Harry Potter - From the Beginning! (May refer to Book 7)

[Alatar]

Brief detour to read some book called the Hidden Worlds... back soon!

Lord M, whats your thoughts on the first two books after re-reading? Foreshadowed all the way? COmpletely seperate? Something in between?

[Túrin Turambar]

Something in between. I think the basic elements of the final confrontation were in place from the start, but I think the series was initially envisioned as being much thinner and simpler.

[Rebecca]

Some things I noticed as I'm rereading the first book...


It seems like a really cruel world that would snap a 13 year old wizard's wand in half, when they are needed so much in the wizarding world. How would Hagrid be expected to get by without it? Of course, we learn later that they think he opened the Chamber of Secrets, which is a pretty big deal, but since Dumbledore vouched for him he was only expelled. If I remember that part correctly, that is. But still, snapping his wand in half? Seems extreme to me. How about rehabilitating this young kid instead of essentially crippling him for the rest of his life?


Hagrid is not supposed to have a wand, but yet is allowed to do magic to follow Harry? Surely people know he's using the umbrella with broken wand bits in it. But shouldn't that be illegal? Seems like things like the Trace, mentioned later in the books, would be used on someone like Hagrid who isn't supposed to use magic.


Why does McGonnagall give Harry such a great broom for Quidditch? He's just another player on the team....none of the other players got new, nicer brooms, did they?


Throughout the books, they imply that Harry has a rare invisibility cloak. Not a completely unique one. Ron even says "those are really rare and really valuable." Obviously we can assume Ron doesn't really know what he's talking about, but there's mentions of other people having invisibility cloaks later in the series. So when we hear about Harry's cloak being one of a kind, it seemed like a bit of a stretch for me, like she decided that at the last minute. And then decided to tell us that all those other cloaks we heard about could have their enchantments broken or stop working after awhile.

[Crucifer]

but since Dumbledore vouched for him he was only expelled. If I remember that part correctly, that is. But still, snapping his wand in half? Seems extreme to me. How about rehabilitating this young kid instead of essentially crippling him for the rest of his life?

They destroy young wizards/witches wands for breaking the law. Harry is sent a letter saying that his wand will be destroyed. It's to nip rebellion in the bud, I suppose.

Why does McGonnagall give Harry such a great broom for Quidditch?

Because they haven't seen talent like Harrys since his fathers days in school. She really wants to win the cup, and it's very important that the seeker have a good broom. They probably couldn't have gotten away with buying the whole team new brooms. Every house would have wanted a set of Nimbuses then.

Throughout the books, they imply that Harry has a rare invisibility cloak. Not a completely unique one. Ron even says "those are really rare and really valuable." Obviously we can assume Ron doesn't really know what he's talking about, but there's mentions of other people having invisibility cloaks later in the series. So when we hear about Harry's cloak being one of a kind, it seemed like a bit of a stretch for me, like she decided that at the last minute. And then decided to tell us that all those other cloaks we heard about could have their enchantments broken or stop working after awhile.

No one has any idea that the Hallows even exist. Everyone just assumes that it is an 'ordinary' invisibility cloak, but these are also rare. The only other character to have one (two, in fact) is Moody, but then, he would, wouldn't he.

[Rebecca]

but since Dumbledore vouched for him he was only expelled. If I remember that part correctly, that is. But still, snapping his wand in half? Seems extreme to me. How about rehabilitating this young kid instead of essentially crippling him for the rest of his life?

They destroy young wizards/witches wands for breaking the law. Harry is sent a letter saying that his wand will be destroyed. It's to nip rebellion in the bud, I suppose.

I understand that, it just seems very extreme. He's only 13, for goodness sake. Harry nearly losing his wand is extreme as well, but was obviously ridiculous as the Ministry of Magic was corrupt.

Why does McGonnagall give Harry such a great broom for Quidditch?

Because they haven't seen talent like Harrys since his fathers days in school. She really wants to win the cup, and it's very important that the seeker have a good broom. They probably couldn't have gotten away with buying the whole team new brooms. Every house would have wanted a set of Nimbuses then.

Seems like obvious favoritism, to me. She doesn't really know how he'll turn out when he gets the broom, she's hopeful, but that shouldn't get him such a great broom.

Throughout the books, they imply that Harry has a rare invisibility cloak. Not a completely unique one. Ron even says "those are really rare and really valuable." Obviously we can assume Ron doesn't really know what he's talking about, but there's mentions of other people having invisibility cloaks later in the series. So when we hear about Harry's cloak being one of a kind, it seemed like a bit of a stretch for me, like she decided that at the last minute. And then decided to tell us that all those other cloaks we heard about could have their enchantments broken or stop working after awhile.

No one has any idea that the Hallows even exist. Everyone just assumes that it is an 'ordinary' invisibility cloak, but these are also rare. The only other character to have one (two, in fact) is Moody, but then, he would, wouldn't he.

Just really seemed to come out of nowhere. We got no indication before DH that his cloak was anything more than a rare (not unique) item.

[Crucifer]

But that's because nobody knew about the Hallows. Everyone assumed it was just a normal invisibility cloak, albeit a very long lived one. No one had reason to suspect that it was anythng more or less than a normal invisibility cloak, other than Dumbledore.

[Rebecca]

Hmmm...

In the chapter where Harry first sees Voldemort in the Forbidden Forest, Firenze saves Harry. The other centaurs are mad that Firenze saved Harry from Voldemort, saying he's interfering with what the planets say is going to happen.

[Crucifer]

So the planets say Tom will kill Harry. We know this happens.

[Rebecca]

So the planets say Tom will kill Harry. We know this happens.

I know, I just found it interesting. Nice bit of foreshadowing.

[Crucifer]

It's good isn't it. Every time a new book came out, I was like: aww. It doesn't mean anything.

Then it did, just there near the end.

[Túrin Turambar]

The odd thing about Harry's invisibility cloak seemed to be its longevity. As far as actual use goes, it isn't too different from a regular cloak (although a little better). Still, I get the impression that the Hallows were thought up towards the end of the series.

[Crucifer]

I agree.

For one thing, there are no references to Dumbledores wand being particularly powerful. It is obvious that he is a formidable wizard, but nowhere is it stated that his wand has anything to do with it.

[Túrin Turambar]

Yes, the wand should have been foreshadowed.

In other news, my re-read’s continuing, and I’m now into GoF.

1. JKR’s writing seems to continue to improve from PoA – Chapter 1 of GoF is one of the best-written I’ve read. Captures the mood and opens the book perfectly. Reading the fairly economical use of words in these books, I think that she falls into a bit of an over-writing habit in the later books. Dobby’s burial, especially, seems to get a bit melodramatic.

2. Something I miss from the later books is the funny little moments and descriptions we get. The wizards trying to pass themselves off as muggles at the World Cup probably made me laugh more than anything else JKR wrote the first time I read about them.

3. Again and again in these early books, Snape’s churlishness and childishness keeps coming out. I’d forgotten about his attempt to poison Neville’s toad in PoA – what kind of teacher tries to kill his students’ pets out of pure spite?

[Rebecca]

3. Again and again in these early books, Snape’s churlishness and childishness keeps coming out. I’d forgotten about his attempt to poison Neville’s toad in PoA – what kind of teacher tries to kill his students’ pets out of pure spite?

As I was reading those parts with Snape, I was always reminded that these were books targeted at children. It seems so childish of Snape to act that way, but something that kids would enjoy reading. Since I'm not reading them as or to a child, I always wished some of the characters were more realistic.



That also reminds me of something else that always bothered me in all the books- what horrible teachers/teaching styles Hogwarts really has. JK Rowling is so obviously not a teacher and seems clueless as to how to write the professors' teachings. Even though it's a magical world different from ours, I cannot possibly imagine the kids learning anything. Why bother having teachers? Snape just writes potion recipes on the board and then doesn't seem to help them. The rest of their professors spend too much time just lecturing/droning on.

The whole method of teaching in Hogwarts seems to be- Hey, here's a spell, do it. Oh, that didn't work? Try again while I watch you but don't actually teach in any way. They might as well be just sitting in their room with a spell book.

I guess it just drives me crazy from a teacher's point of view, knowing a bit about what does and doesn't work.

[Crucifer]

THat's always bugged me too. I mean, they take five years lecturing and passive teaching, and then, fifth year, just dig out notes from first year and mysteriously can recall everything!

[Túrin Turambar]

Continuing on through the series:

1. GoF is better than PoA at times, especially towards the beginning and the end. It is, however, more uneven. It is the first HP book to have parts that drag a little, albeit nowhere near as badly as in the later books. Part of it, though, is that the book is a bit depressing from when Harry’s name comes out of the Goblet until the first task, with everyone hating him and all. Nonetheless, it really hits some high points and is very good.

2. I’ve also never really liked the way that Harry gets into the Triwizard tournament. Dumbeldore reads his name as it comes out of the Goblet despite the fact that it shouldn’t, neither Bagman nor Dumbledore protest against the imperiused Crouch’s interpretation of the rules even though they have it on Harry’s word that he didn’t volunteer and must know that he would struggle to cope or even survive in the tournament, and Harry himself doesn’t flat-out refuse to compete.

3. BTW, what’s with the title? Does any other book have an eponym that is so minor in the overall plot?

4. The more and more I read, the less and less I understand the ‘Snape is a really great guy and a better man than Dumbledore’ line. He hits a new all-time low with his ‘I see no difference’ line at Hermione’s cursed and rapidly-growing teeth. I can’t possibly understand why Lily didn’t want him…

[Crucifer]

neither Bagman nor Dumbledore protest against the imperiused Crouch’s interpretation of the rules even though they have it on Harry’s word that he didn’t volunteer and must know that he would struggle to cope or even survive in the tournament, and Harry himself doesn’t flat-out refuse to compete.

Harry has no choice. It is a magically binding contract that if your name comes out, you must compete, whether you like it or not. Harry was so overwhelmed and shocked that he didn't know what to say. Bagman had found a way to get out of trouble financially, and Dumbledore is a manipulative old man who wanted to see where it would lead.

[Athrabeth]

The more and more I read, the less and less I understand the ‘Snape is a really great guy and a better man than Dumbledore’ line. He hits a new all-time low with his ‘I see no difference’ line at Hermione’s cursed and rapidly-growing teeth. I can’t possibly understand why Lily didn’t want him…

I don't think there ever was a 'Snape is a really great guy and a better man than Dumbledore' line. He is most definitely NOT a really great guy. He's vindictive and cruel at his worst and his best ain't no hot stuff either (at least "the best" we actually see over the course of the series). His love for Lily doesn't make him "good", it makes it possible for him to defy Voldemort and give his loyalty to Dumbledore instead. It's not because he believes in some vaulted "higher cause" that Snape turns, it's because of this one, small, unsullied aspect of himself that allowed him to put another's life before his own, an aspect of himself that without Lily, would never have been awakened. This is one of the really surprising aspects of the story for me - that Rowling didn't give Snape the cliched "noble sacrifice" redemptive ending that I thought she would. Snape's character, when all the pieces of the puzzle are aligned at the end, reminds me more of something from one of Le Carre's Cold War spy novels than a fantasy series (especially one aimed at a youthful audience).

BTW, what’s with the title? Does any other book have an eponym that is so minor in the overall plot?

It's seems better to me than Harry Potter and the Tri-Wizard Tournament, but I have no idea why.

[Rebecca]

If the Goblet of Fire hadn't spit his name out we wouldn't have much of a story?




Athrabeth, I really liked the way you described Snape. Said what I was thinking, only much, much better.

[Athrabeth]

Thanks, Rebecca!

Rowling's expositions of Snape and Dumbledore (among a few other aspects of the tale) have a subtlety and sophistication that really did surprise and impress me.