Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: The Spoiler Post. This Post Contains Major Major Major Harry Potter Spoilers. Minor Ones Too.

Posted by rjp
July 23, 2007

It's ironic that you make that Sopranos comment because I told my wife that Rowling definitely did not pull a Sopranos. I loved the Epilogue. I thought it gave me just enough to know they lived normal lives, but without leaving me wanting more stories about Harry's adventures. While I will always remember the Sopranos finale as one of the least satisfying finale experiences of my life, I'll remember the Deathly Hallows as one of my favorite.

Posted by L
July 23, 2007

I agree, I wanted to know more about the veil where Sirius died. I definitely did not like how Remus and Tonks's deaths were handled. And the Snape and shampoo line was probably the one of the funniest lines of the entire series.

I still don't know where I stand on the epilogue. It closes the door for a continuation in the future, at least for the Trio. I guess I would have liked a little more information, but this way, you can imagine things for yourself and not feel disappointed.

I love how Rowling hints at things that aren't actually covered until several books later. For examply, the Lily/Snape thing. There are subtle hints first in the Order of the Phoenix with Snape's Worst Memory and again in the Half Blood Prince when Petunia is talking about the dementors and says 'that awful boy'. It was sort of obvious Snape had a thing for Lily, but that they knew each other when they were little is completely shocking.

Posted by Matt S
July 23, 2007

I hated the epilogue, probably because I enjoyed the rest of the book so much that I was annoyed it ended so badly. Epilogues should tell us things that we didn't already know. The best that thing gave us was that Neville is teaching Herbology (*shocker*) and Harry really has groked Snape's sacrifice.

On the other hand, after spending a good chunk of Lupin's time in the book having him angst about the fate of his son, we aren't told if he's a werewolf? That just sucked.

Posted by Courtney DeMaria
July 23, 2007

I agree that the epilogue was a little disappointing in its lack of information, except for the tidbit about Professor Longbottom, which I loved. As for the way JK handled the Snape situation, I thought it was perfect because she had me doubting my previous Snape-theories throughout the entire book. I had actually hypothesized that Dumbledore had known Snape had to kill him; but, as soon as I began reading, I decided that I had been wrong, that is, until the end. The real killer for me, however, was when Snape mutters "look..at..me.." and then croaks. That part just about sent me over the edge with curiosity. And, although I found it very hard to say goodbye to Dobby, I was so glad that Ron and Hermione made it! As for Lupin and Tonks, I felt that they were goners as soon as Harry had been made the Godfather of their baby.

Posted by Church
July 23, 2007

I was fine with the boring suburban epilogue. That's what they were fighting for, after all. (Althought there is a bit of me that suspects it's an attempt to pre-empt any sequels.)

"The Prince's Tale" was awful. I was begging her to lay off the clue-hammer. All we really needed was the memory of Snape agreeing to kill Albus and reaffirming his love for Lily.

I'm still confused by the tort claims over the Elder Wand. Maybe it'll make sense the second time around.

Posted by Mel
July 23, 2007

I reread 5 & 6 just before reading 7, so in answer to the door in the basement of the Department of Mysteries, the room it's in is referred to as the Death Chamber. Maybe that's where wizard executions are held?

My death list was wrong too. I expected her to off Ginny, not Fred. I thought that would have been what enraged Harry enough to actually kill Voldemort. (And nice touch on Rowling's part with the Taboo being able to trace anyone who used the name.) I do agree with you on the deaths at the end being glossed over. I thought Lupin, at least, deserved a death scene. He was a real character to me, not just a name and a gimmick like Tonks with her ever-changing hair and nose. And when Fred died, I bawled. I don't think being a twin has anything to do with that reaction. When Mrs. Weasley throws herself on his body, my heart broke.

As far as the Pensieve, once she killed Dumbledore, and there was no way Hermione could know something, she had to have some way to deliver the info that Harry would need. But I thought Snape's memory really tied his character up nicely. Now if only she hadn't overused the bloody thing in the previous books, it might have had more of an impact.

I was a little upset by the Epilogue too, but I guess she felt like she had to give us a happy ending. And I don't know if Harry is an Auror, but he seems to work at the Ministry (there's a quick comment about avoiding Percy, because he doesn't want to talk about cauldron bottoms.)

The one thing that really bugged me was the whole "resurrection". If Harry was really dead, someone should have found him and shoved the Resurrection Stone in his mouth or something. I'm thinking he was never really dead, and that the whole Dumbledore conversation was some neurons getting knocked around, along with some wishful thinking by Voldemort. The messianic overtones were almost bludgeoning. But that's my biggest complaint about the book.

Posted by Humphrey
July 23, 2007

I knew right after I finished "Half-Blood Prince" that Harry was a Horcrux. Great story.

She may have over-done Dumbledore's back story. We know so much about him now, he's not the huge, enigmatic "God" figure he should have been.

Kind of disappointed over Wormtail's sacrifice. I thought that would be a much more profound point in the whole story, like maybe he would jump in front of the Avada Kedavra and save Harry at the end.

Did anyone doubt Snape was a good guy?

Definitely not a Sopranos ending. She delivered well.

Posted by Sasha
July 23, 2007

I'm s-l-o-w-l-y coming to terms with the epilogue. A major theme of the books, after all, was that the people we love and lose are never truly gone--always just "beyond the veil"--so I suppose it was a nice thing to see some of those characters, whom we thought we'd lost forever, making a final appearance... But perhaps I'm just trying to convince myself that JKR couldn't possibly have allowed the series to end on a lame note.

Only thing is, I DESPERATELY wanted to hear that Harry becomes Defense Against the Dark Arts prof at Hogwarts! And all that we really glean from the epilogue about his, Ron's, and Hermione's futures is that they definitely don't end up at Hogwarts.

Posted by Humphrey
July 23, 2007

Also, I always thought Neville would be the one to take down Bellatrix.

Posted by Molly
July 23, 2007

I feel like there's so much to say, especially since I haven't been able to discuss this with anyone else I know, since they're all still in the middle of the book -

- I, too, thought Neville would die, but loved his moment of glory. For me, Fred was sad, but the one that hit me hard was Lupin. I didn't want to believe he was dead after the quick mention of Harry seeing him and Tonks lying together, but I started crying once he appeared in the forest alongside the others. Maybe that's why he died offstage - to increase the power of that moment. (But looking back, as the last of the four friends, I think he simply had to die.)

- I personally love the Pensieve and the way Harry discovered Snape's motives - and the fact that Snape really didn't like Harry. There's no way I would have been convinced that all that animosity was fake, so I'm glad Rowling didn't attempt to convince us that, deep down, Snape was fond of Harry.

- My main problem with the epilogue is that we jump to it so quickly. I would've liked a little more time after the battle - sort of a debriefing period - to adjust to everything that had just happened, and particularly the chance to mourn Fred's death with the Weasleys. But I agree that more information (careers, etc. - I too, always thought Harry destined for the Defense teaching job) would have been welcome in the epilogue as well.

However, I completely appreciate the circular nature of Harry sending his own son off to school, and I love imaginging Gryffindor tower filling up with little Potters and Weasleys. All in all, I thought the whole thing was pretty amazing.

And has anyone else noticed that, once you understand the scene, the cover art completely gives away the ending? Mary GrandPre definitely deserves credit for the subtle depiction of that scene.

Posted by treacle
July 23, 2007

"Also, I always thought Neville would be the one to take down Bellatrix."

Me too! I'd assumed it was a given!

One thing I really loved about this book was the camping. When reading that section, around 6 in the morning after a full night of reading, I nearly drifted off--but looking back on it, it's pretty amazing. She took camping, this fun adventurous thing that you could imagine young people doing together and having a grand old time, and turned it on its head into a terrifying situation, with Harry, Ron, and Hermione in effect doomed to be camping for months.

Posted by river
July 23, 2007

One thing has left me particularly puzzled. I don't see how the Avada Kedavra, the killing curse, would destroy the bit of Voldemort's soul left in Harry. Throughout the series, it's seemed quite clear to me that the soul and the body are very separate entities. When a dementor sucks out your soul, your body remains, an empty shell. If destroying your soul doesn't kill you, why would the killing curse destroy your soul?

When Lily, James, Sirius, Lupin came out of the Resurrection Stone, they were themselves at the primes of their lives--to me, their essences, their souls reflected. The soul hangs around; it is what keeps characters alive in the hearts and minds of those they leave behind when they die.

So, it didn't feel right that the killing curse would destroy a seventh of Voldy's soul. It didn't kill the piece of soul inside him when it rebounded off Harry however many years previously, did it? It just reduced him to near-death.

Posted by Church
July 23, 2007

Now that I think about it, the biggest suprise for me was that the last word wasn't "scar." I was actually confused for a few moments, flipping through the back pages looking for the rest of it.

Posted by Lev
July 23, 2007

Lot of good points here. What about Lil' Lupin? (Please God let there not be a Saturday morning cartoon called that, ever.) And now that you mention it, I too thought it would be Neville who gave Bellatrix her fatal wanding. and @ river, yeah, I don't see how the soul-physics works out there.

(And did anybody else find JKR's seven-part dedication a little creepy? Split seven ways...LIKE VOLDEMORT'S SOUL...)

Posted by Matt
July 23, 2007

I like the comment about Dumbledore winning the wand from Grindelwald. If Dumbledore WAS rocking with the Elder Wand, how did he only fight Voldemort to a draw in Pheonix? I was pleased with the main three surviving, although I didn't like Hermione getting tortured. And what was the deal with Wormtail?? I thought that he "owed" Harry his life? He hesitates killing Harry for one second then his magical hand turns on him...a slight disappointment.

Posted by Brittani
July 23, 2007

About the epilogue: I'm actually glad that JK closed the door on Harry, Ron, and Hermione so effectively. The story ended just as it should have.

The door definitely did not close on Hogwarts or the world of witchcraft and wizardry. Not by a long shot. Give her a few years . . . maybe a decade or so. I think we'll hear more about this fantastic world in the future.

Posted by Corey
July 23, 2007

I wanted to know what James and Lilly did for a living...but then again, they could have lived off interest from the Potter fortune.

I would have like to have known what happened to Luna as well. I've always had a sneaking suspicion that she and Neville hook up.

Posted by Corey
July 23, 2007

I'd like to echo Brittani...

Terry Brooks closes out each novel or set of novels for the characters in them in the Shannara universe.

Shea Ohmsford lived a long and happy life with no more adventures. I'd be quite reasonable for other people to have adventures or write some fantasy novels that don't use high adventure but focus entirely on character drama.

Posted by Brittani
July 23, 2007

Also, Molly kills Bellatrix? I didn't see that coming at all, and I LOVED IT! Very sad to lose a Weasley though--that was the only one that really hurt. And I still feel unsettled about Sirius--I expected that to resolve more thoroughly.

Posted by Kit
July 23, 2007

I'm glad Wormtail's death was so short and uninteresting. I don't think he deserved a glorious death, considering.

As for Lupin's lack of a death scene (and Tonks, for that matter) -- I like it. If anything, I think it made it more powerful. To just suddenly see them laying there -- it's shocking, overwhelming. The battle scene was very chaotic and it's only when the dust settles that Harry trully sees all he's lost in the process. I sort of appreciated the lack of the death scenes for some of the characters.

And I didn't mind the epilogue.

There was one thing that I was sad about. I wish that when Harry returned to the Headmaster's office and is applauded by all the portraits of the headmasters ... I wish that Rowling would have mentioned Snape having a portrait as well. He was a Headmaster, after all. And in HBP Dumbledore gets a portrait immediately after dying. I wish Snape had too.

Posted by Matt S
July 23, 2007

River, before the wedding Hermione talks about how you destroy Horcruxes. I can't remember all of it, but it is basically the set up for your question.

I think my biggest complaint about the epilogue was that it isn't really neccisary. If that's all the information she was going to give us, then why not just let the story stand as it is? The story was strong enough to have ended with Chapter 36. Though keeping the structure of the previous books (climax in the second to last chapter followed by a chapter of reflection) and giving us a 37th Chapter set shortly afterwards would have been cool.

I can't help feeling that the epilogue got tacked on, either because she felt compelled to write one, but didn't really want to, or wanted to try and kill any sequel talk. If it is the latter, Lev's comment above shows how fruitless any attempt would have been.

OK, and now I'm going to stop fixating on the one negative and focus on all the positive.

First, I also loved what Neville turned into through out the series. There's almost a sense that this is his story as much as it is Harry's. Which plays into his role in the prophecy.

Second, I liked Snape's tale. It showed that Snape's feelings for Lilly were more then just a crush. It gave it more weight, which helped to sell Snape's motivation for turning double agent. And left the implication that if Voldemort hadn't targeted Lilly, Snape would have been a loyal servant to the end.

It also adds an interesting twist to the Harry/Snape relationship. I think saying that Snape didn't like Harry is over simplifying that relationship. I wonder if Snape really had any kind of relationship with Harry. His interactions seem mostly to be defined by the conflict between his hatred of James and his loyality to Lilly. Though his reaction when he finds out that Harry is going to die was interesting.

Oh, and it was a nice little reprieve from the intensity of the surrounding scenes. Not to mention it helps set up Harry's decision to do what he did, how he did it. There's a strong "better do it now, before I loose my nerve" feel after the break, which made his decision a little more real for me.

Like treacle I also loved the camping section. It helped to give the book a real epic quality as the over arching story was segmented into a series of smaller stories. And for the first time in the series, it actually felt like a year had passed.

OK, this is getting long. Short list:

* Fred and Dobby's deaths killed me. I wasn't expecting either of them at all and so they really grabbed me when they happened.

* Lupin and Tonk's deaths got a reaction out of me, but not nearly as much as Fred and Dobby. Honestly though, I'm not sure I could have handled death scenes for them.

* Kreecher's change was cool and him leading the charge at the end made me smile.

* I loved how hollywood the final show down was. From Nevill killing the snake till Voldemort throwing the killing curse is going to look cool as hell on screen. Though, Voldie's actual death (being hit by his own spell) was a little of a let down.

* At no point in this book did I want to throttle Harry for being too angsty or stubbornly blind. This in and of itself is an accomplishment after the last couple of books.

OK, I'll stop now.

Posted by Nick
July 23, 2007

Wow... What a story...

As far as the epilogue, I completely agree with some of the earlier comments that it more or less ensures that nobody can write continuing adventures unless they want to cover the children's adventures (but even then Harry was marked and defined by tragedy at such a young age that it made him interesting, these kids seem to have pretty happy childhoods). I don't think it was Rowling's greatest literary moment because the previous chapters were so monumental that this one pales in comparison. Nevertheless, I am not sure that she could have ended it any other way without giving a full detailed report on each character for the rest of their lives. So I think the epilogue was more out of necessity than anything else.

As for the deaths in the book, Dobby's was tragic because he sacrificed himself for others, Fred's was difficult to read because how could you not like him and George (however, with so many Weasley's around, I expected one of them to finally fall, especially after so many near-death experiences in the family already). I think Lupin had to die since he was the only one remaining after James and Sirius (and Wormtail). I also find interesting that more not being made of Hedwig's death since it happened so quickly despite the owl being introduced so early in these stories.

I know Rowling used the Pensieve to explain a lot but I don't think she could have conveyed the truth about Snape in any other fashion that we would have truly believed. If he simply told Harry, there is no real way for us to know whether it was the truth (and I would find it funny to believe a Potions master succumbing to the likes of veritaserum). By using the Pensieve, I think Rowling makes Snape's death kind of poignant and shocking on its own.

Overall, I had many expectations or ideas of how I thought the final story would develop and while this book did not occur that way (i.e. I fully expected Dumbledore to return and either Ron, Hermione, or Harry to die), I think that this book surprised me so much in the directions it did take that I was very happy to be proven wrong on so many of my theories. A fitting end to a wonderful saga.

Posted by Eric J
July 23, 2007

Killing the Horcrux: the way I interpreted it, the Avada Kedavera curse "killed" Harry and the Horcrux, sending them into the space between life and death. The horcrux was the misshapen, baby-like thing mewling on the floor- what was left of Voldemort's soul.

Harry chose to leave and didn't take the horcrux with him. He then gave Voldemort the opportunity to show remorse and thus retrieve that piece of soul from between the worlds. When he refused, it was destroyed.

And my assumption was that the fact that Teddy's hair changed color like his mother meant that he wasn't a werewolf. I would like to know who raised him, however.

Posted by P Martin
July 23, 2007

Oh, and Snape's hatred for Harry had to be obvious. Everytime he saw him, he saw Lily's eyes staring right back at him, so that had to put pain in him, but Lilly's eyes were staring at him from the replica of James, so that's just adding insult to injury, that his one mistake (the mudblood comment) lead to Lily hooking up with James, not him.

Posted by Nick
July 23, 2007

Matt, you hit on so many great points that I completely agree with.
I liked that Voldemort was killed his own spell because for me it meant that he was the orchestration of his own demise, which I think falls in nicely with many of the comments that Dumbledore made in Harry's vision.

Honestly, I cannot wait to see this (and HBP) in the theater.

Posted by Matt S
July 23, 2007

"Nevertheless, I am not sure that she could have ended it any other way without giving a full detailed report on each character for the rest of their lives."

I was thinking about this. I think it would have worked better if the epilogue had been sooner. Harry and Ginny's wedding would have been a perfect chance to do a quick recap of each of the main characters as the couple chats with their guests during the reception. It is also a natural point of reflection in a person's life.

So, you do a quick recap of the key players with a few off handed comments here in there. You mix in Harry reflecting on those that had been lost. Then you end it up with a line that seals his fate (i.e. he lived a long and boring life or whatever) then your done.

Posted by Gloria Albuquerque
July 23, 2007

Folks, the epilogue is the one chapter that has been written fully FOR YEARS. Therefore, like it or not, that is the way she wanted to end it all up. Her book, her call. I for one would take another 100 pages of book easily (I finished this thing in 10 hours and I have spent another 6 or so reading the parts I liked best) so we could have more details in all the characters. Alas, that is ok, because of FANFICTION. There is tons of materials to work with and lots of good authors. The saga continues. Loved the book, great entertainment. The woman has earned all the money the comes to her fair and square, how many more millionaires out there can say that with a straight face?

Posted by Kit
July 23, 2007

So. Anyone else notice that Harry killed Voldemort with his "signature spell" that the death eaters had been identifying him with?

I have to say, I thought that was a great touch.

Posted by Nick
July 23, 2007

Matt, that is an interesting point that could definitely bear fruit. I think the only thing potentially holding it back is that Lily and James die at 21 years old. So obviously they married and had Harry at a very young age. Not to get too technical but if we assume that Harry and Ginny follow a similar route, there might not be enough time from the events for reflection. Maybe they wait and don't get married right away, then I think that people would wonder what they have been up to until that point. So very interesting, I would be curious how it could be pulled off

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

Nope, didn't notice that the dedication was split into 7.Ü

Lev, the Weasley brother who warned about Griphook was Bill, not Charlie.Ü

I was already bawling in "Fallen Warrior," I thought Ron wouldn't make it. When Dobby died I was actually kinda relieved (sorry!) because for some reason I thought I read somewhere that Rowling only killed off 2 characters, so with Dobby dead I thought everbody else was safe. The moment Percy sobbed over Fred I went back a couple of paragraphs to check if I understood it correctly. I was still in denial (about Fred's death) when it was mentioned that he was with Lupin and Tonks along with the other "bodies." Lupin and Tonks death was somehow glossed over, yes, but i guess that's the way it always is with war right? You can't have everybody dying in some grandiose way. I also guessed wrong about Ginny dying - boy, I'm so glad I'm wrong.

About Harry not wanting the elder wand, I wouldn't have kept it either. A wand chooses its owner, right? I'd certainly feel more comfortable with a wand that I grew up with than some "cursed" wand I won over from someone else. Re: Dumbledore winning against Grindelwald, well, Hermione has always maintained that it's the wizard, not the wand.

Not convinced about the Harry-is-a-horcrux thing though. Voldemort was supposed to have split his soul into 7 because he believed in the number's magical properties, the extra portion of his soul that's with Harry is supposed to be the 8th. Shouldn't that weaken him into extraordinary proportions that that accident itself should've just finished him off? Voldy was also supposed to have some of Lily's protection. Why then, did it seem relatively easier to kill him compared to Harry Potter? Or maybe I just really don't understand love.Ü I dunno... I really need to read the book again.

I'm quite happy with the epilogue - I agree with Church - that WAS what they were fighting for. I did think about what Teddy Lupin turned out to be though: a werewolf that can change fur color? And what is he doing in Hogwarts Express anyway? He's 19 years old! A friend reasoned he maybe there to send Victoire off, who I assume is Bill&Fleur's daughter, but still, that had me thinking.

Posted by Andrew
July 23, 2007

I was certainly a little perplexed by the whole "Elder wand" thing. How exactly does the unbeatable wand get beaten........twice. And I could have done without the epilogue. I think readers are imaginative enough to fill in the gaps on their own. Great book, though.

Posted by JaquiHughes
July 23, 2007

This is in response to the post by Courtney...

Courtney was "over the edge" with curiosity about Snape's dying words for Potter to "Look...at...me." Snape wanted to look into Lily's eyes one more time before he died and, as we all know, Harry always had his mother's eyes. I hope my take on that scene helps with your curiosity.

Posted by Dave
July 23, 2007

Ok. The book was great, but J.K., you still owe us some explanations. Who ended up as the new Headmaster of Hogwarts? Was the baby a werewolf? Did Harry become an Auror?

Things I Didn't like: Relying a little too much on the Pensieve at the end. Getting confused at the end trying to keep track of the number of horcruxes, hallows, and other weapons (snake teeth, swords, etc.)

Things I liked: Wormtail's death, how poetic. Lupin and Tonks together at the end, Werewolf problem solved (for them) and legacy safely in place. Molly Weasley taking on Bellatrix to protect her family, totally unexpected and still raises a lump in my throat. The main final battle lasted a long time, thanks for giving them ALL a chance to fight back. The mental image of Professor McGonagal leading a herd of school desks into battle: Priceless.

BTW - One of a godfather's responsibilities is to raise the child in case of death of both parents.

Posted by ASP
July 23, 2007

Everyone is saying this is the last, but Rowling herself has said there may be stories about other characters. The ending I read left things pretty open should Rowling change her mind and decide to pick this up again.

Of course, the classic struggle of good vs. evil would have to pre-date Harry as Harry has supposedly vanquished evil. Or did he? Did some minion of Voldemort get away to attempt to be the new Dark Lord? What of Draco Malfoy's naming his son Scorpius? Still pretty dark thinking and a good name for a villain that Albus Severus , James, or Lily Potter might have to face with Ron and Hermionie's kiddies. Teddy is there to play a part as well. The stage has been set. I hope the actors are brought forth before too very long.

Posted by Courtney
July 23, 2007

Thanks Jaqui! I guess that was pretty obvious huh? JK is far more brilliant than I.

Posted by Dave
July 23, 2007

Also, in contracts to the statement "there are no higher powers in residence there", I found God all throughout the book. He and she(J.K.) were just letting the humans work things out on their own.

Posted by Lev
July 23, 2007

re: lil' Scorpius, yes! Draco is so metal.

Posted by Dave (not the same as above)
July 23, 2007

Here's the thing about the epilogue: she's been very public about the fact that she had written it with SS. She fixed a couple of things at the very end, she said, but all in all, it was always how it is. It's not an epilogue for Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. It's an epilogue for freaking Harry Potter and Everything. It's her indirect way of saying, "Yes, DD and Snape were always in it together; yes, Snape was always good; yes, the scar was always the center of it." It didn't need to be earth-shattering.

There are SO many things to think about:
-What's Harry going to do with the Resurrection Stone? (or "What did Harry do...")

-I think the part that will bring me closest to crying the second time through is when Snape dies, and says "Look... at... me," and it talks about the green eyes meeting the black, and then Snape dies. Oh, man... the eyes that tormented him for the last seven years... the eyes of the woman he always loved on the face of the man he always hated... the eyes that he faced death regularly for... are the last thing he sees.

-Getting back to work. I'm sure I'll comment on later posts.

Posted by anne
July 23, 2007

I have to say, I was in a bad mood all day Friday after reading your "God dies in the Deathly Hallows" piece, but you really redeemed yourself with the review and blog. You have a lot of good insights and I really like the way you write. I think the problem of God is important in this series and, living in the South, amongst people who think these books are Bad, I would be interested in a nuanced discussion of this topic.

Posted by Matt S
July 23, 2007

Andrew, twice? Harry didn't beat the Elder Wand, he was its rightful master and so it answered his call. Also, you've got to remember that the wand only changes hands when the owner is defeated so it has likely happened a lot more then only the time that Dumbledore got the wand. Its the wizard, not the wand...

Dave, not sure what the role of godparent is in other religions/denominations, but in Catholocism the role of godparent is spiritual/religious. It wouldn't automatically imply that Harry raised Teddy. Lilly's comment about Teddy finally joining the family if he marries what's her name seems to back this up.

When Lupin and Tonks go to fight they leave Teddy with Tonks' mother. I assumed that she raised him, possibly with help from the others, but her house was his home.

Posted by slr
July 23, 2007

Did anyone notice how Bill & Fleur's baby is named Victoire, like... Viktor Krum? I thought that was pretty funny.

I always expected Lupin to die, so I had steeled myself for that blow pretty well, and I've never liked Tonks much, but the fact that they had a baby changed things, made it so much sadder.

History is repeating itself all over the place in this book, but I thought it was a strange choice of JKR's to have Tonks & Lupin die and leave behind an orphan. Out of all the marauders, Lupin was really the least significant (though he was probably my favorite); it's odd that he and Tonks turn into the "James & Lily" to Harry's "Sirius." I could imagine, I don't know, Ron and Hermione dying and leaving behind an orphan, with Harry as the godfather... but whatever. As it's been said above, she always intended for the series to end in this fashion.

I am incredibly thankful that JKR didn't let us know who made up the fifty dead after the Hogwarts battle, though, because, when you think about it, they must have been mostly members of the D.A.! They were supposed to be of age, so no nameless, faceless first-, second-, third-, fourth-, or fifth-years; and if they hadn't belonged to the D.A. earlier, it's unlikely they would have chosen to stay behind and fight. That list would have been unbearable had she provided it.

I would have traded ANY Weasley, other than Ron or George, to save Fred.

But the thing that really gets to me is how great a distance has been traveled between from the first book in the Harry Potter series to this one. Did any of us expect something like Deathly Hallows to evolve from Sorcerer's Stone? It blows my mind. I doubt we'll ever see anything like this phenomenon again.

Posted by shara says
July 23, 2007

I had really wanted Harry to be the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher - I had always seen that coming, with the unending stream of teachers, none of whom could last in that spot. Harry becoming the DADA professor would have really brought that around full circle. Other than that, I had NO problem with the epilogue - basically it told me that they all lived Happily Ever After, and that new generations of Hogwarts kids were able to experience its wonder and magic, thanks to Harry and the gang. That's all I needed to know - I'm fine leaving the rest to my imagination ;)

Posted by Harry
July 23, 2007

I really feel the JKR felt the pressure from reviewers and fans to not kill Harry. I felt it was coming the whole time and was not surprised when he was told he was a Horcrux. However, she went back and edited the story after it was done. I really believe it would have been better to end it with Harry dead. Was there ever an explanation as to why he came back to life? It seemed very Jesus-y to me. The fact that he was the chosen leader and resurrected after his death. I was satisfied though and I am just venting b/c my wife hasn't finished.

Posted by korijane
July 23, 2007

I agree that Tonks and Lupin's deaths were glossed over at the end. And maybe it was just me, reading a little faster to see what happens, so was Fred's.

One thing that I've liked about these books is the fact that as I've grown up, the perspective has changed. Now that I'm older, with a little boy of my own, I've thought of Harry a little differently. Tears welled in my eyes while reading about Dobby - but the parts that made me bawl were the grafitti on the sign in front of the Potter's house and the part when Harry asks his mom to stay close to him as he's entering the forest to meet Voldemort.

Also - was I the only one waiting to see if Ron was under some kind of curse when he returned?

Posted by browneyed
July 23, 2007

Oh god, I just understood that Snape line, the "look at me." That's profound, is what that is. And I thought I'd finised crying over this book!

Posted by Chaddogg
July 23, 2007

@ Dave - I'm pretty sure that Teddy Lupin was raised by Tonks' parents/mother....remember, Harry had no grandparents, evidently, hence he was sent to the only family he had left (the Dursleys) rather than Sirius (he was sent away BEFORE Sirius got framed for murdering Wormtail). Still, Teddy was a frequent guest and family member of Harry & Ginny's family - the whole line about him coming over for dinner 4 times a week, etc.

And while Teddy was 19, it was certainly reasonable that he may have fallen in love with a younger Victorie (Bill and Fleur's daughter) while at Hogwarts together, and he was there to tell her goodbye.

Posted by Matt S
July 23, 2007

"What's Harry going to do with the Resurrection Stone?"

At the end of the book he clearly states that he intends to leave the stone where it fell in the woods.

Posted by Mel
July 23, 2007

To Dave (not the same as above) re: the Resurrection Stone. Harry dropped it in the forest and decided to leave it there. The only one of the Hallows he wanted to keep was the Invisibility Cloak.

Posted by cliffhanger
July 23, 2007

I was expecting more loose ends tied and fewer new loose ends getting unleashed in this seventh book, but there's so much left unexplained! She's made it pretty clear that there will be no more Harry Potter books, but if it weren't for that, I'd think she intended to write more.

Posted by Gary
July 23, 2007

I blew through the book so quickly that it was easy to miss some connecting points, so I'm going to have re-read it soon at a slower pace; but in the meantime, can someone clear up for me why Draco was really the master of the Elder Wand? I don't remember that being fully explained. Probably because I reading at warp speed.

Posted by KF
July 23, 2007

I also would have traded any other Weasley (except George) for Fred. His death was the only one that really killed me (I cried). I can't even imagine George without Fred, and how horrible it would be for George to be without his twin. Of course, if JKR was going for effect, Fred and George are the obvious Weasley choices to kill. Bill and Charlie are relatively minor characters and wouldn't have had as much impact, and Percy has basically been a jerk for two books, and Ron and Ginny are too important. And funny guys dying is always the worst to deal with.

I thought the epilogue was ok, but I would have loved to know what careers Harry, Hermione, and Ron had.

And I wish Snape had a better death scene than being killed by a snake bite. He got robbed. But I love the explanation about him and Lily.

Posted by sasha
July 23, 2007

Draco was the master of the Elder Wand because he disarmed Dumbledore at the top of the tower, before Snape killed him, in Book 6. I know, I had to go back and re-read the page before, I was pretty confused. But there you go, the power of disarming highlighted again.

Posted by Lauren
July 23, 2007

I agree about the Elder Wand. Dumbledore even admitted that the edge he MIGHT have had was a small one.

I wanted the ending to tell more...I, too, was disappointed that Rowling "really did kinda pull a Sopranos on us."

And here's my other question: why in the world would Harry not have named his son after Sirius? Save Severus for boy #3. Sirius deserved a higher placement.

Posted by Kit
July 23, 2007

Okay. About the Elder Wand:

Dumbledore posessed the Elder Wand and, while deciding his death with Snape -- he fully intended for Snape to kill him and, thus, become master of the Elder Wand (in hopes that it will help him protect Hogwarts and everyone, in Snape's hands).

However, when he was atop the tower in HBP, Draco disarms him with Expelliarmus -- taking away his wand. Draco now is master of the Elder Wand. Dumbledore dies.

Later in the book, Harry disarms Draco's regular wand. And that wand seems to 'choose' him. Somewhere far away, tucked in Dumbledore's tomb, the Elder wand switches allegiances to Harry.

Voldy gets the wand from the tomb, thinking it will obey him now. But the Elder wand still sides with Harry because no one has "taken" it from Harry yet.

It won't work for Voldemort. Thinking Snape is it's master (as Snape killed Dumbledore), he kills Snape. The Elder Wand still belongs to Harry.

So in the end, when they face one another - Harry and Voldy - the Elder Wand still belongs to Harry.

Hope that clears anything up.

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

@chaddogg: yeah, but I got the impression that James told Lily he saw Teddy after taking a peek inside Hogwarts Express. I really gotta get back to the book.Ü

@korijane: re Ron coming back - come to think of it, why haven't I thought of that?

Posted by Maya
July 23, 2007

Urgh, it would have made SO much sense for Harry to become Defense Against the Dark Arts professor! Voldemort jinxed the job, remember, but with him gone, Harry could have held it as long as he liked! And Harry and Voldemort are so similar already, it would have emphasized that even more; also, Harry and the Ministry have a terrible history, I cannot imagine him ever wanting to work for it. The highlight of Harry's Hogwarts experience was the D.A., and the events in the seventh book prove just how important it was that he organized that. When Harry mentions, on his way into the Forest to die, that Hogwarts is the only place he's ever felt at home, I thought, "Oh, excellent, I'm going to be right, he has to come back and teach there!" It was my signature prediction, the one I stood by for ages, but I know for SURE I wasn't right because of the epilogue. Bummer.

Posted by Nick
July 23, 2007

Gary, If I remember correctly from HBP, Draco disarmed Dumbledore of the Elder Wand, in essence "defeating" him in a Wizard's duel. Therefore, although Snape actually killed him, Dumbledore had already been defeated. I don't have a copy of the previous book in front of me so I don't remember the details but when I read that in DH that was how I sorted it out.

Posted by KarenK
July 23, 2007

HUGE, unanswered question.... If Voldemort truly was alone when he went to Godric's Hollow on Halloween night and was reduced to 'less than a spirit' when he fled, what happened to his phoenix-feather-core wand? Who kept it for him all those years when he was hiding in Albania? Wormtail might have nicked the thing after the house exploded, but where could he possible have hidden it while he was playing the pet at the Burrow or, later, sleeping in Ron's bed in the Gryfindor boys' dormitory at Hogwarts? This is a plot point that has never been explained but has enormous implications for the encounters Harry had with Voldemort in Goblet and beyond.....

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

@Lauren: maybe Harry was going for a theme when he named his kids. You know, firstborns of each gender get to be named after the parents, 2nd son after headmasters. Haha. Seriously though, Snape played a really impt role in his life, and is actually one of the reasons why he's still alive at that point, so I think the naming was well-deserved. I was also wondering why Ginny didn't seem to have a say on their kids' names.

Posted by Kate
July 23, 2007

I'm also wondering if I missed something... where was Olympe?? I read it quickly, so I may have overlooked it, but I would have thought we'd know more about her and Hagrid, especially since everyone else was pairing off and getting married. The last time I saw her, she was crying in Hagrid's arms at DD's funeral.

Posted by Anonymous
July 23, 2007

Re: Chrissy

I was also wondering why Ginny got shafted in terms of naming the kids. No love for Fred? Seriously?

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

I've always thought Harry's gonna be an Auror. Besides, he dropped out of school. He doesn't have enough academic credentials to become a professor. J/k.Ü

Posted by Kate
July 23, 2007

Yeah, also wondering why we didn't see another "Fred" around. Maybe poor George got married at some point and named a son after him.

Posted by Molly
July 23, 2007

As for the kids - we don't know James' or Lily's middle names. James Sirius? Lily Fredericka? Albus Severus had two significant names - I would think the others would as well.

Posted by Marie
July 23, 2007

I LOVED Wormtail's death. It was so like Voldemort to give him a hand that would automatically punish him for the least infraction, such as a split second of mercy for Harry.

Posted by Kate
July 23, 2007

Good point, Molly!

Posted by gasunshine411
July 23, 2007

Why wasn't anything mentioned about Voldemort being a 'half-blood'. That would have seriously brought the Death Eaters to their knees and perhaps they would have killed Voldemort instead.

Posted by Karen
July 23, 2007

I loved the scene where Snape dies and asks Harry to look at him so he could see Lily's eyes once more before he dies. Heart-wrenching and beautifully written. The one thing that I really wanted to read, though, was that Neville would end Bellatrix, but perhaps, Rowling denied him revenge deliberately? Food for thought.

Posted by Molly
July 23, 2007

A lot of the Death Eaters were half-bloods, anyway - like Snape. It's said throughout the books that wizards couldn't have survived if they had mainted absolutely pure lines.

Oh - and I liked the Victoire/Viktor reference, too. Especially since there's no way Fleur would have let Bill had much say in naming their kids. She has a lot of redeeming qualities by the end, but she's still pretty self-centered.

As for Neville's revenge - I don't think he could do much better than killing Voldemort's final Horcrux. Helping to defeat her master is much more powerful than defeating Bellatrix herself.

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

@gasunshine411: harry actually did mention it in one of the previous books, can't remember which, but bellatrix just gave him a "how-dare-you?" response (something along those lines). We're talking about power-hungry people here. I don't think most death-eaters are gonna care if their leader is a half-blood as long as their on the side of who they think is the most powerful wizard at that time.

Posted by chryssie
July 23, 2007

It was kinda nice that when Bellatrix fell, Voldemort was still affected. It was like he actually still valued someone somehow.

Posted by Church
July 23, 2007

Did we get little James' middle name? Might it be Fred?

Matt S, even in Catholicism, A Godparent's responsibility can extend to actually raising the child, but since Ted had family of his own, it wouldn't be expected.

(And Lev, Draco isn't metal. He's kind of indie/alt rock.)

Posted by Anonymous
July 23, 2007

I agree with Karen on the point about Rowling denying Neville (as well as Harry in some aspects) the revenge that I so wish he'd had, but it would not have brought Neville's parents back to normalcy. Furthermore, and more importantly, everyone wanted a piece of her. We can't forget that she also killed Sirius, so Harry had just as much right for revenge. I think by having Mrs. Weasley - the mothering figure - finish off Bellatrix was genius. When she said that she wouldn't let her hurt any more of her kids, I think she was implying Neville and Harry just as much as anyone else.

Posted by karenw
July 23, 2007

Here's something that I don't understand: when they're breaking into Gringotts, and Hermione is polyjuiced into looking like Bellatrix, she is asked to present her wand for identification. The guard mentions that it looks as though she's gotten a new wand even though Hermione is truly using Bellatrix's wand at this point.

Did the wand somehow alter itself to better suit Hermione?

Posted by Corey
July 23, 2007

@Kit...

No...Dumbledore meant to be the Last Master of the Wand. He would let Snape kill him and since he wasn't truly defeated (you can't be defeated if you let it happen), the wand's power would be broken. Draco messed that up.

Posted by JaquiHughes
July 23, 2007

Responses to a couple of comments:

Regarding naming their son after Severus but not Sirius...I'll go on the assumption that James' middle name is Sirius. James and Sirius were always together, and now we know that Albus and Severus were together as well.

Regarding Harry's not being the Defense Against the Dark Arts professor...we don't know what he's doing. The epilogue is nineteen years later. For all we know, Harry was a professor at Hogwarts for fifteen years and has since retired from teaching.

JKR has left it open and we can believe what we want and fill in the blanks for ourselves.

Posted by BREW
July 23, 2007

Church and Lev are both wrong. Draco is goth rock. He like stuff by Dario Argento's Goblins. You know the classic horror stuff.

Posted by Kit
July 23, 2007

@Corey - Ah, true. I suppose that was what Dumbledore had in mind for the wand, now that you mention it.

Posted by Molly
July 23, 2007

@karenw -

Somehow the goblins and/or the Death Eater that they met up with in Diagon Alley had heard Bellatrix had lost her wand in the struggle at the Malfoys, so it was actually very suspicious that Hermione as Bellatrix shows up with Bellatrix's actual wand. But Harry (under the invisibility cloak) Imperiuses both the goblin and Death Eater into thinking it's a new one. His first real success at an Unforgivable, I think - because he really means it, seeing as he really needs them to believe Hermione is Bellatrix.

Posted by JaquiHughes
July 23, 2007

re: comment by Maya

As for Harry never working for the Ministry because of his bad history with it...let's not forget that Kingsley Shacklebolt was appointed the new Minister of Magic. He might work for him if the Ministry's direction had changed. If he became an Auror, maybe he got to round up a few people (like Umbrage and Skeeter) and bring them to trial when the dust had settled.

Like I said earlier, we get to think what we want.

Posted by Cinday
July 23, 2007

I think Dumbledore beat Grindelwald (who had the elder wand) because Grindelwald did *not* beat the prior owner - the wandmaker Gorgawhatever - he stole it!

Posted by JaquiHughes
July 23, 2007

I've read some complaints about the chapter about Snape's dying memories in the pensieve. I agree with one post that we wouldn't have believed him any other way. We've spent the entire series not knowing whether to believe Snape or not. We haven't even been sure whether to trust Dumbledore ABOUT Snape. The only way Harry (and we) would believe all these things about Snape was to witness it ourselves.

I did like during an early memory of Harry's first year at Hogwarts, a throwaway line from Dumbledore to Snape to "keep an eye on Quirrel." We know he did...and because of the memory in the pensieve we also know why he did.

Posted by vaughn
July 23, 2007

Correct me if I misread, but didn't Grindelwald steal the Elder Wand instead of winning it? And if that were the case, wouldn't it have been fairly easy for the Deathstick to choose Dumbledore as its next master?

Posted by Lev
July 23, 2007

re: the Deathstick, yeah, sounds like Cinday and vaughn both called it. Grindelwald wasn't its true master when Dumblydore took him down.

Posted by Lilac
July 23, 2007

I was so sleepy from trying to read the book through ...so excuse the question if its a dumb one:

The baby with the flailed skin, crying when Dumbledore is explaining stuff to Harry in the afterlife - who is it ?You -know- who?

Posted by Jason
July 23, 2007

I thought to become master of the Elder Wand you had to defeat the previous master. So if Grindelwald did not defeat the previous master, then that would mean that while Dumbledore defeated Grindelwald, he did not defeat the wands current master. That would mean that Dumbledore would not be the wands master either.

Posted by Atalanta
July 23, 2007

I loved the book! I tried to put it down and go to sleep, but I failed miserably and pulled an all-nighter.

re: Snape's portrait

Umbridge didn't receive a potrait either, after her term as a Hogwartws headmistress ended. Maybe you have to be a "rightful" head, recognized by the magic in the school? Maybe Snape didn't want the job, and was only there on Dumbledore's orders? He was a pretty terrible headmaster, allowing teachers to use illegal curses and all that.

Anyway, know that we know Snape's real motivation, I'm surprised that Sirius and Lupin believed that Snape's hatred of James was because of Quidditch. Relationships between different houses was rare, and I hardly believe a Gryffindor being best buds with a Slytherin would've gone unnoticed.

I liked finding out about the Bloody Baron, and Norbert/Norberta, and how she slipped that into GOF so sneakily! I also loved how Neville was a part of destroying Voldemort, and how he became the DA leader in Harry's absence. I also loved, loved, loved Mrs. Weasley killing Bellatrix. I thought it was poetic, a woman devoted to her family offing the woman who was ready to kill off her family. I also liked the redemption of the Malfoys, and how their values had changed at the end.

I would've liked to know what happened to Luna, and George, since he lost his twin. I also wanted to hear more about what Harry, Ginny and Hermione decided to do. It's disappointing to me to think of three such magically powerful people only raising a family.

Posted by badia
July 23, 2007

I thought Lupin and Tonks lying there dead was actually very effective...I literally couldn't believe it because it was mentioned so casually and described them as looking like they were sleeping peacefully. I had to re-read because I couldn't believe it but like many have mentioned, it seemed fitting because you imagine that in battle, deaths come that easy...and when Fred died....I literally stopped reading and asked outloud, crying, "Why, Rowling, why!!??" (<--haha) And I don't know why, but Dobby dying really, really got to me. He risked his life so many times for Harry Potter, this boy he admired so much. Dobby just represented innocence to me...with his last words being, "Harry..Potter..." I just broke down. I mean BROKE DOWN. It was like innocence died.

Also, after the last time I had read HP6 (about a few days ago) I finally realized Harry was a horcrux himself and was completely mesmerized when Dumbledore explained it to Snape (in the pensieve)in this book because the anticipation of what was to come next was absolute.

Snape's love for Lilly was convincing because it gave us his background (giving us a true sense of his character) and Lily's...making it all so much more real. It made that compelling bit of evidence that Snape would remain loyal to Dumbledore (as the characters had suggested in HP6)convincing. In retrospect, his death and saying "look..at..me" to see Lily's eyes in Harry's is so much more tragic. Oh Snape. he sacrificed himself for harry and in that way...Lily. At least harry got to announce it to Voldemort in front of everyone.

I was completely in awe of the sequence from when harry realized he had to sacrifice himself to save the others until the point where Voldemort dies by his own curse. I mean, Harry went willingly! AHHHHHHH! Of course Voldemort wouldn't die by a killing curse from Harry...harry is now completely untarnished. Notice he did not have to kill anyone in this book to defeat Voldemort!?! (at least not with the avada kedavra curse, correct me if I'm wrong) And of course he didn't want that "death wand", it just goes to show how worthy of it he really is anyway!

OMG, can I be more in love with Harry Potter?

Finally, the epilogue paled in comparison to the chapters before it but I was completely ok with it. To actually see the print that they were ok (and the couples we wanted, together, and living normally) was something that I appreciated. Thank you Rowling. I loved reading HP for the last 10 years of my life. The only sadness I carry with me is the knowledge I can't look forward to another story from Hogwarts or our favorite characters.

Posted by Cindy
July 23, 2007

Love the discussion - a couple of new points to add - how did Neville pull the sword out of the hat since Griphook ended up with it? Because of his bravery and great need? Also, what's up with Ron and Hermione naming their kids Rose and Hugo? Anybody remember who they are? Why don't they have a Fred? Would Harry still become an Auror if Voldemort is destroyed? Or would everyone be hunting the remaining Death Eaters - and where would they put them if Azkaban had been destroyed? Would Dementors still guard them? It was nice to know that Hogwarts was rebuilt - can you imagine the MESS the whole world was in at the end? A lot of work to rebild everything. And last but not least, how did Hermione make the world a better place? Thanks for any additional thoughts.

Posted by Jason
July 23, 2007

I really loved this book. I stayed up all night to read it. The book pulled me in from the get go and had me for the entire time. I wish that the epilogue had given a bit more information but I understand that JKR has to end it some where and that was a good place to do it. From the start of book one to the end of book seven, I have to say very well done.

A few of things that I thought about at the end of the book:
*OMG I feel so sorry for the director/producer that has to make this book into a movie....what a monumental task it will be.
*It will be interesting to see Alan Rickman play the Snape role from this book.
*With all this action it feels like the movie will need to be named Die Hard: The Deathly Hallows....j/k. However there is a ton of action in this book.
*How can an author continue to get better book after book when she/he was doing pretty darn good on previous books.

Posted by Kit
July 23, 2007

@Atalanta, re: Snape's portrait

I can understand how Snape might not be seen as a "true" headmaster. However.. I have to disagree on him being a terrible headmaster.

As I was reading the books, I sort of knew that Snape was good. I'd always thought so though JK almost threw me off with the beginning sequence. However, the moment I found out that Snape was Headmaster of Hogwarts, I breathed a sigh of relief.

And then when he gave Ginny, Neville, and Luna (if I remember correctly?) a simple detention for stealing the sword of Godric, I knew without a doubt he was a good character.

There was little Snape could do in the respect of the Death Eaters at Hogwarts without blowing his cover. But I believe he probably did all that he could to keep an eye on the kids. Specifically with that one example of Ginny and the sword. He had the students of Muggle-loving parents at his mercy. He had every reason to be able to punish them harshly (they stole a priceless sword!). What does he do? He gives them a single detention.

We don't have much info as to what all happened at Hogwarts and what all Snape did to help, but in light of the situation I don't think there was much he could do. Still, I'd like to think he deserved a portrait, but that's just me.

Posted by Cindy
July 23, 2007

Another point - in the movie, Order of the Phoenix, Umbridge and co. break into the Room of Requirement. Bet the director is going, "Oh no", right now, because in Deathly Hallows, they state that the Room cannot be broken into. Pretty funny.

Posted by ariella
July 23, 2007

sorry if this is a stupid question- did hermione and ron ever use the basilisk fang since hte diadem was destroyed in the fire? i feel like that part was extremely unnecessary especially the way ron was able to open the chamber of secrets by copying harry's use of parseltongue

Posted by ariella
July 23, 2007

oh and one more thing- before the book came out, we heard that someone would use magic for the first time later in life. who was that?

Posted by Molly
July 23, 2007

Responding to the last few posts:

In Deathly Hallows, they talk about how they've learned they need to ask the room to be impossible for the authorities to find, which they didn't realize they had to do in Phoenix. As long as at least one of them stays in it, the room maintains its current purpose, which includes that request - and also serves that request by altering its exit point. Basically, they understand the room better, and so it serves them better.

The basilisk fang was used to destroy Hufflepuff's cup - up until then, they'd been carrying it around with them, but since they'd lost the sword, they hadn't been able to destroy it.

Posted by mk
July 23, 2007

Grindelwald defeated the previou