YES!! I have my Harry Potter book **SPOILERS ABOUND!!!***

[CarolinaCutie]

Originally Posted by AlethiaSi

hijack/ I hate to say this, but as I'm re-reading the book, I'm finding myself skipping over whole parts and chapters, not exactly to get to the end, but just because I don't want to read them (i.e. like during the whole hunt for the Horcruxes with Harry and hermione... i just found it to drag and be kind of painful)
does anyone else do this?

/hijack

Well... I think it's kind of strange that you're re-reading it so soon after finishing. I know that I would not be able to focus fully on the book if I did that, and probably would do the same as you. Why are you re-reading? Just to catch things that you missed? Or because you just enjoyed it so much the first time?

I know that I re-read OoTP about three months afterward, but that was mostly because I read it really super fast the first time while on vacation and I found that I had missed some important things!

[AGDee]

I just heard that some people's books are missing pages 371-402. There would have been a real issue in this house if our books were missing pages!

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by cuteASAbug

does anyone else think that the Harry Potter series, particularly book 7, is a good way of introducing kids to the Holocaust?

Originally Posted by lovelyivy84

No.

It's a fantasy story with a happy ending. Not something I would use to introduce the topic of genocide, but YMMV.

I would tend to agree, especially if one means reading the books and then saying "now, let's talk about the Holocaust."

However, in the best tradition of fantasy, myth and fairy tales, these stories do portray the best and the worst in people, and life and death, in a way that helps kids start to get a handle on them. They do lay some groundwork, so to speak.

Originally Posted by ISUKappa

There's definitely a running theme of the strength and depth of a mother's love through the series, which makes sense as JK had two (I think? maybe all three?) of her kids while writing them.

Her oldest daughter was already born when she started writing the series, but her other two children were born during. She said in one interview, that if she saw a boggart, she would see what Molly Weasley saw -- her own children dead.

Also, her mother died (of MS at age 45) while she was writing Book 1.

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

Maybe it's just me, but I didn't find the book too predictible, especially the end. I didn't expect DD to tell Snape that Harry had to die and Harry to walk up to Voldemort and "give" himself up.

I wasn't expecting that either, but when I got to it, I felt like slapping myself on the forehead. She said back in 2000 that she was glad no one had quizzed her too closely on her religious beliefs, because then they'd see where the books were headed.

At the core, the books are about the power of love, and "greater love has no man than this, that he lay his life down for his friends."

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by ASUADPi

But they technically are. At our bookstores, HP is in the Children's book section, not young adult and not adult, children.

A mere technicality. I think because they started out as children's books, publishers have mistakenly left them in that category. Harry, himself, is no longer a child and neither are his initial fans. But, alas, how often we humans prefer the comfort of our old ways rather than forging newer, more sensible ones.

Originally Posted by AGDee

I just heard that some people's books are missing pages 371-402. There would have been a real issue in this house if our books were missing pages!

My sister told me of a woman who shut herself up in her room, ignoring her husband and children for days until she realized 30 pages of her book were missing. After a strangled yell, she ran downstairs, ripped open a backup copy that had arrived by UPS, and went back upstairs to keep reading. (No, I don't know who she was or how my sister found out about it, but I was appalled all the same).

I don't know, but I was under the impression that the person who came into magic late in life was Kreacher. He finally accepted Harry as his master and, in that turn, was able to clean and cook just as magnificently as other houselves. Must've been some magic there that he had been witholding ever since losing Mrs. Black as a mistress.


Okay, does anyone else find the timestables of these books rather cool? For instance, that Harry was born so many years ago (about 1980), being older than many of us who read about him, and the series itself ending far into the future(about 2016)? It's kind of comforting for me to know that JKR made it a point to not let the presence of magic be bound by time...like this series and, magic in general, doesn't begin and end in our realm...it's timeless and continues on...I liked it.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by christiangirl

I don't know, but I was under the impression that the person who came into magic late in life was Kreacher. He finally accepted Harry as his master and, in that turn, was able to clean and cook just as magnificently as other houselves. Must've been some magic there that he had been witholding ever since losing Mrs. Black as a mistress.

Interesting thought, but I don't think think it really fits with what JKR said. Kreacher could always do magic, he just didn't want to for a long while.

I still think it's either Merope or it's something she decided not to include after all.

Originally Posted by christiangirl

And what happened to George...I can't imagine his life without Fred.

Of course! It just hit me reading this comment why Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione don't have a son named Fred (assuming that Fred isn't James's or Hugh's middle name). George is the one with a son named Fred.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

Interesting thought, but I don't think think it really fits with what JKR said. Kreacher could always do magic, he just didn't want to for a long while.

I still think it's either Merope or it's something she decided not to include after all.

Of course! It just hit me reading this comment why Harry/Ginny and Ron/Hermione don't have a son named Fred (assuming that Fred isn't James's or Hugh's middle name). George is the one with a son named Fred.

My other thought was that while George is alive, they won't name anyone else Fred. It wouldn't be the same.

[lovelyivy84]

So the reprieved indiviudal has been revealed- it was Mr. Weasley!

He was originally going to die in book 5! I am so happy he didn't. I think it would have broken my heart and added unnecessary drama.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by lovelyivy84

So the reprieved indiviudal has been revealed- it was Mr. Weasley! He was originally going to die in book 5!

Ack!!! Where did you read that?

[AlethiaSi]

Originally Posted by CarolinaCutie

Well... I think it's kind of strange that you're re-reading it so soon after finishing. I know that I would not be able to focus fully on the book if I did that, and probably would do the same as you. Why are you re-reading? Just to catch things that you missed? Or because you just enjoyed it so much the first time?

I know that I re-read OoTP about three months afterward, but that was mostly because I read it really super fast the first time while on vacation and I found that I had missed some important things!

i'm reading it to catch up on things that i missed, but perhaps I should wait a little bit, I always re-read the books right after, then re-read them a few months down the line (and before another book or movie came out) but this one i'm having more trouble with, so I think I might put it on the shelf for a little bit in the mean time....


Also, in response to the interview- i'm super excited for any other information... even if we/I have to wait for it! lol