Harry Potter Book 7 *SPOILERS*

[Maleficent13]

Everyone keeps talking about someone who got a "reprieve" and someone who "found magic late in life". What is this about? Did I miss something in the beginning of the book? I will say that I purposely avoided all articles and discussions about the book before I read it - didn't want to spoil anything.

JKR alluded to these things in interviews prior to the book's release. Sort of like teasers for us.

 

[Jockaroo]

In my mind, there is a second white tomb on the grounds of Hogwarts, near Dumbledore and honoring Severus Snape. I was pleased with the way the Snape subplot played out. Since his worst memory, I always thought he loved Lily and on a re-read, wondered if he was the boy who discussed the dementors with Lily and Petunia. The way Petunia turned her jealousy of Lily into a repulsion of the magic world was also mirrored in Snape's dislike of Harry due to the hatred of his father, but the need to protect him for Lily.

I'm still fuzzy about how the scene in the forest played out. Harry walked out unarmed and allowed Voldemort to "kill" him, yet it was the horcrux that was ultimately destroyed (bit of Voldemort's soul). I understand that the wand did not work correctly, however, I was wondering if Harry did not die because the invisibility cloth was folded at his chest. Did the cloak allow Harry to escape death, or was it as another poster suggested, that the wand could not kill its rightful owner? Any ideas on this. I know I need to go back and enjoy a more leisurely read and will pick up more the second time around.

 

[eclectics]

I wish there had been a chapter right before the epilogue, one where they buried Fred and Remus and Tonks. I just felt like there could have been more closure after the battle.

That was my wish also. Personally, I also would have liked to have read that Dolores Umbridge finally got her comeuppance.
Otherwise, I thought the book was excellent. I think J.K. handled the ending very cleverly. She can leave it as it is, because she let us know Harry, Ron and Hermione end up just fine, or she could someday pen a book(s) explaining the time gap in detail. Either one is okay.

 

[piglet too]

Just a quick thoughts on what I have read here.

Rose ~ I do not think her name came from the MOM stuff of the weed strangling the rose. Hermione is a "mudblood" thus it was her strangling the rose, a "pureblood" or Ron.

I thought it was very touching when Dumbledore tells Snape that he sometimes feel that they sort the houses to soon. Also liked how Harry tells Albus that he can tell the Sorting Hat where he wants to go.

 

[U2_rocks!]

I'm still fuzzy about how the scene in the forest played out. Harry walked out unarmed and allowed Voldemort to "kill" him, yet it was the horcrux that was ultimately destroyed (bit of Voldemort's soul). I understand that the wand did not work correctly, however, I was wondering if Harry did not die because the invisibility cloth was folded at his chest. Did the cloak allow Harry to escape death, or was it as another poster suggested, that the wand could not kill its rightful owner? Any ideas on this. I know I need to go back and enjoy a more leisurely read and will pick up more the second time around.

I'm a little fuzzy too - I need to reread the "naked Harry" chapter, where Dumbledore tells Harry he's actually still alive. Harry was sure he was going to his death in the forest, but after the naked scene in King's Cross he understands what he has to do to destroy V and still live himself. So D must have said something in that scene - I just don't remember all the details, I was reading so fast at that point, I needed to be sure that Harry did live!

 

[WaltD4Me]

Haven't had a chance to read through all of the responses, but I'm really confused on something.

Everyone keeps talking about someone who got a "reprieve" and someone who "found magic late in life". What is this about? Did I miss something in the beginning of the book? I will say that I purposely avoided all articles and discussions about the book before I read it - didn't want to spoil anything.

I REALLY enjoyed the book and like others found myself crying in several places. I wish there had been a chapter right before the epilogue, one where they buried Fred and Remus and Tonks. I just felt like there could have been more closure after the battle.

Both these things are things JKR talked about in interviews or on her website.
She said there would be someone who came into magic later in life and that when she was writing the last chapter, there was originally someone who was going to die, but didn't and two others died instead.

I agree about having a chapter before the epilogue with a funeral and maybe a little wrap up, like Mc Gonagel being appointed Head Master, opening up Azkaban again for the captured Death Eaters, that kind of thing.

Also, I've been thinking how odd it was for the Malfoy family to be sitting in the Great Hall in the end. I mean through six books, Lucius was truly evil, not borderline like Malfoy. Lucius seriously was aiming a killing curse at Harry at the end of Chamber of Secrets...so I can see Narcissa and Draco in that scene, but Lucius just doesn't fit.

 

[mickeyfan2]

In my mind, there is a second white tomb on the grounds of Hogwarts, near Dumbledore and honoring Severus Snape. I was pleased with the way the Snape subplot played out. Since his worst memory, I always thought he loved Lily and on a re-read, wondered if he was the boy who discussed the dementors with Lily and Petunia. The way Petunia turned her jealousy of Lily into a repulsion of the magic world was also mirrored in Snape's dislike of Harry due to the hatred of his father, but the need to protect him for Lily.

I'm still fuzzy about how the scene in the forest played out. Harry walked out unarmed and allowed Voldemort to "kill" him, yet it was the horcrux that was ultimately destroyed (bit of Voldemort's soul). I understand that the wand did not work correctly, however, I was wondering if Harry did not die because the invisibility cloth was folded at his chest. Did the cloak allow Harry to escape death, or was it as another poster suggested, that the wand could not kill its rightful owner? Any ideas on this. I know I need to go back and enjoy a more leisurely read and will pick up more the second time around.

Harry was the true master of the Elder Wand. A wand will not kill it's master. So when Voldemort used the killer curse on Harry it only killed that that was not it's master, ie V's soul fragment. V was thrown back as a response to his soul frament being killed by himself. Harry never died but accompanied V's soul fragment to the other side before returning to earth. Harry had to see what V had become to try to save him. If V showed remorse all the other 7 soul fragments would have jointed back with him.

 

[snowy76]

Just re-reading a bit...

Anyone else notice the line on page 707? D says to Harry, "You wonderful boy. You brave, brave man. Let us walk."

Italics mine.
I just love that bit. Harry has become a man - D knows this and finally shares all his secrets with Harry, man to man.

I also love that Harry is given a choice - basically to die (I think they describe it as boarding a train at King's Cross) or to return to fight again. Harry no longer fears what death will be like - he faced it willingly - as D says, he becomes the true master of Death because he already accepted that he must die. His worst fear - dying - has been overcome - he can take on Voldemort without fear - and V thrived on that. He can't frighten Harry anymore.

 

[Amy]

I'm a little fuzzy too - I need to reread the "naked Harry" chapter, where Dumbledore tells Harry he's actually still alive. Harry was sure he was going to his death in the forest, but after the naked scene in King's Cross he understands what he has to do to destroy V and still live himself. So D must have said something in that scene - I just don't remember all the details, I was reading so fast at that point, I needed to be sure that Harry did live!

Ok, this part confused me, too, so I looked on Wikipedia. Here are some excerpts that I think explain it, the first is when "naked Harry" meets Dumbledore in Kings Cross:

He meets the deceased Albus Dumbledore, who explains that Harry cannot die while the blood carrying Lily's protection resides in Voldemort's body. He further explains that the part of Voldemort's soul within Harry has been destroyed by the Avada Kedavra curse.

Ok, so in one of the prior books, Voldemort drank some of Harry's blood, so while Voldemort is alive (i.e., the blood w/Lily's protection resides in V's body), Harry cannot die. But Voldemort can be killed, even though he has Harry's blood in him??

And here's the part about the final battle:

Harry confronts Voldemort. Harry realises that Draco Malfoy was the true master of the Elder Wand, for it was Draco who had disarmed Dumbledore and thus beaten him in battle, while Snape was acting according to a wandless Dumbledore's wishes when he killed him. Harry subsequently disarmed Draco, and thus, mastery of the Elder Wand has passed to Harry, not to Voldemort. Voldemort fires Avada Kedavra at Harry, and at the same time Harry fires Expelliarmus at Voldemort. The Elder Wand refuses to kill its master and the spell rebounds, killing Voldemort.

Here's a link to the Wikipedia summary of the book, if any of you need a refresher: Wikipedia

 

[Duchie]

JKR alluded to these things in interviews prior to the book's release. Sort of like teasers for us.

Ah - well, that explains it then! Thanks for clearing that up for me.

 

[XOoOoVEEoOoOX]

The whole dead/not dead scene explains that when Voldemort took some of Harry's blood into himself he tied them together even more,Harry is tied to Voldemort through the piece of Voldemorts soul and Voldemort to Harry through the blood he took in (blood that has the enchantment from Lily's sacrifice) So when Vold "killed" Harry he killed that piece of his soul that was in Harry, but since Harry's enchanted blood was still in him, Harry didnt die, and was able to return, finally completely free of Voldemort.

At least thats the way I interpreted it .....

 

[Lanshark]

I thought Harry not dying had to do with the Deadly Hallows.

He had the cloak, the stone and the wand so he cheated death

 

[U2_rocks!]

I thought Harry not dying had to do with the Deadly Hallows.

He had the cloak, the stone and the wand so he cheated death

I wondered about that too, b/c he got the snitch open as he was headed to the forest, and the Resurrection Stone was in it. That made him Master of Death.

 

[Plantlady]

I wondered about that too, b/c he got the snitch open as he was headed to the forest, and the Resurrection Stone was in it. That made him Master of Death.

But didn't he drop the stone, before he reached Voldemort? I don't have my copy so, I can't double check (DH took it to work with him).

Didn't Dumbledore explain, that it was because Voldemort took some of Harry's blood, that he could live, because part of him was still alive within Voldemort?

Again, can't double check, but I think it was explained by Dumbledore.

 

[snowy76]

Also, I've been thinking how odd it was for the Malfoy family to be sitting in the Great Hall in the end. I mean through six books, Lucius was truly evil, not borderline like Malfoy. Lucius seriously was aiming a killing curse at Harry at the end of Chamber of Secrets...so I can see Narcissa and Draco in that scene, but Lucius just doesn't fit.

I agree with that on one level, but what if Lucius had died? Then we might have seen Draco wanting revenge or something - then we have an unresolved plot line. But I think JKR wants us to see that even the Malfoys show, in the end, that they value family above all else. Their only concern in Draco.

Also, I think JRK was trying to put Lucius in a more and more pitiful state throughout Book 7 - he has clearly fallen from favor - in some ways I think he had almost become like Wormtail. Remember in GoF how V points out that Wormtail was a faithful servant out of fear, not loyalty? I think the Malfoys were finally at that point themselves - you see in book 6 how V basically used Draco to do his dirty work and had no problem threatening Lucius and Narcissa if Draco didn't perform. Then V takes Lucius's wand - basically strips Lucius of his status as a wizard. Later on, after Harry escapes from the Malfoy's dungeon, there is a line about Lucius having been beaten or tortured (right before he gets Snape so that V can kill him). The Malfoys have few reasons to remain loyal to V.

 

[XOoOoVEEoOoOX]

I wondered about that too, b/c he got the snitch open as he was headed to the forest, and the Resurrection Stone was in it. That made him Master of Death.

Possesing these things isn't what makes him master of death, it was accepting his own death that made him the master over it.

 

[triplefigs]

I am so tired. Got the book at 10pm last night and read straight thru. Now I need sleep to process the details and then will re-read it. I am very pleased overall. Exhausted but pleased!

 

[wendy46001]

I thought Harry not dying had to do with the Deadly Hallows.

He had the cloak, the stone and the wand so he cheated death

Actually he didn’t have the wand yet, while he was its master Vold still held on to it...and He said he dropped the stone at the end...saying he will not go looking for it....So it was the bond between Vold and Him is what kept him alive, not the Hallows...is how i took it....

 

[sabrinadv1]

Someone posted awhile back about Neville possibly being the chosen one. I think that she did show us more of this. She showed that Neville could have been just as dangerous to Voldermort as Harry. He took up leading the students while Harry was gone. At the moment everyone thought everything was lost Neville never gave up and was willing to die to take out the snake just because Harry told him it was important. Neville lost nearly as much as Harry did in the whole series and yet he turned out very brave and loyal. He too had just as many choices as Harry did about which way his life could have turned out. At the beginning we kind of think that he should have been in Hufflepuff because he seemed weak and mild mannered. However he turned out just the opposite. At the point where he went screaming Dumbledore's Army at Voldermort I had chills only Neville could have been the one to do that.

 

[U2_rocks!]

Possesing these things isn't what makes him master of death, it was accepting his own death that made him the master over it.

Yes, but can anyone be a master of death simply by accepting it, or does it have to be in conjunction with the 3 items?

Another poster just reminded me that Harry dropped the stone - I knew that, but couldn't remember where on the timeline that occured.

I'm still confused about the tie between Harry and V - why would Harry be the one protected by V having Harry's protective blood in him? I thought that would have protected V, if anything, not Harry! And let's say that both were protected to some degree by the tie between them and Lily's blood - why then was V killed so easily by the rebounding AK curse that he'd aimed at Harry? I can understand why Harry was able to repel the curse, but why did it kill V so easily? Was it something to do with the fact that he only had a tiny bit of soul left in his body (all the other pieces had been killed) and therefore he was very weak, and Harry's protective blood couldn't save him?