that's what I thought too.... brains versus brawn... which is exactly what harry did himself... he knew he couldn't die when he went into that battle... with voldie being a horcrux for harry. the wand knew it too.
What did people think of the Deathly Hallows? (spoilers)
- Thread starter Candlelight
- Start date
that's what I thought too.... brains versus brawn... which is exactly what harry did himself... he knew he couldn't die when he went into that battle... with voldie being a horcrux for harry. the wand knew it too.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
On first pass, maybe. Rowling has created a heck of a world to be sure. But her writing skills within that world leave much to be desired.
NOTHING Harry does helps his own cause, for example. Harry is never allowed to be proactive. He gets held back time and time again until someone or something ELSE shows up to give him the means to succeed.
That's a primary flaw in Rowling's writing, really. Her protagonist is stuck in reactive mode. He is never allowed to better himself or his situation. Anything he acheives is DESPITE his circumstance, not because of it. That is done so she can hammer us over the head with her "choices not circumstances" theme.
And it's such poor logic. By rights, Dumbledoor (aka the Manipulative Old B***ard) was grooming the next Dark Lord with what he did to Harry.
Except of course that Harry didn't have the education needed to BE a Dark Lord. Which is another logic bomb in the books.
To Wit:
You know this kid is going to be the future salvation of the world as you know it.
What do you do? Ship him off to relatives who hate his guts based off some specious reasoning regarding "blood wards". Who treat him like a slave and abuse him (and NEVER get caught doing it). Never bother to check up on him. Allow critical parts of his education to be compromised by poor teaching (Snape, et al). And you don't step in to take up the slack?
No. None of it makes any logical sense. Too much "writer ex machina" thinking. To much happening "just because" and no logical consequences.
And don't get me started on the "romances"....Ginny the Cipher becomes Ginny, Love of Harry's Life? UGH! (though, given that her mother was a "potions princess" vis a vis her father...I have to wonder...like mother like daughter?)
Hermione loves a thoughtless, selfish, boorish prat who disses her on one hand and copies her homework on the other? BARF!
Rowling created a heck of a world, to be sure, and her writing STYLE is a genuine pleasure to read...the SUBSTANCE of her writing though does NOT bear close nor repeated examination.
Loved it. Go Neville!
I basicly agree with what you're saying, but one defense, thinking back over the series, Dumbledore seemed to simply have complete faith in the prophecy. Now, all the events that lead to the prophecy become complete were totally contrived and manipulated by the author. It doesn't end up looking like Dumbledore's genius plan, it looks like he rolled 20 sided dice and kept his fingers crossed for good luck.... but Dumbledore believed in the prophecy and felt he just had put other things in place so that when it came down to Harry and Voldy it would be Harry on top.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
By keeping him ignorant and untrained? By never checking up on him so that he grew up as abused if not more so that Voldemort (running the risk of him becoming the next Dark Lord)?
For me, the "logic" just doesn't hold. If Harry is so supremely important, you don't take those sorts of chances. The Fidelius charm was good enough to keep 12 Grimnauld safe up until the latter stages of the war. Another location could have been secured, say with the Longbottoms or the Boneses. For that matter, why was Sirius left to rot without a trial? One word: veritaserum There he could have had a safe, happy childhood AND been given a good head start on learning the things he needed in order to win.
As it stands, there is NOTHING about Harry himself or his efforts that won the day. His victory was engineered entirely by "writer ex machinas" (the Hallows, the "blood protection", et al ad nauseum), and his sufferings (in my opinion) were entirely UNnecessary.
It's one plot contrivance after another; all designed to allow Rowling to swing her "theme hammer".
Everyone wants to think good of Dumbledore. I'd like to as well, but every time I go over his grossly incompetent handling of Harry's life, the less respect I have for him.
I was disappointed, mostly because I preferred Snape as a bad guy (who killed Dumbledore with no consent involved) and really wasn't convinced by the explanation we got, it seemed like a weak surprise in order to be a surprise, just as killing Harry and bringing him back, unconvincingly, was.
This also bugged me, as did Luna thinking of him as a friend when he hadn't, IIRC, acted as one in the previous books. Neville as a hero also didn't feel convincing, and Voldemort wasn't as scary as he should have been.
This also bugged me, as did Luna thinking of him as a friend when he hadn't, IIRC, acted as one in the previous books. Neville as a hero also didn't feel convincing, and Voldemort wasn't as scary as he should have been.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Well, Neville is an interesting example. In the movie version of GoF, Neville steps up and helps out Harry, playing Dobby's role from the books. This is just one example, but clearly Neville could have gradually, subtley grown into just a bit more intrepid character throughout the books.
Rowling keeps him as a clumsy incompetent right until the last minute, then he is an action hero. There's an unspoken implication that he shines when Harry's not there to outshine him. But there's no logical reason why that should be, it was never Harry holding him back, it was more like Snape, and his parents. And those things hadn't changed for him by the end of the book.
So we get back to the prophecy again. Neville could have been the chosen one, so he should have had the potential all along, and in the end we see that. But it is, as you say, writer ex machina, we aren't allowed to see his growth throughout the series. Even after OotP, where Neville has trained with DA all year, we see him only clumsily dropping the prophecy, and unable to cast a spell with a broken nose. Then by DH he is leader of the rebellion.
Rowling keeps him as a clumsy incompetent right until the last minute, then he is an action hero. There's an unspoken implication that he shines when Harry's not there to outshine him. But there's no logical reason why that should be, it was never Harry holding him back, it was more like Snape, and his parents. And those things hadn't changed for him by the end of the book.
So we get back to the prophecy again. Neville could have been the chosen one, so he should have had the potential all along, and in the end we see that. But it is, as you say, writer ex machina, we aren't allowed to see his growth throughout the series. Even after OotP, where Neville has trained with DA all year, we see him only clumsily dropping the prophecy, and unable to cast a spell with a broken nose. Then by DH he is leader of the rebellion.
Another brilliant thing I thought about #7 was how we directly got to see the villains and Voldy, how most of the Death Eaters were only working for V because they were terrified of him (particularly the Malfoys). It set up the ending well because once V is dead you still have a vast army of villains, but without him they don't WANT to slaughter and rule the entire world (well a couple of them!).
I really liked DH; I have to imagine that the tent scenes will be the bridge that breaks the final book in two for the last movies. Also, I just imagine this going on between Harry and Hermione :
(The tent and the rain scenes )
Hermione : Harry?
Harry : Yes?
Hermione : This tent scene is going to be huge shipper-bait on the fanfic scene, isn't it?
Harry : You mean, will such writers have two barely-legal kids in a situation they could have entered into hundreds of times but never have, thereby placing themselves, while hunted, in an awkward, vulnerable and sometimes noisy position?
Hermione : Noisy?
Harry : Thin walls at the Weasleys. Kept me up.
Hermione : That was mostly Ron.
(The tent and the rain scenes )
Hermione : Harry?
Harry : Yes?
Hermione : This tent scene is going to be huge shipper-bait on the fanfic scene, isn't it?
Harry : You mean, will such writers have two barely-legal kids in a situation they could have entered into hundreds of times but never have, thereby placing themselves, while hunted, in an awkward, vulnerable and sometimes noisy position?
Hermione : Noisy?
Harry : Thin walls at the Weasleys. Kept me up.
Hermione : That was mostly Ron.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
I didn't get that at all prior to DH. The DEs were not only villains, but damn near "moustache twirling" amounts of evil.
That's my point, #7 finally showed us the villains directly and we got to see their POV. Before then the baddies only appeared in the middle of a firefight at the end of the book. But here we get to hear their dialogue amongst themselves. It's just one of the many things that #7 kicked up a notch.
My only problem with these examples were that they were predictable, but that's only because they made perfect sense within the story. I will admit though that before reading the book, I entertained the notion that Snape really was a bastard who hated Harry and was planning on killing him, while simultaneously double crossing Voldemort.
A reference to Germans and Nazi Germans perhaps? Only following Hitler out of fear and not for the glory of what may come (unless you're Bellatrix).
J.K. Rowling reminds me a lot of George Lucas. She knows how to create a wonderfully imaginative world full of great characters, but she fails when it comes to execution. The flaws in her writing were easy to overlook when Harry Potter was nothing more than a children's book, but when the books started taking themselves seriously those flaws became impossible to ignore.
The Deathly Hallows wasn't terrible (except for the epilogue), but it had so much wasted potential. J.K. Rowling did her best, but she bit off way more than she could chew with those last two books. Harry Potter was at its best when it was a simple children's story. It all went downhill with The Order of the Phoenix.
The Deathly Hallows wasn't terrible (except for the epilogue), but it had so much wasted potential. J.K. Rowling did her best, but she bit off way more than she could chew with those last two books. Harry Potter was at its best when it was a simple children's story. It all went downhill with The Order of the Phoenix.
You know who that sounds like?
Indiana Jones in 'Raiders of the Lost Ark' (one of the greatest films in existence).
The entire movie is one failure after another for him. He gets the idol stolen from him at the start. He loses the girl, and when he finds her, can't even rescue her. As soon as he finds the ark, it's taken from him. He gets it back briefly only to have it stolen again, along with the girl. He gets the upper hand on the Nazis, only to surrender in about one minute. Finally, he wins by being tied up and closing his eyes.
What a loser, right?
Well, says your analysis, anyway. I consider it a brilliant film and think you're a bit daft for suggesting that it uses a flawed formula.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
It's not the same thing at all.
Indy is a smart, educated, adventurer with many skills and abilities to fall back upon, plus years of experience to draw upon.
Harry is a clueless kid whom Rowling KEEPS clueless by having those in charge of his life do little or nothing to prepare him for the role he has to play in the story. Moreover, their decisions often actively HINDER Harry in terms of his development. Harry is left to get by on luck and "fate", not any skill or attribute he posesses or develops by his own efforts.
Well, if Harry had developed some skill that could beat Voldemort, I'd pretty much consider that the most unbelievable thing in all 7 books and probably wouldn't have finished reading the last 30 or so pages.
What, exactly, are you suggesting here? I mean, WHAT could he have learned? I honestly can't figure out what you're suggesting.
darkwing_duck1
Vice Admiral
Given that Harry is "the Chosen One", I find the entire timeline of his life is so illogical and implausible that it just reeks of bad writing.
1) He's shuffled off to magic-hating relatives based on some dodgy theory about "blood wards" when it's shown that the protections isn't in any wards, it's in Harry himself (witness what he did to Quirrell). His relatives abuse the hell out of him at every turn: beaten by his cousin, treated as a slave by his aunt and uncle, and starved by all three so badly that his growth is stunted.
2) No one EVER says anything about how he's being treated. And before you say "no one knew", remember Mrs. Figg, the squib. Even if she weren't there, Dumbledork could have looked in from time to time.
3) Once he GETS to Hogwarts, Dumblenuts CONTINUES to "mushroom" him (keep him in the dark and feed him bullshit). Not only is he NOT given a proper education in key areas for a normal student (DADA, Potions), but he's also NOT given a proper education that he needs as Chosen One to have ANY sort of fighting chance to beat Voldemort. And when he DOES ask for information/help, they pat him on the head, tell him "let US worry about that, you don't need to know anything", and ship him back to Durskaban for more abuse.
4) When Dumb-as-a-fork DOES finally start arranging some special training for him (years 5 and 6) it's pretty frakking useless. What IDIOT would trust Snape to do SQUAT to help Harry after all that Snape's put him through? And in Year 6, the Barmy Old Goat does nothing but go over the "This is Your Life Tom Riddle" show...
So, when the "Brawl for it All" happens (Year 7), what are we left with? A physically and emotionally stunted boy who isn't even trained up to the standard of a NORMAL wizard, let alone the "destined savior of the Wizarding World".
Nowhere is that more clear than duing the Tent Exodus...Harry and co wander around haplessly without adult guidance until Rowling contrives to spoon feed them the help they need when by that point they SHOULD have been able to take up the tast themselves.
