Lois & Clark Forums Forums General Discussion Off Topic Harry Potter 6: SPOILERS!!!!!

OK - Anyone coming into this thread must be prepared for SPOILERS about Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. If you don't like SPOILERS, don't read any more. Back out quickly and close this window until you've read the book.


L
A
S
T

W
A
R
N
I
N
G

F
O
R

S
P
O
I
L
E
R
S


Whew.

Alright, I finished this book at 3 a.m. Sunday morning. Started it after I got home from the midnight party but I was so sleepy I only got to page 30 or so. Then I spend all day yesterday (except for those half a dozen hours of family time) reading.

And WOW!

Never in a million years did I expect what happened to happen. Of all the characters who might have been killed off, only Ron, Hermione or Harry would have shocked me more. And how it happened and by who was almost as big of a freak for me as who it happened to. I kept expecting Snape to turn around and point his wand the other way.

Now I'm completely at a loss about Snape. Through the last five books, I've detested him right along side Harry because of how nasty he's been. Except I've always figured there was something we (the readers and Harry) didn't know that explained why Dumbledore trusted him so much. I figured eventually we would learn a big secret, and even after Chapter 2 of HP6, when Snape made that Unbreakable Vow with Draco's mother, I figured he was acting as some kind of double agent.

So now I have no idea what to think. Clearly he is evil. Clearly he is working for the dark side. So why do I keep thinking there is some other explanation? Why do I keep expecting Dumbledore to pull a Gandalf and explain that Snape had faked everything?

How about those romances?! I've always had a thing for Hermione and Ron. It's so great to see them acting like real 16 year olds. I loved how Harry just suddenly realized his feelings about Ginny. The monster that grew in his chest! What a great analogy.

Really, I'd have to say that out of the six books so far, I think this one is my favorite.

And I cannot believe I now have to wait two or so years to see how it all ends. Ugh!

Lynn

Wait! I thought there were spoilers! Who died? Tell me!!! I need to know . I just ordered my book today, so I won't get to read there for a few weeks. So who dies? What does Snape do?

I need *real* spoilers .

Laura, are you serious? I will be happy to tell you, either here or via private e-mail. I just didn't want to totally come out and say it just in case you don't really want them...

I'm hoping this thread becomes a great discussion where we will talk about events which constitute huge spoilers, thus my big time spoiler warnings. But since it's still too soon, I was afraid of going overboard. But I'm happy to tell you if you really do want to know.

Lynn

Snape was the biggest surprise to me. I had a feeling near the beginning that I knew who wasn't going to make it, and I was right.

But Snape.... I always felt a little sorry for him after finding out how he had been tormented by James Potter and friends. I just figured that he couldn't have been as bad as he was portrayed to be.

And now we have to wait for book 7. Sigh. I'm in withdrawal already.

Irene

I find it very hard to believe that anyone over the age of 12 would read these books.

Tank (who was forced to listen to about an hour of one of the Harry Potter books on tape and was immensly unimpressed)

Tank, I know that the maxim "different strokes for different folks" applies very much in the case of reading material choices. But I have to say - and honestly, no offense intended toward you - that I really do think that believing that these books can only be appreciated by children and that adults are in some way "off" if they enjoy them shows a lack of open mindedness that staggers me. I read an editorial printed in the LA Times wherein the writer actually called adult readers of the HP books "stupid." I won't use the word for what I thought of this particular writer whom I have no doubt has read not one word of the books himself yet condescends to pass judgment on those who have.

And I won't try to convince you otherwise regarding what I see as the incorrectness in your statement because it would be a pointless and wasted effort. You are certainly entitled to believe that these books are meant for children and only children should enjoy them. However, IMO, unless you've read all the books, I think it's a bit presumptious to make such a broad statement.

Kind of like someone wondering why any rational adult would love watching a show about a man who flies around in tights after only having watched the opening credits.

Lynn

Absolutely 100% serious!

I'm still reading and I've chosen to be spoiled. Now I don't know all the circumstances surrounding the murder but my thoughts, based on chapter 2, are:

What if he's not really dead, that it was a trick so that Moldyshorts believes that Snape is still loyal to him?

Again, because I am not up to that part yet, I don't know the details yet. I only know what I've managed to uncover before I got my hands on the book. I do know that JKR has said that the reason why DD trusts Snape so much is revealed in this book ... has it been?

I'm a little disappointed at the ships in this book, but hey, they are only in school and my AU fanfic will live on. <G> You would be amazed how many H/H shippers are abondoning their writing ... I think that's being a little over sensative but it's their call. )

I'm getting there, slowly but surely.

Coming from a huge fan of comic books, this is hilarious, Tank

PJ

A couple of months ago, I was watching the 'newsround' on the BBC (a news programme designed for children), and they had a story about who was likely to die. Apparently, a couple of people working at the printers had apparently placed bets at the local betting shop. I was really cross, because the story came out of nowhere, no spoiler warning or anything.

So, anyway, I wasn't surprised about who died. (And I half expected it, anyway. Mind you, my guess would have been that the person who died would have met their end in a different way. Oh, yeah. I had theories which are so wrong it's now painful to think of them.)

What I didn't expect was the whole thing with Snape. I'm still in shock. Completely and utterly.

Chris (still incoherent)

While my oldest daughter has read everyone of these books up to number five (we're saving 6 for Grandma to buy) and I'm a big fan of the movies, I still say Rowling has nothing on the Brothers Grimm or Hans Christian Andersen.

Now THOSE guys were scary!

TEEEEEEJ/who recalls a certain comic book store is quite full of superhero plush toys and action figures for childern of ALL ages Tank

P.S. tell those stock guys I want those Black Fury temporary tatoos next time I come in.

Actually, there's a very long tradition of fantasy for children being appreciated by adults. Long before JK Rowling. IMO, the very best of children's fantasy are the ones that can also be appreciated by the young at heart, no matter what their age. The Narnia novels are one example. Enjoyed by generations, from 8 - 80, as they say.

I worked in a library for ten years and I found more than once that the children's' fantasy authors wrote the most complex, enthralling stories I'd ever read. They can certainly hold their own among the adults. And sometimes they can beat them into a cocked hat.

For myself, I've never let it bother me what age group a book is supposedly aimed at. What matters to me, purely and simply, is whether it's a darn good rollicking tale.

And certainly for many adults and children the HP novels hit the spot.

I haven't actually been bitten by the HP bug. I may well read them at some point, but at the moment there are so many other books on my to read list that are ahead of them on the list.

Even so, I came into this thread because I'm intrigued by the discussion, regardless. Perhaps I might read something that sparks that interest. Who knows? Or maybe I'll just enjoy vicariously the sheer pleasure so many take in these novels and wish them well of it, remembering the pleasure I've taken in my own most favourite books.

Enthusiasm is always engaging imo. Whether you share it or not.


LabRat

Okay, Laura, you asked for it.

I'm sure you've guessed by now that one of the key characters dies, and that key character is Dumbledore. It's not too hard to figure out if you see that there is a lot of time spent on this character during the balance of the book - we finally have some major Dumbledore action.

What really shocked me most, though, is that Snape is the one who kills him. Flat out, cold. And from all indications, it was really Snape (not someone dressed up like Snape) and Dumbledore is really dead (as opposed to a missing body).

What I didn't like at all was the reasons given for Dumbledore's blind trust in Snape all these years. Apparently, Snape was the one who ran to Voldemort with the prophecy information which lead to Voldemort going to the Potters and killing James and Lily and almost killing Harry. Even though Snape hated James with a passion, supposedly he felt horrible about his part in the deaths and confessed all to Dumbledore, including a lot of rubbish about regrets. This remorse is supposedly the reason Dumbledore has always trusted Snape. I find this kind of flimsy since Dumbledore has always been portrayed as a very wise person and good judge of character.

Like I said in my first post, I'm still not 100% convinced that Snape is truly a bad guy. I mean, I know that nothing is written in stone about what JK Rowling *has* to do, but six books' worth of ambiguity about Snape's loyalty all to have him turn to the dark side now seems like a really big cheat. I'm already having a hard enough time with Dumbledore's death in that he's one of the Big Good Guys who I imagined would make it to the very end.

I guess we'll find out in two years!

Lynn

Oh my god. I finished the book at 1 in the morning. I'm still speechless.

Ditto...there's...just something fishy about the whole thing. I mean for Snape to spend all this time at Hogwarts, only to be Voldemort's agent the whole time? He coulda 86'ed Dumbledore from day 1 and gone onto something else. Or at least, that's what I would have done.

Me either, but...I don't know. I guess if you want badly enough to believe that someone's telling the truth *shrug*... Kinda reminds me of a certain superhero who wants to believe there's good in everyone. <g>

My latest thought is, I don't get why Snape tried to stop Quirrell from stealing the stone in Book 1 if he's really been on Voldey's side all this time.

K, I'm out of thoughts for now,
Jen

Ooohhh, good point, Jen. Why wouldn't Snape have snatched the stone (and remember, Harry suspected Snape of doing just that!) back in Book 1, despite the fact that such a turn would have negated Books 2 thru 7?

Annette - I meant to remark on your shipper comment. So, are there really people out there who expected an H/H pairing? That totally baffles me because so many huge hints have been dropped all along that Hermione and Ron would eventually end up together. Even in the PoA movie, one of my favorite moments is when H, H, and R are watching what they think is the execution of Buckbeak, and Hermione turns to Ron in her grief and he comforts her. Harry was also standing right there, but she instinctively turned to Ron. I figured JKR had to approve that scene as it was script-written with directions to the actors, so it's what she intended.

I figure Harry will remain partner-less with maybe just a hint of a future with Ginny by the end of Boook 7. I figure as the Chosen One, he has to be kind of a loner. Also, I figured if H and H ever got together, the balance of the trio would shift too much. I think of Harry, Hermione and Ron as a triangle, with Hermione and Ron as the base and Harry as the tip. If Harry paired up with Hermione, the entire structure tilts to one side and Ron is left out. But if Hermione and Ron get together, they form a more stable base for Harry. I know, kinda of weird reasoning.

And I liked Harry with Ginny. I liked the idea of the little sister with the crush who turned into the young lady with so much appeal that Harry's eyes are finally opened. *sigh*

Lynn

Okay, I just finished the book five minutes ago. And all I can say is

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!

I think I would have preferred even Ron or Hermione to die than Dumbledore. But the worst thing was that I was reading something about this book on a newspaper website around midnight UK time on Friday and I almost clicked on a link with more stuff about the expected sales... and then I saw the URL. The last words of the URL were Dumbledore_death. I was furious. I had no idea if it was speculation, a real spoiler or something unrelated to the specific book. But it meant that I was half-expecting, half-afraid of this happening all along.

As for it being Snape... well, I'm appalled too. It's almost doing the expected, making him one of the bad guys. All along, he's seemed to be bad but in fact was good - he saved Harry's life in Book 1 and helped save the Philosopher's Stone; he helped Lupin; he helped Dumbledore; he gave Umbridge fake potions; and so on. I find it hard to buy him being a bad guy all along - and, like Lynn and others, Dumbledore's reason for trusting him is way, way too thin.

So my bottom line is that I really didn't like the last few chapters. Bad choice of character death, for me - though I see Harry's point about every one of his protectors having been taken from him so now he has to stand up for himself - bad setting up for Snape to be a bad guy after all, and - at least, I think - bad decision on Harry's part to stay away from school next year. It feels too stupidly noble, and too clichéd - the brave hero has to walk away from everyone he knows and loves so that he won't bring any harm to them.

Roll on Book 7, all the same - and I'm hoping I'll like the way things turn out! But something about the series is spoiled for me now - I'm not looking forward to the next book the way I was with the last two.


Wendy

I'm still halfway through book 4 (have been for a couple of years as it hasn't really fascinated me as much as 1, 2 and 3 yet), so I thought I'd read this thread as by the time I read book 6, we'll all be old and retired.

Anyway, I'm not entirely surprised that Dumbledore is the one who dies. However, I'm really, really amazed that Snape is the one who kills him, and I really hope there's some kind of trick where it turns out he's not the one doing that.

Like what you guys said, I always thought Snape was not really a bad guy, but just a very strict teacher. Okay, he's the head of Slytherin, but if Slytherin was totally bad, would it stay at Hogwart's? Unless Dumbledore somehow thinks he needs a balance between good and evil, but that would be kind of been there, done that, for plenty of other books and other creative works. And yes, he actually saved Harry's life in The Philosopher's Stone. So why would he do that if he'd been the one giving out the information to Voldemort about where Harry and his parents were hiding?

Also, as a H/H shipper, I'm of course not very keen on the Hermione/Ron relationship, although it was of course very much expected. Oh well, there's always fanfic.

I'll still read the book, though... once I finally manage to get past book 4 and race through book 5.

Kaethel

I finished this book yesterday, and boy, was I depressed. I mean how could Dumbledore die, and why did it have to be Snape?! WHY!!! I'm tempted to find an address and grab the pitchforks and torches. But something strikes me... Before book 5 came out, there were of course rumors of someone dying. Jo confirmed this, and said she cried when she wrote that chapter. I haven't heard anything like that about this book, though. Hrm... (yes, I'm trying to delude myself)

As far as the relationships go, ooooh, I was gloating for most of the book. I can't help it, but I was. Well, that and looking for a good heavy cast-iron skillet, because Hermione and Ron were just being stupid.

I don't really think this one will be my favorite of the series. In fact, it's my least favorite. Not just because of the deaths, but because it seems like a fanfic, and not in a good way. More like what I'd find in another fandoms. I had to keep reminding myself that I'm reading a bound book, and not electronic format. It was unsettling.

My comment was not meant as an attack on any idividual (and I apologise to any who took it as such). Rather it's an opinion of the books and the writing style from the exposure that I've personally had with them.

I'm all for anything that will get kids to read, and for that I think the books have done a great service. I also (as was pointed out) am someone who has read comic books for years and read fantasy of many kinds, including the Narnia books (though that was a long long time ago). But as I mentioned, I was subjected to several chapters of one of the books on tape sometime back and found the author's style not to my liking.

I could see where her writing might appeal to a younger crowd, but I didn't feel the duality of levels that would allow an adult to enjoy the work also.

Maybe the fact that the main characters are all children was a factor in my assessment. I mean, really, who could enjoy any story centered around children as the main protagonists?

Tank (who also is negatively predisposed to anything given the amount of pre-release hype that these books get)

Warning, many detailed spoilers ahead.


...
...
...

...

...


...


...


...


....
Apparently like everyone else, I finished the book sometime in the wee hours of Saturday night/Sunday morning. I have to admit I wasn't terribly surprised that Dumbledore was the one to be killed. I kept hoping I was wrong but was disappointed to find out he was the one. It does make a bit of sense. If Harry's to stand on his own two feet, he does have to get out from under Dumbledore's protection.

I also wasn't surprised it was Snape who killed him. After all, Snape did take the Unbreakable Vow at the beginning of the book. If Draco failed, he was obligated to kill Dumbledore else the cost was his own life. Whether he took it as a calculated risk that his cover or his life was more important than Dumbledore's or whether he really was evil, we'll find out in book 7. I simply couldn't see Draco killing anyone, no matter how bratty he was.

And considering how noble Dumbledore was, I wouldn't have put it past him to consider that he was sacrificing himself for Harry's sake and telling Snape to kill him since it wasn't like him to plead. He kept saying that Harry's life was worth far more than his. Of course I have no idea why Dumbledore didn't do a freeze on the person coming through the door, thus allowing himself to be disarmed unless he thought there was an army coming through instead of just Draco.

Maybe Dumbledore intends to come back like Obi-Wan Kenobi? <g> "Harry, you will go to Godric's Hollow. There you will learn from R.A.B., the Wizard Master who instructed me."

Consider that Snape stopped someone from killing Harry. Would Voldemort really be all that upset if Harry was dead because of an overenthusiastic Death Eater? That's another possibility pointing to Snape's redemption. I still think he's really evil, though. Anyone besides me keep thinking "Abra Cadabra" every time someone invokes the killing curse, "Avada Kedavra"?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't the bad guys say that Dumbledore's greatest weakness was his trust in people's goodness? If so, the most powerful wizard in the world could conceivably be fooled by a truly evil Snape.

If JK Rowling did reveal the reason behind Dumbledore's trust in Snape to be his regret that he got James and Lily killed, it was a truly lame reason. Nobody's that stupid.

As for Snape being the Half-blood Prince, that threw me for a loop. While I suspected him near the beginning since Snape was the Potions master, the age of the book made me think otherwise. Since the book was 50 years old, I figured it had to be someone around the time of Tom Riddle. I even thought that Tom Riddle might have been the HBP since he was born of a Muggle father. Or it might have been Slughorn since he was the new Potions master who had been around at the time of Tom Riddle. I tossed that theory when it was revealed that Slughorn was a teacher 50 years ago and not a student.

Anyone have a guess as to the identity of R.A.B.? Whoever it is has to be a very powerful good wizard, though, to get through the trap. A wild guess on my part would be Slughorn since he seems to be the only one identified who knows what a Horcrux is. And he was bitterly regretful that he had told Tom Riddle what it was.

What I thought was amusing was that once again, Hogwarts couldn't keep a Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher for longer than one year. That was another reason I suspected Snape might be a bad guy. The first thing I thought when Snape was made DDA teacher was that, "uh oh, Snape's not going to be a teacher next year." LOL

As for Tank's contention that the writing style wasn't to his taste, I have to agree with him in that regard. I tried reading the Sorcerer's Stone many years ago but could never get past Chapter 2. I simply didn't care for the style, thinking it was too childish. So that book went by the wayside. It wasn't until this last December that I saw the three movies over two nights that made me even remotely interested in the series. When I got back from my European trip, I read all five books in early January this year. The plot was interesting enough to get me past the slow parts at the beginning.

Anyone know why Rowling titled the first book, "The Sorcerer's Stone," in the United States and "The Philosopher's Stone" everywhere else in the world? Seems a bit strange to have to publish different English language versions and film two different sets of scenes just for that minor difference.

Anyway, I enjoyed the book. It was very suspenseful and hard to put down. The series had definitely left the realm of children's books around the time of "The Prisoner of Azkaban" and arguably around the time of "The Chamber of Secrets." That was one scary basilisk. The series is far too dark for small kids. In the last book, I can't even think of a part that's FOR children. I won't even consider letting my kids see these until they're ten or so, and even then, with serious parental supervision.