Author | Joseph L. Selby

The Six Books of Harry Potter

Nathan Bransford invited readers to post comments about Harry Potter on their own blogs and link back in his, for which this post is created. Depending on how long you’ve been following me, you might have listened to the episode of the PodgeCast or even read the older post on my LiveJournal that covered the matter. Rather than digging through all that, I will repost here why I think the seventh book should be erased from the collective memory.

Why to read HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS

Molly Weasley vs. Bellatrix Lestrange

Why NOT to read HARRY POTTER AND THE DEATHLY HALLOWS

Like many of the previous novels in the series, HPDH lacked a firm editorial hand1. The 300-page trek through the woods was interminable. At least 100 pages could have been cut from that scene without detracting from the story.

The climax of HPHBP enumerates a number of rules for the final book. Harry is chasing after Snape and not having any success at all. Snape tells him that he’ll never succeed without learning how to cast without speaking. More over, if Harry ever hopes to face Voldemort, he must first defeat Snape. Neither of these issues are addressed in book 7.

Never, not once ever, does Harry cast a spell without speaking in the seventh book. When it comes to the final conflict, it has no bearing whatsoever to the outcome.

Harry never faces Snape. Nagini kills Snape while Harry watches, so really, the whole ending of book 6 is negated.

WORSE, that negation also reduces Dumbledore’s sacrifice. Why did he let Snape kill him? To protect the Elder Wand. Snape defeats Dumbledore and thus is the owner of the Elder Wand. Harry is supposed to defeat Snape so he can get the Elder Wand. The Elder Wand is one of three items that GIVE THE BOOK ITS NAME! That plotline is entirely disregarded.

Lupin and Tonks die so that Harry can be father to an orphan, bringing to a ridiculous conclusion to the character arcs of two of the most reasonable characters in the series up to that point. They throw their lives away to avoid responsibility2 and their deaths are a complete throw-away. It’s not even a scene of the book.

Harry sends Ginny, the most badass combat wizard of the group, away at the end of the sixth book. And she stays away. What character is this? Certainly not the one that had grown into a strong-minded woman in the two previous books3.

And the clincher, JKR’s comments following the publication of the book. No, not that Dumbledore was gay. Who gives a shit about that? No, she made two comments that just make me wonder how she managed to write such an amazing series in the first place as she seems completely out of touch with her own characters.

Blog post 1: JKR answers the questions of what happened to the characters after the end of the series. Harry and Ron become aurors and revolutionize the field. AYFKM?!?!? Neither of them are smart enough to be aurors much less to revolutionize the field. They lucked into potions class and would never have been able to last in any long-term capacity in that profession.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, she had created an arc she never resolved. Voldemort had tried to be the Dark Arts professor and failed. Following, the school never had another professor for more than a year. Being his opposite and given his proven track record at surviving the dark arts (and experience leading DA), Harry should have taken on the roll to break the curse. Ron could have taken his self-confidence and gone on to play professional Quidditch, which is the only activity he ever truly loves in the entire series.

Blog post 2: JKR says she crafted the ending specifically for Harry to represent Jesus in an effort to draw readers to Christ through her fiction. Hey, if that’s what she wants to do, that’s her choice. But to accomplish it, she derailed her own series and turned it in a direction where she could recreate Good Friday in a wizard combat zone. Never sacrifice your story for your message. A skillful author could use the former to deliver the latter.

Adendum 1: I also contend that Neville is more popular because of the movies than he is because of the book. JKR uses Dobby as the character that arrives with the timely answer (e.g., gillyweed). In the movies, they use Neville who is a lot cheaper than a CGI house elf. Not only did it work, it was BETTER than the books. It fit the character better and fleshed it out. The Neville of the books never got any real attention (other than being a practical joke) until HPOP, whereas the movies began his evolution one story earlier in HPGF. While he gets a great scene in the final book, I wonder how much attention he would have got if he hadn’t grown so popular.

Adendum 2: What would have been cool? In HPPS/HPSS (depending on your nationality), Ron is the knight and has to sacrifice himself for Harry to continue on to the end. If that had been paralleled in the final book, it would have been a stroke of genius.

1 After the series became popular, there became a standard format to any Harry Potter novel. Part 1: Main plot. Part 2: Awesome subplot. Part 3: Lame subplot.

Parts 2 and 3 always got equal attention and swelled the book well beyond an appropriate page count. Parts 3 from every novel could have been chopped with no loss to character or primary plot flow. It would have just chucked lameness that we all had to wade through like we were sewer workers or something.

2 I have yet to meet a (sane) mother who would sacrifice the life of her kid to be with her husband while he runs off to get himself killed.

3 In all their previous fights, Harry and Ron have required a third person to force them back together. When Ron returns with the sword, it should have been Ginny hauling him there with whatever cattle prod Ron needs that book. They abandoned their strongest weapon and the story abandons her too4.

4 I will admit to some bias, as she’s my favorite character, but really. If you’re going to war, you don’t send the guy with the machine gun home because it’s dangerous. Certainly the guy with the machine gun doesn’t stay home once he’s there.


Previous
Next

8 responses to “The Six Books of Harry Potter”

  1. Nate Wilson

    Great analysis! I'd never thought about book 7 in much detail, since it'd been a couple years and I didn't remember everything left hanging in book 6. You make some salient points, but a few stand out for me:

    1. Ginny = awesome
    2. When you finish a series, you don't get to just make up what happens next for the characters (unless you keep writing about them). If we let Rowling do it, George Lucas will want to, too.
    3. I'd have been all in favor of Addendum 2. But no, instead she went and killed off a random Weasley.

  2. Joseph L. Selby

    I have to say, the death of one twin but not both is actually much more cruel a result. They did everything together. And while I'm usually horrible to my characters, I would have let them both die together.

    In fact, I probably would have killed all the male Weasleys (except maybe Percy) just to show how horrible the fighting really was.

  3. Joseph L. Selby

    I would have also copy and pasted as much of Ron's text from the scene in the first book as would properly fit.

    (This Ron symmetry wasn't originally my idea. A guy named Adam proposed it and it is totally awesome, so I now include it in my suggestions.)

  4. autumnrhythm30

    WORSE, that negation also reduces Dumbledore's sacrifice. Why did he let Snape kill him? To protect the Elder Wand. Snape defeats Dumbledore and thus is the owner of the Elder Wand. Harry is supposed to defeat Snape so he can get the Elder Wand. The Elder Wand is one of three items that GIVE THE BOOK ITS NAME! That plotline is entirely disregarded.

    Draco was the owner of the Elder wand since he disarmed Dumbledore. Dumbledore had Snape kill him so it would confuse Voldemort enough to protect Draco. Harry defeated Draco at Malfoy manor when he disarmed him, thus becoming the owner of the Elder Wand. You don't need to kill to own it, like Voldemort believed.

  5. Joseph L. Selby

    This sounds familiar. I have to admit, it's been 3 years since I've read the book as I've never been willing to reread it.

    So I Googled it and then pondered on what my reactions had been. You are correct. That was a mistake on my part. I do remember my reaction at the time. I thought the whole Draco "defeating" Dumbledore was incredibly thin. Sure I accept that you don't have to kill to win (a good message), but Draco did not win that encounter. The encounter played out in his favor, but he choked.

  6. autumnrhythm30

    Yeah, it was kind of a woven tale that was thin. I mean, the only thing Draco did was say 'expeliarmus' to him. In the movie it's much more pronounced. You see Dumbledore SLOWLY raise his wand so Draco has to have enough time to disarm him.
    Also, I for some reason I woke up with answers/arguments to some of your other points. Let's just say this is a healthy debate. I'm not one of those rabid fans that attack any sign of non-JKR loyalty. I never thought DH was the best book or even the worst book, it's just the last book to me. *shrug* I just reread DH or I would never have remembered all this.

    First, I believe Snape told Harry he would never win if he couldn't do spells without speaking because, in the end, he was trying to protect him. Sure, he hated Harry because of James, but he loved him for Lily and ultimately wanted him to survive. That's what his whole life was dedicated to.
    Secondly, I know Harry was never going to be good enough to defeat Voldemort. Dumbledore knew that and planned accordingly. If you think about it, without the Deathly Hallows, Harry wouldn't have stood a chance. Also, Snape had no idea the Deathly Hallows existed. So, in his mind, he was trying to prepare Harry for battle. Dumbledore prepared him another way, making it nearly impossible to hurt Harry with the Elder wand since Harry was the owner and it would obey him before V if possible.

    I completely agree with Ginny, Tonks/Remus, Ron as a quidditch player and Neville. I am going to ignore the JKR wrote Harry to represent Jesus thing because (even as a Catholic) I find that incredibly odd. I had never heard that before. I mean, why can't a story just be a story?

  7. Joseph L. Selby

    I don't think you're acting like a rabid fan. I think you are trying to rationalize poor writing. While your explanation of Dumbledore and Snape can be plausible by a coincidence, there are no coincidences in writing. The author has full control. If Chekhov is hanging above a fireplace in Act I, he better be fired in Act III.

    The same thing here. If Snape is going to list the challenges Harry must face to succeed, he must face them. Whether his plans and Dumbledores overlapped, it's poor writing to simply ignore the one because of the other. It's a big old dangling plot thread of dinosaur proportions (and not the little guys the size of chickens; I'm talking the kind that end up in Spielberg movies).

    As for Snape, I don't think he loved Harry at all. Too frequently he tells Harry how much like his father he is. Snape is obsessed (to the point that it's absolutely creepy) and his efforts to defeat Voldemort are completely self-serving. He wants to prove himself to Lilly. He wants to earn her forgiveness. And if that means helping the son who so reminds him of the man he hates, so be it. But he does not love Harry. He just hopes Lilly is watching in heaven so he can steal her away in the afterlife.

    What a perv.

  8. autumnrhythm30

    I can totally see him doing that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *