Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogue

[Joy]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Firstly, the epilogue takes place 19 YEARS after the Battle of Hogwarts. There is PLENTY of time for Ron to have matured, especially since both he and Harry went straight into being Aurors instead of going back to Hogwarts to do their 7th year. The kinds of dangerous situations that come with being an Auror will surely have shaped and changed Ron and Harry.

We have to remember that they're still in the teens when we see them last before we see them again 19 years later. So, so much can change in that span of time. Hell, just a YEAR can change a person a lot. I know that from personal experience.

As for marrying school sweethearts... It's called wartime & post-wartime marriage. People get married out of fear, out of seeking comfort, out of the urge to procreate. Sure, relationships like that often don't work, but a lot of times marriages like that come after just months of knowing each other. The Trio/Quartet had seven years together, plus however many years between that and actually getting married. Plus, having children can also strengthen a relationship, so perhaps their marriages were rocky after the newlywed phase, but maybe having children brought them together and made them seriously work out the kinks in their relationships.

Point is, a LOT can happen, a LOT can change, over the course of 19 years, so I don't think there really can be any "logical" argument against how the pairings turned out in the epilogue.

 

[Checkmate]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

I hear people only marry their perfect mate in all circumstances at all times in all situations. And that no one ever marries someone who other people think is an odd or incompatible choice. And never, EVER, do those types of marriages work out, nor do they ever EVER become some of the strongest marriages.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Ginny was obviously introduced from the very beginning specifically to become Harry's love and a way for him to actualize his place as part of the Weasley family. Rowling telegraphed this from the minute Ginny first appeared with her exaggerated crush on Harry.

Rowling makes Ginny a non-issue outside of her role as "damsel in distress" in Book 2 for five whole books. Ginny is there in the way Arthur is there or McGonagall is there: as a person who is around. They barely speak to one another. She shares in virtually NONE of his adventures.

Then out of nowhere in Book 6, again, the "Chest Monster" shows up when he sees her with another boy. This girl who has been a complete NON-factor in his life up until that point suddenly becomes his love interest in an obsessive, unhealthy way that points more to the "chemistry" of a love (actually an obsession) potion than the chemistry between two compatable people. (Again, remember the gun in the drawer rule, and consider Molly's "confession" in Book 5).

Again, Ginny has NO traits that make her the logical candidate for Harry's affections. They share no background, no experiences in common. They have not been "through the fire", in the way Harry and Hermione have together.

Does this make Ginny more of a plot device than a character? Absolutely, but that's a weakness of Rowling's writing and nothing else.

Nothing else? That's everything, when it comes to the issue...

Hermione and Ron were likewise set up from early on - and by GoF she's hitting you over the head with how obviously they are "meant to be together".

Oh yes, verbally berating someone to the point of sending them off in tears on multiple occasions and generally being an ill-mannered sloth, pig and all around shallow idiot mean that Ron is the perfect man for Hermione...

The entire dynamic and a good portion of the action centered on the Weasley family and their home - which is presented as the ideal family in the fictional universe,

You must be reading a different book series. The Weasley family is a dysfunctional mess, mainly due to Molly the Control Freak, whose smothering insistence on keeping Harry child-like at all costs is an active threat to his well-being as she opposes him having information he NEEDS to survive and succeed at every turn. And she's hardly any less smothering with her OWN children.

You may find the epilogue unsatisfying but I think that means you didn't really like the books as they have a pretty straight-forward throughline- all heading toward exactly the ending that was provided.

They had one through line up until the end of 5, then went into Bizzaro world with 6 and 7.

That the adults are, in the end, revealed to have been working in Harry's best interests

Like H*LL they were. DD ADMITS he knew Harry would be abused by the Dursleys, but he sent him there anyways, pleading the "blood wards" as his reason, which is complete BS. Those wards didn't protect him from his relatives, now did they? And if they were so almighty important, then Harry should never have been allowed outside them except when he was at school (no QWC, no Burrow, no HQ).

No, the "blood wards" are a half-assed excuse to try to justify DD's inexcusable behavior towards Harry in allowing him to grow up abused, weak, and ignorant as part of a "plan" that amounts to Harry as human sacrifice eating an Avada for the "greater good".

Again, everything comes back to Harry's ultimate familial happiness, thus righting the wrong which is repeatedly held up throughout the book as his tragic loss. It's all very simple - but it's also all very consistent with the nature and tone of the stories from beginning to end.

And again, I'm not trying to deny Harry his "happy evers". I wanted them presented in a logical and believable context, however, which the Crapalogue does not do.

 

[DonIago]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

It almost sounds as though you're saying that life isn't always logical and sometimes people make mistakes despite their best intentions or end up falling in love with people whom you never could have forseen them ending up with...

 

[Broccoli]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

I just now bothered reading the poll options. Wow, those aren't slanted at all!

 

[Gaith]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

^^I've got no idea what you're talking about.

Harry and Luna was obviously the way to go.

That would have been far better, aye.

 

[Shazam!]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

They share no background, no experiences in common. They have not been "through the fire", in the way Harry and Hermione have together.

Didn't you watch Speed? Relationships that start under intense circumstances, they never last.

 

[cultcross]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

They share no background, no experiences in common. They have not been "through the fire", in the way Harry and Hermione have together.

Or, say, Ron and Hermione.

Added to that, neither being fawned over as The Chosen One and instead being 'Harry Potter's friend'. They had a much more similar experience than Harry and Hermione did and yet you still favour that pairing instead. Your logic isn't exactly consistent here.

 

[opali]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

I have not read or listened to any interviews with Rowling - but in every author interview I have ever read, the writer can usually speak at length about the thought process involved in creating the characters. That does not make the characters or their writing complex or thought-provoking. I've asked dozens of people this and no one has ever been able to answer me - if HP is a complex and thought-provoking piece of literature, tell me a theme, or symbolic motif contained within the work that is more complex than bigotry is bad, good inevitably wins over evil, or love is more powerful than hate, which are not thought-provoking themes at all, heart-warming as they may be.

Look, I'm not bagging on HP - they are charming, enjoyable adventure tales. But they're not thought-provoking.

Ha ha. I don't think you're bagging on it.

I'm not sure how you define thought-provoking, I suppose, Lapis. There wasn't an insinuation that that they were akin to Goethe and therefore prompted deep and intellectual discussions on thousand year old philosophy. But they weren't "Frog and Toad are Friends," either.

If you walked away finding only the themes, "bigotry is bad," "love triumphs over evil," etc., then that's all you picked up when reading it. These were obvious, sweet ideas that encapsulated the series, and made her a very rich woman.

For my son and I, however, these books and their more subtle themes have been the catapult for various conversations between us, some of them (conversations) caught me off guard because I hadn't read the books at that point and became interested after I read a paper he wrote about Dumbledore.

**One of the things we chatted about was the definition and meaning of names in the book. How a name can shape how a person views themselves, and whether or not they might feel they need to live up to their namesake.

My son was especially interested in her interviews as he read the series, so those conversations above included talk about the comment by J.K. Rowling

In Africa there are tribes where the name is never used. Your name is a sacred part of yourself and you are referred to as the son of so-and-so, the brother of so-and-so, and you're given these pseudonyms, because your name is something that can be used magically against you if it’s known. It’s like a part of your soul. That’s a powerful taboo in many cultures and across many folklores. On a more prosaic note, in the 1950s in London there were a pair of gangsters called the Kray Twins. The story goes that people didn’t speak the name Kray. You just didn’t mention it. You didn’t talk about them, because retribution was so brutal and bloody. I think this is an impressive demonstration of strength, that you can convince someone not to use your name. Impressive in the sense that demonstrates how deep the level of fear is that you can inspire. It’s not something to be admired.

**Bullies...My son was, at the time, learning to cope with a 'popular' bully who used his charm to get away with very mean-spirited comments. He vacillated between vengeance and admiration of this classmate. Rowling handles her bully characters in an interesting way. Not only is Slytherin an included addition as part of the four groups of the school, but they are encouraged to 'be all they can be.'
Difficult talk, that one...how adults laughed at and were charmed by this boy who was getting away with hurting people around him (including my son) constantly.

But I thought of Draco as someone who is very capable of compartmentalizing his life and his emotions, and always has done. So he's shut down his pity, enabling him to bully effectively. He's shut down compassion — how else would you become a Death Eater? So he suppresses virtually all of the good side of himself. But then he's playing with the big boys, as the phrase has it, and suddenly, having talked the talk he's asked to walk it for the first time and it is absolutely terrifying. And I think that that is an accurate depiction of how some people fall into that kind of way of life and they realize what they're in for.

You mentioned the "love always wins" theme and also spoke of Harry getting his family in the end...righting the wrongs done to him.
But, not only does Draco live, he has a family as well. Just like Harry. This was another great discussion we've had, how sometimes evil wins, and not only that, but lives right alongside good. We talked about the way he thought the book would end, and how he was surprised that Draco lived 'happily ever after,' too.

Here was her comment about life after death

“The truth is that, like Graham Greene, my faith is sometimes that my faith will return. It’s something I struggle with a lot,” she revealed. “On any given moment if you asked me [if] I believe in life after death, I think if you polled me regularly through the week, I think I would come down on the side of yes — that I do believe in life after death. [But] it’s something that I wrestle with a lot. It preoccupies me a lot, and I think that’s very obvious within the books.”

I suppose you get out of it what you put into it. He read these books probably a hundred times, each(!) and then he would come hang out with me and we would discuss them. He reads like a madman and besides the obvious choices..."Where the Red Fern Grows" and "Hitchhikers Guide..." among a few others, I can't think of any stories we've discussed as much as Harry Potter.

 

[Silvercrest]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Not only is Slytherin an included addition as part of the four groups of the school, but they are encouraged to 'be all they can be.'

I've gotta say, though: Gryffindor is supposed to be the house that values courage, bravery and so on. Slytherin values ambition, cunning, etc. We see Gryffindor get awarded points when its members do courageous things, all right.

So logically, shouldn't Slytherin get extra points for being sneaky, getting the jump on the next guy, and so on? Recognition from Dumbledore, that is, not just their Head of House.

 

[FluffyUnbound]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

The only people with a problem with the epilogue are Harry / Hermione shippers.

Tough luck! You lost!

Harry / Ginny and Ron / Hermione had been rolling at you like a freight train since book 2. It's not the epilogue's fault you couldn't see it!

 

[Tulin]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

I know!

To me it was OBVIOUS and a natural extension of what had come before!

Hence my disbelief that this "epilogue hatred" is some kind of national movement and more the keyboard vomitting of a few disgruntled basement dwellers.

 

[Gaith]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

^^ No need to get your tighty-whities in a bunch, cowboy; many of us epilogue non-fanciers think the series went to crap in Book 5 and never recovered, so it's not as though we were been blindsided by the suck fans of the whole rest of the canon were/should have been.

 

[kitsune]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

The only people with a problem with the epilogue are Harry / Hermione shippers.

Tough luck! You lost!

Harry / Ginny and Ron / Hermione had been rolling at you like a freight train since book 2. It's not the epilogue's fault you couldn't see it!

There's a big difference between seeing a ship being set up by the author, and accepting it.

I'm sure everyone saw Ron/Hermione being set up starting with the scene where they first met (in a purely slapstick, "opposites attract" sort of way), but it's not at all satisfying since Ron has only one redeeming quality (loyalty). Hermione would be better off marrying nobody than to settle for Ron.

Ginny's crush on Harry in book 2 can only be considered foreshadowing after reading book 6 since Ginny barely gets a another reference until the Department of Mysteries. "Hindsight is 20/20" and all that.

While Harry/Ginny is possible, it's not at all satisfying either since it really comes out of nowhere (they have nothing in common besides being in Gryffindor and being on the Quidditch team, and Ginny barely gets a reference in books 3 and 4).

 

[Joy]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

My sister has only seen the movies, and yet even she has seen Ron/Hermione coming from day one.

 

[Tulin]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Indeed - they have that whole antipathy thing that obviously, at some point turns around and blossoms into awkward teenage romance.

I honestly don't know how people could not see it coming, besides the whole Harry/Hermione thing being WAYYYYYYYY too obvious!

But then, maybe some of the H/H "shippers"(Holy FUCK I LOATHE that term)are young kids who have not read much or seen many films and don't know the tropes and formulas enough to see which way it was all going?

 

[CaptainCanada]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Eh, it's not like there's a lack of stories where the male lead gets together with the female lead.

Shipping preference is mostly about who you think would make the best couple (or, for the more out-there ones, just having fun coming up with strange pairings).

 

[Thestral]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Not sure why I'm wading into this, but hey...

Rowling makes Ginny a non-issue outside of her role as "damsel in distress" in Book 2 for five whole books. Ginny is there in the way Arthur is there or McGonagall is there: as a person who is around. They barely speak to one another. She shares in virtually NONE of his adventures.

Ginny is definitely not a "non-issue" for the first five books, because of Order of the Phoenix. Books 1-4, okay maybe (aside from her role in Book 2); but not Book 5. By the end of Book Five, between Dumbledore's Army and her Quidditch role, Ginny is a well-established secondary character, on a level with Neville and Luna.

In fact, the Department of Mysteries Battle (before the Order arrives) features who? The triad that's been the main characters all along (Harry, Ron, Hermione), and three other characters who have become really a "second trinity" in Neville, Ginny, and Luna. It's convenient that each of them corresponds in some way to their counterpart, with Neville being the other possibility for the prophecy, Ginny being a Weasley, and Luna being almost the mirror-image of Hermione. And notice who was leading the Hogwarts resistance while Harry, Ron, and Hermione were traipsing across England looking for Horcruxes.

Oh yes, verbally berating someone to the point of sending them off in tears on multiple occasions and generally being an ill-mannered sloth, pig and all around shallow idiot mean that Ron is the perfect man for Hermione...

It's called being an average ordinary teenager with all the problems that entails; there's something important and true about Hermione's character that she doesn't need the dashing superstar hero, but is happy with an average guy who cares about her, even if he is a fool sometimes.

The only people with a problem with the epilogue are Harry / Hermione shippers.

Tough luck! You lost!

Harry / Ginny and Ron / Hermione had been rolling at you like a freight train since book 2. It's not the epilogue's fault you couldn't see it!

Ron/Hermione, maybe... the trope definitely worked pretty ho-hum there. Harry/Ginny? Nah, not all the way back in Book 2; more like Harry/nobody

I'm sure everyone saw Ron/Hermione being set up starting with the scene where they first met (in a purely slapstick, "opposites attract" sort of way), but it's not at all satisfying since Ron has only one redeeming quality (loyalty). Hermione would be better off marrying nobody than to settle for Ron.

Bah, "settle." Look, I preferred the idea of Harry/Hermione too, but this idea that Ron was "beneath" Hermione is... annoying.

Ginny's crush on Harry in book 2 can only be considered foreshadowing after reading book 6 since Ginny barely gets a another reference until the Department of Mysteries. "Hindsight is 20/20" and all that.

Ginny was definitely an important, if secondary, character throughout Order of the Phoenix.

 

[kitsune]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Hermione would be better off marrying nobody than to settle for Ron.

Bah, "settle." Look, I preferred the idea of Harry/Hermione too, but this idea that Ron was "beneath" Hermione is... annoying.

I was probably a bit harsh. But I honestly find it hard to see anything likeable about the poor bloke If Hermione and Ron hadn't been Harry's friends, then the choice of Ron would be exceedingly arbitrary.

 

[darkwing_duck1]

Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu

Not sure why I'm wading into this, but hey...

Rowling makes Ginny a non-issue outside of her role as "damsel in distress" in Book 2 for five whole books. Ginny is there in the way Arthur is there or McGonagall is there: as a person who is around. They barely speak to one another. She shares in virtually NONE of his adventures.

Ginny is definitely not a "non-issue" for the first five books, because of Order of the Phoenix. Books 1-4, okay maybe (aside from her role in Book 2); but not Book 5. By the end of Book Five, between Dumbledore's Army and her Quidditch role, Ginny is a well-established secondary character, on a level with Neville and Luna.

"Secondary" being the key. She's NOT part of the "Golden Trio". She's a bit player in the background, like Neville, Luna, et al.

In fact, the Department of Mysteries Battle (before the Order arrives) features who? The triad that's been the main characters all along (Harry, Ron, Hermione), and three other characters who have become really a "second trinity" in Neville, Ginny, and Luna. It's convenient that each of them corresponds in some way to their counterpart, with Neville being the other possibility for the prophecy, Ginny being a Weasley, and Luna being almost the mirror-image of Hermione. And notice who was leading the Hogwarts resistance while Harry, Ron, and Hermione were traipsing across England looking for Horcruxes.

None of which makes her an appropriate love match for Harry...Neville yes, because she went through the tough times at HIS side, not Harry's.

Oh yes, verbally berating someone to the point of sending them off in tears on multiple occasions and generally being an ill-mannered sloth, pig and all around shallow idiot mean that Ron is the perfect man for Hermione...

It's called being an average ordinary teenager with all the problems that entails; there's something important and true about Hermione's character that she doesn't need the dashing superstar hero, but is happy with an average guy who cares about her, even if he is a fool sometimes.

He's NOT an "average guy". He's a sloth, a pig, and a fool with the emotional range of a teaspoon. He treats her like shit continuously. Hermione, being a young lady of quality and good breeding, would never fall for such a troll.

Bah, "settle." Look, I preferred the idea of Harry/Hermione too, but this idea that Ron was "beneath" Hermione is... annoying.

Then Rowling should have written him as a better person.