Midnight tonight, the bewitching hour I imagine. Anyone here going to be queuing for the new Harry Potter? I will no doubt be sent out to obtain a copy one way or another, but last time I remember actually looking forward to it myself and it was a big media event. This time, not bothered, and only seen occasional references to it in the media. I think the last book must have been incredibly dull or something because I can barely remember a thing about it. Certainly don't recall anything which made me go, "hurry up and write the next one, FFS." Can anyone remind me what happened? Does anyone care?
[ 29.07.2005, 10:56: Message edited by: dang65 ]
Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
Apparently someone called Dumb L. Door dies in this book. I've heard that he commits suicide after facing allegations that he's had his hands on Harry's wang.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
Are you kidding? There have been about two new Harry Potter stories on BBC news website every day this week. There's millions of pounds of orders been placed, and most book shops are planning wretched-sounding 'queue parties'. It all sounds ghastly to be honest, but I haven't noticed a lack of fuss.
And VP is going to be queueing at midnight, spod that she is. She even tried to rope me into it again. Fuck that, though.
Posted by H1ppychick (Member # 529) on :
My brother pre-ordered me a copy from Amazon and presented me with an envelope declaiming this fact on my birthday. In February.
This is the fulfilment of a longawaited dream for me Posted by Waynster (Member # 56) on :
Hopefully JK Rowling dies in this one and we never have to put up with this again.
I had a colleague at a bank I worked for who it seemed every shift would ask if I had read the latest HP book, or seen the film. I'm sorry but I just don't find the idea of 13 year speccy twats casting spells in the slightest bit interesting - certainly it is good if it encourages children to read, but when grown adults become so engrossed in such stories, it does make you question their current grip on reality and their maturity.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: Are you kidding? There have been about two new Harry Potter stories on BBC news website every day this week.
Oh, right. Must just be me then. I mean, I've seen the odd CBBC website link from the News page obviously, but last time it seemed more of a general talking point everywhere, including on here. I suppose there's been other things to talk about this time.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Waynster: certainly it is good if it encourages children to read, but when grown adults become so engrossed in such stories, it does make you question their current grip on reality and their maturity.
I think the idea is to allow people to relax their grip on reality and maturity for a while, same as pretty much any other fiction, music, film, computer game or real life game does. How is Harry Potter different from these?
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: Oh, right. Must just be me then. I mean, I've seen the odd CBBC website link from the News page obviously, but last time it seemed more of a general talking point everywhere, including on here. I suppose there's been other things to talk about this time.
I guess it's been a bit overshadowed, but there's still been a fair bit of buzz on it with the Pope and Gordon Brown passing comment on the books.
I quite admire the showmanship of the whole thing; the idea of anticipation, the queueing, the sense of event, the feeling of everyone reading it at the same time. It's just a shame I couldn't care less about the book.
Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
I bought some stamps from WHSmith the other day and as I handed over my hard-earned currency, the female Smith (dressed in a Harry Potter T-shirt) asked me if I wanted to pre-order the Halfblood Prince. It took me a minute to figure out what she meant, after which I cast her a glare which I hope said "Do I look like I would want to?!" Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: I think the idea is to allow people to relax their grip on reality and maturity for a while, same as pretty much any other fiction, music, film, computer game or real life game does. How is Harry Potter different from these?
Most fiction, music, films and computer games consumed by adults don't centre around the lives of children.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
quote:Originally posted by MiscellaneousFiles: Most fiction, music, films and computer games consumed by adults don't centre around the lives of children.
Mmm. A healthier mind would gravitate towards fiction that incorporates little furry creatures that live on a planet called Endor, eh Misc?
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
Yay, the annual "Why Do Grown Ups Enjoy Harry Potter?" thread!
I shall compress my argument to a few succinct points:
- media frenzy to generate publicity and sales is nothing new: see Wilkie Collins and Charles Dickens in the 19th century.
- commercialisation wank is an unfortunate by-product of modern sales, the books stand up to scrutiny without the tie-in HP pencilcases etc.
- 3 books in the series were published and grew immensely popular through word of mouth before being seized upon by the Marketing Whores.
- I am an adult with a degree in English Lit who dislikes most offerings from the fantasy genre and I didn't read the books avidly to get in with local 12 year olds, I read them because I found them enthralling, well-written, and able to withstand several re-readings.
- Stephen Fry loves them and he's an intellekchull.
- I once saw this really unfunny, annoying comedienne (Northern) trying to raise laughs by doing the "but Harry Potter's for kids! Adults should be reading things like Madam Bovary!" line to weak applause.
You can close the thread now.
Posted by Gemini (Member # 428) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vogon Poetess: - commercialisation wank is an unfortunate by-product of modern sales, the books stand up to scrutiny without the tie-in HP pencilcases etc.
- I am an adult with a degree in English Lit who dislikes most offerings from the fantasy genre and I didn't read the books avidly to get in with local 12 year olds, I read them because I found them enthralling, well-written, and able to withstand several re-readings.
You really think that they are well-written childrens books?
Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: Mmm. A healthier mind would gravitate towards fiction that incorporates little furry creatures that live on a planet called Endor, eh Misc?
You're right. I have an unhealthy mind - and that's largely because I like the Star Wars films so.
My point still stands. Can anyone name another series in popular culture which is based around the lives of children but appeals to adults in such numbers?
Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
OK - South Park.
Posted by statist (Member # 806) on :
True grown-ups should only really pay attention to The Golden Girls. That's where it's at.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
quote:Originally posted by MiscellaneousFiles:
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: Mmm. A healthier mind would gravitate towards fiction that incorporates little furry creatures that live on a planet called Endor, eh Misc?
You're right. I have an unhealthy mind - and that's largely because I like the Star Wars films so.
My point still stands. Can anyone name another series in popular culture which is based around the lives of children but appeals to adults in such numbers?
I don't think you have an unhealthy mind - but I don't think Harry Potter fans do, either.
Your final question is a bit loaded: there are few things in pop culture at all with the appeal of Harry Potter, let alone ones which centre around kids. Something like The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime appealed to adults as much as kids, and I wouldn't think an adult was retarded or had a slim grasp of reality or whatever if I saw them reading that.
Posted by statist (Member # 806) on :
Loads of adults liked Finding Nemo but it was still shit.
Posted by MiscellaneousFiles (Member # 60) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: I don't think you have an unhealthy mind - but I don't think Harry Potter fans do, either.
Did I say that they do?
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: You really think that they are well-written childrens books?
They're easily as good as any other children's books I've read, both in storytelling and in readability. I wouldn't know about literary style and all that stuff. I've never read any book, adult or child, with that in mind, just for a well-told story. If the language is stunning too then that's a bonus, but not an essential requirement by any means.
I'm not a massive fan, but I read the books to the children as bedtime stories and it's always a pleasure to do so. We tried Artemis Fowl a little while ago and that was complete shite, but maybe biased by having recently read HP.
I'd compare the HP books favourably with something like Watership Down, for example. HP is miles better than Alan Garner's real world/fantasy world stories which one might consider comparable. C S Lewis? Only read a couple of Narnia books and they go too far into fantasy for me (I never liked Tolkien for the same reason, and nor do my kids).
Roald Dahl always came up with great ideas, but the writing is very hit and miss and long drawn-out. A bit dull for an adult to read, although my 9-year-old reads his books a lot and that's who they were aimed at so one can't really complain.
Posted by New Way Of Decay (Member # 106) on :
quote:Originally posted by statist: True grown-ups should only really pay attention to The Golden Girls. That's where it's at.
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: I don't think you have an unhealthy mind - but I don't think Harry Potter fans do, either.
Did I say that they do?
The implication was clear when you explained Waynster's comment:
quote: when grown adults become so engrossed in such stories, it does make you question their current grip on reality and their maturity
to Dang.
Did you yourself question the mental state of adult readers of Harry Potter? Not in so many words. But you did follow up in agreement with someone else's comment saying that. So, in answer to your question, "essentially, yes, you did say that".
Posted by Abby (Member # 582) on :
A chum of mine works in the Picadilly Waterstones and has been organising The Launch for weeks. She is a nervous wreck. Mind you, they do have snipers on top of the shelves in the shop to take out any member of staff spotted taking a peek before 12.
She was astounded when I said that, no, I wouldnt be there at midnight, I was planning on borrowing her copy when she had finnished. Though I may have to stop by to laugh at her entertaining the queue. Apparently there will be baloon animals...
Posted by statist (Member # 806) on :
quote:Originally posted by New Way Of Decay: Fo bizzledizzle
Exactly. By "true grown-ups", I really was referring to those that are into porn. Everything else is just kids' stuff.
Posted by Roy (Member # 705) on :
My Dad hates HP because he sees it as nothing more than the re-hashing of 'jolly hollysticks' adventures at boarding kids in which posh kids becomes detectives and track down the horrible working class people who stole their jam.
He's a scouser though, so legally he is required to be full of shit.
Posted by H1ppychick (Member # 529) on :
JK Rowling is a relatively solid writer of childrens' fiction who just happened to have a quite good plot idea.
In contrast to a more accomplished writer who ticks boxes for both plot and writing quality (like Diana Wynne Jones or Philip Pullman), she's nothing special when it comes to stringing a sentence together.
Posted by statist (Member # 806) on :
What are Madonna and Fergie's books like?
Posted by Gemini (Member # 428) on :
I suppose the age range of child needs to be defined in this instance. Whereas I think this would be an enjoyable book for 8-10 year olds I think by 12 they should have moved on to something else (such as HippyChick has said Philip Pullman). Or maybe I am just over-estimating the reading ability of an average 10 year old in todays society.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by H1ppychick: JK Rowling is a relatively solid writer of childrens' fiction who just happened to have a quite good plot idea.
As someone who comes up with a fantastic new plot idea for a book every few days myself, I must say that I think that is grossly unfair. She has managed to sustain a good basic idea into a series of entertaining stories, with a longer term, as yet unconcluded, thread running through the series of books, plus many many smaller details and in-jokes and general flights of imagination. That's the 99% perspiration required of genius, not just the 1% inspiration which just about all of us have.
I've not yet read any Philip Pullman, but I've read many reader reviews saying that he completely fails to sustain the brilliance of the first book across the trilogy. I don't think that can be said of J K Rowling at all.
I feel a bit daft arguing on a thread like this, as I'm not a great reader and I'm not a particularly big fan of Harry Potter. I do enjoy reading the stories to the children, but I don't then go on HP forums to discuss the finer details of the plot or anything, and I only started this thread to ask if the phenomenon was cooling a bit and if anyone could even remember the last book. (I just read the plot synopsis on the BBC site and couldn't remember much of it except that Sirius Black gets killed.) But I don't think it's fair to dismiss J K Rowling as someone who got lucky and who isn't a "proper" writer. In fact, both of those assertions are blatantly untrue.
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
I think the whole area of childrens literature is really intiguing. Everyone here hopefully has happy memories of books they loved as a child, that fired their imagination and made them wonder. In some ways, childrens authors are as powerful as parents and teachers in the effect they have on a child.
Firstly, I think it's wrong to be disparaging about childrens literature. It's naive to assume that a childrens book is somehow easier to write, and its disingenuous to kids to think that they aren't discerning readers.
Secondly, I think you have to question whether adults and children read books for the same reasons and are looking for different things out of a text.
Finally, I think the line between children/teen/adult fiction has become increasingly blurred. This seems to confuse people who like books to be clearly categorised- perhaps the way Waterstones in Piccadilly displays it's wares: "books about London", "books set in Japan", "love stories" etc. Philip Pullman's HDM trilogy has two 12 year olds as its main protagonists, but I doubt a 12 year old would fully understand the significance of many elements of the books. The HP series will follow Harry from age 11 to 18, with the final book coming out more than 7 years after the first one was released- hence a child who read Book 1 at age 11, will be legally an adult when Book 7 appears. Does this mean they are not allowed to read it?
I can see why people are finding the marketing bollocks surrounding anything HP-related tiresome, but I am finding it difficult to understand the sneering at those who genuinely enjoy the novels.
I have read countless thousands of books. Pretty much all of the English Literary Canon, a fair few French classics in French, and a lot of Mediaeval and Olde English texts. I love books and I love reading. But I'm an adult, so how can I possibly enjoy a book ostensibly aimed at children?
In a lot of ways, the HP series is quite unusual. There is the "real time" element of children growing up with Harry. There is the meticulous planning to the way Rowling has let the story unfold (compare to G Lucas making Star Wars up as he goes along). There is the way the books have progressed from being just about Harry, to encompassing a huge range of adult characters and the the growing sense of the importance of Harry's dad's generation. And of course it is also comfortingly traditional, with it's boarding school setting, the narrative unfurling against the progression of the academic year, enjoyably continuing the fine literary tradition of stories about kids with special/magical abilities. Of course, the books are by no means perfect, the first two are fairly pedestrian and the last one was in need of some serious editing.
However, somewhere, in this mix of innovation and tradition, Rowling has managed to appeal to all ages. To really appeal; making people want to re-read and discuss with others. And remember this wasn't a writing strategy dreamed up by some kind of publishing equivalent of the marketing board in the pre-film Orange ads.
So I will be queueing at midnight for the unique sense of shared anticipation. I feel a bit sorry for those of you who don't have anything as fun to look forward to in your lives.
Posted by Carter (Member # 426) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: I've not yet read any Philip Pullman, but I've read many reader reviews saying that he completely fails to sustain the brilliance of the first book across the trilogy. I don't think that can be said of J K Rowling at all.
I find that really surprising, and I would get hold of the trilogy to see for yourself how wrong these people are.
The first is certainly the most accessible, and the most conventional-fantasy of the three, but I think that the books just get better and better through the trilogy. By the end, you're trying to hold together this cat's cradle of ideas and philosophical concepts that really does qualify as brilliant.
Posted by New Way Of Decay (Member # 106) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vogon Poetess: I feel a bit sorry for those of you who don't have anything as fun to look forward to in your lives.
You might want to edit this. If it's not going to work for me on Saw, it's not going to help you with HP.
Posted by H1ppychick (Member # 529) on :
I enjoy Harry Potter. I think Rowling is workmanlike in her storytelling and plot handling. I just don't think she's the gr8test children's writer in the world EVAH!!!!!!! Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
quote:Originally posted by H1ppychick: I enjoy Harry Potter. I think Rowling is workmanlike in her storytelling and plot handling. I just don't think she's the gr8test children's writer in the world EVAH!!!!!!!
I don't think anyone here has said so. What's your point?
Posted by Gemini (Member # 428) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: But I don't think it's fair to dismiss J K Rowling as someone who got lucky and who isn't a "proper" writer. In fact, both of those assertions are blatantly untrue.
quote:Originally posted by :Vogon Poetess Firstly, I think it's wrong to be disparaging about childrens literature. It's naive to assume that a childrens book is somehow easier to write, and its disingenuous to kids to think that they aren't discerning readers.
I don't think that anyone has said that she isn't a "proper" writer, or that the books aren't enjoyable. Nor has anyone said that a childrens book is easy to write. What is being argued is that the HP books aren't as well written as other childrens literature and some of us can't see what adults see in these books when if they want to read childrens literature there are better examples around that can challenge the adult brain.
[ 15.07.2005, 08:18: Message edited by: Gemini ]
Posted by discodamage (Member # 66) on :
i have decided to stay out of these conversations seeing as the last time i expressed my vague befuddlement at the hp phenom an hp obsessive threw a fishknife at me in ager at my blasphemy. a fishknife! i think she got confused and thought she could turn it into a magickal lightening bolt midair or something.
(by the way, the woman in question is a cambridge graduate, fluent in four languages. im casting no aspersions about the intelligence of hp fans any more).
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: What is being argued is that the HP books aren't as well written as other childrens literature and some of us can't see what adults see in these books when if they want to read childrens literature there are better examples around that can challenge the adult brain.
C'mon - how can you seriously talk about "challenging the adult brain" when you read Terry Pratchett and got excited about Van fucking Helsing, for Christ's sake.
No-one wants to spend their whole time having their brain melted by literary mind-fucks like The Magus. I don't think any one reads Harry Potter for the challenge - that's what grown up books were for. Why would you read a children's book to challenge your adult brain? Wouldn't you just read an adult book? Isn't reading Harry Potter just like eating a tub of strawberry ice cream? You'd have problems if that was all you ate, but I don't think it does much harm once every two years.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: I don't think that anyone has said that she isn't a "proper" writer, or that the books aren't enjoyable. Nor has anyone said that a childrens book is easy to write.
Hmm. Maybe I read it wrong then, but saying that "JK Rowling [...] just happened to have a quite good plot idea" seems to imply that if anyone else had been lucky enough to stumble on that idea then it would've been easy for them to churn out a series of bestselling books too. Maybe that's not what Hippy meant, but she hasn't denied it so far, besides damning JKR with faint praise by calling her "workmanlike".
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: What is being argued is that the HP books aren't as well written as other childrens literature and some of us can't see what adults see in these books when if they want to read childrens literature there are better examples around that can challenge the adult brain.
This really does depend on your definition of "well written" though. To me, the storytelling is the most important aspect of, well, a story. If a writer can draw me in and relax me and make me willingly suspend my disbelief and lose myself in the tale then they've succeeded in good storytelling.
Can we start seeing a list of children's books which non-HP converts consider to be "better" than HP?
Starting with:
1. Philip Pullman's trilogy
Posted by Roy (Member # 705) on :
quote:Originally posted by discodamage: i have decided to stay out of these conversations seeing as the last time i expressed my vague befuddlement at the hp phenom an hp obsessive threw a fishknife at me in ager at my blasphemy. a fishknife! i think she got confused and thought she could turn it into a magickal lightening bolt midair or something.
Last time you have lunch with JK Rowling.
Posted by Gemini (Member # 428) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis:
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: What is being argued is that the HP books aren't as well written as other childrens literature and some of us can't see what adults see in these books when if they want to read childrens literature there are better examples around that can challenge the adult brain.
C'mon - how can you seriously talk about "challenging the adult brain" when you read Terry Pratchett and got excited about Van fucking Helsing, for Christ's sake.
No-one wants to spend their whole time having their brain melted by literary mind-fucks like The Magus. I don't think any one reads Harry Potter for the challenge - that's what grown up books were for. Why would you read a children's book to challenge your adult brain? Wouldn't you just read an adult book? Isn't reading Harry Potter just like eating a tub of strawberry ice cream? You'd have problems if that was all you ate, but I don't think it does much harm once every two years.
umm I've never read TP, but yes I was looking forward to watching VH. I don't know, maybe because I look for different things in my films than I do in my books. I'm not a flim buff so don't get as worked up about the intracacies.
Challenge is probably the wrong word, involve might be a better one. I don't understand what an adult gets from a HP book. If we are going to use ice-cream analogies HP is like the Tesco value strawberry ice-cream and someone like Philip Pullman is the Hagen-Daz.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: umm I've never read TP,
Sorry about that: that was a nasty slur on my part if it's not true. I just dimly recalled you defending him in the past. Maybe you were just commenting on literary snobbishness in general. Maybe it was Ben Elton, in which case my point still stands.
It's all very well saying "But Philip Pullman is better!" but people may well read both. It's not an either/or thing.
Posted by Fionnula the Cooler (Member # 453) on :
I was going to suggest we do this - not submit our attempts to the Guardian but post them on TMO for our own amusement. But when I tried to write one I realised I didn't know enough about Harry Potter to write something that would make sense. Maybe it doesn't matter. Shall we try? I bagsy Faulkner.
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: Can we start seeing a list of children's books which non-HP converts consider to be "better" than HP?
yes, I'd be interested to see what people put forward on this list.
I think Rowling is a pretty decent writer, with lots of good ideas, great attention to detail and a shrewd idea of how to develop a long soap-opera style plot. Undeniably, she writes about stuff which is already guaranteed to be popular, and was fortunate to start publishing at a time when the LOTR films started a magyckal revival. I'm not sure who's the Bestest Best Childrens Writer Ever, but I'd put Rowling in the Top Five.
I guess a major reason for the success is the anticipation of waiting for the next installment, and the bonding through speculation about how the story will pan out. Like I say, Wilkie Collins' The Woman In White created a similarly frenzied response when it was printed in installments to tantalise the public . It's obviously been so long since something was delivered in this manner that readers are in the mood to be teased by the publishers in this way.
Posted by Gemini (Member # 428) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis:
quote:Originally posted by Gemini: umm I've never read TP,
Sorry about that: that was a nasty slur on my part if it's not true. I just dimly recalled you defending him in the past. Maybe you were just commenting on literary snobbishness in general. Maybe it was Ben Elton, in which case my point still stands.
It's all very well saying "But Philip Pullman is better!" but people may well read both. It's not an either/or thing.
No I remember trashing Ben Elton on these boards as well
Yes people may very well read both but I can see why there is a fuss about Philip Pullman and can also see why adults might enjoy it, and might even understand the underlying themes better than a child i.e. there is something there for adults as well as children. This is not something I get with HP.
Posted by H1ppychick (Member # 529) on :
I've just read it; it's not bad. A bit of a return to earlier form, in fact. Quite pacy, most of the time. Hmmm. OK. Yes, she's quite a good children's writer. I'm persuaded.
Posted by Waynster (Member # 56) on :
quote:Originally posted by New Way Of Decay: Fo bizzledizzle
Nice to see John Leslie's downward turn of luck has not seen him quit the showbiz world.
[ 17.07.2005, 07:48: Message edited by: Waynster ]
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
I still think Snape's gonna turn out to be a really nice guy in the end. He's just misunderstood.
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
Dang- the only thing I find consistently readable on Barbelith is the HP discussions. Quite interesting to see how people are split between thinking Snape is evil or not.
I think it's a given that he did what he did as part of some cunning Dumbo plan to SAVE THE UNIVERSE!
I enjoyed Book 5, but my favourite is still Book 3, with 4 a close second.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
I've never been to that Barbeleith place. Might have to pop over there. I really enjoyed the new book, though it was frustrating that I really couldn't remember huge chunks of the previous book, which kept getting referred to. Mrs Dang said the same thing. Our copy must've been hexed or something. Anyway, the whole story is very nicely brewed ready for the final book. She'll probably get run over by a bus or something now, knowing my luck.
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: though it was frustrating that I really couldn't remember huge chunks of the previous book, which kept getting referred to. Mrs Dang said the same thing. Our copy must've been hexed or something.
I thought the same thing too. Though I put my total amnesia about major plot developments in the last book down to the disposability the series, rather than a hex.
When that character gets killed off, my mind kept wandering to a Dead Ringers (I think) sketch in which LOTR and HP cinematic wizards compete to be the most wizardy.
Posted by rooster (Member # 738) on :
Oh, I agree with you two! I was worried I was the only HP reader (fan?) who couldn’t remember all these random people to which references were made – and those initials at the end…real HP fans already have a list of people to match. Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
I've read most of the books about 5 times so that wasn't a problem. I didn't pick up on the mention of Arabella Figg at the end of HP4, and the Mrs Figg who was Harry's neighbour in HP1 though.
Someone on Barbelith has guessed at the identity of R.A.B and I think they're right- want me to spill?
Posted by Louche (Member # 450) on :
Have they guessed Sirius' brother? That seems to be the most popular theory at the moment on a number of boards I'm not naming, as that would reveal I go there.
I didn't have plotholes for last book, as I dedicatedly read Book 4 again beforehand. And I totally fell for the Snape evil thing, because I am thick.
Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vogon Poetess: I've read most of the books about 5 times so that wasn't a problem. I didn't pick up on the mention of Arabella Figg at the end of HP4, and the Mrs Figg who was Harry's neighbour in HP1 though.
Someone on Barbelith has guessed at the identity of R.A.B and I think they're right- want me to spill?
Please do VogPot ... I thought it might be summit to do with Sirius, but wasn't his brother already killed ?
Posted by rooster (Member # 738) on :
It's ok Louche, I kind of already revealed I go to those too by mentioning the real fans, so you aren't alone.
Oh well...
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
Go on, reveal.... I've only heard one theory mentioned but since it's a character we haven't met directly, I wouldn't have a clue.
So, any real fans here want to admit to planning a paper for the Accio conference?
I didn't think much of their suggested discussion areas, but then again if none of us can actually remember the backstory this session could prove particularly short:
quote:Mythopoeia, Etymology and other sources of inspiration: How appreciation of JK Rowling's use of "what has gone before" is important to our understanding of the series.
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
Yes, Regulus Black seems the most likely candidate- presumably he stole it and stashed it (perhaps somewhere in the house that Harry now owns) before he got killed.
As also mentioned on Barbelith, the phenomenon of moving wizard pictures and the talking portraits of the dead needs to be explained.
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
Regulus Black: that's what I read somewhere too.
The dead characters speaking from portraits do need explaining don't they? JK appears to draw attention to some metaphysical discomfort around this when a recently killed character crops up in a portrait and no one looks them in the eye.
I presume it doesn't make portraits horcruxes does it?
Damn, I'm sounding like someone who cares. Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
quote:Originally posted by OJ: Regulus Black: that's what I read somewhere too.
The dead characters speaking from portraits do need explaining don't they? JK appears to draw attention to some metaphysical discomfort around this when a recently killed character crops up in a portrait and no one looks them in the eye.
I presume it doesn't make portraits horcruxes does it?
They'd have to kill someone to make a horcrux and that doesn't sit well with all the Headmasters having them. Must be summit else.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
I did wonder if <the person that dies in this book> might have sorted out a horcrux for themselves, thus not being particularly bothered if they were "killed". But that would be a bit of a cop out, and JKR doesn't usually do that.
Also, I saw a thread title somewhere: Is Harry Potter a horcrux?
Good concept, d'yer reckon?
Posted by rooster (Member # 738) on :
No way would recently dead person have a horcrux - he considers them evil.
Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
The 'person' made quite a lot of the fact that Harry was a complete soul so no .... ooh hang on, I see what you mean... ooh thats a twist alright.
Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
second thoughts, Lord V would hardly attempt to destroy his own horcrux would he.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
I wish other people on here read 100 Bullets, then I'd be able to have conversations like this. Book 8 of 100 Bullets came out last friday, and I haven't stopped thinking about it yet, going so far as to draw up a list of the activated minutemen, against their codenames, etc. I also wonder whether Graves and Shepherd have been working together from the start, and there's been an ingenious plan to ingratiate Lono back into the trust just like Graves wants. It's tricky stuff. God I love it. I love it so much. 100 Bullets is the single greatest English Language artistic acheivement in the last 100 years.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vanilla Online Persona: second thoughts, Lord V would hardly attempt to destroy his own horcrux would he.
Are we sure he's trying to destroy HP? He might just be trying to recover that bit of his soul and then found out that the host is a bit of a speccy pain in the arse. It does say somewhere that the snake is one and that Voldemort has an uncanny communication with said animal. Doesn't he have uncanny communication with HP too?
Posted by Louche (Member # 450) on :
quote:Originally posted by Thorn Davis: I wish other people on here read 100 Bullets, then I'd be able to have conversations like this.
I read a bit of this over the shoulder of a insanely cute girl on the train the other morning, if that helps? But she got up and moved seats after a few minutes, so I didn't get to digest all that much of the story.
Posted by Thorn Davis (Member # 65) on :
Manchester has insanely cute girls who read 100 Bullets? That's it. I'm moving up North.
[ 29.07.2005, 10:13: Message edited by: Thorn Davis ]
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Louche: I read a bit of this over the shoulder of a insanely cute girl on the train the other morning, if that helps? But she got up and moved seats after a few minutes, so I didn't get to digest all that much of the story.
Fantastic! I might try that if the train is crowded tonight. Except that I always get crowded by sweaty, nondescript blokes. Does it work with them too?
[ 29.07.2005, 10:19: Message edited by: OJ ]
Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
yeah but no but yeah. well, it fits with the prophecy 'tis true. It's a possibility. Also, it explains why the Hat wanted to put Harry in Slyth.
Where did you see this theory?
[ 29.07.2005, 10:25: Message edited by: Vanilla Online Persona ]
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
I think we should stop pussy-footing around and name the HP6 deadee. The book's been out for nearly two weeks now; if people haven't read it yet then they're not proper fans and are thus of no concern to us.
I'm expecting an explanation of how Harry's dad got hold of the very rare invisibility cloak. Could this be another possible contender for a horcrux? I'm pretty sure it's going to be something that's appeared in a previous book- like Ron's dull pet rat actually being a disguised spy.
[ 29.07.2005, 10:38: Message edited by: Vogon Poetess ]
Posted by Vanilla Online Persona (Member # 301) on :
do you mean HP6 deadee ? cuz even the dead know the HP5 deadee by now.
Posted by Louche (Member # 450) on :
quote:Originally posted by OJ: Fantastic! I might try that if the train is crowded tonight. Except that I always get crowded by sweaty, nondescript blokes. Does it work with them too?
For sweaty nondescript blokes I recommend a sharp jab in the thigh with a PDA stylus. A biro will do, but a stylus tends to be sharper. Alt, waving your arms around, muttering and announcing, loudly, that you have incontinence issues tends to clear a decent enough space rapidly enough.
Also, if we do the HP deadee, can't Dang just edit his title so that it sez spoilers? He seems a nice enough chap, he'd probably volunteer to do that.
[ 29.07.2005, 10:44: Message edited by: Louche ]
Posted by Vogon Poetess (Member # 164) on :
Arse, yes of course AitchPeeSix.
I liked the new characters; Slughorn being a Slytherin who wasn't pale, brooding and obviously sinister, and the new Minister for Magic who's an important Auror but somehow not very trustworthy.
I think Rowling's female characters are the best though. Luna is great, and I'm expecting to hear about more about Aunt Petunia. Also, how will Prof McGonnogall run the school?
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Louche: Also, if we do the HP deadee, can't Dang just edit his title so that it sez spoilers? He seems a nice enough chap, he'd probably volunteer to do that.
There you go.
So, shame about Ron being killed wasn't it?
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
Don't know how PMcG will run the school, but I couldn't help having a little when Harry wouldn't tell her the full story about what happened to Dumbledore.
I mean, come on. It's the single most important plot device isn't it? Harry refuses to tell the headteacher about the really important black magic thing, he's involved in. Which is a shame, because they could have averted all danger...
ps. Louche, I don't have a PDA, much less a stylus. Perhaps a wand would make people give me a wide berth thus avoiding the protracted elbow battles.
Posted by Louche (Member # 450) on :
Excellent Dang! For about five minutes, two days after the book came out I made some people think it was Fred and George. That was ace and made my mean gland happy.
Won't your workplace give you wanky nice things like PDAs, OJ? I suspect you need another job.
Posted by OJ (Member # 752) on :
quote:Originally posted by Louche: Won't your workplace give you wanky nice things like PDAs, OJ? I suspect you need another job.
Grr. Tell me about it. And that's the least of the reasons, surely I've bored you with all that already?
"OJ, Do you know how many licence-fee payers would have to die to pay for your evil organiser?" Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
quote:Originally posted by Vanilla Online Persona: yeah but no but yeah. well, it fits with the prophecy 'tis true. It's a possibility. Also, it explains why the Hat wanted to put Harry in Slyth.
Where did you see this theory?
I only saw the thread title somewhere in passing on a forum somewhere. Never actually read the thread, but the idea that HP may be a horcrux himself fits into a lot of aspects of the story.
One thing that's always bugged me is Snape's permanent loathing for Harry, never letting up for one moment. The explanation is supposed to be that Snape was bullied at school by Harry's father, but who carries on a vendetta to that extent? He's not the Mafia FFS.
A better explanation would be if Snape knows that Harry is 'possessed' by Voldemort and that it's that side that he loathes. He probably told Dumbledore, and it's their shared knowledge and their joint plan to deal with it, to use Harry as a weapon against Voldemort, which has given Snape this 'immunity' with Dumbledore that no one else can comprehend.
Also, all this stuff with Harry's mother's love protecting him may be another complication in the process of making the horcrux. Maybe it made Voldemort drain too much of his soul into Harry, losing so much of his power in the process that he became helpless for many years.
Yes, I think this will be the revelation. Quite how it will all be tied up, I'm looking forward to finding out.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
Any chance of VP coming out of retirement specially to pass comment on the final book? I miss VP.
I just finished the book anyway. Certainly not disappointed, and I think the series is a quite amazing achievement of storytelling (as, obviously, do millions of other people ).
Some fairly close predictions in the old thread there, and a couple of spot on ones too, but she bungs in so many twists and turns that a few good guesses don't spoil anything.
Posted by Darryn.R (Member # 1) on :
quote:Originally posted by dang65: Any chance of VP coming out of retirement specially to pass comment on the final book? I miss VP.
Me too, why did she retire ?
Posted by Kellifer (Member # 187) on :
I just read this whole thread after spending last week reading Deathly Hallows and most of today either reading other people's ciao reviews or writing my own. My head aches.
The prophecies about Snape and 'Harry is a Horcrux' were very good. I think that she does backstory and detail really well and enjoy the depth of character.
My review is here if anyone wants to take a look in the absence of VP.
It does spoil the plot if you haven't read it and intend to, and it is probably a bit too sappy for some of the hardcore literary types on here, but take a look if you are bored or something.
Posted by dang65 (Member # 102) on :
Look forward to reading that, but it's one of those infuriating blocked URLs which they seem to impose completely at random where I work.
I think Thorn said that VP has definitely left TMO, but I can't remember if it was a flounce or just an attempt to recover some sort of sanity and real life. I hope to encounter her again one day in cyberland anyway, perhaps via the website wwww.forumsreunited.inthefuture.
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)