HOME / the book club: New books dissected over e-mail.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

SPOILER! The End of Harry Potter vs. the Sopranos Finale

Posted Monday, July 23, 2007, at 4:16 PM ET

Caution: This entire Book Club contains spoilers.

Illustration by Charlie Powell. Click image to expand.Dear Dan and Polly,

Thanks for welcoming me to your correspondence. I'm afraid that my media blackout—which began about a week and a half ago, once I began hearing rumors of a leak—extended to this Book Club; even though I knew you guys would not be so crude as to include spoilers, I simply could not be safe enough. It was odd how many people took joy in giving away the ending; a friend who writes a Potter column for another site said someone e-mailed her anonymously over the weekend with all the spoilers. That's positively Voldemortian. The Dark Lord takes many forms.

I'm afraid, Polly, that I cannot assuage your fears; I, too, found the book mildly disappointing. This was surely inevitable, but alas. In a way, I find this last book just as frustrating as I found the Sopranos finale—but frustrating in the exact opposite way. In the ambiguous final episode of The Sopranos, David Chase seemed not to care enough about his characters to give them an appropriate send-off: He seemed more concerned with making a statement about audience expectations than with satisfying our desire for closure. Here, J.K. Rowling seems to care too much. She continuously walks her charges to the precipice and pulls them back to safety. She can't bring herself to kill off anyone important. For all the talk of major characters dying, none of our key heroes ever seems in real danger. Sure, Lupin, Tonks, and Mad Eye bite it, but we were never tied as closely to them as to our sainted trio. (You'll forgive me for not rending garments at the death of Dobby; I've always found the elves an annoying mix of Ewok, Jar Jar, and Hobbit. The scene when Harry manually digs Dobby's grave is one of the most gripping scenes in the book, perhaps more than the elf deserves.) People die … but no one we really care about.

I've read the section in which Harry talks with the dead-but-still-whimsical Dumbledore a couple of times now, and I'm still not quite sure I buy his explanation of why Harry isn't toast. The torturing of Hermoine by Bellatrix—whom Longbottom totally should have been allowed to kill (although having Mrs. Weasley kill her instead did facilitate the thoroughly enjoyable appearance of the word bitch in a Harry Potter book)—is nothing compared with Dumbledore's tortured explanation of why Harry isn't dead. When Harry is walking toward what he believes is his fatal destiny, it's the most heart-tugging section of the book; never has Harry been more heroic than when he knows that only his death can save the wizard world. Letting him scamper away from that via some bizarre technicality—one we understand (insofar as we understand it) only thanks to another "we're at the end of the book, so it's time for Dumbledore to explain everything" soliloquy—feels like Rowling copping out. Could we have handled a Harry death? I think we could have. I think it would have ennobled him, and us. Of course, I'm 31, not 12.

It's a shame, because the whole Battle of Hogwarts section might be the best battle sequence in any of the books; I imagined it being directed by Peter Jackson. But to interrupt it twice, once with Dumbledore's odd King's Cross musings and once with the dip into Snape's memories—which means the most suspenseful, climactic moment of a 600,000-word series features Harry staring into a bowl—is contrary to the hard-charging, plot-driven, move move move nature of the other books. These books are about action; here, Rowling keeps dawdling in the midst of the main set piece.

This is the most lackadaisical of all the Potter books, I think. Not only is the conclusion spliced strangely, but the whole middle section, as you pointed out, Dan, is a rather dull and meandering road movie. I will now sum up an unusually long passage:

*** Harry, Hermoine, and Ron go on the run.
*** Harry, Hermoine, and Ron show up in a deserted hiding area and yell at each other because they're bored and scared.
*** Repeat.
*** Repeat.
*** Ron leaves because he's bored and scared.
*** Harry and Hermoine show up in a deserted hiding area and try not to yell at each other because they're bored and scared.
*** Ron comes back, and then the action (finally!) starts again.

I just summarized about 150 pages. I've always enjoyed the length of these books because they never felt like they were stalling; the world Rowling created was so expansive and alive that they almost felt too short. That's not the problem with this one; with this one, you want to scream, "Get them out of the damned forest! We haven't seen Snape in about 400 pages! Unless they're about to pull a Donner party, can we move on, please?"

And don't get me started about Snape. The most compelling character of the whole series has three scenes in the final book, and his big death scene involves him leaking blue memories about Harry's mom. Harrumph.

Man, I do sound grumpy, don't I? As always, I loved the physical experience of reading the book; perhaps I grouse because it's slowly dawning that that experience is now gone.

Hoping I'll feel more charitable tomorrow,
Will

SPOILER! The End of Harry Potter vs. the Sopranos Finale

Posted Monday, July 23, 2007, at 4:16 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
Dan Kois was the founding editor of New York magazine's arts and culture blog, Vulture. He lives in Arlington, Va. Will Leitch is the editor of Deadspin.com and the author of the young adult novel Catch. Brad Meltzer, a novelist and comics writer, is the author of The Book of Fate. Polly Shulman is the author of Enthusiasm, a novel for young adults.
Illustration by Charlie Powell.
COMMENTS

Remarks from the Fray Editor:

If you're spoiler shy... If you're following Harry Potter discussions... If you haven't yet finished the book... If you're experiencing all three of these conditions, yet you're reading this article... Then you, my friend, are a foolhardy reader.

There seem to be a lot of foolhardy readers out there.

If you're afraid of spoilers close your eyes. Close this page. Don't enter the Fray. Open your book and get finished already, so that you can join this discussion. Spoilers follow below. The Fray overfills with 'em.—G.A.

Remarks from the Fray:

I find it odd that people seem disappointed that 19 years down the road the characters lead seemingly humdrum lives, about which we don't hear much. [That's] just the point.

Folks, most people don't aspire to be under constant threat of death - mostly people want to live happy, relatively uneventful lives. They want to live in a house they love, do work they enjoy, raise kids, be comfortable. The fact that killing Voldemort allowed this to happen is, I think, poignant - Harry was never comfortable as the Boy Who Lived, and now he can finally get away from it. Maybe as readers we want excitement and adventure and really wild things on the page, but by not making Harry et al want these things, Rowling is respecting the characters she created.

On a certain level, I find it a profound commentary on what most people want out of life - not fame or fortune or power, but love and happiness. Odd that so many readers don't seem to see that.

--brennan

(To reply, click here.)

The continued short shrift that Harry gives Hermione is incredibly frustrating in this book, more than in any other. Perhaps Rowling's one effort to comment on this is when she complains about having to do all the cooking - which is not only immediately dismissed, but also like, come on! The one thing Hermione is going to complain about is something so easily dismissed by the unsympathetic reader as an 'age old' feminist complaint. How about the fact that Hermione does everything and never gets a shred of the credit, other than some astonished expressions and the occasional "Mione that's amazing!"

She is consistently the character who saves Harry's ass and I continue to be frustrated that in the last book Rowling does nothing to really acknowledge or challenge this within her book - it is not just enough to assume that readers who like Hermione are going to get it, especially when Harry remains on such a pedestal, or that the lack of thoroughgoing challenge to Harry and Ron's behavior will be picked up on by readers with feminist sympathies, especially when most readers do not share such sympathies! It is especially important to be challenging this, I think, in a children's book.

It is not really believable that Hermione wouldn't challenge Harry more when she so relentlessly stands up for those who are denied rights, equality, and dignity. Maybe it's that other tendency on her part (or Rowling's?) to view her guy(s) as the only ones who are not sexist - they're my best friends, how can they be sexist? etc

Does Rowling's overall failure to inject a feminist critique into Harry Potter reflect her desire to prevent the boys from having to engage in some serious self-critique, a caving in to popular dislike of feminism, or her own discomfort with feminism?

--heypop

(To reply, click here.)

The Problem with the final Harry Potter book is lack of sex. In books 5-6 the students at Hogwarts slowly start to come to terms with their maturing attitudes to the opposite sex. Rowling deftly negotiates the concerns and fears of adolescence as they begin to date, and finally "snog". Throughout book 6 Rowling has various students, including Ron, Harry, and Ginny snogging constantly as they realize their emerging desires.

In book 7 Rowling starts with a great scene showing Harry's awkward attitude towards himself, his body, and his friends. "He felt like asking them to show a little more respect for his privacy as they all began stripping off with impunity, clearly much more at ease with his body then they would have been with their own." This one line gives much insight into the mindset of a 17 year old and allows Harry and his friends to seem believable.

When you contrast that with the 3 teens spending months living together in a forest, with no one supervising, and no one else to disturb them and yet there's no real awkwardness or tension ever described, you begin wonder why Rowling took her characters and replaced them with figurines. By the time Rowling has the plot moving she's turned each of them into an extreme example of their singular character traits. Never is it more apparent then when each wishes for their favorite Deathly Hallow.

Had she bothered making her characters continuously feel real, she could have actually written an interesting finale to the book...rather than a plot-driven bore upheld by at least half a dozen deux ex machina moments.

--Joschenker

(To reply, click here.)

(7/25)

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
TODAY'S DOONESBURY
TODAY'S VIDEO
On the move.61/091110_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on Barack Obama.77/091110_TC.jpg
With a capital I.80/091110_TD.jpg