What I think of HBP so far
Haven't finished the book yet--although it was shipped from England on Friday morning there, the hardcover version hasn't arrived yet, thank you SO much, UPS--I've been reading an html version. Keep in mind that I've only just finished chapter 13.
Things I liked, or that amused me:
1. The scene in the Prime Minister's office; it was the kind of detail I'd wanted when Sirius had escaped from prison and Fudge had to tell the Prime Minister.
2. Romilda Vane, who keeps trying to get Harry's attention. Pure Bitchiwitch Sue. Whose name anagrams to "I'm a Dan lover!" Yeah, I think that JKR is making fun of the movie fans. Just a little.
3. Luna saying that being in Dumbledore's Army "was like having friends." Oh, Luna. My heart broke for you at that moment.
4. Learning (through spoilers) that Regulus was a brave young man, and not the soft idiot that Sirius claimed. As a writer of Regulus, this pleases me no end.
5. Snape. Complex. And intelligent. And conflicted. And interesting.
6. Well, none of my Peter stuff has been Jossed.
7. I think that Horace Slughorn's name is a shout-out to Willy Wonka's ambitious rival, Slugworth. It amused me, anyway. (I also found him very slightly creepy.)
8. Canon fodder. We got definite confirmation--Regulus and Andromeda were Slytherins, Sirius and Lily were Gryffindors. Also, Sirius and Regulus were both childless. Take THAT Daughter of Sirius Sues and Daughter of Regulus Sues!
9. The Gaunts. They amused me, because they were such blatant stereotypes. They were the kind of wizards who were thrown out of Deliverance for being too ugly, stupid and inbred. I kept waiting for dueling banjos. And hound dawgs.
10. Harry sassing Snape. Stupid thing to do, but very believable from a teenager.
11. Trelawney's fortunetelling with cards--and the foreshadowing therein.
Things I disliked:
1. Obviously, Sirius's will, which leaves everything to Harry and nothing to Remus. Whether you ship Remus and Sirius or not, canonically they were the best of friends, and Sirius treats Remus shabbily here.
And I don't think that the will could have been written pre-Azkaban. Sirius could not have left the house to Harry [as Dumbledore clearly says he meant to do] in 1981. The house is entailed, and until Harry, had to be inherited by a male Black. Regulus died in 1980, and Sirius was disowned. He would have had no title to the house, and no right to try to bestow something that he didn't own.
His father, however, was still alive in 1981, according to JKR, and still had a life estate in the house. Sirius only got the house because, although he was disowned, every other male surnamed Black predeceased him while he was in prison.
And no, I don't think he could have made a will leaving stuff to Harry that he hadn't owned pre-Azkaban but did post-Azkaban. That kind of sloppiness just leads to long involved probate cases and attempts to break the will. And it would have made Harry's inheritance far less secure.
So, to me, all this points to it being a post-Azkaban will. Sorry, fellow puppyshippers. (If you still prefer to see it as a pre-Azkaban will, that's fine with me.)
2. The wizarding world's attitude toward Muggles--contemptuous, patronising and arrogant. It shows up on both sides of the war, not just Voldemort's side, and that bothers me. There's no respect for Muggles or their considerable accomplishments in the entire series; even the wizards who are curious about them, like Arthur Weasley, are considered wildly eccentric. And over and over again, mind control and Memory Charms are justified...because they're ONLY Muggles, so it doesn't really matter. And we have to keep the wizarding world safe from them, after all. Wizards talk to and about Muggles as if they're potentially dangerous retarded children.
I almost like the Death Eaters better. I prefer honest hatred to pretended respect that hides fear and patronising contempt.
3. I really hated Dumbledore's behaviour toward the Dursleys. He KNOWS they are terrified of magic, so what does he do? Zap up stuff left and right. Conjures up drinks for them--knowing that they would have to wonder what spells the drinks would cast on them. It's unfair, bullying behaviour, and I wanted to slap him for it. And break his fucking wand.
4. Dumbledore's attitude toward non-magical people was appalling; his attitude toward young Tom was even worse. Basically, Chapter 13 broke down like this:
Mrs. Cole (Social Worker): I'm glad you're taking young Tom away. He hangs pet rabbits and tortures younger children.
Tom: I can make bad things happen to people who annoy me. I can make them hurt if I want to.
Dumbledore: Here, let me set fire to the wardrobe you keep your clothes in to show you that magic can help you set fire to things and to people.
And just to show the readers how moral and upright I am, and to make things easier for myself, let me mess with the mind of the non-magical social worker. Because controlling peoples' minds is only bad when bad people do it.
Dumbledore (50 years later): I had no idea that he was evil! Or a Dark Wizard! Or a potential serial killer! Why, to know that, I'd have to be a Legilimens--oh. Wait.
I have to wonder if Tom would have been better off getting some sort of mental or emotional healing, rather than being dumped in a world that hates, fears and patronises Muggles, and that says that pretty much anything goes, as long as you can do it magically and don't get caught.
5. She really doesn't want Peter to be a three-dimensional character, does she? All he got was a comic-relief cameo with him rubbing his hands together and being "'umble."
6. If blood doesn't matter and choices do, shouldn't Tom have come from a perfectly nice, if somewhat uptight, family? And shouldn't he have deliberately chosen to do evil, rather than being a born sociopath/psychopath?
7. I thought Parseltongue was the language of snakes. And that it was an insanely RARE talent. If those are both true, then how did Marvolo and Morfin Gaunt use Parseltongue to speak to each other? They were human, not snakes. And three people in one family with an insanely rare talent (Marvolo, Morfin and Tom) is too much. BAD JKR. Don't feed the Suethors!
8. Tonks. Weepy, pining for her man for a frelling YEAR! Tonks does not, in my view, fit the characterisation of the woman that we saw in OotP. I'm going to rely on this essay; it fits HBP canon and makes Tonks' behaviour credible.
9. The splitting of Voldemort's soul. I hate that. In the Catholic conception, a soul is a single indivisible entity. This violates twelve years of religious training, and even though I'd be at best an agnostic at this point, the notion jars me unpleasantly.
Moreover, I can't even find any basis in folklore for it. Putting your lifeforce in an egg or a stone or something, yes. But there's always only ONE receptacle. For ONE soul. AND it violates previous canon--when Voldemort was disembodied, he possessed lower animals, and possessed Quirrell. This is classic folklore behaviour for an evil soul or a demonic spirit. But PART of a soul...?
I'm having trouble suspending disbelief. It violates folklore. It violates previous canon. It certainly violates everything I ever believed religiously. The very idea has a nails-across-the-chalkboard feel to it. I don't like it.
That's how things stand now. Doubtless I'll mention other things that I like or don't like as I continue to read the book.
Things I liked, or that amused me:
1. The scene in the Prime Minister's office; it was the kind of detail I'd wanted when Sirius had escaped from prison and Fudge had to tell the Prime Minister.
2. Romilda Vane, who keeps trying to get Harry's attention. Pure Bitchiwitch Sue. Whose name anagrams to "I'm a Dan lover!" Yeah, I think that JKR is making fun of the movie fans. Just a little.
3. Luna saying that being in Dumbledore's Army "was like having friends." Oh, Luna. My heart broke for you at that moment.
4. Learning (through spoilers) that Regulus was a brave young man, and not the soft idiot that Sirius claimed. As a writer of Regulus, this pleases me no end.
5. Snape. Complex. And intelligent. And conflicted. And interesting.
6. Well, none of my Peter stuff has been Jossed.
7. I think that Horace Slughorn's name is a shout-out to Willy Wonka's ambitious rival, Slugworth. It amused me, anyway. (I also found him very slightly creepy.)
8. Canon fodder. We got definite confirmation--Regulus and Andromeda were Slytherins, Sirius and Lily were Gryffindors. Also, Sirius and Regulus were both childless. Take THAT Daughter of Sirius Sues and Daughter of Regulus Sues!
9. The Gaunts. They amused me, because they were such blatant stereotypes. They were the kind of wizards who were thrown out of Deliverance for being too ugly, stupid and inbred. I kept waiting for dueling banjos. And hound dawgs.
10. Harry sassing Snape. Stupid thing to do, but very believable from a teenager.
11. Trelawney's fortunetelling with cards--and the foreshadowing therein.
Things I disliked:
1. Obviously, Sirius's will, which leaves everything to Harry and nothing to Remus. Whether you ship Remus and Sirius or not, canonically they were the best of friends, and Sirius treats Remus shabbily here.
And I don't think that the will could have been written pre-Azkaban. Sirius could not have left the house to Harry [as Dumbledore clearly says he meant to do] in 1981. The house is entailed, and until Harry, had to be inherited by a male Black. Regulus died in 1980, and Sirius was disowned. He would have had no title to the house, and no right to try to bestow something that he didn't own.
His father, however, was still alive in 1981, according to JKR, and still had a life estate in the house. Sirius only got the house because, although he was disowned, every other male surnamed Black predeceased him while he was in prison.
And no, I don't think he could have made a will leaving stuff to Harry that he hadn't owned pre-Azkaban but did post-Azkaban. That kind of sloppiness just leads to long involved probate cases and attempts to break the will. And it would have made Harry's inheritance far less secure.
So, to me, all this points to it being a post-Azkaban will. Sorry, fellow puppyshippers. (If you still prefer to see it as a pre-Azkaban will, that's fine with me.)
2. The wizarding world's attitude toward Muggles--contemptuous, patronising and arrogant. It shows up on both sides of the war, not just Voldemort's side, and that bothers me. There's no respect for Muggles or their considerable accomplishments in the entire series; even the wizards who are curious about them, like Arthur Weasley, are considered wildly eccentric. And over and over again, mind control and Memory Charms are justified...because they're ONLY Muggles, so it doesn't really matter. And we have to keep the wizarding world safe from them, after all. Wizards talk to and about Muggles as if they're potentially dangerous retarded children.
I almost like the Death Eaters better. I prefer honest hatred to pretended respect that hides fear and patronising contempt.
3. I really hated Dumbledore's behaviour toward the Dursleys. He KNOWS they are terrified of magic, so what does he do? Zap up stuff left and right. Conjures up drinks for them--knowing that they would have to wonder what spells the drinks would cast on them. It's unfair, bullying behaviour, and I wanted to slap him for it. And break his fucking wand.
4. Dumbledore's attitude toward non-magical people was appalling; his attitude toward young Tom was even worse. Basically, Chapter 13 broke down like this:
Mrs. Cole (Social Worker): I'm glad you're taking young Tom away. He hangs pet rabbits and tortures younger children.
Tom: I can make bad things happen to people who annoy me. I can make them hurt if I want to.
Dumbledore: Here, let me set fire to the wardrobe you keep your clothes in to show you that magic can help you set fire to things and to people.
And just to show the readers how moral and upright I am, and to make things easier for myself, let me mess with the mind of the non-magical social worker. Because controlling peoples' minds is only bad when bad people do it.
Dumbledore (50 years later): I had no idea that he was evil! Or a Dark Wizard! Or a potential serial killer! Why, to know that, I'd have to be a Legilimens--oh. Wait.
I have to wonder if Tom would have been better off getting some sort of mental or emotional healing, rather than being dumped in a world that hates, fears and patronises Muggles, and that says that pretty much anything goes, as long as you can do it magically and don't get caught.
5. She really doesn't want Peter to be a three-dimensional character, does she? All he got was a comic-relief cameo with him rubbing his hands together and being "'umble."
6. If blood doesn't matter and choices do, shouldn't Tom have come from a perfectly nice, if somewhat uptight, family? And shouldn't he have deliberately chosen to do evil, rather than being a born sociopath/psychopath?
7. I thought Parseltongue was the language of snakes. And that it was an insanely RARE talent. If those are both true, then how did Marvolo and Morfin Gaunt use Parseltongue to speak to each other? They were human, not snakes. And three people in one family with an insanely rare talent (Marvolo, Morfin and Tom) is too much. BAD JKR. Don't feed the Suethors!
8. Tonks. Weepy, pining for her man for a frelling YEAR! Tonks does not, in my view, fit the characterisation of the woman that we saw in OotP. I'm going to rely on this essay; it fits HBP canon and makes Tonks' behaviour credible.
9. The splitting of Voldemort's soul. I hate that. In the Catholic conception, a soul is a single indivisible entity. This violates twelve years of religious training, and even though I'd be at best an agnostic at this point, the notion jars me unpleasantly.
Moreover, I can't even find any basis in folklore for it. Putting your lifeforce in an egg or a stone or something, yes. But there's always only ONE receptacle. For ONE soul. AND it violates previous canon--when Voldemort was disembodied, he possessed lower animals, and possessed Quirrell. This is classic folklore behaviour for an evil soul or a demonic spirit. But PART of a soul...?
I'm having trouble suspending disbelief. It violates folklore. It violates previous canon. It certainly violates everything I ever believed religiously. The very idea has a nails-across-the-chalkboard feel to it. I don't like it.
That's how things stand now. Doubtless I'll mention other things that I like or don't like as I continue to read the book.