).

I agree about the quandary Snape was faced with. I think all the information will be available to put him in the clear, but I don't think it will ever be generally known.

I suspect Legilimency will come back into play too. I was thinking that Harry has to learn to close his mind off very effectively if he hopes to go up against Voldemort. He did very poorly against Snape because of it, and it's been mentioned that Voldemort is a very good Legilimens. Harry only came out alive in book 4 because the dueling wands caught Voldemort off guard - he had no way of knowing that could happen, he couldn't have known Harry's wand was his own wand's brother. Next time, in addition to being able to protect himself, he'll have to be able to pull information out of an opponent, and one who's also very good at defending themselves. He did catch Snape off guard during lessons, so it's possible he has a special gift there - possibly courtesy of Voldemort himself.

What I'm really curious about is the power he has that Voldemort doesn't. Perhaps Love? That's been put up as the great magic that protected Harry in the first place, and now he's trying to break up with Ginny to protect her - I don't think he's going to get away with it, because that has Harry denying the one thing he has in his favor. Not to mention, Ginny has a gift with the curse of the bogeys. Not a girl you wanna tick off.

Question to CowboyNeal

[Anonymous Coward]

What part of the "stuff that matters", don't you understand?

Re:Question to CowboyNeal

[tezbobobo]

That was my origional thought. I guess though t that seeing as science fictio/fantasyt is generally considered nerd, it would probably fit into the first catagory..

Re:Question to CowboyNeal

[Anonymous Coward]

I can see that, but is a title of a book, albeit a very successful one, really news?

(I'm not the same AC)

Re:Question to CowboyNeal

[Kizor]

Consider: This actually has some kind of effect on the lives of many of us, if not most. That makes it far more notable than a possible new kind of solar panel coming up in a decade or two, or the hairiness of black holes.

Re:Question to CowboyNeal

[Duds]

I'd be willing to suggest that if we held a poll of "Which is more interesting to you, Harry potter or "Zonk finds way to slag off PS3 again"" then this would win

Re:Question to CowboyNeal

[Gilmoure]

...or the hairiness of black holes.

Hey, you leave my girlfriend out it!

The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

The title for those who don't want to read the article:

"Harry Potter and the Death Knell of American Literature"

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

"Harry Potter and the Death Knell of American Literature"

Are you implying that because an English writer will dominate the Best Seller list for a while?

Or perhaps you are concerned about millions of kids who have discovered books can be entertaining thanks to Rowlings books?

Or maybe you're just point out how stupid you are in that you didn't realize one of the biggest selling modern writers is neither American nor are her novels set in America, or that literature and popular books are completely independant?

Re:The Title

[WilliamSChips]

Harry Potter is British. What does it have to do with American literature?

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Harry Potter is so awesome, American literature will wither and die off. Duh.

Re:The Title

[WilliamSChips]

Wouldn't it have withered and died off when the first few books were released, then?

Re:The Title

[PixelScuba]

Amen. I teach 5th grade and it is astonishing to see how engrossed nearly all the students are with the Harry Potter franchise. It's not the movies that draw them in either, that's just icing on the cake. I ask them about a new Potter film and they will tell me, "It's not as good as tht Book." or "This was different in the Book." Older children and young adults love these stories, and why not. A Fantasy world set in the modern era, with young teens as the protagonists who become wrapped up in a mystery at a fantastic magical castle while casting magical spells, defeating monsters and overcoming issues teens their age face (puberty, dating, school/studies). Who has the right to say to readers, "This is crap, read something better," especially to budding readers who are already at an age when young boys begin dropping off from reading as it becomes "uncool." Maybe Harry Potter isn't listed on "great literature" lists, who cares. Kids are reading, and that is reallly the most important part. They are challenging themselves to read a significant novel of considerable depth and length for people their age. If they enjoy these stories, you can turn them on to other works they might enjoy to push their boundaries and reading capabilities. Enough witht he Harry Potter bashing, if you don't like them, don't read them.

Re:The Title

[Otter]

They're also, by the way, great books for brushing up on a foreign language: they're translated into just about everything and the way each book is successively harder gives you a chance to start slow and be reading at a young adult level by the end.

Re:The Title

[myth_of_sisyphus]

Well said. Hear hear.

Re:The Title

[glwtta]

"This is crap, read something better,"

I don't think anyone's saying that, especially not to kids. It's the hordes of adults who go on about it being some quantum leap in the evolution of literature, who are somewhat bemusing (or annoying, depending on your perspective).

Re:The Title

[Woldry]

I wouldn't call it a quantum leap, but I do agree with C. S. Lewis who said (I'm paraphrasing here, can't find the exact quote), if a book is worth reading when you're five, it's worth reading when you're fifty.

Re:The Title

[thePig]

My biggest issue with Harry Potter series is that it depicts the protagonist as one who has no genius, is not hard-working by any standards, has bigotry - in short - an absolutely average person.
The protagonist then goes and defeats a much more able antagonist (whose biggest fault is bigotry, by the way) with nothing more than - love of his mother protecting him.

My biggest issue with such a story - that too tailored for young children - is that the protagonist is not anywhere close to the perfect role model for children - and they are impressionable at that age. I am not asking for the protagonist to be a genius - I am just saying there should be some real stand-out feature in the protagonist - in a children's book. I couldn't find it in this book.
When I read the book, it felt as if the political correctness of the current times have enveloped the fantasy world too.

YMMV.

Re:The Title

[modecx]

Hey, that's a really awesome idea.

Re:The Title

[NosTROLLdamus]

Enough witht he Harry Potter bashing, if you don't like them, don't read them.

Jesus, it's not like you're in some small persecuted minority.

Don't go off with your "If you don't like it, ignore it" crap. I'm sorry people on a discussion site don't all (*cough*) jump into some big circle-jerk when the title of some junk book is mentioned.

Re:The Title

[Atlantis-Rising]

I don't like it because of one point you raised (but I think you didn't emphasize enough)- the protagonist is merely average. And yet he manages to overcome through sheer luck of the draw and general bumblingness someone who is by no means average and has an advantage over him in just about every way possible, other than being bigoted.

Reminds me of that quote from Spacebattles:
"Evil will always win... because good is STUPID!"

It just annoys the hell out of me that the bigots always lose because they're bigoted. Sure they're bigots, but I really don't care. The fact that Harry's incompetent bugs the hell out of me a lot more.

Re:The Title

[Martin Foster]

It worked out pretty well for Frodo in Lord of the Rings. It does seem to be a re-occuring theme in books and popular culture of late. People perhaps feel comfort that no matter how little they try to change, work to better themselves or learn something new... That great things are still in store for them?

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

No, after book 7 HP is done and after years of nothing to match it all of the children/fat women/gay males in the U.S. will commit suicide in one grand act of protest, thus heralding the end of American literature. This is elementary stuff.

Re:The Title

[Thangodin]

If he were a superman, that would send the wrong message too: "Oh, well, he can do that because he's really clever and powerful." He's not lazy, but he's not particularly studious either. He actually has to work much harder than Hermione to learn the same things (most of the time, though, he's up to his ass in schoolwork and other problems as well.) On the other hand, he's no slouch--he still manages to be near the head of his class. And he pays dearly for all of his flaws--he makes so many mistakes in Order of the Phoenix that he almost gets everyone killed, and in the end, Sirius Black pays for it with his life.

What he does have is loyalty, fairness, kindness, generosity, and courage. In every situation, that's what carries him through. In standard fantasy parlance, he'd be a Paladin. The books are about the power of love vs. the power of hatred (ironic that Christians try to ban these books--they just don't get much of anything, do they?) His mother's protection is just a metaphor for that--but his mother's protection, and Dumbledore's, is gone now. In the final book he will have to grow up and face Voldemort alone. He's going to have to work like a trojan to be able to pull it off. But Rowling has set it up so that he's going to be tested most in the very qualities that have carried him so far. All is not what it seems. If Harry behaves like a jerk in the final book, he will lose a great deal, even if he wins the final battle.

Re:The Title

[thesandtiger]

What about "Harry Potter and the Pretentious Fuck"?

Re:The Title

[dbIII]

Harry Potter is British. What does it have to do with American literature?

Those poor Americans have to get their literature from somewhere.

Re:The Title

[thesandtiger]

I actually like this. Harry's "exceptional" traits are ones that anyone can have. He's brave (but not foolhardy), loyal, kind, generous - that's why he manages to pull through. He's got some abilities of his own (flying, pretty good with that whold "defense against the dark arts" thing) but overall the reason he triumphs is because he is a decent human being. In fact, many of the difficulties he runs into in the stories come from when he doesn't act like a mensch.

It's not supposed to be realistic - let's face it, truly "nice" people tend to get eaten alive in the real world - but it does send a good message: you don't have to be special, just try not to be an asshole.

Plus, he's dreamy!

Re:The Title

[Broken scope]

So when I'm still reading some of my Dr. Seuss books when im 40 i won't be a complete loser? HOOOOOORRRAYY!!!

Re:The Title

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Actually, harry works a great deal, just not always on his school work. For example, he volunteers and takes up the task to find out who's going after the Philosepher's Stone, who's behind the Chamber of Secrets, and what's up with the murder of his own parents, fighting dragons, mermaids and various other magical beasties(granted, most of Goblet of Fire's events weren't voluntary). He even starts his own goddamn vigilante group and fights Voldemort's henchmen.

Frodo never did that. He just took a stroll down the country side to return some old git his gaudy jewelry.

Re:The Title

[Buchenskjoll]

Ah, finally someone positive. I love the Harry Potter books, eventhough J.K. will not get a Nobel prize anytime soon.

Re:The Title

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

I don't think that's the case... I mean, in the first book, Voldemort would've come back had Harry not had any sort of courage or strength of character to even confront him. Most people in that universe don't even want to say his -name- much less be around him, and Harry not even sure what to DO does what he thinks is right and tries to stop Voldemort.

Also, I think that it's been hinted that even the good guys have bigotry. I mean, fan favorite character Sirius Black treated his own servant House Elf like crap.

Re:The Title

[KingPrad]

That's how I feel, too. The real hero of the book is the girl. She's the only one who is diligent at her studies, she does all the detective work, and explains to Harry how to solve his problems. Harry just bumbles through in his uncomprehending way. It's sad the people in the book and - even worse, the actual readers - look up to him as a hero.

Re:The Title

[__aaclcg7560]

That's what they said about Stephen King. He's a Harry Potter fan as well.

Re:The Title

[glwtta]

That's a nice self-serving sentiment there, though I'm inclined to completely disagree with it. Unless he meant to imply that in order to be worthwhile reading for kids, a book needs to be able to appeal to adults. In which case both HP and his work fail as children's books (which I personally don't think they do).

Or maybe he's assuming that most people will already be senile by 50...

Re:The Title

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

It's the return of characters in an epic(in the sense that this does not take place within a single narrative, but several) setting. The evolution though, is bringing the C.S. Lewis or L. Frank Baum style of a wonderful mystic world to life in the modern world. While Narnia was set in what was C.S. Lewis' modern age, or close to it, the meat of the story isn't taking place in the modern world with modern concerns, emotional worries, etc. It's taking place in Narnia. Same with Oz. The evolution here is that we're bringing these wonderful places and concepts to life in our own lives.

There is a major difference though, in that JKR just isn't making this up as she goes along like C.S. Lewis or Frank Baum did. It was carefully plotted out similar to Dune or LotR. Which makes it even more exciting to know that there is an ending set in mind from page one.

Re:The Title

[Scrameustache]

My biggest issue with Harry Potter series is that it depicts the protagonist as one who has no genius, is not hard-working by any standards, has bigotry - in short - an absolutely average person. He's a natural on a broom, which in turn makes him a sports star.
He is also famous and rich, on top of the natural affinity for being a respected athleet. And frankly, he takes a LOT of abuse without becoming abusive himself. That's hard.

My biggest issue with such a story - that too tailored for young children - is that the protagonist is not anywhere close to the perfect role model for children I thought your biggest issue was his lack of genius?

- and they are impressionable at that age. I am not asking for the protagonist to be a genius But... it's your biggest issue with the series!

- I am just saying there should be some real stand-out feature in the protagonist - in a children's book. I couldn't find it in this book. Couldn't find the scar? The gold? The quidditch cup?

When I read the book, it felt as if the political correctness of the current times have enveloped the fantasy world too.
 
YMMV.
 
  I'm sorry, did lil' red riding hood and her grandma get saved by a hunter who's extremely good at vivisection (and a wolf who swallows their victims whole) or did the lil' twit die so that kids would learn to beware of strangers? PC got to the fanyasy world a loooong time ago.

Re:The Title

[Meagermanx]

Maybe it's because the character has flaws that millions of people identify with him?
If you look at Bilbo, Frodo (as you pointed out), or, actually, most contemporary (low- or high-brow) fantasy, you're going to find bumbling characters who make mistakes and only pull through because of Deus Ex Machina, luck of the draw, or some moral accomplishment.
 
I think it's the fact that we all recognize our own faults and inner issues, and can see them portrayed in these characters, that makes us, as readers, identify with the heroes of these stories.
We fuck up. We make mistakes. Sometimes, we're jerks to our friends, we don't put enough time into our relationships, and we make the wrong moral decisions.
Superman doesn't have those problems.
Harry Potter has those problems.
 
Remember the success of Spider-Man? From the Wikipedia article: The Spider-Man series broke ground by featuring a hero who himself was an adolescent, to whose "self-obsessions with rejection, inadequacy, and loneliness" young readers could relate.

Re:The Title

[Geoffreyerffoeg]

I am just saying there should be some real stand-out feature in the protagonist

Courage. Honesty. The self-confidence to do the right thing, no matter what, and realize that rules are secondary to morality.

Sure, you could have had a smart or strong or talented character as the hero, but merely being smart, strong, or talented isn't what really counts. There's a reason the three main characters -- especially Hermione -- are in Gryffindor.

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Is bigotry so acceptable to you that you automatically scorn portrayal of it in a negative light?

Accept the fact that most people like to see the everyman succeed against daunting odds because it gives them hope.

Re:The Title

[miskatonic alumnus]

In 1977, when I was in fifth grade, I was into Moorcock's Elric of Melnibone, Howard's Conan the Barbarian, and Baum's Wizard of Oz series. I don't think any of those will ever be considered classic literature. Nevertheless, I kept turning the pages. In my junior year I discovered Lovecraft, to the horror of my English Lit teacher. I like the Potter books too. Tis a damned shame the title isn't Harry Potter and the Goat with a Thousand Young.

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you... did you just call "Spaceballs"... "Spacebattles"?

Re:The Title

[Yomic]

Actually it's from Spaceballs and the quote is: "... now you see that evil will always triumph because good is dumb!"

And pertaining to your arguement, I totally agree that he (Harry Potter) gets through things out of sheer dumb luck, but the fact that he is average gives him a greater appeal to the average kids who can relate to him rather than the typical child prodigy hero who can zap enemies with a cunning flick of his wrist and get out of trouble in the wink of an eye. That wouldn't even work with the storyline presented because most of what happens is DUE TO his inability to get out of certain situations such as sneaking around the school and whatnot. He is also not entirely average because he has proved himself in situations of greater importance like saving a friend or something. A very admirable feat you'd want in a protagonist if you ask me.

Of course you may want a more interesting protagonist like Raislin from the Dragonlance novels. If so, go read them and let these kids read what they like.

Re:The Title

[Sarisar]

If it's still your first reading then no it doesn't count. You have to finish the book and re-read it for it to count :P

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, but you see, Harry can _love_.

--------

Join the Baby Seal Clubbers and save the baby fish!

Re:The Title

[AncientWarrior]

Harry is not incompetent -- he is described many times as an extremely talented young wizard. Rowling has clearly put a lot of thought into the precise nature of this talent, and it's a subtle characterization. There is an element of raw power -- recall when Harry and Voldemort's wands are locked together, Harry is able to push back with more than equal force. Harry thinks very quickly under extreme pressure, and has an uncanny ability to react instantly and correctly -- recall, for instance, when he stabs Voldemort's diary with the basilisks fang...

Of course, talent in wizardry is not something that a muggle could readily comprehend :-)

Re:The Title

[CaptainCarrot]

They're also, by the way, great books for brushing up on a foreign language

Yes. That's why I buy the British editions and not those translated into my native American. I had no idea that they called sorcerers "philosophers" in the UK!

Re:The Title

[MrWa]

Harry is the anti-geek: he isn't smart, isn't the best in school, doesn't give a rat's ass about magic, etc. The only thing he is good at is flying his stick; Harry is a JOCK! People love him, help him cheat or give him secret help so that he always looks good in public and the people with real talent around him are diminished. His only claim to fame is his heritage.

Re:The Title

[that this is not und]

Kids are reading, and that is reallly the most important part.

This is true, however when the market for kids books is such that a huge blockbuster series captures (probably) a two-digit percentage of the revenue in children's books every time the next book in the series is released, it sucks that much revenue out of the market that could be going to a bunch of smaller, maybe even better, books. 'All of publishing' is not a zero-sum game, but certainly every family only has a certain budget for books for the kids. That $17 for the new Rowling book could have bought a bunch of other stuff.

I was partial to the Brains Benton detective series as a kid. That and 'Alfred Hitchcock and the Three Investigators.' Neither of which appears to still be in print. Both of which probably warped plenty of young minds from my generation into nerd-dom.

Re:The Title

[that this is not und]

It's encouraging, though, that there are probably lots of young girls out there who are really admiring that girl character (proper nouns ALWAYS elude me) instead of dumb Harry, who reminds them of their pesky brother. There is always, still, the need for smart role models for young girls to look up to.

Re:The Title

[happyemoticon]

What gets me is that he's essentially a jock, but we have trouble recognizing it because he hasn't yet adopted jockish bravado nor gotten a pair of magic contact lenses. Think about it. He's:

• Good at sports,
• Spends lots of money on fancy sports equipment,
• Gets special treatment from the powers-that-be,
• (in)Famous,
• Guided by his dick, and, most importantly,
• Dumb.

Seriously, a trip to Aberzombie and Fitchicus and a six pack of Cooricon's Light is all he needs to become a typical beer-swilling young jock.

Re:The Title

[kamapuaa]

I seriously doubt you have ever done this for yourself, it's terrible advice. The series varies between child-level reading that even a beginner to a language can understand, and advanced gobbledy-gook about magical spells, that is often specific entirely to the Harry Potter series, or at least to English mythology.

Really I can't imagine much worse of a novel to use for brushing up on a language.

Re:The Title

[alexhard]

Very true that..When I read the first Harry Potter book (at 11) I pretty much hated books...now I'm 18 and I have a pretty large library, mostly consisting of stuff that would be considered much "finer" literature than HP (I still read the new ones though)..

HP is like a gateway drug to reading heavier stuff!

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

What about someone like Xena or Hercules from the shows of the same names?
Contemporary fantasy, not bumbling or flawed in any particular way.

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

You know, I agreed with the principles in your post even before I read it, until I came across this section

Maybe Harry Potter isn't listed on "great literature" lists, who cares. Kids are reading, and that is really the most important part.

It occurred to me that this mentality is dangerous:

• Maybe Backstreet Boys aren't listed on "great music" lists, who cares. Kids are listening, and that is really the most important part.
• Maybe Jerry Springer isn't listed on "great cinema" lists, who cares. Kids are watching, and that is really the most important part.
• Maybe McDonald's isn't listed on "great dining" lists, who cares. Kids are eating, and that is really the most important part.
• Maybe TV newsmagazines aren't listed on "great journalism" lists, who cares. Kids are glued, and that is really the most important part.

Sometimes not caring about the quality of the things we consume allows cracks to form in the dams that keep society from being awash in filth.

Re:The Title

[whimdot]

Ah, but we don't. The problem in translation stems I think from the absence of the relevant period of history on the Western side of the Atlantic. The philosophers' stone was a mythical substance derived from alchemical pursuits with properties of confering eternal life and turning base metal into gold. The alchemists were philosophers and not sorcerers since, after all, even 500 years ago no-one admitted to believing in magic.

Re:The Title

[Gavin86]

I'm sorry you feel that way, but I am fairly certain that you miss a message that IMHO was paramount to all the series: they stress all the values of companionship and relationships. The message isn't that Harry relies upon supremely omnipotent figures, or some other sort of external locus of control; it's that he overcomes adversity with the help of his personal relationships. He had a certain cushion early on with Dumbledore and other eminent figures, but the plot is increasingly dependent on his on self determinism, which seems to express the universal eventuality of that growth process of youth. The other balance to the formula for success is those personal relationships. Primarily his friends who have become de facto family or even the legacy of his parents and what their love for him and their love of justice represents. Those figures in his life empower him to reach his potential as a wise young man in pursuit of goodness. In my opinion, it only reflects good family values on a certain easy to understand level. As previous commenters have said, there seems no point in being pedantic about the contents of the book.

Re:The Title

[AaronLawrence]

Nut... but... he can't be a jock! He wears glasses!

Re:The Title

[Eustace Tilley]

Potter's stand-out feature is bravery.

Re:The Title

[Kazzahdrane]

I gathered that the reason they changed the title to include "Sorcerer" instead of "Philosopher" in the USA was because a philosopher is someone who thinks. Yeah, I couldn't resist a little jab at the Americans, sorry guys!

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you implying that because an English writer will dominate the Best Seller list for a while?

JK Rowling is Scottish.

Re:The Title

[MythMoth]

Maybe Harry Potter isn't listed on "great literature" lists, who cares.

Not me. "Great" literature is just literature that's readable enough to have made it down to the next generation. It's worth reading the greats because they're really well written and interesting, not because it's worthy or important.

People get snooty about Harry Potter because it's for children, and because it's popular. More power to J.K.Rowling's elbow. She's done more for "real" literature than any amount of posturing by modern highbrow authors (who're mostly just jealous that they're not multi-millionaires anyway).

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

- let's face it, truly "nice" people tend to get eaten alive in the real world -

I keep hearing it over and over again, but it simply isn't true. The truth is, when someone "nice" gets "eaten alive" it hurts the rest of us more and we tend to remember that as injustice (some people have unexplainable illusion that life owes them something for their good deeds or sufferings) and "ungratefulness of real world". If you are good, you get instant gratification from your actions. It is not like you have choice (at least not one that would satisfy you) at that or that you do it for any outside reward. However, most people whose goodness comes from belief in some sort of karmic rewards (in this life) get disillusioned after a while and then lament about "fate of the good" (meaning: their own).

Re:The Title

[lilo_booter]

I think you're missing the point - the commendable thing about Harry Potter is simply that it isn't a 'TV show' - kids are reading and for many, HP is their introduction to the diverse world of literature.

And I would cast another light on the poor role model complaint - people who make good role models are not perfect. If that was a requirement, then no one on the entire face of the planet would qualify. The fact that Harry Potter is not portrayed in an idealistic/impossible manner - with all his faults and failings laid out in front of us - makes the story more interesting and accessible.

I can't really think of any character from any work of serious fiction (fantasy, sci fi or otherwise) who doesn't have faults. I would probably go as far as to say that a recurring theme in fiction is the consequence and sometimes resolution of the protaganists failings.

Re:The Title

[Gilmoure]

I totally agree that he (Harry Potter) gets through things out of sheer dumb luck ...

Must be pronounced with a Maggie Smith Scottish brogue.

Is similar to Mike Myers' You're heading the right way for a smack bottom! from Shrek.

Re:The Title

[Gilmoure]

Psst! Hey, kid, c'mon, try it. All your friends are doing it. It don't hurt no one. Here, just read a couple of pages...

While not a fan of Harry Potter (is derivative of other children's books and treats magic the way Star Treck handles science), they have gotten my daughter away from basic picture books and started her reading actual novels. I can't complain about that. Now if only, her reading skills were a little more advanced so that I didn't have to jump in and help her figure out new words ever two minutes. What's wrong with our schools? Don't they teach reading in Kindergarten? /daughter is 6

Re:The Title

[bryanp]

Who has the right to say to readers, "This is crap, read something better," especially to budding readers who are already at an age when young boys begin dropping off from reading as it becomes "uncool."

I've tried to make this point repeatedly. I've always got a book of some sort with me and I've had people ask me how they can get their kids to be lifelong readers. "Let them read something they like" is usually my reply. I started out with comic books and graduated to a box of old "Doc Savage" 1930's pulp novels my dad had lying around. "Hey! This book has a guy on the cover with big muscles, a submachine gun and ... DINOSAURS! COOL!" From there I moved on to Robert Heinlein juveniles, and so on from there.

It can be a problem to get parents to understand that even if their kids never go on to read "great literature", simply being a constant reader of *something* will serve them well later in life.

Re:The Title

[GrueMoon]

So not the drama.

Re:The Title

[Woldry]

Are you implying that HP & Lewis's books fail to appeal to adults? I know an awful lot of adults (not to mention publisher's marketing departments, bookstore staff, librarians, and kids whose parents insist on reading the books first) who would disagree with you there.

Re:The Title

[dr_dank]

The books are about the power of love vs. the power of hatred (ironic that Christians try to ban these books--they just don't get much of anything, do they?)

In all of the books, Rowling always includes a scene of the characters celebrating Christmas. I've always wondered if she did that to pacify the religious wackos who would seek to ban the book due to "satanic and occult themes". Point to the Christmas part of the book and say "How can they be worshipping the devil if they're exchanging gifts and opening crackers?".

Re:The Title

[hotdiggity]

> He's going to have to work like a trojan to be able to pull it off.

I'm not familiar with this comparison. The only trojan I know works very well until you pull it off!

Re:The Title

[suffe]

Not to sound rude or anything (especially since this is a complaint about parents in general), but what is wrong with "our" parents. Don't they teach reading at home? I was reading fairly well at age four and while I'd like to think of myself as the pinnacle of evolution and a genius beyond comprehension even I am forced to believe that my parents had something to do with it. Read for your kids, read with your kids, give them things to read. The world is a much duller place without it.

Re:The Title

[christurkel]

The good thing about these books is that they are cute without being Disney cuteish and are well written and charming. They are good books to read for any age.

Re:The Title

[RembrandtX]

Actually, I had thought I read somewhere that they changed the title due to copywrite issues, but this site suggest other reasons.

Re:The Title

[d3ac0n]

(ironic that Christians try to ban these books--they just don't get much of anything, do they?)

Actually, most Christians DO get this. It's just the few idiot ones that don't. Christianity is like any other social group on the planet. It's made up of humans, some of which are morons. Unfortunately, Christian morons seem to get more press than those of other stripes.

I realize that there are many here on Slashdot that, for one reason or another, have thier hate on for Christians. I'm not going to address that bigotry right now. But for those that don't hate Christians, but really do think they all want to ban Harry Potter, I recommend going here and reading:

http://lashawnbarber.com/archives/2006/12/21/laura -mallory-and-the-misguided-crusade/

Not all Christians want to ban Harry Potter. Most don't, and those that do are a small moronic minority.

Re:The Title

[freeweed]

Yeah, but he wears glasses.

Ergo, nerd :)

Sadly, this IS how most people view the books and movies.

Re:The Title

[OglinTatas]

Amen again. I have been getting my nieces and nephews books for Christmas and birthday gifts since they were born. (I also get them a cool toy, I'm not a complete jerk. Although they ONLY remember that I get them "stupid" books, not which books, not even that they got toys too... but I digress) I would get them "classic" books like RL Stevenson, Tolkein, Dumas, Baum, L.Ingles-Wilder, Lewis Caroll, etc. I would even try to read to them at appropriate age levels, but if it wasn't TV or video games, they are not interested. Then came the Harry Potter books, and they actually _enjoyed_ reading. Who would have thought? Now they _ask_ for specific titles (mostly dragon stuff right now), if they haven't already gotten those book from the library, and it pleases me. But _I_ didn't get them reading, Ms. Rowling did.

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

He has good teeth?

Re:The Title

[FacePlant]

Those poor Americans have to get their literature from somewhere.

That's why we grew Christopher Paolini [Eragon] in vat in a secret laboratory.

Re:The Title

[Otter]

The series varies between child-level reading that even a beginner to a language can understand, and advanced gobbledy-gook about magical spells, that is often specific entirely to the Harry Potter series, or at least to English mythology.

Putting aside the first half of that (I'm rusty, that's the point), I'm not sure what your objection is. The Harry Potter specific-jargon isn't any harder in a foreign language than in English, and it's not like that's all or even most of the vocabulary in the books. The only downside is that it's hard to discuss the books with people who have read them in English, since I had no idea what a "dementor" or an "OWL" was.

Re:The Title

[Gilmoure]

Sigh. No one perceives sarcasm anymore.

Of course we read to our daughter. How else would she learn? They don't start teaching reading at her ES until first grade. Now, I suppose that it is possible that my daughter sprang fully armored from my forehead, spear in one hand and book in another, reading a Fitzgerald translation of the Illiad, but it's not likely.

What has amazed me about the HP books is that, while she will pick up and read her Dr. Suess and other picture books, with minimal text, this is the first 'chapter book' without pictures that she is actively pursuing. Actually, she's now on chapter 5 of the second book. She tried Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe but found it not as exciting as the first HP book. Oh well, give her time.

Re:The Title

[WilliamSChips]

It's not so secret anymore, is it?

Re:The Title

[MS-06FZ]

The title for those who don't want to read the article:

"Harry Potter and the Death Knell of American Literature"

Get a grip. It's a children's book. (And, as others have noted, it's not American.)

Other alternative titles:

Harry Potter and The Jumping of the Shark
Harry Potter and The Progressively Less Fun Fantasy
Harry Potter and His Various Problems Which Are Worse Than Yours
Harry Potter and The Revolving Door Of Father Figures
Harry Potter and The Death of One Or Two People He Really Cares About
Harry Potter and The Missing Period (had some fun with Ginny before dumping her, I guess)
Harry Potter and The Many Obvious Clues Which Are Very Specific To What's Going On But Which He Doesn't Understand Until Hermione Gives Him The Answers
Harry Potter and the Very Long Quidditch Scene
Harry Potter and The Emotional Baggage
Harry Potter and The Kiln of Nair
Harry Potter and The Very Bad Man

Re:The Title

[WilliamSChips]

He's still writing books. Actually I think when he "quit" he was actually writing names under a pseudonym.

Re:The Title

[FacePlant]

It's not so secret anymore, is it?
Why? Do you know where the lab is?

Re:The Title

[Doctor Faustus]

Harry is the anti-geek: he isn't smart, isn't the best in school, doesn't give a rat's ass about magic, etc. The only thing he is good at is flying his stick; Harry is a JOCK!

Yeah, probably. Just like in Buffy the Vampire Slayer, though, the main character isn't really one of the more interesting. Many of us are far more interested in Snape, Hermione, Lupin, Willow, Giles and Oz.

Re:The Title

[Doctor Faustus]

what is wrong with "our" parents. Don't they teach reading at home?
Do you have any idea how to teach beginning reading? I certainly don't, and I refuse to feel guilty for only helping my son out with hard words and making sure he reads a lot since he was taught at school. He reads well and has very good spelling now (just turned nine), and I'm not all that concerned that he couldn't do so at four.

Re:The Title

[glwtta]

Are you implying that HP & Lewis's books fail to appeal to adults?

I am not implying anything. The parent said "worth reading", not "appeal to" - HP and Lewis are not worth reading when you are an adult.

Re:The Title

[suffe]

That was never my point. For one thing, kids develop at different rates. Neither was my point to make the parent (pun slightly intended) feel like I singled him out. My point was *drum roll* that people should read to their kids and read with their kids. If they learn how to read from that (which I find highly likely) then good. But at the very least it gives them an introduction to literature, HP or otherwise.

Re:The Title

[CaptainCarrot]

OK, see that "Funny" mod? It's a joke, son!

Re:The Title

[Thangodin]

Not all Christians want to ban Harry Potter. Most don't, and those that do are a small moronic minority.

Yeah, they are a minority. Unfortunately, they're a damn noisy minority, who seem to have a better publicity machine and better connections than most. That leaves the impression that the lunatics are in charge of the asylum. The press and the government seem to assume that people like these speak for you, and that makes you look like a moron too.

There was a time when these people lived in backwood shacks and nobody paid attention to them because more balanced Christians kept them in check. Now they show up on the news every day. If they don't get on the news, they scream about a bias against Christians until they do. Targetted messaging campaigns fill petitions with names that they brandish to the media and politicians as the people they represent, even though many of the names on the list may have no idea of what their name is actually going to be used for. My sister ended up on some of those mailing lists, and she had no idea what she was signing up for.

So I feel for you, but unless moderate Christians start to make some noise and pack these loons back to the fringes where they belong, a lot of people are going to assume that you agree with them.

Re:The Title

[Anonymous Coward]

Good observation.

Naturally the "lunatic Christians" who want to ban Harry Potter or Tinky Winky or whatever chafes them on a particular week are going to receive the press. It's the nature of news reporting. Moderate Christians working in a soup kitchen, or collecting gifts to send to an orphanage in the Ukraine, or just helping an elderly neighbor shovel a sidewalk aren't newsworthy enough to improve ratings.

This isn't unique to Christians.

News is all about reporting the extreme and the aberrations, pulling in viewers, and selling those commercial slots. You can learn a lot about what's going on from the media, but you'll never get a balanced view of any given topic from it.

Damn...

[locokamil]

... I was hoping it would be called "Harry Potter and the Back Alley Abortion."

Seriously, why do people keep on reading this stuff? :: goes and pre orders five copies-- one for self, one for wife, one for sister, one for children, one for mother ::

Re:Damn...

[Anonymous Coward]

... I was hoping it would be called "Harry Potter and the Back Alley Abortion."

But an actual abortion would clash with Harry's 'Luke, I am your father' twist later on in the series.

Re:Damn...

[Walt Dismal]

"Harry," said Dumbledore, "we frown upon sex with younger students, especially freshmen boys. You see, this is why we have female goblins and elves around here."

"I don't quite understand, Sir," said Harry.

Dumbledore took him by the shoulder. "Ah, Harry, that's what I like about you. Sometimes you're thick as a brick. Which allows us to keep the series going for so many books."

Hermione interrupted. "*I* understand, Sir."

"And I've been meaning to speak to you, Hermione. About those candles, broomsticks, and bowling pins the housekeepers report littering your bedchamber..."

---- sometimes, you just DON'T want to see the parts Rowling edited out of the draft manuscripts...

Re:Damn...

[mojo-raisin]

thanks for saying that. I think some current slashdoters don't appreciate decent story telling, or just assume the series is *just* a children's series.

Re:Damn...

[Kelson]

"Harry," said Dumbledore, "we frown upon sex with younger students, especially freshmen boys. You see, this is why we have female goblins and elves around here."

The sad thing is, you can probably find this story on a Harry Potter fanfic site.

Re:Damn...

[Umbral Blot]

Perhaps because it has been turned into a money making machine?

Re:Damn...

[Zelucifer]

Would it be far too geeky of me to point out that their are no freshman? Only 1st years (11 year olds)? ;)

Re:Damn...

[FirienFirien]

Remember that it's set in England, where "freshers" is a corruption of "firstyears". I have no idea what "freshman/freshmen" is derived from.

Re:Damn...

[jamstar7]

Perhaps because it has been turned into a money making machine?

So? Nothing wrong with paying the rent and eating sometime this month by doing what you enjoy doing. And if people want to drown her in money, who am I to argue?

Re:Damn...

[LordLucless]

There seems to be some weird compulsion for nerds to tear down anything popular or mainstream (possibly because they themselves are generally neither). For some reason, they also seem to be accusing JKR of milking her books for money, even though it was indicated from the very first book that there would be seven of them, and despite the fact that JKR has written two books with all proceeds donated to charity. What were they expecting her to do, stop writing mid-series when she'd made enough money? A real storyteller won't stop midstory, because they enjoy telling the story as much as others do reading it.

Re:Damn...

[identity0]

Somehow, I want to imagine Harry as a closet RPG and fantasy geek who keeps his 'hobbies' hidden because of the ridicule hed' get from his friends for being a real wizard who's into fantasy...

"Harry", said Hermione, "Are you ready to... take this to the next level?"

"You bet", said Harry. "I'll put on my robe and wizard hat."

"What? That's not what I'm..."

"I cast Level 3 eroticism. You turn into a beautiful woman, instead of a flat dork."

"What did you call me?!?!"

"I wave my wand of undressing and you turn naked."

"You have no idea what to do, do you?"

"I look through the Pokedex for the best creature. Hermione, I choose you!"

"My god, you're somehow more pathetic than a muggle dork, you play pretend magic even though you're a real wizard?!"

"Okay, if that's the way you want to play, then I'll use this tome of unspeakable horrors I found in the library. The Necronomicon."

"What?! Harry, you're not supposed to-"

"ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn! Ia! Ia!"

"My god, what is that thing!?!? It's all tentacle and-"

"I hope you enjoy this, Hermione, I saw this in a Japanese cartoon once..."

"*NOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!* *mrrrrhhhh*"

Ah, well. One can dream, can't he? (References to bloodninja and Cthulu)

Re:Damn...

[csrster]

Puts me in mind of my dear old Cambridge College library where the "No Refreshments" sign had been vandalised to read "No Freshmen". I had always believed that fresher is an abbreviation of "freshman". The OED seems to agree with me - finding uses of the term "freshman" in a British context from the 16thC up to modern times.

Re:Damn...

[hansamurai]

A money making machine? Give me an example where she has exploited the fans so much? The series was planned to be seven books from the start, God forbid she signs a movie deal, where obviously there will be seven movies. Oh noes, the terrible EA is making the Harry Potter video games.

So let's see, there's the books, the movies, and the video games. Those are pretty standard fare for any sci-fi/fantasy series if you ask me. Now if Warner Bros. re-released all the movies with super magical editions and she published uncut versions of the books, then I would consider it a money making machine.

I think it's just sour grapes over how many copies the books have sold, which I would bet, account for the majority of the money she makes.

Re:Damn...

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps because it has been turned into a money making machine?

Yeah, unlike Star Wars, Matrix, Firefly and just about everything else. Oh, and does the name Christopher Tolkien ring a bell?

wtf?

[Anonymous Coward]

first politics and now books! what a crock!

What's a Hallow?

[davecrusoe]

Our friendly Webster dictionary says: (and I quote) "Etymology: Middle English halowen, from Old English hAlgian, from hAlig holy -- more at HOLY 1 : to make holy or set apart for holy use 2 : to respect greatly : VENERATE synonym see DEVOTE" Interesting -- unless there's something that I'm missing, from earlier books in the series? Thoughts?

Re:What's a Hallow?

[redcaboodle]

Probably a placename again.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[rufusdufus]

I don't think the word you looked up is the one meant in the title. First off, the word you reference is a verb, and in the title it is used as a noun. I have found a reference to the word here that has a meaning that makes more sense: a hallows is a relic.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[SinGunner]

in the course of the "complicated procedure", could someone have transposed "G" and "H"? thus, we could have "Garry Potter and the Deatgly Gallows!"

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Woldry]

Knowing Rowling's punning nomenclature, "Hallows" could be a pun on "hollows" (in the sense of a small, steep valley) / "hallowed [ground]". It's also an old word for a Catholic/Anglican saint, so it may have something to do with that.

Either way, or even if I'm off base on both counts, I'm definitely on tenterhooks...

Re:What's a Hallow?

[SinGunner]

in reference to my above post, one might also note that the video shows a game of "hangman" to determine the title... the "hangman" character being on a crude scaffolding, or "gallows"? perhaps there's more to the game than just getting the right answer?

Re:What's a Hallow?

[gardyloo]

The OED has "hallow" (the noun form) meaning one of the following:

      1. A saint, a god of the heathens, or something belonging thereto (like a relic);
      2. A loud shout or cry, to get dogs to chase, or to draw attention;
      3. The parts of a hare given to hounds as a reward or encouragement after a chase. (I really hope it's this meaning that Rowling has in mind!)

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's almost certainly a references to the Horcruxes mentioned in the previous book.
They are 'Hallowed' magical objects into which "He Who Must Not Be Named" has poured a portion of his soul, to keep himself functionally immortal. The last one we saw did a real number on Dumbledore's hand, so yes, these things will convey serious hit points.

Harry's gonna have to destroy them all before he goes head-to-head with ... Him ... again.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[tdelaney]

I don't think so. As another poster pointed out, "hallows" can mean "relics". Now, what would qualify as a "relic" in the previous book, that's associated with death?

Perhaps a good translation of the title might be ... "Harry Potter and the Horcruxes".

Re:What's a Hallow?

[rpj1288]

I believe it is a reference to something from earlier in the series. Harry's parents lived in a town called Godric's Hallow.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's "Godrick's Hollow", not "Hallow".
The place was named after Godrick Griffindore, one of the founders of the school.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't worry. It'll be renamed for the American audience when the movie comes out, just like Philosopher's Stone was.

"Harry Potter and Like.. Stuff.. d00d."

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Woldry]

*smacks forehead*

Of course, you're right. I think my brain was addled by trying to reduce my risk of dying.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[that this is not und]

The really weird thing is, after 'a chase' our dog decides on his own what part of the hare to 'give' himself.

Many an afternoon he can be seen far across the dogyard tearing something into strips and eating it; one just avoids that part of the yard for awhile. Of course, he's a Britanny Spaniel, not a hound.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[SinGunner]

As I recall, "All Hallow's Eve" makes use of "hallow" as a noun in reference to spirits. That fits pretty well with the ol' Harry Potter frame of mind, eh?

Re:What's a Hallow?

[oz1cz]

So what have we got?

• "Harry Potter and the deathlike saints"?
• "Harry Potter and the deadly relics"?
• "Harry Potter and the killing hunting trophies"?
• "Harry Potter and the fatal hunting cries"?

Re:What's a Hallow?

[jamstar7]

Many an afternoon he can be seen far across the dogyard tearing something into strips and eating it; one just avoids that part of the yard for awhile. Of course, he's a Britanny Spaniel, not a hound.

As opposed to him being Britney Spears?

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Lectrik]

"Harry Potter and the deadly relics"?

Well, at least one person has died retreiving a relic in the books

Re:What's a Hallow?

[ScentCone]

Many an afternoon he can be seen far across the dogyard tearing something into strips and eating it; one just avoids that part of the yard for awhile. Of course, he's a Britanny Spaniel, not a hound.

Hey! He's supposed to be pointing and retrieving that [whatever mammal/bird]! Bad dog!

Um, of course, I live with German Shorthaird Pointers, so no matter pious I try to get about dogs not having their own agenda, I've got NO room to complain about anyone else's dog. Damn German dogs, anyway. Constantly working the angles and looking for legal loopholes to get away with very un-Pointerish things. My only excuse is that the Germans made that breed to be an all-around hunting dog, and they're supposed to have the drive to bring rabbits back to the house on their own, with or without human/shotgun assistance.

My bigger dog's dam actually spent all night once dragging a deer back to the house. Even when they're being bad, they're impressive! *sigh*

Re:What's a Hallow?

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering Harry's parents were killed on All Hallows' Eve. Presumably, that same night, his mother's charm saved his life and killed one part of Voldemort's soul/spirit.

Re:What's a Hallow?

[dbolger]

The most compelling theory I have seen on this is that the Hallows are the remaining Horcruxes.

In mythology, the the Four Hallows of Ireland are treasures possessing magical attributes - the Stone of Destiny, the Spear of Destiny, the Sword of Light, and a bottomless cauldron. The Four Hallows are sometimes referred to as the Four Treasures of Ireland, and this would seem to fit, in that Voldemort's greatest treasures would be the horcruxes.

If the correlation holds, "deathly" would most certainly be a fit adjective to describe such things created by the Dark Lord, and the title of the final book, which we know has to deal with Harry's quest to find these objects, would roughly translate to "Harry Potter and The Remaining Horcruxes".

Hallows?

[WilliamSChips]

Hallowed are the Ori.

Re:Hallows?

[Kelson]

The difference, of course, is in how these Hallows relate to death.

The Ori will bore you to death.
The Harry Potter books, however, will kill you if dropped on your head. Seriously, the last three books have been moving into Wheel of Time territory.

Re:Hallows?

[TheBeowulf]

We bring light where there is darkness.

Death to all non-believers.

{bows} Hallowed are the Ori.

damn it

[Anonymous Coward]

What god awful dribble those books are. Now if you don't mind I need to roll this d20.

Re:damn it

[fireproofjew]

"Drivel". If you're going to mindlessly bash something, at least have the tact to use proper spelling/grammar, please.

Spoiler

[Anonymous Coward]

To mirror the opening chapter of the first book, "The Boy Who Lived", the final chapter will be "The Boy Who Died." In it, despite the name, Harry Potter will kill all women on the face of the planet, thus dooming the human race -- muggle and magic alike.

Re:Spoiler

[75th Trombone]

Despite your troll, you've almost got it right. The final chapter of the final book will actually be entitled "The Boy Who Lived," just like the first chapter of the first book.

Note how clever that turn of phrase is: you can look at the table of contents and see that chapter title, but you won't know until you read the book whether it means 1) the boy who used to live, or 2) the boy who fought Voldemort (again) and lived.

Re:Spoiler

[BeerCat]

Surely, a more apposite last chapter title is "The Man Who Died". By that time, Harry will be officially an adult, so it can then refer to either Harry or Voldemort (since everyone has pretty much reckoned that there will be the final showdown)

Re:Spoiler

[anshil]

They will kill each other. Point.

Re:Spoiler

[Anonymous Coward]

Harry Potter is a Horcrux. As long as he's alive, Voldemort can't die.

So, yes, they'll kill each other.

Re:Spoiler

[75th Trombone]

Oops, you're half right! I forgot all the business about coming-of-age. It will, in fact, be "The Man Who Lived." Thanks for the half-correction. :)

Orginal title

[edwardpickman]

It was originally called "Harry Potter Laughes All The Way To The Bank". But the publisher convinced her to change the title.

Re:Orginal title

[Nimey]

And a good thing, because that title would have embarrassed the proofreader something fierce.

Re:Orginal title

[Stormwatch]

Isn't that archaic english?

You heard it wrong

[Stormwatch]

It's actually: "Harry Potter: the plot is shallow".

Re:You heard it wrong

[zobier]

Mendel Quoth:

Deathly Hallows

at the blue river valley

your babies left swinging, in the boughs.

a fly grasping warmth while perched on an integrated circuit

Re:You heard it wrong

[syousef]

I thought that was the last one. The new one is: Harry Potter: Ka-ching!!!$$$$$

Long as the kids enjoy it and you teach them about franchises and marketing when they first get hooked by this sort of thing, I'm not so sure it's that bad. Let them buy into all the commercial BS and you'll have a mindless drone albeit a literate one if they go for the book.

Re:You heard it wrong

[Reality Master 101]

It's actually: "Harry Potter: the plot is shallow".

I know you're just being funny, but the LAST thing you can accuse the HP plot of is being shallow. That world is HUGE and very complex. I think that's one of the reasons that adult readers can get dragged into it as much as the kids. Supposedly JKR has boxes and boxes full of notes about how various things work. She's said she might publish an encyclopdia of the world based on her notes (for charity, like the other two charity books).

Re:You heard it wrong

[thesandtiger]

Maybe it should be "Harry Potter and the Cynical Bastards"?

As children's books go, the HP series is far better than most from both a literary and a commercial standpoint. While everyone involved has certainly made a pile of money, they have stayed relatively consistent.

For my money, it beats "JRR Tolkein's Notes Taken While Upon The Crapper That My Son Is Publishing Because He Likes Money A Whole Lot," "Dune: Ass-raping My Father's Legacy" and "Piers Anthony's Yet Another Disturbing Look Into My Psyche (And Also Puns!)"

Re:You heard it wrong

[Dun Malg]

It's actually: "Harry Potter: the plot is shallow".

I know you're just being funny, but the LAST thing you can accuse the HP plot of is being shallow. That world is HUGE and very complex. I think that's one of the reasons that adult readers can get dragged into it as much as the kids. Supposedly JKR has boxes and boxes full of notes about how various things work. She's said she might publish an encyclopdia of the world based on her notes (for charity, like the other two charity books).

The world may be complex, but that has nothing to do with the plot. Harry Potter plots are all exasperatingly shallow. Harry is a bloody dunce who wanders around through a fantastic world in a complete muddle, ignoring or missing clues all around him until he is trapped in a corner and saved by whatever deus ex machina plot device JKR had handy. It's absolutely horrendous writing. Complex? sure. Engaging? Yeah. Well crafted plots? Not at all.

Re:You heard it wrong

[ClosedSource]

To be fair, Herbert Jr. was just continuing the Ass-raping of the Dune legacy that Herbert Sr. started with "Children of Dune". What can you say about a series when the only character that appears in every book, died in the first one?

Re:You heard it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

"Supposedly," whatever. You know you read that in some interview or Harry Potter magazine or perhaps at your Hogwartz Guild at the public library. The books are totally shallow, and it freaks me out whenever I come across these weirdo adults who are into these kid wizard books. Just because the world is huge and complex doesn't mean the plots and characters aren't shallow and boring and simpleton.

I can't wait for the Harry Potter fad to fucking die already. We're already seeing it fading out...hopefully this book will be the end of it.

Re:You heard it wrong

[that this is not und]

I'll second your sentiment, and add to it. The very fact that Rowling apparently has boxes and boxes of notes to sift through shows that she's a craftsperson, not an artist. An artist creates works from his/her imagination. A craftsperson just opens up the scrap book and looks for pieces to kachunk together.

In that, sense, I will disagree with you on your comment about 'well crafted plots.'

The best creative writing is not craftwork. Never has been, never will be.

But JK Rowling is writing for an audience of children. Let's be fair.

Re:You heard it wrong

[LordLucless]

Plots don't have to be complex to be good. And books don't even necessarily need "good" plots to be good books. It all depends on what the book is trying to do. If you're writing a romance, the plot doesn't need nearly as much work as the characters and their relationships. If you're writing horror, atmosphere is likely to be a bigger concern than plot. Having a complex plot can even be a detriment when your audience isn't after a complex plot - they just want to read more about the characters, but are being forced to wade through stuff they don't care about to get it.

Harry Potter is a coming-of-age story in an epic-fantasy cross boarding-school setting. It's plot has always been straightforward, but the focus has more been on the setting and character development than the plot. And that's not a bad thing. If you're after cryptic, complex plots, then go watch Memento, or read some cyberpunk. Just the same as if you're after complex character relationships and development, you probably shouldn't be reading Clive Cussler. Horses for courses.

Re:You heard it wrong

[Zebadias]

But JK Rowling is writing for an audience of children. Let's be fair.

Phillip Pullman also writes for children however is in my opinion able to write creatively.

Re:You heard it wrong

[ConceptJunkie]

I always joke that I read the Dune books when they were only a trilogy.

Re:You heard it wrong

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, do I disagree. I'm listening the Chmber of Secrets currently, and I'm in awe of how well she weaves the dozen or so subplots into one connected story. It's never obvious how until it happens, but it always seems "fair" to me. I agree the phoenix in CoS is a deus ex machina. I'm not sure how you applly the term to the other books. She's a master of misdirection as well -- red herrings abound, all with reasonable explanations at the end. I look forward to her first "adult" mystery when HP is done.

Re:You heard it wrong

[Reality Master 101]

The world may be complex, but that has nothing to do with the plot. Harry Potter plots are all exasperatingly shallow.

I'm speaking of the plot, as well as the world. Harry is at the center of the plot, but his actions are only a small part of the whole thing. This series is not seven individual stories, it's one story split across seven books. There are dozens and dozens of subplots, all contributing to a huge master plot arc spanning probably 4,000 pages once it's done.

Harry is a bloody dunce who wanders around through a fantastic world in a complete muddle, ignoring or missing clues all around him until he is trapped in a corner and saved by whatever deus ex machina plot device JKR had handy.

First, one of the appeals of the series is its realistic, fallible characters. Harry, while powerful, is NOT a genius. He is a very flawed, damaged individual. He doesn't see things he should.

Second, contrary to popular belief, these are not mysteries where can you "solve the mystery". They are about the hero's journey, doing the best he can with whatever resources he has. That's not to say there aren't hints along the way -- there are a lot of hints, some planted in the first book that didn't come to fruition until the fifth and sixth books.

Well crafted plots? Not at all.

The genius of JKR -- and why both seven and 70 year olds can enjoy these books -- is that they can be read two ways. Either as a superficial, simple plot, or as an amazingly deep plot, depending on how much you dig into them. A seven year old sees the evil Voldemort. An older reader sees the two-class system of "pure" wizards and muggleborns, and all the allegorical ramifications. A seven year old sees scary Dementors running the prison. An older reader can wonder and debate about the morality of using such creatures to guard prisoners. We could get into politics of the wizarding world... on and on, all contributing to the enormous plot arc.

Just find some essays on all the unanswered plot questions -- some very subtle -- and you'll see just how deep the plot really is. There's a reason people get obsessed about these books (not me, of course *cough* :)).

Re:You heard it wrong

[vadim_t]

I'll second your sentiment, and add to it. The very fact that Rowling apparently has boxes and boxes of notes to sift through shows that she's a craftsperson, not an artist. An artist creates works from his/her imagination. A craftsperson just opens up the scrap book and looks for pieces to kachunk together.

What, and Tolkien didn't? If so, then what are the Silmarillion, Unfinished Tales, and the several volumes of notes (forgot how they're called) about LOTR which apparently (haven't read them) explain things like that Aragorn was originally conceived as a hobbit who was tortured in Mordor?

Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Khakionion]

Seriously, a book has been titled? So what?

I can't believe this is on the Beeb and Slashdot's front pages.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[DigitalRaptor]

Out of curiosity, have the read the other 6 books?

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Anonymous Coward]

No everybody is down around here after hearing a developer was leaving Novell but than the article came how the co-found came back.
*YAHHHH* to *ahhhhhh noooo*

They must be very bitter now knowing that Suse will make Linux a success.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[furbearntrout]

In other news, Debian 5.0 will be named Lenny.
--

(posted from debian testing-Etch).

--

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[i kan reed]

Could it be the most popular book series of this millinium? IT MIGHT BE. I don't even read this crap, and I can recognize why it may be treated as news. It's fantasy(technically) so it suits slashdot in some sense. What do you have left to complain about?

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[BoberFett]

Of course it's on the Beeb, it's major financial news. Harry Potter is the UK's only export. :P

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Rik Sweeney]

Harry Potter has been very important in the UK, mainly because it got young people reading books again instead of just gawping at television. This book is also the final Harry Potter that JK Rowling will write.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[PlasticArmyMan]

I don't think that's entirely the point.

On the BBC it only came a few stories down from the war in Iraq! Important it might be to people who enjoy the books but on that sort of scale? Some people need to give their heads a shake.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[shadowmas]

The same can be said of the U.S. military in US. the only difference is that you can enjoy harry potter.

disclaimer : i'm neither british nor american. :)

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[jacobw]

Why is this news? Well...

Whether or not you like her work, J.K. Rowling is the most financially successful author in the history of the written word. And, no, that is not hyperbole: that is a mathematical fact. According to Forbes magazine, she is the first person in the history of the world to become a billionaire by writing books. Whatever her place in the history of writing as an artform, she has a major place in the history of writing as an industry--equal to Samuel Johnson, the first person to earn a full-time living as a writer in the English language.

Each of her last three books has set a record for the fastest-selling book in history, only to be surpassed by her next book. The best-selling book of 2004 was The Da Vinci Code, which sold about 6 million copies in its first year of release. The best selling book of 2005 Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, which sold 6.9 million copies in its first 24 hours. Again, putting aside any artistic considerations, JK Rowling sits atop a hugely profitable and influential industry. Imagine if Apple or Ford only announced one product every two years. Don't you think the announcement of that product would get major media attention?

Finally... For those of us who DO love the Harry Potter books, a major part of the fun is engaging in debate and speculation with other fans. This gives us an excuse to do so. And, most likely, after the final book comes out, we'll never again have quite the same opportunity. With any serial fiction--whether it's "Lost" or the Star Wars movies or the Harry Potter series--there comes a point when the secrets of the story become public knowledge, and you can no longer have the pleasure of concocting your own theories to explain the mysteries. So, hey--let us have our fun.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[webvictim]

Nobody wants to hear any more about the war in Iraq - we in the UK didn't want to be part of it in the first place, and yet we didn't get the choice because our leader is a spineless creep. I think that near Christmas, a novelty story about the title of the newest Harry Potter book is probably just what people would like to see, rather than endless bollocks about things that have happened due to an idiot politician trying to secure supplies of oil.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[jeremyp]

the only difference is that you can enjoy harry potter.

Clearly you haven't read the sixth book.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[kabocox]

I can't believe this is on the Beeb and Slashdot's front pages.

Give 'em a break it is the Friday before Christams. Are you doing any real work today? Next week they'll mostly be off for the holidays. I'd expect much less "news" than this to surface next week.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[suffe]

Nor has he been introduced to the joys of masochism and the tender loving that only a strange man entering your house in the middle of the night can give you.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[maxume]

Drive an earthmover lately? Use a computer? Eat wheat? Watch a movie? Enjoy having somebody else fight your battles? I thought so.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[DigitalRaptor]

Judging from a lot of the other positive and interested comments to this story on Slashdot, I think it is.

This is Slashdot, "New for nerds. Stuff that matters."

It's new for nerds, about stuff that matters to them. Clearly a lot of Slashdot readers were interested in this.

Personally, I couldn't care less about anime, and yet we have a whole freaking section dedicated to it. How is it any more or less appropriate for Slashdot than a story about the Harry Potter series?

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Anonymous Coward]

Haven't you seen similar stories about the new name for Windows/Ubuntu/Firefox/Whatever? This is what passes for news these days.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Doctor Faustus]

The same can be said of the U.S. military in US. the only difference is that you can enjoy harry potter.
Now, now, I know several women who have enjoyed the U.S. military. The line "liberated from the tyranny of my pants" was relayed by one friend of mine.

Re:Harry Potter And The Slow News Day?

[Anonymous Coward]

JCB, Computer allright i'll concede that, wheat locally produced kthx, movie watched a british one, and we fought our own battles thanks we just bought weapons off you.

A better book

[Watson Ladd]

Would be Hirsute Ceramist and the Holy Lambda for those of us who like Lord Voldemort's Schemes.

Re:A better book

[sskroeder]

${ZOMG}... I wish that our computer science dept. could dish out assignments like that -- those exercises are quite fun to read ;-D

Re:A better book

[icebrain]

Oh lord... why did I read that? Just when I'd managed to get the last vestiges of scheme out of my head, I revisit the nightmare of freshman year... DAMN YOU GEORGIA TECH!

sorry.

Re:A better book

[kiyoshilionz]

Come on man, I just finished Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programming and I loved it! How could you not love the flexibility of Lisp/Scheme.... Mod points for you buddy!

Re:A better book

[aditi]

I love the way the names get better and better each year. Two terms ago it was just plain 'ol Hairy Cdr and the Chamber of Stata. I think Grimson and the Registrar were trolls.

Re:A better book

[The_mad_linguist]

Surely you mean Lord Voldemort's Schemas?

Anything hand-worthy?

[Cybert4]

I heard they are getting more "adult"?

Hmmm...

[linux pickle]

Isn't Slashdot's motto "News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters."? This seems to be neither...

Re:Hmmm...

[SpectreHiro]

News for kids. Stuff that matters precious little.

Re:Hmmm...

[Thraxen]

Wow... you couldn't be more wrong. There is a high probability that these books are actually fairly popular among /.s audience. As a result, this news fits both parts of /.s slogan. Most of the people whining about this news story wouldn't say a thing if this was news about a new Star Wars movie or something, but I fail to see the difference.

Re:Hmmm...

[bkr1_2k]

Perhaps for the hordes of slashdot dorks without kids. For those of us that do have them, this is in fact news. Maybe not important news but certainly as good as any book reviews about obscure code languages.

Re:Hmmm...

[Anonymous Coward]

OMG!!! Ponies!!!

Darned and drat

[MjrTom]

I was so hoping for Harry Potter and the Closed Casket Funerals. Guess I should have known that that wasn't going to happen.

Re:Darned and drat

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that is damn funny. :) Thanks for the laugh.

zo'o nai cai

[Cybert4]

do je'a bebna

Get over yourself. Slashdot is a business, not something formed to fight for geek ideals. Moron.

Re:zo'o nai cai

[WilliamSChips]

Is that Lojban?

Another Title

[mulhollandj]

I like Harry Potter and the Ding Dong Dudley better. But seriously what a pain to write a book where millions of people are going to look for the slightest error or inconsistency. Many don't realize Harry is a fictional person.

Re:Another Title

[Elvis77]

Crap he is

Harry Potter and...

[coredog64]

I was hoping it was going to be "Harry Potter and the Balance of Earth" and that it would come bundled with a copy
of "An Inconvenient Truth" and some moon sapphires...

Re:Harry Potter and...

[eric76]

How about Harry Potter and the Deathly Vole?

[spoiler]

[Peganthyrus]

I'm sure there are people in the intersection of Slashdot readers and Harry Potter fans who are cursing you for posting this news without hiding the name behind the 'Read More'. Hey, 'complicated procedure', might be one of those little treasure hunt things some people like doing, but now there's no point in solving the puzzle if you happen upon Slashdot first, is there?

Regardless: Harry Potter and the what the fuck? I think every other book had a title that made sense to the uninitiated, but "Deathly Hallows"? That just doesn't parse.

Re:[spoiler]

[dethl]

Ok....karma burn but for some funny php action.

$title = "Deathly Hollows";
$flag = 0;
foreach ($englishdictoinary as $word)
{

if preg_match($word,$title,$result) {
echo "Ha! It parsed";
$flag = 1;
}

}

if ($flag = 0)
echo "Boo, it didn\'!";

Re:[spoiler]

[shadowmas]

there is this nice thing called the internet these days where you can find websites like www.dictionary.com ;)

Re:[spoiler]

[Peganthyrus]

I know the word, dear.

> ASK PEGGY ABOUT "HARRY POTTER AND THE DEADLY HALLOWS"
I don't understand the word "hallows" when you use it that way.

Obvious?

[Anonymous Coward]

Harry Potter and the Search for More Money.

However, I think we all know that the real money is in merchandising.

Re:Obvious?

[PriceIke]

Ha ha! I saw Spacebattles too!

go'i

[Cybert4]

ko cilre tu'a la lojban

Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[tyrr]

"The Hallows could refer to the Four Hallows of Arthurian legend. They are intimately connected to the Grail and ultimately probably go back to the Four Treasures of the Tuatha de Danaan of Irish myth.

The Four Hallows are:

The Cup or Chalice
The Baton or Wand
The Sword or Dagger
The Coin, Disc or Pentacle

I think we were right all along in connecting the horcruxes to the four elements. These hallows are associated with the elements, and match up quite nicely to the remaining horcruxes:

Cup (HH)
Baton or Wand (RR)
Sword or Dagger (GG)
Pentacle (SS locket)

Just my two knuts!"

Read here: http://www.leakylounge.com/index.php?showtopic=368 09&st=0

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[aditi]

Some more information on the Celtic myth: http://www.mystical-www.co.uk/arthuriana2z/h.htm

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[MtViewGuy]

Hey, you might have unlocked much of the plot points of the final Hary Potter novel! :-)

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[Broken scope]

Damnit, now I'm going to waste a week looking at this stuff.

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[Anonymous Coward]

So it's Harry Potter and the Code of the Davinci?

At least Rowling is a more entertaining writer than Dan Brown.

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[hey!]

Let's imagine English folkore to be a shabby, unfashionable neighborhood. Let's imagine Dan Brown, J.K. Rowling, and Susanna Clarke as persons with different interests in that run down old place.

Dan Brown is a restaurant mogul who makes regular raids on the neighborhood to steal memorabilia like street signs, old post boxes, advertising posters. Anything really so long as it looks old and worn out. He takes these things and nails them to the wall of his restaurants. Dan Brown restaurants feature cozy wooden booths with melamine tables, brass rails, and dishes flowing with the ambrosia of melted cheese.

Rowling is a crack real estate developer with a sure eye for the proverbial diamond in the rough. A little elbow grease here, a spot of trash removal there, some new but quaint looking faux gaslight streetlamps... before you know it the trendy cafes are popping up like mushrooms. A diabolical masterpiece of a marketing campaign convinces young, affluent people that they are called salmon-like to the district by some deepseated hereditary imprinting. This siren call is so irresistable that it even works on young professionals who have just moved here from Bangalore.

Susanna Clarke is a young, hip, affluent woman who likes to dress like a young, hip, indigent delinquent. Her favorite pastime is to go slumming in the old neighborhood with her mates. Half the thrill for her is the ever present possibility she might get lost and mugged. She is pissed at what the other two are doing to her favorite hangouts.

Re:Four Hallows of Arthurian legend

[jafac]

Man, if you're right, the Christianists are going to go absolutely batshit crazy over this book.

I can't wait.

Georgie? Did you have something to do with this?

[The-Bus]

Deathly Hallows? Really?

I think Mrs. Rowling has been getting title ideas from Mr. Lucas and/or other young children.

Operation Meat Hammer

[b.burl]

Nope, I heard: Harry Potter and Operation Meat Hammer (Or How I learned to stop worring and enjoy beating a dead horse until its no longer profitable). ps: Thanx stephen.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[WilliamSChips]

If I remember correctly Harry Potter was always going to be seven books.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[Stormwatch]

If I remember correctly Harry Potter was always going to be seven books.

Just like The Matrix was always going to be three movies, and Star Wars was always going to be six movies... yea right. :P

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[Neon Crossing]

Good though your point was, I'm pretty sure Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone states that Hogwarts lasts for seven years, sort of setting up the series right from the start for seven total books.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[WilliamSChips]

Both examples ended when they said they would. You prove my point. Also, the first book has always said "Year 1" on it.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[king-manic]

If I remember correctly Harry Potter was always going to be seven books.

And Guid^H^H^H^H Voldemort shot first.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[Anonymous Coward]

It's funny that you mention horse. Daniel Radcliffe (the boy what plays Harry in the movies) is going to be the lead performer in the West End show "Equus".

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[Gilmoure]

Um...Star Wars was supposed to be 9 movies; three prequels, three 'real Star Wars movies' and three concerning Luke and Leia's children. Yes, was supposed to be those two but since Harrison Ford turned out to be so popular, they had to change things for the second movie.

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[Minwee]

"Guido shot first"? Was that a version of 'Raging Bull' that didn't make it to the theatres?

Re:Operation Meat Hammer

[psmears]

Good though your point was, I'm pretty sure Philosopher's/Sorcerer's Stone states that Hogwarts lasts for seven years

Indeed—and this is consistent with how long secondary school usually lasts in England. What's more, OWLs and NEWTs (the exams taken by the characters) correspond, in terms of the age they're usually taken at, to GCSEs and A-levels, as taken by most English schoolchildren. So it's quite natural to assume JKR intended seven book from the start, one for each year of HP's school life.

www.jkrowling.com

[Aeron65432]

If you go to her home, click on the eraser and you will be taken to a room -- you'll see a window, a door and a mirror.

In the mirror, you'll see a hallway. Click on the farthest doorknob and look for the Christmas tree. Then click on the center of the door next to the mirror and a wreath appears. Then click on the top of the mirror and you'll see a garland.

Look for a cobweb next to the door. Click on it, and it will disappear. Now, look at the chimes in the window. Click on the second chime to the right, and hold it down. The chime will turn into the key, which opens the door. Click on the wrapped gift behind the door, then click on it again and figure out the title yourself by playing a game of hangman.

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Overly Critical Guy]

When you've completed the puzzle, congratulate yourself excitedly, then get hit with sudden depression at the realization of your lack of social life and the fact you could have been getting exercise outside or perhaps plowing a member of the opposite sex rather than following a clicky game on some fantasy author's site and playing a game of hangman to get a book title that was already announced on your daily nerd news site. You poor sod.

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[that this is not und]

That all sounds like it would involve Macromedia Flash or other abominations.

I should load up links an clomp on over there to see, I guess. ...

Nope. I don't see an ascii art eraser anywhere. Kinda odd though, that all the first page gives me with Links is hyperlinks to 'text only page' in several languages. Why not just go to the text-only page?

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Skinnybrown]

When you've completed the puzzle, congratulate yourself excitedly, then get hit with sudden depression at the realization of your lack of social life and the fact you could have been getting exercise outside or perhaps plowing a member of the opposite sex rather than following a clicky game on some fantasy author's site and playing a game of hangman to get a book title that was already announced on your daily nerd news site. You poor sod.

Oh the irony! How much exercise did you get, and how many members of the opposite sex did you "plow" whilst reading this article and its comments, then taking the time to post a reply?

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[shadowmas]

Are you sure you're in the correct website? this one is called slashdot

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Eustace Tilley]

Thanks sincerely for the walkthrough. Any hints on how to get the door to open? I've waved the key all over, but it just keeps jumping back to the chimes.

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Anonymous Coward]

Two.

How many for you?

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[EMeta]

I suppose you just forgot to mention that you were plagerizing that text from the AP article?

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Hillgiant]

Hands don't count, dude.

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[Overly Critical Guy]

Well, I was just making a joke--something we were all supposed to laugh at as fellow geeks doing a silly web puzzle. If you want to get hurt and offended by it, then I'll answer your question. I run laps, and I'm in a relationship that has an active sex life. And you?

Re:www.jkrowling.com

[PriceIke]

I find your comments intriguing and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

New Name

[Aqua OS X]

No, It's going to be named " Harry Potter and the Franchise of Sequels."

Re:New Name

[75th Trombone]

For what it's worth, J.K. Rowling intended there to be seven books in the series from Day One --- before she even knew whether the first one would sell enough to get the others published. She has said unequivocally that Book 7 will be the last (except MAYBE someday she'll publish all her unpublished notes that didn't make it into the books, or got changed before they made it into the books, etc.), and she'll stick to it.

If she doesn't stick to it, THEN you're more than welcome to pull out the "money-grubbing" accusations.

Re:New Name

[Kelson]

Interesting question: If she keeps writing, but writes other stuff (ie. not Harry Potter books 8-infinity), would people still consider her money-grubbing?

Re:New Name

[that this is not und]

(except MAYBE someday she'll publish all her unpublished notes that didn't make it into the books, or got changed before they made it into the books, etc.)

Naw. Her son Christopher Rowling will publish all the notes in a big edited conglomeration called 'The Potterillion' and then commence publishing a bunch of other junk with the word Christopher small and the word Rowling in huge text on the cover.

Re:New Name

[Aqua OS X]

"'money-grubbing' accusations."
I don't recall writing anything like that. I wrote "franchise of sequels," which, umm, Harry Potter is. It's a franchise, and there are sequels.

Perhaps she should write an 8th book called "Harry Potter & The Irrationally Defensive Fanboys of Slashdot."

Re:New Name

[shadowmas]

not at all. she's a writer thats what she does. i certainly hope she will write more books (not Harry Potter though).

Re:New Name

[cskrat]

If she continues writing, I wonder if she'll continue to use the HP universe for future story lines. She has put a lot of effort into building it and it seems to be as cohesive as Tolkien's Middle Earth (though perhaps not as expansive).

Of course if she isn't completely idiotic with her money, the work that she has done on Harry Potter will have her and her children set for life financially if she should choose to retire once the last three movies are complete.

Re:New Name

[Lectrik]

I can't wait until Harry Potter and the Increasingly Innacurately Named Hitchhiker's Guide Trilogy comes out. I hear Voldemort even turns out to be mostly harmless.

Re:New Name

[Thraxen]

Well, thanks for pointing out the obvious then. I would have never known the 7 books are a series otherwise.

Re:New Name

[Anonymous Coward]

Why don't you simply shut yer fuckin trap?

Idiot.

Re:New Name

[Thraxen]

ACs are lame.

Re:New Name

[hansamurai]

Well, she is a billionaire. You'd have to be a real class act idiot to blow that.

http://www.forbes.com/lists/2006/10/CRTT.html

Re:New Name

[suffe]

And Lucas intended there to be 9 Star Wars movies. He had them all in his head from day one. You can't make this stuff up, it has to be true.

Re:New Name

[hey!]

(except MAYBE someday she'll publish all her unpublished notes that didn't make it into the books, or got changed before they made it into the books, etc.)

That's news. I'd understood this task was going to be left to he as-yet-unborn son, Christopher Rowling.

Re:New Name

[Minwee]

I was leaning towards "Harry Potter and the Increasingly Inaccurately Named Trilogy", but I think that one is already taken.

Re:New Name

[Darthmalt]

I've always hoped she would. I'd like to see a more adult series about an Auror during the initial rise of Lord Voldemort. Or maybe Charlie or someone like him looking for treasures for Gringotts. There are a lot of potential storylines and secondary characters that could be explored with even having to mention Harry Potter.

Re:New Name

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you are, but what am I?

Re:New Name

[Mr. Shiny And New]

As cohesive as Tolkein? Did you read the same Tolkein I did?

I'll admit, I read the HP books and find them entertaining. But so many things don't make sense; starting with why certain things can be conjured or transformed in ways that violate the laws of physics (i.e. turning one object into another, like transforming a pig into an ink jar) and yet all wizards aren't "rich" with material goods. You'd think they could transform some dirt or dust into a house.

Then there are things that change in the story, so that stuff that used to make sense no longer does. Like, why do wizards need to speak for spells? This is pretty clearly demonstrated in books 1-5; the battles at the end of 4 and 5 show experienced adult wizards speaking their spells or being rendered helpless when they can no longer speak. Yet in book 6 it is revealed that all experienced wizards can think their spells. Surprise!

Finally it seems that certain kinds of magic are trivial and others are hard, even though they are related. Making a spell that grows you a beard or grows or shrinks some physical feature (or transforms a living animal into a different kind of living animal) is done routinely, yet only the "nurse" in the school hospital can cure "injured" students. Also it seems no wizards use magic to alter their appearance; some wear shabby clothes, or have unmanageble hair, or wear broken glasses, or whatever, even though these things should be fixable (and why does Harry wear glasses? Seems they should have been able to correct that easily enough).

Then there seems to be this strange disconnect between the wizard world and the muggle world. The worlds are connected, and related, but even though many muggles know about the magic they NEVER TELL ANYONE. Or if they do it never becomes an issue. And virtually no wizards offer their services to muggles or attempt to rule over them or anything.

Frankly, I hope Rowling DOESN'T use the HP universe; it's so incohesive it needs a complete reboot.

Yawn...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd much prefer to read a cereal box.

On the news

[Drakin020]

I thought it was funny on my local news they were talking about this books. they said the name of the book then said "You can goto the website and play a game of hangman to find the name of the book" Just thought it was funny that they said that right after they said the name of the book.

Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to get back together too? Are there many slashdotters that read Harry Potter books?

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[TheMadcapZ]

Not everyone only reads C++ GUI interfaces guides.

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[LordOfTheNoobs]

Why not?

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[iMac Were]

Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys

iPrefer nancy boys. Kiss kiss!

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[TheMadcapZ]

Cause J.K Rowling hasn't written "Harry Potter and the Blue Screen of Death"

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[Drooling Iguana]

Because GUIs are too clumsy and random. The CLI is a far more elegant interface, for a more civilized age.

Re:Are you wanting for Nancy Drew/Hardy Boys to

[masdog]

Not everyone only reads C++ GUI interfaces guides.

Yeah, but are there really that many Mac users?

Damn...

[Ka D'Argo]

Mod me down if you must but damn, the one time I don't have mod points to use and like the majority of comments are just flamebait and trolling. Quite a few nerds are into Harry Potter, let's not forget nerds extend into the fantasy genre, and there has been plenty of news on such things as Lord of the Rings or Warhammer on /. in the past...So why the hate for HP? If you dislike the novels for their story and such, thats your opinion you are entitled too but damn, don't dis on Neil for putting up a story many of us are interested in.

Shutting down

[illuminatedwax]

I am now severing my connection to the Internet. I can no longer trust even the most unlikely sources for Harry Potter spoilers. Fucking Richard Stallman ruined it for me last time. He sure got an earful from me, though.

Re:Shutting down

[75th Trombone]

Oh, AMEN, brotha, I was right there on that blasted web page with you. I'll probably get modded troll for this, but that little climax to his misapplied rant about freedom cost Stallman at least one person who might ever take his hyperactivism seriously. He may have done a lot of good for Free Software, and I'm not going to just dismiss everything he says from now on because of it, but stuff like that rant seems to indicate that he's incapable of 1) factoring in reality or 2) caring about people rather than ideas when something gets his ideological goat.

Phew. I've been waiting for this outlet for a long time. Thanks for providing the opportunity. :)

Re:Shutting down

[illuminatedwax]

I called that fucker up and he gave me a bunch of crap about how "this is more important than the plot of some stupid book" and then I said "well why don't you just link it with a warning??" and he's like "... ok that makes sense."

ARGH!

HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[glwtta]

Man, that naming formula is even more boring than Star Wars' "Episode NUMBER: VERB of the NOUN".

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[VGPowerlord]

Actually, you forgot the "of" and "of the" which appears in 4 of the titles.

Harry Potter and the...
Philosopher's Stone
Chamber of Secrets
Prisoner of Azkhaban
Goblet of Fire
Order of the Phoenix
Half-Blood Prince
Deadly Hallows

Oh, and the sequels which take place after he graduates from Hogwarts:

Harry Potter and the...
Malady of Magic
Revenge of the Malfoys
Phantom Menace
Fountain of Youth

OK, I know I'm being silly now, but eh. :D

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[o'reor]

Oh, and the sequels which take place after he graduates from Hogwarts:

Harry Potter and the...
Malady of Magic
Revenge of the Malfoys
Phantom Menace
Fountain of Youth

You forgot my favorite : Harry Potter and the Dead Horse

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[NoMoreFood]

Actually it would be Star Wars' "Episode NUMBER: NOUN of the NOUN".

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[webvictim]

The dead horse gag wasn't funny the first time, but you've just totally ruined it. I hope you're proud of yourself.

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[Anonymous Coward]

Harry Potter and the Raiders of the Lost Ark*
Harry Potter and the Temple of Doom
Harry Potter and the Last Crusade

*not the original title, I know. I'm pissed about it, too.

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[CelticWhisper]

Tell me about it. Hell, I'm still waiting for Konami to cut the crap and actually name a game "Castlevania: Bad Things of General Unpleasantness."

Re:HP and the (ADJECTIVE | NOUN ADJECTIVAL) NOUN 7

[dkleinsc]

Like "A New Hope", "The Empire Strikes Back", and "The Phantom Menace"?

Harry

[chkMINUS]

Harry Butthole Pussy Potter

Stupid, just stupid.

[n6kuy]

Forget the Hallows, let's put this one on the gallows.

lol

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe it's that "English/English" thing, but "Deathly Hallows" is a slang term for vagina in the northwest US.

Harry Potter: the trust fund kid

[Pausanias]

Here's a very good article from Slate discussing this point in detail. It is quite well written, and despite being a Harry fan myself, I really have to say it highlights the things that bother me about Rowling's writing. What's neat about the article is that it takes the viewpoint of someone who is enamoured of the world Rowling created, but not of Harry himself.

My biggest issue with Harry Potter series is that it depicts the protagonist as one who has no genius, is not hard-working by any standards, has bigotry - in short - an absolutely average person.

Re:Harry Potter: the trust fund kid

[RyuuzakiTetsuya]

Fraud? no.

In all but ONE of the books, he's making a conscious decision to do what's RIGHT, not what's COMFORTABLE.

If you want to see the Trust Fund Kid in action, look at Draco Malfoy. His parents have all the money in the world, yet, unlike Harry who is similarly endowed(probably in the other sense too), doesn't fight, doesn't work hard, and until the 6th book, hasn't risked anything. In fact, his parents called in favors with Severus Snape to make sure he gets out alive!

Because it's funny

[quokkapox]

Because you can s/wand/wang/ as you read.

People around you will wonder why you suddenly LOL while reading.

Harry extracted his cloak from his trunk with some difficulty, trying not to show Dumbledore the mess within. When he had stuffed it into an inside pocket of his jacket, Dumbiedore waved his wang and the trunk, cage, and Hedwig vanished. Dumbledore then waved his wang again, and the front door opened onto cool, misty darkness.

This was the problem with the .txt version I excitedly torrented right after the last book came out. All 214 occurrences.

Re:Because it's funny

[Anonymous Coward]

A friend showed me this... I agree that it's hilarious
http://bash.org/?111338

Slash fic

[jfengel]

And far, far scarier than that. I've seen stuff that would turn your hair white. And most bizarre is that many of the writers of such thing seem to be women.

Re:Slash fic

[Anonymous Coward]

And most bizarre is that many of the writers of such thing seem to be women.

It's not so bizarre when you consider that straight men tend to appreciate lesbian porn, and women tend to read romance novels. Slashfic is do-it-yourself gay porn for straight women.

Re:Slash fic

[that this is not und]

On the internet, anybody can adopt a female 'pen name.'

Re:Slash fic

[Anonymous Coward]

Slash has been predominantly written by women for a lot longer than fanfic writers have been using the internet.

Consider that the term Slash is short for K/S, which is short for Kirk/Spock... and this stuff dates from the time when Star Trek was new.

Best /. post ever

[jjohnson]

One of the best comments ever was in a long thread about the technicalities of RAID hardware. Someone wrote four long paragraphs, and halfway through the second, tacked on to the end of one sentence "and besides, Hermione dies in the last book anyways." *

The outrage was tremendous because, before you even realized you were reading a spoiler, you'd finished and comprehended it. Sweetest troll ever.

* No one knows who dies in the last book, if someone does. At the time, Rowling explicitly said she hadn't decided who. It wasn't a real spoiler, and isn't now. Don't freak out.

Re:Best /. post ever

[Scrameustache]

One of the best comments ever was in a long thread about the technicalities of RAID hardware. Someone wrote four long paragraphs, and halfway through the second, tacked on to the end of one sentence "and besides, Hermione dies in the last book anyways." *
 
The outrage was tremendous because, before you even realized you were reading a spoiler, you'd finished and comprehended it. Sweetest troll ever. You admire trolls and repeat the content of their posts?!?

Re:Best /. post ever

[75th Trombone]

Spoiler alert: There are potential spoilers in this comment. Stop reading now if you don't want any clues at all. There is also a link in this comment. Do not click it or hover over it if you don't want explicit spoilers.

There is still no solid information whatsoever as to who might die in Book 7 ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Deathly Hallows. We do know there will be one dead major character (probably at least two), and that two characters she originally planned to kill have gotten reprieves.

We know at least one dead major character because J.K. Rowling has explicitly said so. It's probably at least two characters, because Rowling said something about killing a character who she wasn't planning on killing originally. And as the following paragraph describes, it's pretty clear there was one character she was always planning on killing.

There are some clues in the books related to alchemy that seem to clearly indicate that one particular character is not going to make it.

If you want no clues whatsoever as to who it is, then 1) do not click or hover over that link! and 2) do not read the following paragraph.

If you want to figure it out yourself, then look some stuff up about what different colors mean in alchemy, then figure out which characters are related to those colors.

Re:Best /. post ever

[Battleloser]

Where's the "WANT SMASH FACE" -mod option?

Don't scare me like that, I'm all nervous from last years little forum spamming spoiler campaign :-(

Re:Best /. post ever

[Anonymous Coward]

xkcd meta-spoiler

Re:Best /. post ever

[Hillgiant]

I think I will be a bit draconian for this next book. I plan on unplugging my DSL connection a week before the book comes out.

No internet. No spoilers. No problem.

Re:Best /. post ever

[Doctor Faustus]

One of the best comments ever was in a long thread about the technicalities of RAID hardware. Someone wrote four long paragraphs, and halfway through the second, tacked on to the end of one sentence "and besides, Hermione dies in the last book anyways."

Different topic, but this washing instructions tag has the same style.

Wash with warm water.
Use mild soap.
Dry flat.
Do not use bleach.
Do not dry in the dryer.
Do not iron.
We are sorry that Our President is an idiot.
We did not vote for him.

Re:Best /. post ever

[jjohnson]

I admire elegance, even in trolling. The troll I mentioned was better than an AST, the original high water mark for trolling.

SWAA challenges GNAA

[Anonymous Coward]

The SWAA (Straight White Association of America) challenges the troll GNAA (Gay Niggers Association of America) to a troll war.

Do you have the guts?

Are you guys tough enough?

Re:Georgie? Did you have something to do with this

[Dachannien]

Nah, ol' George was stuck on "Episode VII: Attack of the Snape".

References, please.

[75th Trombone]

A Google search for "deathly hallows" (including quotation marks) brings up zero results on Google. I find it hard to believe that an actual slang term for "vagina" doesn't have one web page using the phrase until it becomes the name of a Harry Potter book.

I call BS.

Oblig. Bash quote

[Anonymous Coward]

#111338
<JonJonB> Purely in the interests of science, I have replaced the word "wand" with "wang" in the first Harry Potter Book
<JonJonB> Let's see the results...

<JonJonB> "Why aren't you supposed to do magic?" asked Harry.
<JonJonB> "Oh, well -- I was at Hogwarts meself but I -- er -- got expelled, ter tell yeh the truth. In me third year. They snapped me wang in half an' everything

<JonJonB> A magic wang... this was what Harry had been really looking forward to.

<JonJonB> "Yes, yes. I thought I'd be seeing you soon. Harry Potter." It wasn't a question. "You have your mother's eyes. It seems only yesterday she was in here herself, buying her first wang. Ten and a quarter inches long, swishy, made of willow. Nice wang for charm work."
<JonJonB> "Your father, on the other hand, favored a mahogany wang. Eleven inches. "

<JonJonB> Harry took the wang. He felt a sudden warmth in his fingers. He raised the wang above his head, brought it swishing down through the dusty air and a stream of red and gold sparks shot from the end like a firework, throwing dancing spots of light on to the walls

<JonJonB> "Oh, move over," Hermione snarled. She grabbed Harry's wang, tapped the lock, and whispered, 'Alohomora!"

<JonJonB> The troll couldn't feel Harry hanging there, but even a troll will notice if you stick a long bit of wood up its nose, and Harry's wang had still been in his hand when he'd jumped - it had gone straight up one of the troll's nostrils.

<JonJonB> He bent down and pulled his wang out of the troll's nose. It was covered in what looked like lumpy gray glue.

<JonJonB> He ran onto the field as you fell, waved his wang, and you sort of slowed down before you hit the ground. Then he whirled his wang at the dementors. Shot silver stuff at them.

<JonJonB> Ok
<JonJonB> I have found, definitive proof
<JonJonB> that J.K Rowling is a dirty DIRTY woman, making a fool of us all
<JonJonB> "Yes," Harry said, gripping his wang very tightly, and moving into the middle of the deserted classroom. He tried to keep his mind on flying, but something else kept intruding.... Any second now, he might hear his mother again... but he shouldn't think that, or he would hear her again, and he didn't want to... or did he?
<melusine > O_______O
<JonJonB> Something silver-white, something enormous, erupted from the end of his wang

<JonJonJonB> Then, with a sigh, he raised his wang and prodded the silvery substance with its tip.

<JonJonJonB> 'Get - off - me!' Harry gasped. For a few seconds they struggled, Harry pulling at his uncles sausage-like fingers with his left hand, his right maintaining a firm grip on his raised wang.

Re:Oblig. Bash quote

[Kelson]

Oh, that Bash quote. I thought for certain you were going to post "I put on my robe and wizard hat."

"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[Animats]

As the series is sometimes referred to by less successful working writers.

But at least Rowling writes her own books. Tom Clancy seems to have given up writing in favor of licensing his name. Latest "Splinter Cell" book: "Tom Clancy" in big letters at top of front cover. "Written by David Michaels" in small type in grey letters on black background at bottom.

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[1u3hr]

Tom Clancy seems to have given up writing in favor of licensing his name.

Can't be worse than the crap he (presumably) wrote himself before that. His first two or three were good thrillers, I kept reading from momentum, but they got more and more full of turgid prose, jingoism, silly factual errors, and Tom Ryan became just a mouthpiece for Clancy's extreme right-wing politics.

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[NorbrookC]

kept reading from momentum, but they got more and more full of turgid prose, jingoism, silly factual errors,and Tom Ryan

You mean things like the main character's name was Jack Ryan?

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[glesga_kiss]

His first two or three were good thrillers, I kept reading from momentum, but they got more and more full of turgid prose, jingoism, silly factual errors, and Tom Ryan became just a mouthpiece for Clancy's extreme right-wing politics.

I absolutely agree. I used to like Clancy's books; they are very detailed, accurate and plausible. On a technical level they were really interesting as they tended to explain a lot as they went on.

However, then came "The Bear and the Dragon", which starts off on the most horrendous and completely inaccurate character assassination of the Chinese race. It was borderline offensive as he set up the villain for the piece. After that I completely lost interest in the series.

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[1u3hr]

You mean things like the main character's name was Jack Ryan?

Yeah. So much for continuity.

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[1u3hr]

However, then came "The Bear and the Dragon", which starts off on the most horrendous and completely inaccurate character assassination

A neo-con wet dream. I particularly liked how the student revolutionaries just walked into the CCP headquarters and the old guard communists folded up and walked away when they realised democracy was just a better idea.

In that, he couldn't even spell the name of the major city "Guangzhou" correctly. Doesn't he have an atlas?

The last straw for me was Rainbow Six where he demonised conservationists as a bunch of genocidal maniacs. Of course they were defeated by the elite team of crack snipers, because the Greenies decided to attack them head on in their home base for no good reason, instead of just getting on with releasing their plague.

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[MjrTom]

Clark was a much more interesting character for the lead of a book. Try Without Remorese

Re:"Harry Potter and the Mountain of Royalties"

[Doctor Faustus]

However, then came "The Bear and the Dragon"
He needed to stop after "The Sum of All Fears". That was a really great book, but it diverged too far from reality to continue the series further without wandering off into Lala Land.

Title

[AndrewNeo]

That's funny, I heard the name and didn't have to jump through any hoops. It came in the form of a Borders newsletter asking me to preorder :P

Who will die?

[tmk]

Joanne K. does it again: she announces the death of two main characters. She did this before 'Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix' and killed Sirius Black in a pretty inconvincing way.

Who will die this time? My guess: Dudley eats himself to death and owls hunt Uncle Vernon into the sea...

Re:Who will die?

[Anonymous Coward]

Who will die this time?

Harry. Rowling is going to try and make certain no one (including herself) will write any "sequels". (Right, like that stopped anyone ever before. (Kirk, anyone?))

Re:Who will die?

[webvictim]

The thing is that you are probably right. It's said in one of the earlier books that both Harry and Voldemort are inexplicably linked due to the backfiring Avada Kedavra curse (shown by the scar on Harry's forehead) and as such, when one of them dies, the other will too. Maybe the two people that die are Harry and Voldemort.

Re:Who will die?

[echocharlie]

Are you discounting the whole "Neither can survive while the other lives..." part of the prophecy laid out in Order of the Phoenix?

Re:Who will die?

[dr_dank]

and owls hunt Uncle Vernon into the sea.

O RLY?

Re:HP and the Hallows Be Thy Name

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, that naming formula is even more boring than Star Wars' "Episode NUMBER: VERB of the NOUN".

Too right! Although truth to tell I was really rooting for "Harry Potter and the Dalek Invasion of Earth".

Gender stereotyping

[Anonymous Coward]

The real hero of the book is the girl. She's the only one who is diligent at her studies, she does all the detective work, and explains to Harry how to solve his problems.

Good grief! I presume there's to the character than you describe. On that summary she'd barely be more of a cliché if she was an investigative journalist who self-identified as "feisty".

Re:Gender stereotyping

[Gilmoure]

What? You found a cliché in Harry Potter? Say's it isn't so, Joe!

SPOILER ALERT

[Anonymous Coward]

Snape kills Trinity with Rosebud!
--xkcd

PS: Adrienne is already dead at the beginning of the new Rocky movie. Sorry.

THATS IT! No more of this kids stuff...

[Anonymous Coward]

Luke is not incompetent -- he is described many times as an extremely talented young Jedi. Lucas has clearly put a lot of thought into the precise nature of this talent, and it's a subtle characterization. There is an element of raw power -- recall when Luke and Darth Vader's light sabers are locked together, Luke is able to push back with more than equal force. Luke thinks very quickly under extreme pressure, and has an uncanny ability to react instantly and correctly -- recall, for instance, when he destroys the Empire's Death Star with the Womp Rat bagging technique...

Ah, much better for us muggles!

SPOILER ALERT

[mushadv]

Snape kills Dumbledore!

Oh wait...

Harry hits puberty

[Legion303]

_Harry Potter and the Dark, Moist Cave_.

Re:Harry hits puberty

[ultracool]

This is no cave.

Re:Harry hits puberty

[_tognus]

Harry Potter and the Hole of Hermione.

Re:Harry hits puberty

[Anonymous Coward]

Harry Potter and the Sticky Wand

Harry Potter Gets Laid

Harry Potter and the Morning After Too Much Butterbeer

Harry Potter and the Comingout Closet

Harry Potter and Hermione's Magical Lesson

Harry Potter Swallows Ron's Potion

Re:Harry hits puberty

[sharkey]

"Harry Palms and the Lotion of Friction"

Re:Harry hits puberty

[Hillgiant]

Oh good grief. I know it is just supposed to be some puerile joke, but you Harry+Hermonine people make me sick. Once and for all, Harry has never had a crush on Hermonine and Hermonine has never had a crush on Harry.

I swear. Y'all are almost as bad as the Harry+Malfroy people.

Re:Harry hits puberty

[Scott Lockwood]

Or maybe, _Harry Potter, and the Pink part of Ginny Weasley_

Original title [RC2]

[Anonymous Coward]

It was originally called "Harry Potter Laughs All the Way to the Bank". But the publisher convinced her to change the title.

realmuggles.com

[deft]

this is a site where letty potter is the main character, they have muggles, even one of the characters has the same name as harry's broom.

it was pretty damning proof of plagirism. They used to have a list of the similarirites... dont think it's up anymore.

if you go there and read any of it, you'll quickly see it is a low budget poorly written book... but I do think JK got some ideas from it, and of course made a better story... but this chick deserves a little credit... and a bit of a payout.

Re:realmuggles.com

[KokorHekkus]

The writer behind the books on that site took it to court and lost. Apparently the court said that there was no plagiarism but also that she (Stouffler) had lied and doctored evidence. Seems like the last name Potter only occurs in later reprints and not in the original ones... Which is pretty damning proof that she was trying to cash in but didn't trust her proof that much. She applead to a higher court but verdict was upheld. My highly personal opinion: Stouffler is a golddigger and you took the bait hook, line and sinker. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nancy_Stouffer

Re:realmuggles.com

[webvictim]

Agreed - it's hardly surprising that someone who had a similar sort of idea, but was clearly not as talented a writer as JK Rowling, would try and cash in on the success of the Harry Potter books just because Rowling is now loaded and "NK Stouffer" (also some form of rip-off of Rowling's style of name) is not.

Cool!

[Another AC]

Now we only have to find out what she'll name the fifth movie!

Bad Name?

[ShakaUVM]

Anyone else think it's a terrible name? I mean, not attack of the clones bad, but still...

UK to get off Litvinenko case or lose 1bn UKP?

[Anonymous Coward]

The seventh book may actually be called "Harry Potter and the Grottner revelation" and you may read it on the web as early as March 2007. To understand the true meaning of this you have to be russian.

news for nerds, or book hype for publishers?

[mjdmjd]

Harry Potter? News? This is slashdot not http://www.booktribes.com/?

Semi off-topic

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's funny:

http://www.themovieblog.com/archives/Potter-Star-W ars-Rip.jpg

Re:Semi off-topic

[webvictim]

I like that a lot.

hehe

[Danzigism]

hehehe ok ok.. i lol'd at most comments.. some were down right retarded.. but i will say this, the 7th book is something we've all been waiting for, and i'm sure there's a lot of us on here that are looking forward to reading it, regardless of how many of you actually want to admit it..

flamebaiting lamer as I may be, the HP books got me interested in fantasy novels and series all together.. i'm 26 years old, and didn't read crap worth of books after high school.. had a girl push the first couple books on me, and i thoroughly enjoyed them and many other books thereafter.. i'm a bit in debt to harry potter.. without it, i would of forgot why books are so awesome.. might be a lame excuse, but it's true for me..

Re:hehe

[Lain01001]

Though I will admit that the Potter books are great reads for small children, I find it quite sad that it takes such low level books with pretty bad plots to motivate adults into reading. I guess it's the fact that the older audience of the books (specifically the ones that don't read anything besides Harry Potter) can get into what looks like a very fancy plot. For the most part it's just the basic naive hero who stumbles upon something and only succeeds in what he must do through blunders. I give JK the thumbs up for providing a series that put that spark into the life of books once again. *waggles finger at certain adults* For shame on you folk though, read more. On a side note, the only HP related book I was ever crazy about reading was the works of HP Lovecraft ^_^

Re:hehe

[Danzigism]

its not sad.. what's sad is how the educational system intimidates and influences younger students to despise reading books.. you speak the way you do because you are an experienced reader.. maybe if i had read the many great books that you have, then I'd feel differently about HP in a assinine critical type of way.. I've read many better books than HP, but THANKS to HP I wouldn't of even bothered picking up the Thrawn Triology by Zahn, or the Lord of the Rings, or even His Dark Materials by Phillip Pullman.. there's no sense in demeaning something that does more positive than negative..

Or based on the last two books

[Anonymous Coward]

Harry Potter and the lack of a god-damn editor. Seriously Rowling needs someone to trim back her exceedingly rambling stories. Book 5 was an insult, a grand total of two events of note occured in the god knows how many long pages of mundane prose. Book 6 really wasn't much better.

Four Horcruxes and a Funeral

[Anonymous Coward]

Much better title in my mind.

Re:Georgie? Did you have something to do with this

[Anonymous Coward]

Erm, just a bit -
Hogwart - Mispronunciation of "Hoggle" in Jim Hensons "Labyrinth"
The bad guy's name in one film sounds like "Sauraman" from LOTR
The entire thing is a shoddy rip off of "the worst which" - which(!) were actually well writting and original...
Various rippoffs of names / places from any fantasy novel ever written...

Sirius Black pays for it with his life.

[bkedersha]

That is like blaming a woman for being rape. It is the fault of Black's cousin not Harry's.

WTF

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you people nerds or something?

--
Trolls? Some of my best friends are trolls!

harry killed off?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is going to be the last book right?

REPENT

[Kerstyun]

Wizard's are santanists and your going to heck.

Re:Georgie? Did you have something to do with this

[sharkey]

Almost as if Harry Potter is a series of children's books, huh?

Kids vs. Kids

[Per Abrahamsen]

The main target audience of the first Harry Potter books were kids just a few years younger than the average /. reader. That breeds resentment, and a need to distance themselves from the subject matter.

Most people I knew who read the books are old enough not to have to worry about being taken for kids (they have kids of their own), and they all love the books (especially the start of the series).

Larry Gardner and the Angry Half-orc

[Lord_Slepnir]

I would have preferred Larry Gardner and the Angry Half-Orc

My dream has died

[Zak3056]

I'm pretty bummed--I'd so wanted book seven to be named "Harry Potter and the Temple of Doom."

Harrison Ford could have had a cameo in the movie...

What is it called in other countries?

[aplusjimages]

You know how the books are titled different in other countries. I'd like to know the titles for them.

Celebrity author syndrome

[RogueyWon]

Amen to that.

A couple of years ago, I did a little work around the periphery of the publishing industry. At no point was I even close to anybody who was close to anybody who was involved with any of the Harry Potter books. However, a few of the things that were common knowledge then seem particularly relevant now.

What J.K. Rowling is increasingly suffering from is Celebrity Author Syndrome. This, simply put, is a state in which no editor has both the guts and the backing from above to stand up to the author in question and insist upon necessary changes. In some cases, this goes hand in hand with the author being a self-important prick, but that's absolutely *not* an essential pre-requisite (and I have absolutely *no* idea what JKR is like to work with).

Let me explain...

The vast majority of manuscripts that are submitted to publishers by first-time authors are seriously long. They contain repetition of scenes, subplots that are never developed, page after page of background exposition on characters and vast amounts of unnecessary description and digression. Reading the average freshly-submitted manuscript is a pretty depressing alternative; by the time you've waded through all the padding, you can hardly remember anything about the plot and the characters. Now, of course, most manuscripts submitted to publishers go straight in the bin. Occasionally, however, one will be considered interesting enough to pick up. What happens in this case (with some variation across the industry, but the model remains more or less the same) is that some money might change hands and the publisher might indicate to the author that they could conceivably be convinced to publish the book, provided the author work with a designated editor to strip the work down to something fit for public consumption.

This process is often pretty gruelling for the first-time author. They've suddenly got an editor, who they likely see as a pen-pushing bureaucrat and spawn of the devil, demanding that they cut out whole chunks of words that the author has sweated blood over. Emotionally, this is surprisingly difficult. However, most first-time authors who have made it this far have a strong incentive to comply with changes demanded by their editor and will comply. After all, the editor's say-so can kill the book. The publisher looses relatively little from killing the project, while for the author, this could mean months or years of work going to waste. Ultimately, it is very rare that a book is not improved beyond recognition by this process.

However, this dynamic changes massively with a celebrity author (as in, a celebrity who is famous for writing, not a celebrity who has decided to write a book). The publisher suddenly has a lot more to loose if the relationship goes sour. Whatever contractual obligations the author might be under, they know that they'll always have a market for their words elsewhere in the future. If the author is a prick, they can therefore change editors at will and refuse to make changes as they see fit.

However, even if the author is the nicest, most compliant person in the world, the editor is still going to be under a lot of stress. They know, and the people who pay them know, that this author has been lucrative in the past. The editor knows that his future job security almost certainly depends to a large degree on him managing this author right. There is therefore an enormous temptation to just sit back and assume that the author knows best (even though the wisest authors might realise themselves that this isn't the case).

We saw the results of this with the 5th and 6th Harry Potter books (and to a lesser extent, the 4th). The 5th book in particular had a stupidly high number of redundant scenes, most of which could have been excised at will. The bizarre, only-half-realised political commentary surrounding Dolores Umbridge ended up eating a significant chunk of the book without adding anything significant to it. The character could (and in an earlier book, would) have been ha

Re:Celebrity author syndrome

[WuphonsReach]

Goodness yes...

Another example would be the three prequel films in the Star Wars series.

Or [i]Snowcrash[/i] which is a book that I would *like* to enjoy, but simply can't because it's in need of a heavy edit to fix technical goofs and plot problems.

But with regards to HP, I'm not completely sure that she's crossed over into CAS-land yet. Her work in book 6 was a bit uneven, so maybe we're seeing the first symptoms of CAS.

Re:Celebrity author syndrome

[mkoenecke]

That's a nice comment with which I agree. But I'm starting to wonder if there is some sort of code on Slashdot that turns every instance of the word "lose" into "loose," like the way Fark changes "naughty" words.

I mean, I can live with people who do not know that "I could care less" means the opposite of what they intend, and can understand misspellings of complicated words. But "loose" for "lose?" I cannot imagine it's a common typo, like "teh," since it's not all that easy to do an inadvertent double tap with the right ring finger. Those sorts of things introduce jarring bits of error which compromise the message. Especially from someone in the publishing industry, who ought to know better.

Yeah, yeah, I know this has been discussed ad nauseam. But unless you're deliberately going for humor (and I can just see responses to this like "I think you should loose your attitude"), please stop.

Re:Celebrity author syndrome

[Garse Janacek]

Neal Stephenson wasn't a celebrity when he wrote Snow Crash.....

Re:Celebrity author syndrome

[Anonymous Coward]

your_comment =~ s/loose/lose/g;

Re:Celebrity author syndrome

[75th Trombone]

I think your post omits the ultimate reason for the phenomenon: Once an author becomes a celebrity, there are suddenly a nontrivial number of people who want to read every last word the author writes, for better or worse. Especially where the books in question are in a fantasy series. As Zarf has said, "The defining trick of fantasy and science fiction writing is to stuff information down your throat, as fast as possible, so smoothly that you never feel the burn."

So you've got a genre where more information is better, and you've got a screaming fan base who wants more of this world, in whatever shape it comes. Given that set of circumstances, it's no wonder that the books get longer and longer.

In any case, J.K. still has editors, and they -- even in book 5 -- still tell her to cut stuff. It's just that it's better for almost everyone involved to cut less.

Interesting Theory

[FirstNoel]

That's one I have thought of. And it would actually make a good story.

hmm...I'll have to reread it now from that point of view.

Sean

Hating Harry Potter

[hey!]

only ever succeeds in getting out of it by accident or when a deus ex machina pops up,

Far be it from me to tell people what they should like or dislike. But it seems to me that many of the most strident critics of the Harry Potter books are those who insist on measuring them by inappropriate paradigms, in this case the canons of dramatic criticism. Literature as a whole needn't abide by rules that are instrumental to mimesis (represenation), important as they may be to the medium of drama.

In learning to critique, we oughtn't lose the art of listening.

I have engaged many people in debates over the merits (or lack thereof) of the Harry Potter books. More often than not they are not simply left cold, as Fred_A seems to be. They are positively offended and outraged by them. I think this ponits the way to some of the chief merits of the books, a point I'll return to in a second. But first I should point out that literary merit is an atomic thing that can be measured on a simple scale. There are many kinds of merit a story may have, such as richness of detail, beauty of language, cleverness in plotting, humor, psychological insight. The Potter books are remarkably rich in some dimensions, and simplistic in others.

When it comes to language, for example, Rowling is clever, but is no J.R.R. Tolkien. The great pleasure of rereadign Lord of the Rings for the 99th time is the sheer beauty of the writing. For example, look up the passage where Frodo takes a last walk around Bag End, before leaving it to his despised cousins the Sackville-Bagginses. It is a masterpiece of writing; evocative and far more poetic (as is often the case with Tolkien) than the book's attempts at verse.

It is also true that the Harry Potter books are by no means masterpieces of plotting, to put it mildly. Stories of this sort seldom are. I agree completely with Fred_A's condemnation of the books... but only if we are talking about the movies. Here the books mimetic weaknesses are on full display, and few if any of their diagetic (narrative) strengths.

The books' greatest strengths are humor and psychological insight. And its important to note that the latter is not necessarily displayed according to the methods of drama, which demand that such insights be shown by the action of plot events on the characters. Narrative arts have no such fundamental constraint. Which brings us to why Harry Potter is so roundly hated by the cultural canon crowd.

Real life is not dramatic. Unlike a play or movie, most acts are not prompted by motivation, but by habit. People in power, even good people, exercise their power for the most part mindlessly. Nobody knows this better than children, who have no power of their own and must live in accordance with rules set by others. Many of those rules are set for the childrens' benefit; some for the convenience of their betters; others are there just because they've always been there.

The importance of this truth to the Potter books hit me when I was reading one of the many passages in which Professor MacGonagle, a good and benevolent adult character, fails to listen and uses her authority in an unreasoning way. In various ways we are told that this character is admirable, intelligent and good; but these qualities are never shown in her actions towards Harry. In a drama this would be completely wrong. This apparent inconsistency had always bothered me, but then it struck me that this quite true to life. As a parent, I don't always take time to make the right decision, and often make the wrong decision because it is easier. On reflection, it seems right that all the adults Harry encounters regularly exercise their power unreasonably, even the ones who have his best interests at heart. It is equally necessary that Harry defy them, even though sometimes this turns out to be a terrible mistake.

In other words, the message of the Harry Potter books is subversive.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Kozz]

I must admit up front that I've never read the HP books, only seen the movies. So on those grounds, I admittedly have a weak case to criticize. Nevertheless, I will. (I'm a huge Stephen King fan, yet 98% of his screenplays have been utter crap)

I find Rowling's character names to be absolutely Dickensian (Dumbledore, Slitherin, Malfoy, Voldemort), which alone makes me bristle. Mal- bad, mort- death, etc etc. Names that fairly clearly tell you if you should or should NOT like a character the first time you learn their name, if it hasn't already been decided for you. Often times the "bad" characters are positively dripping with malevolent charm, making no attempt to appear as though they've got any righteous principles of any kind. "Ooh, he's wearing black, is constantly scowling, and has pointy eyebrows. Quite clearly, he's a bad, bad man." Often there's very little deceit of any kind -- we know from the word "go" who is good and bad, and we have only to watch the magical deus ex machina work, saving HP from doom.

Furthermore, the use of magic is so far removed from what I'm accustomed: typically magic is difficult to control, and generally weak (cantrips, etc) for all but the most experienced and mature. But in HP's world, magic stuff seems to be coming off a mass assembly-line, and is cheap and plentiful.

I one of the movies I watched, I found it amazing that in a "wizard contest" of some sort, the contestants' friends were put in mortal danger without the consent or knowledge of them OR the contestants. Endangering lives of friends for the purpose of a voluntary contest? Seems like madness in which nobody would ever want to participate again. "Harry, please don't put your name on a piece of paper. I don't want to be drowned/dismembered/burned alive" and such.

Mostly the "magic is cheap" concept pervading the movies really bothered me. Do you feel this experience is better represented in the books? Would I be equally disappointed?

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Jhon]

one of the movies I watched, I found it amazing that in a "wizard contest" of some sort, the contestants' friends were put in mortal danger without the consent or knowledge of them OR the contestants.

Yup... you didn't read the books. That "wizard contest" of some sort where the "friends were put in mortal danger"? They were in no real danger at all. Ever. The book made that clear. The movie, less so.

My opinion is that the movies are more or less 'eye-candy' for those who read and enjoyed the books.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[jafac]

One does not come to truly appreciate the wretchedness of Rowling's prose, until one reads the series aloud. The adverb-abuse, particularly in the third book is painfully annoying, and I can't give her any sort of free pass on style. To her credit, after the third book, she seems to have figured out how to occasionally slip a sentence or two in with less than 3 adverbs.

The importance of this truth to the Potter books hit me when I was reading one of the many passages in which Professor MacGonagle, a good and benevolent adult character, fails to listen and uses her authority in an unreasoning way

Holy crap that's gotten tiresome after 6 fucking books about "dumb adults".

In other words, the message of the Harry Potter books is subversive.

But not subtly so. Reading Rowling's subversive message is like stepping in front of a train.
There's another series of books out there called "A Series of Unfortunate Events" - which is also centered around the idea of stupid adults. Only the book is so obviously on the campy side, it's not as painful to watch as the lives of the protagonists get worse and worse on the failings of adults. It's funny, in a black way. The subversive genius of these books is the moral self-doubt the protagonists go through, as they question the morality of their own actions, as necessity for survival. Mister Snickett's prose is a lot more fun to read as well. Rowling had started out on the campy side in her first book, but quickly abandoned that, so now the whole series is situated uncomfortably somewhere inbetween campy and serious.

Rowling makes Harry exceptional only in ways that enable him to fight power, never in ways that allow him to wield it over others.

Two words. Septus Semprum. To me - this is the only interesting thread in the whole series; Will Harry learn the lesson Snape learned (though failed to teach, out of his inability to forgive)? - only it's the same lesson Anakin Skywalker learned.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[hey!]

Mostly the "magic is cheap" concept pervading the movies really bothered me. Do you feel this experience is better represented in the books? Would I be equally disappointed?

Disappointed, I guess, if that is your primary interest in reading the books. You might be better served by Larry Niven's Warlock books, which explore the mechanics of magic as a limited resource in detail.

Stories are contraptions that get their authors' points across. Characters are never realistic, even in "realistic" fiction; they are little automatons that exist for purposes of demonstration. The laws of magic must also apply, not for their own ends (unless they are an end in themselves), but to serve the author's point.

Again and again, the Potter books strongly imply that magical powers, while astounding, are limited. For example, there are rich wizards and poor wizards. Harry's nemesis, Draco Malfoy, comes from a rich and aristocratic family. Harry's best friend, Ron, comes from a poor family. These distinctions are necessary to the book, but are somewhat curious, given that any wizard can conjure things out of thin air. Harry's favorite teacher is unable to find a job, and goes about in shabby, patched clothing despite the fact that wizards can repair things perfectly with a wave of their wand.

All this implies that there are limitations on what magic can accomplish, otherwise wizards would not resort to anything as mundane as buying goods and services with money. However, the nature of these limitations is never specified. One must accept that magic functions in a limited way, without having the exact nature of those limitations explained. An airplane, in a sci fi story, might do all kinds of other things that are impossible for real planes to do, but we can still take it as given that it cannot fly to the Moon. Unless the author needs it to. But then, in the words of Desi Arnaz, Lucy has some 'splainin to do.

Is this a flaw? Possibly. However, the function of magic and the reasons why its use are not really that important to the book. It's more important that Ron be poor and Draco rich than we have a detailed explanation of the economic forces which create disparity in the wizarding world.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[hey!]

Patient: Doctor, I get this twinge every time I read Harry Potter out loud.
Doctor: Well, then don't read Harry Potter.
Patient: But I can't trash it if I don't read it silently. People will make fun of me.
Doctor: So, then read it silently.
Patient: But they aren't quite as wretched if I don't read them out loud.
Doctor: Then learn to enjoy being wretched.

The gift of beautiful prose is not one that every author has. I will agree Rowling does not have this gift, although she is not altogether ungifted in other ways. There is no doubt that "The Philosopher's Stone" is a first novel. You can see some of the same new writer disorganization in Susanna Clarke's Jonathan Strange, executed on a heroic scale Rowling took four books to achieve. Still, I loved both books. Rowlings prose improves in each book, although today perhaps she may be too powerful for any meaningful editorial restraint.

Your comment about adverbs is perceptive. Rowling is a master of settings, but not particularly good at describing action.

Holy crap that's gotten tiresome after 6 fucking books about "dumb adults".

However, that really only characterizes the first three books, possibly four. The shortcomings of Harry's judgment are on full display in book 5.

But not subtly so. Reading Rowling's subversive message is like stepping in front of a train.

I disagree; because the book has obvious themes doesn't mean it fails to develop them in subtle ways. I agree Snickett is quite good; however I don't see the elements you describe an attempt at subtlety; they're of a piece with books' overall archly ironic tone.

Two words. Septus Semprum. To me - this is the only interesting thread in the whole series; Will Harry learn the lesson Snape learned (though failed to teach, out of his inability to forgive)? - only it's the same lesson Anakin Skywalker learned.

See again, you are looking at it through the lens of drama: what will Harry learn? It is a good question, because it does bear on the fundamental question of the use of power. But the answer is obvious: nothing. Because Harry's nature precludes using that kind of power deliberately.

In any case, the power to hurt or kill is not extraordinary in the wizarding world, any more than it is extraordinary in our world. The power to bend others to our will is a different beast altogether.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Kelson]

Oddly, I couldn't get past about book 6 of "A Series of Unfortunate Events," despite the fact that the books are considerably shorter than even the early Harry Potter books. (Though the briefness of each story makes the formula even more noticeable.) One of the major differences in the way adults are portrayed is that in HP, adults can be good, evil, competent, incompetent, or some mixture thereof. In ASOUE, at least the first half, they're either evil or incompetent (or both). It just got tiresome -- like reading an entire book of life with the Dursleys.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[deanoaz]

Thanks for writing that.

I hadn't seen it in that light before, but I agree with every word you've said.

I remember, at the end of one story, a character (or characters?) being specifically rewarded for taking a stand against their own friends. The lesson for children is that ultimately they need to learn to decide for themselves what is right, rather than thoughtlessly accepting the judgements of others.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[thephydes]

This is pretentious crap. You might as well say that every book written has a hidden message that is potentially damaging to developing minds. Any fool can see that when a person writes a book it will contain, in some way or other, the experiences/gender/beliefs/politics/educaton/etc of the author. I know, lets get rid of all books and raise a generation of illiterates As a parent and an educator, I actually doubt that the supposed subliminal or subversive messsages exist in most cases except in the warped mind of an adult reader. In my experience children ( and I suspect most adults ) who read HP, do so because they love the stories, and the books have encouraged many non-readers to do so.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[ejp1082]

Holy crap that's gotten tiresome after 6 fucking books about "dumb adults".

Most every kid's story out there is a story about "dumb adults". Watch Nickelodeon sometime - the parents/teachers/principal/authority figure is always clueless, the kids are always outsmarting them, and it's always the unique insight and perspective of the kid that saves the day.

Actually, I give the potter books credit for just how much Harry *is* wrong and *should* have listened to Dumbledore.

My own opinion of them is that they're great in the same way that the original Star Wars trilogy is great. Rowling builds a universe rich in detail that engages the imagination. She doesn't win any real points for literary style, but she makes up for it with sheer fun. The story is mostly your standard good vs. evil, borrowing heavily from classic epic tales and legend - it doesn't score points for originality, but when does that stuff ever get old?

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Raindeer]

Just about the names.

The books are childrens's books. Don't forget that. They were aimed at british children age 10 and up. So the French words are not too known for them, but it does have something dark to it.

Its a childres fantasy world that grownups love to get lost in for a couple of hours.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Mr. Shiny And New]

The problem I personally have with the Harry Potter books, in regards to the Magic, is the seeming haphazard application of it. Certain things are impossible, while other things that seem related are trivial. As you pointed out, wizards should be able to conjure goods or magically repair clothes, yet seem unable to. A wizard economy exists, the wizards have money and a bank, and, presumably (maybe this was explained? I forget) magic to prevent counterfeiting. And yet wizards have slaves, even though magic can be (and is) used to automate tasks such as preparing food. It seems that these details, with all their flaws, were just slapped together for the first book, and expanded upon when needed for the other books, with no real thought to their consistency and whether the concepts make sense.

As you mention, this may be beside the point of the stories, but it still stands out as a flaw; much like a movie (cough Return of the King) where an army of soldiers is seen on horseback, then, in the next shot, they are all on foot; It's not really important whether they're attacking on horse or not, but the sudden disappearance of the horses breaks the narrative for me. Similarly the inconsistencies in the Wizard world annoy me.

However my most hated inconsistency is the one regarding how magic is actually performed. In the first five books it was made pretty clear that, in order to cast a spell, you needed to vocalize its incantation. Speak the magic word, so to say. This is clear because even powerful adult wizards like Voldemort speak their spells, and other powerful wizards are rendered helpless when they were made speechless. But all of this is discarded in book 6 when the concept of thinking a spell is introduced. In this mode of magic, you merely have to think the spell, or subvocalize, or something, and you can cast the spell. It's harder than speaking, yet deemed essential in, say, duelling situations. And yet, this late in the series, nobody had used this technique. Suddenly this becomes an important key to performing magic. This new development makes it seem as if all the previous wizard duels were mere charades or games. Several times a wizard spoke when they shouldn't have, or was stopped by silencing them; at no point in the past did a "bad guy" ever try to kill Harry with a silent curse. And there's nothing in the story to explain this glaring lack.

Now, I will overlook this, and read book 7 anyway. But in my mind all this plot device does is help reduce Harry's talent; when he was finally becoming a powerful force, it turns out everybody with more training than him was just screwing around with him; he's been rendered incompetent again. This was clearly demonstrated at the end of book 6 when Harry gets into a duel. Thus it seems that Harry's magic won't be able to save him after all; he's a slow learner and one school year won't be enough to turn it around. But this sort of retroactive continuity, or rule-changing, partway through the story, is very annoying to readers who are paying attention.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[strikethree]

Thank you for articulating that. I have been trying to put words to certain things for a long time and you just successfully did so. Well done. You deserve a +7 insightful. :)

strike

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[umbrellasd]

Real life is not dramatic. Unlike a play or movie, most acts are not prompted by motivation, but by habit. People in power, even good people, exercise their power for the most part mindlessly. Nobody knows this better than children, who have no power of their own and must live in accordance with rules set by others. Many of those rules are set for the childrens' benefit; some for the convenience of their betters; others are there just because they've always been there.

People in power are often mindless, yes. But people with power are anything but mindless. Mindfulness is true power.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[SirWinston]

As you pointed out, wizards should be able to conjure goods or magically repair clothes, yet seem unable to. A wizard economy exists, the wizards have money and a bank, and, presumably (maybe this was explained? I forget) magic to prevent counterfeiting. And yet wizards have slaves, even though magic can be (and is) used to automate tasks such as preparing food. The key is that, while you can use magic to e.g. help prepare food, you can't use magic to create it. The subtleties were well explained when it was shown that the food which magically appears on the tables at Hogwarts is actually real food prepared beforehand by house elves in the basements then teleported up--wizards can conjure things from thin air, food included, but anything conjured that way is temporary and will decay to nothingness. So conjured food won't nourish, and conjured gold (like the leprechaun gold that initially fools Ron) can't buy anything (presumably adult or experienced wizards can tell the difference between conjured and real commodities).

So, presumably, Lupin could use magic to seamlessly patch the holes in his clothes--but that would require conjuring new material which would disappear soon, so it's easier just to patch them once with real patches. By the same token, if something can be fixed without conjuring new matter, the fix can be permanent, or if magic can shape existing materials into a new form that can be permanent. But you can't conjure something lasting out of nothing in the Potterverse.

Re:Hating Harry Potter

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sorry, but if you've never read the books, how on earth could you critize them? Seriously?

It's like watching Scrogged and thinking that's what A Christmas Carol is about....

I suggest you read them, at least one of them, and then realize how stupid your post is....

Sorry, but someone's got to say it.

Is it just me, or ...

[Keyslapper]

does this title sound like something out of Lemony Snickets "A Series of Unfortunate Events" series? Sure it's not an alliteration, but "The Deathly Hallows"? - perhaps if it had been "The Horrible Hallows" ...

I expected something more associative though, like all the previous titles have been.

Perhaps it simply refers to the location of the final showdown?

Harry Potter and Leopard-Walk-Up-to-Dragon

[Anonymous Coward]

We all know that this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Potter_and_Leop ard-Walk-Up-to-Dragon is the seventh book!
What nonsense!

always liked....

[Anonymous Coward]

'Harry Potsmoker' myself

Heros in fantasy

[jd]

From Beowulf to Bilbo, the protagonist in quality fantasy is rarely a super-human figure, but rather a very ordinary person who does and says all kinds of extraordinary things. You'll see it in "Weirdstone of Brisingamen" (Alan Garner is one of the greatest authors of all time, IMHO), you'll even see it in "The Colour Of Magic" (Rincewind is a cowardly failed wizard - hardly the stuff of superheros).

Superheroic fantasy is ancient too - much of the Celtic tradition in the "Book Of Invasions" is of the Superman kind. Literally. All superheros in that tradition have a weakness that can be (and eventually was) used to destroy them. They were truly powerful, but not all-powerful and not all-perfect.

The Ultrahero - someone who is all-seeing, all-knowing, all-wise, all-powerful, utterly beyond failure - that is a much more modern invention and is the only kind that can really be called "Politically Correct", albeit correct for medieval Europe as opposed to today. But, hey, what's a thousand years between friends?

Re:Christmas present (where to find it)

[cortex]

If you go to jkrowling.com, click on the eraser and you will be taken to a room you'll see a window, a door and a mirror. In the mirror, you'll see a hallway. Click on the farthest doorknob and look for the Christmas tree. They click on the center of the door next to the mirror and a wreath appears. Then click on the top of the mirror and you'll see a garland. Look for a cobweb next to the door. Click on it, and it will disappear. Now, look at the chimes in the window. Click on the second chime to the right, and hold it down. The chime will turn into the key, which opens the door. Click on the wrapped gift behind the door, then click on it again and figure out the title yourself by playing a game of hangman.

from hecklerspray.com

So

[admiralh]

when will you be leaving Middle School?

Re:So

[Gilmoure]

When I finally get asked to the prom. D'uh!

You really need to read the books

[snowwrestler]

Most of your criticisms don't really apply to the books, particularly the later ones. Character names start to mis-apply more and more...Snape for example has a clearly evil-sounding name and evilly-painted character, but the (slowly revealed) truth is much more complicated. Dumbledore is revealed to be more manipulative and violent(although still basically good). Good Slytherin characters are introduced--they just happen to be cunning in their goodness. One of the most rewarding things about the series is the way in which motivations and backstories are revealed and intertwined. The movies simplify all this stuff quite a bit.

But in HP's world, magic stuff seems to be coming off a mass assembly-line, and is cheap and plentiful.

You've nailed it here--magic is basically an alternate technology base for a parallel society. Rowling does a pretty good job defining the rules and then exploring their implications. For one thing physical harm is not nearly as dangerous as magical harm. One of the characters is discovered to be a wizard when he falls out a second story window as a baby and simply bounces like a rubber ball. People are constantly breaking arms, having all their bones magicked out of their body, getting cut and bitten and burned--and all getting healed by magic. But no trauma to the psyche/soul is healable by magic (including death). The base concept seems to be making real the perceived distinction between body and mind.

Consider our technologies--we live in houses with electrical voltages that can kill us, natural gas lines, various powerful poisons, etc. We drive multi-ton vehicles down the road at 80 MPH. There's actually a fair amount of humor in the books based around technology differences--like the horror the main characters feel toward our medical practices ("They actually stitch people up with needle and thread? How barbaric!" - paraphrase) As we grow up we learn to manage and operate around our societal dangers. In the Harry Potter books the children are doing the same thing--the physical dangers are greatly exaggerated though, because the technology to mitigate/recover from them is so much better (magic). Thus it helps tell the story that all children know well--learning that things that seem scary at first are managable as you learn more and get older. When you're three, a stove is scary dangerous thing. When you're 13, you're expected to heat your own soup. :-)

If you're going to read the series, there's one more thing to keep in mind--they are written to the age of Harry in the book. So the first several books are shorter, simpler, and more rah-rah. But as Harry ages into a teenager, the books get longer, more morally complex, and darker. You have to set your expectations accordingly.

heard of "The Babysitter's Club" or "Hardy Boys"?

[Anonymous Coward]

or "Tom Swift" to go a little further back.

The "Harry Potter" books aren't considered "better" than similar books, they're simply a popular series that's currently in production.

Wait 10-20 years after the last one's been published and the "Harry Potter" books will suffer the same fate as all the other's its shared plot lines with.

For another great fantasy take on those objects...

[snowwrestler]

Read the "The Dark is Rising" series by Susan Cooper.

Boycott Harry Potter!

[Anonymous Coward]

Don't Buy Harry Potter Books!
http://stallman.org/harry-potter.html

Re:Christmas present (where to find it)

[Bandman]

I got the chime to change colors and that's it. The door never opened.

Theories

[Javagator]

Since we are doing theories, here are mine:

1. Neville's parents put the location of the horcruxes in his memory. He will know where they are when he comes of age.
2. Snape was at Godric's Hollow the night the Potters were killed. He tried to warn James that he had been betrayed, but James wouldn't listen. I liked the theory that Snape was immobilized under the invisibility cloak when the Potters were killed, but apparently JKR has shot this theory down.
3. Harry is an accidental 8th horcrux. He will allow Voldemort to kill him when he realizes it.
4. Snape will jump in front of Harry and take an AK for the team.
5. This will reactivate his mother's protection (not sure exactly why). The 2nd AK will kill the horcrux inside of Harry and rebound and kill the now horcruxless Voldemort.
6. The last sentence in the book will be, "On Harry's forehead was a second lightning shaped scar."

Re:Theories

[Anonymous Coward]

This is when you realize it sucks that they translate the names of the characters (except Harry and Voldemort)

Too "Good" For Seuss?

[Ahnteis]

What, you're too smart, too intellectual, and too all-gosh-darn-wonderful to enjoy Seuss because you're older?

Just because you can appreciate more complex prose doesn't mean that everything else is worthless.

Sounds like a case of over-inflated self-importance, or perhaps you're just too darn picky and critical. That's no way to enjoy life.

Re:Too "Good" For Seuss?

[Broken scope]

Wait... so the fact I'm still going to be reading them makes me over-inflated? WTF?

On Harry being a Horcrux

[Yax K'uk Mo']

C'mon, it's the ultimate reset button.

Either:

Voldemort kills Harry. Voldemort wins!

or

Voldemort fails to kill Harry. But Harry is a Horcrux, so Voldemort doesn't die. Do Over!

The Real Question

[Anonymous Coward]

that everyone wants to know the answer to: Does Harry finally bang Hermoine?

Re:Christmas present (where to find it)

[dashiznit]

Me too...I can't grab the key once it changes to gold. Anyone know the trick or have they changed it?

Apologies

[Ahnteis]

I misread your comment as a sarcastic poke at anyone who would read Seuss at 40. :)

Move my comment under some other post making fun of other popular "kids" authors.

Re:Apologies

[Broken scope]

Well illl be reading it to my kids/grandkids/hellspawn but that doesn't mean I won't be enjoying the book to.

Mod parent up!

[WombatDeath]

You can forget the objects and anything else about the thread, and feel free to mod as off-topic as you wish, but read The Dark is Rising anyway. Fantastic stuff, especially this close to Christmas.

Christians Banning Harry Potter

[jzoetewey]

One thing I find ironic is that the Zeeland, Michigan Public Schools took Harry Potter off the shelves. The Zeeland Christian Schools (run by a relatively conservative denomination of which I'm member) kept them on the shelves.

I know this because my mom was a teacher in the Zeeland Christian Schools and is currently a media specialist (aka librarian) for them. She likes the books quite a lot herself. She had nothing to to do with the fact that they're still on the shelves though.

I'd say that some Christians try to ban them, but far from all. In fact, I'd say that quite a lot of them like the books.