Re: Oh, for Pete's Sake: They're actually filming the Potter 7 epilogu
Not so obvious. The notion of not shagging multiple people before you get married is stupid?
Some people don't. So I hear.
I didn't actually say that
that practice is stupid, though I do think it pretty damned risky, and not likely to result in long-term marriages, unless those involved live in and/or share a strong cultural antagonism towards divorce.
I rather meant that, unless the Wizarding world places a much bigger emphasis on marrying young (never mind pre-marital abstinence) than the books actually indicate, the odds that the three biggest characters (plus Ginny) would marry and stay married to their first serious partners is unlikely (not to mention cloying) to the point of absurdity.
And
that's the stupid: instead of leaving the future up to readers' imaginations, Rowling forces the shiniest, absolute best-case scenario down our throats, credibility be damned. The characters are bent into serving the needs of the plot, a fundamental artistic error. The whole thing just stinks.
Well... they were, what, 17 and 18 years old by that time? And nothing says they ran out and got married the next day. But okay, I'll concede the point.
Personally, I don't have a problem with the happy ending as much as another fundamental artistic error: the notion that all these heretofore unrevealed magical rules conspire at the climax of the story to help Harry win. Over and over. And it's not like he's a smart kid who takes advantage of loopholes-- he doesn't find out about these things until afterward.
In Book 1, the villain is defeated merely because he touches Harry, due to a built-in protection that Harry knew nothing about. All he had to do was stand there. And the Philosopher's Stone appears in his pocket because ... why again?
In Book 2, Harry does commit some dashing heroic acts, like killing the basilisk-- but only after a magic sword literally appears out of nowhere, something which isn't explained until later. And don't get me started about how the phoenix does half of Harry's job for him. Also, we find out many books later that a basilisk fang is one of the few things that could have destroyed the diary. So basically, Harry didn't have the right tools for the job, but he was given them as he needed them, one right after the other.
Although the sock thing was funny. That's the sort of magical loophole that Harry should be allowed to exploit,
intentionally, more often.
Book 3 gets a bye. Harry and his friends simply use what they've got.
Book 4: The explanation of what happened in the graveyard is one of the most contrived things I've ever heard. "If two identical wands duel each other, one will force the other to recast its most recent spells, one at a time, in reverse..." ...what? I mean, granted, Harry was doing a good job fighting for his life, but talk about a convenient rule! Which once again isn't explained until afterward.
Book 5 gets a bye again. Yeah, Harry was bailed out by the Order, but only because he intentionally asked them for help.
Book 6: I'm not sure what to make of this one. Harry is actually pretty clever with all the stuff he picks up from the Potions book. (My friends and I still argue about whether it even constitutes cheating. I'm not sure that it does.) That weird potion Dumbledore drank... well, let's just say the logic of "nothing else works, so I guess you have to drink it" is more than a little weird. But no magical laws conspire to save Harry, so I guess it gets a bye.
Book 7: All that stuff with the Elder Wand... to tell you the truth, it's so convoluted that I'm not even sure I have it down yet-- but it appears to be another example of convenient rules. And Harry's survival against Voldemort can probably be argued either way.
I do like the books-- but multiple instances of this sort of thing across four books is way too much. Any thoughts?
