Harry Potter and the Misty Fug
- The Half-Blood Prince - I had my money on Voldemort for this one. Brilliant, egotistical (calling oneself a prince), and delving into the darker side of things. Even if it wasn't Voldemort, I was pissed at Harry for not considering it, especially since he was learning all about Voldemort as a student at the time. He didn't even care. Now, I get that Harry's drawn to the idea of succeeding in Potions easily, like any other kid (except Hermione) would be, but it was uncharacteristic that he wouldn't be curious about it at all. I'd say it was Rowling trying to show subtly that Harry is unconsciously pulled to the darker side of things, no matter how pure Dumbledore thought he was, but I doubt Rowling would do that. My real quibble with this was that Harry realized that it wasn't his dad or any of his friends by the year that it was used. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Snape in that same year? We know he was at least close. I find it doubtful that Snape is 66 years old, which he would have to be if he wrote those notes at 16, 50 years ago (mad math skills, yo). It's possible that Snape used the book after it had been published, but the fact that Harry never even considered that leads me to think that one only used books the date they were published.
- Voldemort's Past - This disappointed me. I know Rowling has stated before that she wants to be able to depict "pure evil," and I don't think she did a very good job. Voldemort, even when he was Tom Riddle, was always evil, inhuman, a sociopath. It's very easy to make the villain evil and inhuman from day one. Dumbledore showed some pity for him, and Harry also felt twangs of pity, but that was clearly because they were the Good Guys, who are obligated to pity the Bad Guys for a few moments before they kill them off. I thought Harry's sympathy for Voldemort should have been played up. Why couldn't Voldemort have been a human being when he was little? It's far more interesting when the villain begins with ambition mixed with hope, a la Lex Luthor.
- Eileen Prince - This is more a starting block for my growing dislike for Rowling's depiction of women. Why are Godric Gryffindor and Salazar Slytherin the ones who are locked in an eternal battle for the world. Why is almost every authority figure in the entire book, especially the more significant ones, a male? There are only so many times you can point to Hermione. Why is it "a mother's love" that saves Harry? Why is Lily so incredibly unimportant when it comes to Hogwart's past? "The brightest witch of her class," yes, but whenever we see clips or memories of James' time at Hogwarts, Lily is a distant, admired figure. It ticks me off. Also, what's with this "beast" that growls and paces inside Harry's heart? I'm not a boy, but I still that's a pretty unrealistic way of dealing with Harry's attraction to Ginny.
- Harry's Obsession with Draco - This was so incredibly gay. Gay gay gay. You knew Harry had to be right about Draco, this time, because if he hadn't it would have been obvious that he was deeply in love with the handsome blonde Slytherin. I liked Draco's character development in this one. I'm irritated, in fact, that it took this long for Draco to actually have a third dimension, but I'm hoping that's because Rowling intends to show Draco's rise to the light instend of his descent into darkness.
- More on Gayness - This whole book was really gay. Snape's obsession with Draco (that line about being as hard as he wants to in regard to Draco was hysterical), Harry's obsession with Draco, Snape's obsession with Harry... I squeed every time Harry flipped out because Crabbe and Goyle had turned into girls and walked away with Draco alone, and every time Ron and Hermione told Harry to end this unhealthy obsession with Draco. So gay.
- Snape - I honestly think Snape's still good. I'm not saying this because I really like Snape. I admire his wit and intelligence, but I'm definitely an HP/DM shipper. I think Rowling's doing this to test our faith (I realize I sound like a radical Christian, but bear with me). Snape took an Unbreakable Vow to guard Draco (gay!) and finish the job Draco had started. I don't think Snape would have taken that vow unless he knew it would not limit his options as a double agent. He knew Draco would fail; it was a forgone conclusion. I think he either assumed that Dumbledore would kill him (Snape) when he tried to kill Dumbledore, and decided to take that risk for the sake of keeping his cover, or Dumbledore had already told Snape that he would have to kill him (Dumbledore - this is why we need more chicks) at some point. Why, I don't know. But we don't know exactly why Dumbledore was pleading with Snape at the end of the book, right before Snape killed him. Dumbledore had professed several times that he was far less valuable than Harry, and I think he would be perfectly willing to die if it somehow meant Harry would suceed. If Snape is actually evil, then it invalidates many of the things that happened in the first few books. Again and again we have suspected Snape of evil, and again and again we have been proven wrong. I realize Harry is now beginning to get things right in his conclusions, but I don't think that makes Dumbledore wrong. I think that he did have a solid reason for trusting Snape, one that Rowling would have explained and taken apart if she had really wanted to show that Snape was evil. If Snape was evil, then we have to go along with Draco's statement that Snape was only trying to steal Draco's glory, which is, of course, stupid. Snape was very clearly trying to help Draco, as a paternal (gay!) figure, and I don't think it was because he was working for Voldemort. I guess ultimately, I admit that Snape could be a Bad Guy in the end. It would certainly be an emotional shocker, a tactic Rowling clearly enjoys, and it's very possible. But the opportunity to make him a good guy, a man filled with remorse for his actions and saved only by Dumbledore's trust, who must rely on his own trust that he is a good man now (and may fail, that would be a good way to make him evil), is far more interesting.
- Dumbledore - Can't say his death was all that surprising. I didn't expect it, but it didn't shock me. In order to force Harry into confrontation, Rowling had to eliminate all of his allies. First his parents, then his godfather, and now Dumbledore. He's been a symbol of faith, trust and protection throughout the series, and I think it was a good idea to get rid of him. Now we as readers are forced to find our own trust and protection, just as the characters are, and it makes the story more interesting. I think we're supposed to question our own trust in the characters, without being able to rely on Dumbledore to explain and make the decisions for us, and like I've said repeatedly above, I'm sticking with his trust in Snape. I could be proven totally wrong, but I don't care as long as it's done well.
- Lupin and Tonks - I'm not gonna say anything about the fact that Tonks can change into anyone's appearance, including, say, Sirius'. Nope. Not a word.
- Felix Felicis, Horcruxes, Sectumsempra, et cetera> - Two things on this one. First, it's irritating when Rowling pulls shit out of the blue like this. Unless Slughorn secretly knew something we don't, he rather randomly decided to offer the Felix Felicis (which translates to "Lucky's Lucky." WYF?) as a prize for best potion. Potter randomly got the Half Blood Prince's book and thus the ability to get the Felix Felicis. I normally have no problem with random things that help the plot. For instance, I didn't mind that Harry used the FF to get the memory from Slughorn. I did mind that Ginny said that the FF saved all of their lives. That means that Ginny et al. are only alive by a random choice, something I consider bad storytelling. And the Horcruxes? That smacks of something she made up on the spot to find a way to tie up the entire series. As for the Sectumsempra, I wanted to smack Harry really hard when he insisted he was ignorant of what the curse did. Most, if not all, of the spells and curses Rowling has written have been bastardized Latin. I take high school Latin and knew what it meant immediately. However, I'm fairly sure that Italian vocabularly could have told me, or Spanish, or French, or Portugese... Even English, if I were scholarly or knew military mottoes. I've always been disappointed that students at Hogwarts didn't learn Latin, since it would be so obviously useful, and I thought it was pretty pathetic that Harry did not have the brains to get a Latin dictionary out of that vast library and find that "sectum" is straight from the verb "seco" (seco, secare, secui, sectum), meaning "to cut, to injure, to divide", and that "sempra" is from "semper," meaning "always." Dur.
- No Ninjas - I was very disappointed to see the lack of ninjas, especially after all the hype.
Looking back, my entry makes it seem like I really didn't like this book. I did. Honestly. A great deal, in fact, just like all of the HP books. I just like to bitch.