Harry Potter & the Deathly Hallows- Book Discussion & MAJOR spoilers-Enter at UR Risk

[SummerInFL]

That and Dumbledore got it by defeating, but not killing, Grindlewald. (that was his name right- Gellert Grindlewald?) So murder is not needed to control the Elder Wand.

Oh! Very good catch!

[Twist_of_Fate]

I still find it interesting that the Elder Wand recognized Harry as it's new master without Draco ever taking possession of the wand itself.

The scene where Dumbledore tells Snape? See, I did not read compassion at all. Dumbledore sounded very matter of fact and kind of oh well, and Snape was the one who reacted with shock.

I'm sure it is personal intrepretation- but I did not see Dumbledore as compassionate any longer at that point- but manipulative and coldly resigned.

Even read that way, Dumbledore would HAVE to be resigned to the fact that Harry would have to die. Before I touch more on that, of course Snape freaked out about that. Here was the man who had been asking him to look out for and protect a child that he particularly didn't like, save for his absolutely undying love for the boy's mother. Dumbledore had already asked Snape to kill him instead of letting Draco do it, which was hard enough for him (the revulsion and hatred in the 6th book, not TOWARDS Dumbledore, but towards what he had to do), but then to reveal that the boy he had asked Snape to protect was going to have to die. I'd be pretty outraged too, personally.

But now in defense of Dumbledore: He had no choice but to sound matter-of-fact and oh well. For Voldemort to ever truly be able to be defeated, Harry would have to "die" in order to destroy the part of Voldemort's soul that attached itself to him. At the same time, though, based on the fact that he told Snape that it was "essential" for Voldemort to do it himself, Dumbledore clearly had inklings that Voldemort's attack couldn't possibly kill Harry due to the shared blood. And here's where this all changes: true, what Dumbledore says sounds cold, very cold. Dumbledore doesn't even refute Snape's claim that he has been "raising [Harry] like a pig for the slaughter." But the thing is this: Dumbledore KNEW that Harry must step forward and willingly accept his death. If he had told Snape or even if he had told Harry that Harry would be protected from any mortal attack by Voldemort himself, then Harry wouldn't have been able to shed the fear of death. He wouldn't have reached the point that he did that night, walking through the Forbidden Forest in the wee hours of the morning. In my opinion, despite Harry's magic being infinitely stronger than Voldemort's, without that acceptance of death as a reality--a SURE thing--then Harry would have NEVER been able to fulfill the prophecy and bring down Voldemort. Manipulative? You bet your sweet hippogriffs it was. Brilliant on Dumbledore's part? Yes. Think back to the entire book, hell, the entire series: Dumbledore, whether it was the lessons from HBP or the bequests that he left the trio in this book or anything else for that matter, was a consummate teacher. Personally, the best teachers that I've ever had haven't told me things flat out, but laid a very clever, careful trail to what they were teaching me. If you ask me, this is what Dumbledore did. Even if he was manipulated to do so, Harry always arrived at the conclusions of his own accord, even when Ron and Hermione would doubt him.

Also, as a brief side point, Dumbledore wanted Harry's soul to be pure and unhindered by the piggybacking Voldemort soul. That couldn't have happened without Harry dying.

[Mac Daddy]

But now in defense of Dumbledore: He had no choice but to sound matter-of-fact and oh well. For Voldemort to ever truly be able to be defeated, Harry would have to "die" in order to destroy the part of Voldemort's soul that attached itself to him. At the same time, though, based on the fact that he told Snape that it was "essential" for Voldemort to do it himself, Dumbledore clearly had inklings that Voldemort's attack couldn't possibly kill Harry due to the shared blood. And here's where this all changes: true, what Dumbledore says sounds cold, very cold. Dumbledore doesn't even refute Snape's claim that he has been "raising [Harry] like a pig for the slaughter." But the thing is this: Dumbledore KNEW that Harry must step forward and willingly accept his death. If he had told Snape or even if he had told Harry that Harry would be protected from any mortal attack by Voldemort himself, then Harry wouldn't have been able to shed the fear of death. He wouldn't have reached the point that he did that night, walking through the Forbidden Forest in the wee hours of the morning. In my opinion, despite Harry's magic being infinitely stronger than Voldemort's, without that acceptance of death as a reality--a SURE thing--then Harry would have NEVER been able to fulfill the prophecy and bring down Voldemort. Manipulative? You bet your sweet hippogriffs it was. Brilliant on Dumbledore's part? Yes. Think back to the entire book, hell, the entire series: Dumbledore, whether it was the lessons from HBP or the bequests that he left the trio in this book or anything else for that matter, was a consummate teacher. Personally, the best teachers that I've ever had haven't told me things flat out, but laid a very clever, careful trail to what they were teaching me. If you ask me, this is what Dumbledore did. Even if he was manipulated to do so, Harry always arrived at the conclusions of his own accord, even when Ron and Hermione would doubt him.

Also, as a brief side point, Dumbledore wanted Harry's soul to be pure and unhindered by the piggybacking Voldemort soul. That couldn't have happened without Harry dying.

I also think Dumbledore wanted to see what was in Snape. Originally, Snape basically said "meh" when it came to losing James and Harry. He was just interested in saving Lilly. This disgusted Dumbledore. So now, years later...how would Snape react to losing Harry. Big deal? The little mediocre, stuck up wizard will be out of his hair? No. Snape was devastated, and in a way...I still don't think it was just Lilly at this point. This was Lilly's child, and he was ready to die for Harry to atone for his mistakes. This was why Dumbledore just dumped it in Snape's lap in that tone. He was saying "What's it to YOU?"

[Rapunzel]

I finished the book last night... and I thought that it was a wonderful end book to the series and lived up to the 8 years I invested in the series. But, if I had the chance again, I would NOT have read "Nineteen Years Later." I dunno, I thought that it was a HORRIBLE final chapter from a literary stance (and I'm not trying to say that Harry Potter is intended to be literary masterpiece, but there is no denying they are an amazing and intricate series)... and as I read it I thought it was such a corny chapter it was painful. I'm sure JK Rowling added that on to end specuation of further books in the series, but I don't think it was fitting to through in at the end of such an amazing series.

[SusieP.]

I think she wrote the epilogue so long ago that it just doesn't match the rest of the book. There was so much chit-chat and names being tossed around that it was actually kind of confusing to me. Maybe I was just tired after reading the whole book, but I didn't care for it either.

[Alice's Wonderland]

I still find it interesting that the Elder Wand recognized Harry as it's new master without Draco ever taking possession of the wand itself.



Even read that way, Dumbledore would HAVE to be resigned to the fact that Harry would have to die. Before I touch more on that, of course Snape freaked out about that. Here was the man who had been asking him to look out for and protect a child that he particularly didn't like, save for his absolutely undying love for the boy's mother. Dumbledore had already asked Snape to kill him instead of letting Draco do it, which was hard enough for him (the revulsion and hatred in the 6th book, not TOWARDS Dumbledore, but towards what he had to do), but then to reveal that the boy he had asked Snape to protect was going to have to die. I'd be pretty outraged too, personally.

But now in defense of Dumbledore: He had no choice but to sound matter-of-fact and oh well. For Voldemort to ever truly be able to be defeated, Harry would have to "die" in order to destroy the part of Voldemort's soul that attached itself to him. At the same time, though, based on the fact that he told Snape that it was "essential" for Voldemort to do it himself, Dumbledore clearly had inklings that Voldemort's attack couldn't possibly kill Harry due to the shared blood. And here's where this all changes: true, what Dumbledore says sounds cold, very cold. Dumbledore doesn't even refute Snape's claim that he has been "raising [Harry] like a pig for the slaughter." But the thing is this: Dumbledore KNEW that Harry must step forward and willingly accept his death. If he had told Snape or even if he had told Harry that Harry would be protected from any mortal attack by Voldemort himself, then Harry wouldn't have been able to shed the fear of death. He wouldn't have reached the point that he did that night, walking through the Forbidden Forest in the wee hours of the morning. In my opinion, despite Harry's magic being infinitely stronger than Voldemort's, without that acceptance of death as a reality--a SURE thing--then Harry would have NEVER been able to fulfill the prophecy and bring down Voldemort. Manipulative? You bet your sweet hippogriffs it was. Brilliant on Dumbledore's part? Yes. Think back to the entire book, hell, the entire series: Dumbledore, whether it was the lessons from HBP or the bequests that he left the trio in this book or anything else for that matter, was a consummate teacher. Personally, the best teachers that I've ever had haven't told me things flat out, but laid a very clever, careful trail to what they were teaching me. If you ask me, this is what Dumbledore did. Even if he was manipulated to do so, Harry always arrived at the conclusions of his own accord, even when Ron and Hermione would doubt him.

Also, as a brief side point, Dumbledore wanted Harry's soul to be pure and unhindered by the piggybacking Voldemort soul. That couldn't have happened without Harry dying.

Agreed. And he also is giving harry the knowledge of the deathly hallows, which conquers death. I think Dumbledore knew the rest of Harry would survive.

[TarzanTrashcanMan]

Last night I was just flipping through the seven books randomly, taking in small bits and pieces when an interesting thought struck me. I immediately went to DH to make sure what I thought was correct, and it was.

Voldemort's soul was divided and placed in seven Horcruxes (six intentionally, and the seventh inadvertently placed in Harry). Harry was charged by Dumbledore with the task of seeking out and destroying the Horcruxes. HOWEVER ... no one, not even Harry, was responsible for destroying more than one Horcrux.

Harry destroyed the first, the diary, in COS.
Dumbledore destroyed the ring.
Ron took care of the locket with Gryffindor's sword.
Hermione used another basilisk fang to destroy Hufflepuff's cup.
It was Crabbe's spell that burned Ravenclaw's diadem.
Neville killed Nagini, again with Gryffindor's sword.
And Harry was killed by Voldemort.

The responsibility of killing Voldemort was never Harry's burden to carry completely alone. Everyone had their own part to play in Voldemort's downfall, even Voldemort himself.

This is just another of those small intricacies the JKR puts in to subtly reinforce her major themes. In this case, it's the idea that we are stronger in unity than alone. Simply put, another reason why this is such an amazing story.

[SusieP.]

"Help is always there for those who seek it." Or whatever Dumbledore said, but it also shows how Harry went from being on his own to learning to accept help, which is really an accomplishment on it's own. Most classic heroes have their pride as their downfall, and Harry was able to overcome that.

[Twist_of_Fate]

So...what about the mistake on the cover? Where's Draco's wand at the time? In the book, Harry never drops it or anything and it's in neither of his hands at the time on the cover. Hrmm.

Oh, and this is assuming that the cover is supposed to be depicting the final battle in the Great Hall at Howarts.

[phruby]

This is all fine and dandy but when do we find out that Voldemort was really Harry's father and Hermione was his sister?

[twinmom]

So...what about the mistake on the cover? Where's Draco's wand at the time? In the book, Harry never drops it or anything and it's in neither of his hands at the time on the cover. Hrmm.

Oh, and this is assuming that the cover is supposed to be depicting the final battle in the Great Hall at Howarts.

I was wondering the same thing...

[SusieP.]

Good call on the cover! I really like the artwork though and how Harry has grown up.

Of course, now all I can see is that his hands are empty.

[Speedway]

I wish Professor McGonagall was my headmistress.

And Dumbledore was my grandad.

[SusieP.]

And that I was married to Lucius Malfoy, except he wasn't evil. Maybe, just a little bit.

[sleepyjeff]

I ...just...finished(Fastest 750 odd pages I've ever read. ......I started War and Peace 11 years ago and I am still not done with that )

I loved it but think it could have been better...maybe cutting out the last Couple of chapters. I know it's horrible; but I think it would have been a better "ending" if Harry died....in fact, it seemed to me that it was almost written that way and the last couple of chapters were written as afterthoughts...Harry dying would upset too many people or whatever.