Thoughts on HBP, SPOILERS GALORE!!!!!1!!1OMGWTFBBQ!!one!
I've ended up writing a veritable essay about my personal thoughts on Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince. It's long, and I guess it nearly goes without saying that it's chock-full of spoilers.
Harry's Character
I like how Harry's not TALKING LIKE THIS so much in HBP. I thought it was appropriate in OotP, given the way he was being kept so completely in the dark about most matters, but the fact that he emerges as a more thoughtful and observant character in the chapters of this book, and not just right at the end, cements for me the fact that he is growing up, making choices and decisions, sticking to his instincts and his loyalties. I like how he puts his foot down against being Scrimgeour's poster-boy. I like how he refuses to back down on Draco and Snape to his skeptical friends. His mistakes are there too, but he learns from them - failing Dumbledore with Slughorn's memory at first, he is reminded of the importance of getting his priorities straight. And the scene where he uses Sectumsempra on Draco is brilliant. It gives us an opportunity to see another difference between Harry and Tom Riddle, who we are reminded is similar to Harry in lots of ways. Would Tom Riddle have cared if he'd used Sectumsempra on an enemy and then seen the consequences without being previously aware of them? I don't think so. Harry, on the other hand, is mortified, and shocked at what he has done. The way that Harry grows up in mentality, resolve and character within the book is really good. The stage is being set for him to stand alone against Voldemort. Sad and horrific though it is, Dumbledore's death forces him to accept that he will be confronting Voldemort, in the end, on his own.
I had trouble wording that last part. It was kinda hard to express, so sorry if it didn't read very well!
One of the most compelling and gut-wrenching scenes in the book, for me, was when Harry had to keep making Dumbledore drink the potion to get to the locket. What a traumatic experience! One of the strongest, greatest people he knows is suddenly helpless and weak, in pain, tortured, and he, Harry, has to force Dumbledore to endure it. I was really touched by how Harry persuaded Dumbledore to keep drinking, keeping in mind that it must have been breaking his heart to do so. But it's another experience that Harry has to go through. Everything that he (and Dumbledore) has to go through is strengthening him, forcing him to stand on his own that little bit more. Could Harry have endured Dumbledore's death if it had occurred at the end of OotP? No, I don't think so. I think that on top of everything else, he would have cracked, or at least found it extremely difficult to continue with a clear direction. But at this point he is prepared more, both by the revelations about Tom Riddle/Voldemort in the Pensieve, and by what he has gone through with Dumbledore. And it doesn't hurt that he's had an extra year to think about things, to work out his priorities and how he feels about the death of Sirius and what it is he's heading for, foretold by the prophecy.
Snape: innocent or guilty?
I'm still not sure of my verdict on whether Snape is innocent or not, but I'm leaning heavily towards him being guilty. I've never *liked* Snape as a character, although I do think he is extremely well written, and I did feel sympathy for him for his treatment at the hands of James and Sirius. But is he innocent of betraying Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix? I find it hard to believe. If Dumbledore had known about the Unbreakable Vow, for instance - which if Snape had been fully on Dumbledore's side he surely would have told him about - then why didn't he mention it directly to Draco, instead of telling him that Snape had only been pretending to help him? I would have thought that if he had known, he would have mentioned it in some context during that scene. No, I think Snape geniunely hoodwinked Dumbledore over this. He is an accomplished occlumens, after all, and people do make mistakes. Even Dumbledore does and here, I think, is an example of misplaced trust, and wrong judgement on his part. So, getting back to the Unbreakable Vow - even if you argue that Snape was bound by it so he *had* to have helped Draco, there's still the fact that he willingly volunteered to help Draco when Narcissa went to him for help. Refusing wouldn't have discredited him, it would only have reinforced him as being a cruel, callous man, at least in the eyes of Narcissa, a Death Eater. And let's face it, most of the Death Eaters fit that description pretty well.
So again, if you argued that he was bound to help Draco by the Unbreakable Vow, if he was on the good side, why would he not then refuse to help Draco at the last minute? He could have sacrificed himself for Dumbledore - who then presumably could have helped Draco and hidden him and his family from Voldemort, like he said he would before the other Death Eaters and Snape arrived at the top of the tower. In my view at least, Dumbledore is far more important to the Order than Snape is, even if you argue that Snape is the Death Eater insider and double-agent. And even if it had been Dumbledore's intention that Snape kill him to save Draco and keep his own credentials with the Death Eaters safe so that he could carry on spying, what does that gain, now that the entire Order is now as likely to trust Snape's word as trusting oh, say, Rita Skeeter as their secret keeper?
R.A.B. and the fake Horcrux - another Black legacy?
R.A.B. - well, Dumbledore drinking that potion and weakening himself wasn't all for nothing. The locket at the bottom of the basin might have been a decoy and not a real Horcrux, and it might have been another cruel blow to discover after all that toil and suffering that it *wasn't* the real deal, but it still gives Harry his only clue as to the fate of the real locket.
I've seen theories that this mysterious 'R.A.B.' is Regulus Black, Sirius's brother. Personally, I'd go with this being the best bet. We know that Regulus died at the hands of the Death Eaters, and as someone pointed out in their analysis of this theory, in OotP there was a heavy locket found in one of the cabinets at Number 12, Grimmauld Place, while everyone was clearing out the junk. Nobody could open it - it had an enchantment on it. Riddle's diary turned up in a Death Eater's house, why not Slytherin's locket at the Black residence? Regulus could have hidden it there, intending to destroy it but never getting the chance to before his death.
This, if true, puts a spin on things. Mundungus is revealed in HBP as having stolen and pawned a lot of things from the former Black residence, and if he'd got hold of the locket, well, it could be anywhere. It could, alternatively, be in Kreacher's den after the House Elf's kleptomaniatic spree, in which case Harry, if he guessed it, would in theory have an easy time retrieving it (destroying it would be another thing entirely).
Mixed thoughts on the Horcruxes
I wondered, after finishing HBP, what role the Order would have to play in helping Harry find the rest of the Horcruxes. Dumbledore asked him not to tell anyone but his two closest friends, and before telling Harry about Riddle's past and recovering the Horcrux memory from Slughorn, he seemed to have gone about his search on his own. So this just leaves Harry, Ron and Hermione to find the remaining four on their own, does it? All within what will presumably be the equivalent of another year at Hogwarts, even if most of the action is away from the school? I don't know what to think about this. Knowing Harry and his loyalty to Dumbledore even in the event of Dumbledore's death, I suppose I'm more inclined to think that he *will* go it alone with his two friends. But then again, who knows? I'm already itching to read Book Seven and find out the answer to this, and JKR said she's not going to start full time on it until the end of this year!!!
I've also seen theories that Harry is one of the Horcruxes, and I'm not sure I find this plausible. Some people who go with this theory see Voldemort trying and failing to kill Harry directly the first time around (giving Harry his scar) as the moment when he unwittingly makes a Horcrux out of Harry. In HBP Dumbledore explains to Harry that Voldemort may have gone to Godric's Hollow intending to make a sixth and final Horcrux at the moment of Harry's death - but he fails, only avoids death because of his other Horcruxes, and then later on he uses his murder of an old muggle man to make a Horcrux out of Nagini, the snake. If Harry had supposedly been - however unwillingly - made into a Horcrux by Voldemort, there are four problems.
Firstly, if Voldemort was not aware of this then he would have gone on to make another Horcrux, which would bring the total to eight, not his desired number of seven. This leaves Harry with yet another object to find in book seven. Five unaccounted for Horcruxes, and his own self, an additional one.
If, on the other hand, Voldemort intentionally made Harry into a Horcrux, then why has he tried to kill him twice since his resurrection? Firstly, in GoF, Voldemort only fails to kill him with Avada Kedavra because Harry tries to disarm him at the same time. Then, in OotP, Voldemort clearly tries to kill Harry when he appears in the Ministry of Magic, and tries to taunt Dumbledore by inviting him to kill Harry if he does not fear death. Why would he desire Harry's ultimate destruction if a part of his soul was hidden away in him? We see evidence at the end of HBP that Voldemort still wants to kill Harry - Snape tells the other Death Eaters to leave Harry because he 'belongs to the Dark Lord'. It also makes sense that Voldemort is intent on destroying Harry because of the prophecy, even though he only heard part of it. Harry is supposed to have the power to vanquish Voldemort, and clearly that's not something Voldemort wants.
Another problem is that for Voldemort, contact with or possession of Harry is repellent. Dumbledore tells Harry in chapter thirty-seven of OotP that Voldemort cannot bear to possess Harry because of the power that Harry possesses, the one that the prophecy refers to - love. It saved him from death when Voldemort tried to kill him as a baby; surely it would not make sense for Voldemort's soul to reside inside his nemesis, whose blood was so full of that totally opposing power.
Lastly, the creation of a Horcrux is, we are told, an intentional process, requiring the performing of a certain spell. How could Voldemort have unintentionally and unknowingly made Harry into one?
The Imperius Curse, Tonks, and romance in HBP
The Imperius Curse had me guessing in this book. I thought that someone must be under it, to have given Katie Bell the cursed necklace, and when it was revealed that the package was handed over in the girls' bathroom, I was still guessing. But then when Harry bumped into Tonks who was pale, dishevelled, not acting in the same way that she had been during OotP and on her way to see Dumbledore, I thought it might be her. After all, she is stationed in Hogsmeade, so she could have been the one to hand the necklace over. And Harry wonders why she has left her post to go and see Dumbledore. She may not have been able to do much against Dumbledore, but as Dumbledore tells Draco, his attempts to kill Dumbledore haven't exactly been the works of genius, or at all successful.
So I was surprised, but pleasantly so, when it turned out to be Madam Rosmerta. I didn't suspect her (despite increased mention of her by characters such as Ron we don't really *see* that much of her in the book, to be fair), but to be honest I'm glad it was her rather than Tonks. She's not a member of the Order, so being under the Imperius curse is less likely to get her killed, and I prefer the real reason that Tonks was acting so strangely. Again, didn't see Tonks/Lupin coming, but it's great, as McGonagall says, that there is 'a little more love in the world'. Also, I can see them working as a pairing, however unexpected. They complement each other.
Talking of pairings in general - I liked how JKR did the romance in this book. The situations that the love-triangles created were funny, seemed about what you'd expect in any teenage school situation, and added a bit of tension. I always thought that Hermione and Ron would end up together (Harry's mental comparison of them to Mr and Mrs Weasley, anyone?) and I'm glad that Harry and Ginny did because their relationship, even pre-dating, has grown to be one of mutual friendship and respect in the last few books, but having a bit of drama along the way to happiness is always a good thing, and makes the shattering of the idyllic Hogwarts school scenario which occurs at the end even more complete. Another LJer pointed out in their thoughts on the book that the shattering of the Gryffindor hourglass is symbollic in portraying the end of happy, carefree Hogwarts days and the beginning of the tough and bloody journey to the end. I pretty much agree with this.
In conclusion, HBP is a great book. So far it's been really interesting looking around the internet and LJ and reading all the other fans' theories. I'm going to scurry off and carry on with that.
Wow. That went on. And on. And on and on. I guess I just had a lot of thoughts on the matter!
Harry's Character
I like how Harry's not TALKING LIKE THIS so much in HBP. I thought it was appropriate in OotP, given the way he was being kept so completely in the dark about most matters, but the fact that he emerges as a more thoughtful and observant character in the chapters of this book, and not just right at the end, cements for me the fact that he is growing up, making choices and decisions, sticking to his instincts and his loyalties. I like how he puts his foot down against being Scrimgeour's poster-boy. I like how he refuses to back down on Draco and Snape to his skeptical friends. His mistakes are there too, but he learns from them - failing Dumbledore with Slughorn's memory at first, he is reminded of the importance of getting his priorities straight. And the scene where he uses Sectumsempra on Draco is brilliant. It gives us an opportunity to see another difference between Harry and Tom Riddle, who we are reminded is similar to Harry in lots of ways. Would Tom Riddle have cared if he'd used Sectumsempra on an enemy and then seen the consequences without being previously aware of them? I don't think so. Harry, on the other hand, is mortified, and shocked at what he has done. The way that Harry grows up in mentality, resolve and character within the book is really good. The stage is being set for him to stand alone against Voldemort. Sad and horrific though it is, Dumbledore's death forces him to accept that he will be confronting Voldemort, in the end, on his own.
I had trouble wording that last part. It was kinda hard to express, so sorry if it didn't read very well!
One of the most compelling and gut-wrenching scenes in the book, for me, was when Harry had to keep making Dumbledore drink the potion to get to the locket. What a traumatic experience! One of the strongest, greatest people he knows is suddenly helpless and weak, in pain, tortured, and he, Harry, has to force Dumbledore to endure it. I was really touched by how Harry persuaded Dumbledore to keep drinking, keeping in mind that it must have been breaking his heart to do so. But it's another experience that Harry has to go through. Everything that he (and Dumbledore) has to go through is strengthening him, forcing him to stand on his own that little bit more. Could Harry have endured Dumbledore's death if it had occurred at the end of OotP? No, I don't think so. I think that on top of everything else, he would have cracked, or at least found it extremely difficult to continue with a clear direction. But at this point he is prepared more, both by the revelations about Tom Riddle/Voldemort in the Pensieve, and by what he has gone through with Dumbledore. And it doesn't hurt that he's had an extra year to think about things, to work out his priorities and how he feels about the death of Sirius and what it is he's heading for, foretold by the prophecy.
Snape: innocent or guilty?
I'm still not sure of my verdict on whether Snape is innocent or not, but I'm leaning heavily towards him being guilty. I've never *liked* Snape as a character, although I do think he is extremely well written, and I did feel sympathy for him for his treatment at the hands of James and Sirius. But is he innocent of betraying Dumbledore and the Order of the Phoenix? I find it hard to believe. If Dumbledore had known about the Unbreakable Vow, for instance - which if Snape had been fully on Dumbledore's side he surely would have told him about - then why didn't he mention it directly to Draco, instead of telling him that Snape had only been pretending to help him? I would have thought that if he had known, he would have mentioned it in some context during that scene. No, I think Snape geniunely hoodwinked Dumbledore over this. He is an accomplished occlumens, after all, and people do make mistakes. Even Dumbledore does and here, I think, is an example of misplaced trust, and wrong judgement on his part. So, getting back to the Unbreakable Vow - even if you argue that Snape was bound by it so he *had* to have helped Draco, there's still the fact that he willingly volunteered to help Draco when Narcissa went to him for help. Refusing wouldn't have discredited him, it would only have reinforced him as being a cruel, callous man, at least in the eyes of Narcissa, a Death Eater. And let's face it, most of the Death Eaters fit that description pretty well.
So again, if you argued that he was bound to help Draco by the Unbreakable Vow, if he was on the good side, why would he not then refuse to help Draco at the last minute? He could have sacrificed himself for Dumbledore - who then presumably could have helped Draco and hidden him and his family from Voldemort, like he said he would before the other Death Eaters and Snape arrived at the top of the tower. In my view at least, Dumbledore is far more important to the Order than Snape is, even if you argue that Snape is the Death Eater insider and double-agent. And even if it had been Dumbledore's intention that Snape kill him to save Draco and keep his own credentials with the Death Eaters safe so that he could carry on spying, what does that gain, now that the entire Order is now as likely to trust Snape's word as trusting oh, say, Rita Skeeter as their secret keeper?
R.A.B. and the fake Horcrux - another Black legacy?
R.A.B. - well, Dumbledore drinking that potion and weakening himself wasn't all for nothing. The locket at the bottom of the basin might have been a decoy and not a real Horcrux, and it might have been another cruel blow to discover after all that toil and suffering that it *wasn't* the real deal, but it still gives Harry his only clue as to the fate of the real locket.
I've seen theories that this mysterious 'R.A.B.' is Regulus Black, Sirius's brother. Personally, I'd go with this being the best bet. We know that Regulus died at the hands of the Death Eaters, and as someone pointed out in their analysis of this theory, in OotP there was a heavy locket found in one of the cabinets at Number 12, Grimmauld Place, while everyone was clearing out the junk. Nobody could open it - it had an enchantment on it. Riddle's diary turned up in a Death Eater's house, why not Slytherin's locket at the Black residence? Regulus could have hidden it there, intending to destroy it but never getting the chance to before his death.
This, if true, puts a spin on things. Mundungus is revealed in HBP as having stolen and pawned a lot of things from the former Black residence, and if he'd got hold of the locket, well, it could be anywhere. It could, alternatively, be in Kreacher's den after the House Elf's kleptomaniatic spree, in which case Harry, if he guessed it, would in theory have an easy time retrieving it (destroying it would be another thing entirely).
Mixed thoughts on the Horcruxes
I wondered, after finishing HBP, what role the Order would have to play in helping Harry find the rest of the Horcruxes. Dumbledore asked him not to tell anyone but his two closest friends, and before telling Harry about Riddle's past and recovering the Horcrux memory from Slughorn, he seemed to have gone about his search on his own. So this just leaves Harry, Ron and Hermione to find the remaining four on their own, does it? All within what will presumably be the equivalent of another year at Hogwarts, even if most of the action is away from the school? I don't know what to think about this. Knowing Harry and his loyalty to Dumbledore even in the event of Dumbledore's death, I suppose I'm more inclined to think that he *will* go it alone with his two friends. But then again, who knows? I'm already itching to read Book Seven and find out the answer to this, and JKR said she's not going to start full time on it until the end of this year!!!
I've also seen theories that Harry is one of the Horcruxes, and I'm not sure I find this plausible. Some people who go with this theory see Voldemort trying and failing to kill Harry directly the first time around (giving Harry his scar) as the moment when he unwittingly makes a Horcrux out of Harry. In HBP Dumbledore explains to Harry that Voldemort may have gone to Godric's Hollow intending to make a sixth and final Horcrux at the moment of Harry's death - but he fails, only avoids death because of his other Horcruxes, and then later on he uses his murder of an old muggle man to make a Horcrux out of Nagini, the snake. If Harry had supposedly been - however unwillingly - made into a Horcrux by Voldemort, there are four problems.
Firstly, if Voldemort was not aware of this then he would have gone on to make another Horcrux, which would bring the total to eight, not his desired number of seven. This leaves Harry with yet another object to find in book seven. Five unaccounted for Horcruxes, and his own self, an additional one.
If, on the other hand, Voldemort intentionally made Harry into a Horcrux, then why has he tried to kill him twice since his resurrection? Firstly, in GoF, Voldemort only fails to kill him with Avada Kedavra because Harry tries to disarm him at the same time. Then, in OotP, Voldemort clearly tries to kill Harry when he appears in the Ministry of Magic, and tries to taunt Dumbledore by inviting him to kill Harry if he does not fear death. Why would he desire Harry's ultimate destruction if a part of his soul was hidden away in him? We see evidence at the end of HBP that Voldemort still wants to kill Harry - Snape tells the other Death Eaters to leave Harry because he 'belongs to the Dark Lord'. It also makes sense that Voldemort is intent on destroying Harry because of the prophecy, even though he only heard part of it. Harry is supposed to have the power to vanquish Voldemort, and clearly that's not something Voldemort wants.
Another problem is that for Voldemort, contact with or possession of Harry is repellent. Dumbledore tells Harry in chapter thirty-seven of OotP that Voldemort cannot bear to possess Harry because of the power that Harry possesses, the one that the prophecy refers to - love. It saved him from death when Voldemort tried to kill him as a baby; surely it would not make sense for Voldemort's soul to reside inside his nemesis, whose blood was so full of that totally opposing power.
Lastly, the creation of a Horcrux is, we are told, an intentional process, requiring the performing of a certain spell. How could Voldemort have unintentionally and unknowingly made Harry into one?
The Imperius Curse, Tonks, and romance in HBP
The Imperius Curse had me guessing in this book. I thought that someone must be under it, to have given Katie Bell the cursed necklace, and when it was revealed that the package was handed over in the girls' bathroom, I was still guessing. But then when Harry bumped into Tonks who was pale, dishevelled, not acting in the same way that she had been during OotP and on her way to see Dumbledore, I thought it might be her. After all, she is stationed in Hogsmeade, so she could have been the one to hand the necklace over. And Harry wonders why she has left her post to go and see Dumbledore. She may not have been able to do much against Dumbledore, but as Dumbledore tells Draco, his attempts to kill Dumbledore haven't exactly been the works of genius, or at all successful.
So I was surprised, but pleasantly so, when it turned out to be Madam Rosmerta. I didn't suspect her (despite increased mention of her by characters such as Ron we don't really *see* that much of her in the book, to be fair), but to be honest I'm glad it was her rather than Tonks. She's not a member of the Order, so being under the Imperius curse is less likely to get her killed, and I prefer the real reason that Tonks was acting so strangely. Again, didn't see Tonks/Lupin coming, but it's great, as McGonagall says, that there is 'a little more love in the world'. Also, I can see them working as a pairing, however unexpected. They complement each other.
Talking of pairings in general - I liked how JKR did the romance in this book. The situations that the love-triangles created were funny, seemed about what you'd expect in any teenage school situation, and added a bit of tension. I always thought that Hermione and Ron would end up together (Harry's mental comparison of them to Mr and Mrs Weasley, anyone?) and I'm glad that Harry and Ginny did because their relationship, even pre-dating, has grown to be one of mutual friendship and respect in the last few books, but having a bit of drama along the way to happiness is always a good thing, and makes the shattering of the idyllic Hogwarts school scenario which occurs at the end even more complete. Another LJer pointed out in their thoughts on the book that the shattering of the Gryffindor hourglass is symbollic in portraying the end of happy, carefree Hogwarts days and the beginning of the tough and bloody journey to the end. I pretty much agree with this.
In conclusion, HBP is a great book. So far it's been really interesting looking around the internet and LJ and reading all the other fans' theories. I'm going to scurry off and carry on with that.
Wow. That went on. And on. And on and on. I guess I just had a lot of thoughts on the matter!