(BOOKS) Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

Through the Immaculate Heart,

Note: This is not a hate-thread but rather it offers constructive criticism.

Almost all the Harry Potter books are great but the seventh one seemed a little off. Not Deathly Hallows but it is deadly hollow.

Even before I started reading the seventh book (which I read even before I read the fifth and sixth books), something within me told me that this one was going to be worse than the others. I thought that maybe J K Rowling would write it quickly so as to please the fans and gain more audiences instead of writing as much an excellent book as possible. Maybe she made the mistake of writing the book like a screenplay because of the films (she even admitted that she wrote better lines for Snape in the book so that Alan Rickman would say them in the films:().

And I was right, the book did show that it was rushed and that it was of lower quality than the others. Here, I am going to show why I think Deathly Hallows sucks. Please, don’t send me hate mail or else, I will put the imperius curse on all of you and force to dress like Leprechauns and sing Harry’s Valentine from book 2 in front of the Queen!

Anyway, lets begin:

I thought it was fantastic.

Harry conquers death by submitting to it, and Voldemort, in trying to flee from death and conquer it by force, becomes overtaken by it. Furthermore, by conquering death, Harry frees all of his friends from the curse of death from Voldemort.

The book follows Harry as he moves on to his seventeenth birthday. After escaping and having small skirmish with the Deatheaters who are Voldemort’s minions, Harry arrives at the home of the Weasleys who are the family of his best friend Ron. Hermoine is with them too and they plan to finish what their Headmaster Dumbledore (who was killed the previous year in battle) started: to destroy Lord Voldemort and stop him from taking over the magical world. In order to accomplish this, they have to find and destroy the Voldemorts Horcruxes, ‘relics’ which contain pieces of his soul. This was the way in which Voldemort escaped death when the killing curse he was going to use to destroy Harry redounded on him and destroyed his body. Instead of moving on, his fragment of soul roamed the earth trying to find a host who would help him restore his own body.

There are seven Horcruxes: one is Voldemorts soul piece within his body Two of them are already destroyed which are Riddles Diary and Gaunts Ring. One of them is an animal, which the guys gueess is Voldemorts snake Nagini. Three of them are personal items which belonged to the founders of Hogwarts. Unbeknowest to Harry however, when Voldemort tried killing him, he unintentionally put a piece of his soul within Harry, thus making Harry a living Horcrux.

Anyway, the minister of Magic pays a visit to Harry who gives him, Ron and Hermoine respectively things which Dumbledore left them: a golden snitch, a light snatcher (which coincedently is also some sort of radio transmitter…) and the book of the Tales of Beedle the Bard.after the deatheaters attack the wedding of Ron’s big brother, Harry, Ron and Hermoine escape and start their quest for Voldemorts Horcruxes. On the way, they find the first one which is a locket and which they found by entering the ministry of magic and stealing it from a witch there. They quite unbelievebly agree to wear it so as to not lose it. The locket though makes them have antipathy towards each other and things grow so badly that Ron even leaves, to Hermoine’s sorrow and Harry’s frustration.

Harry during this time gets his own Phoenix core wand destroyed after he and Hermoine escape from being killed by Voldemorts snake, which was disguised as magic historian Bathilda Bagshot. Later on, after even more unbelievebly finding Griffindors sword (one of the few things which could destroy a Horcrux) in a pond and after Ron comes back and rescues Harry from drowning in it and destroys the locket himself, they set off once again to retrieve the other Horcruxes.

Here, they pay a visit to Xeno Lovegood, their friend at Hogwarts Luna Lovegood’s Father, who tells them about the Deathly Hallows which if collected together, make their bearer the Master of death. They are: the Ressurection stone which make one able to speak with the souls of the dead, the cloak of invisibility which is described as inpenetrable and infallible and the elder wand, the most powerful wand there is. Harry becomes obssessed with the Hallows, so much so that he neglects trying to find Voldemorts Horcruxes and instead tries searching for them, to ROn and Hermoine’s disgust. He eventually overcomes the obsesison, being the supposed good boy he is and recommences his quest for the Horcruxes. They find out that Voldemort is after the Elder Wand so as to wield ultamite power.

They get caught and imprisoned in Malfoy Manor out of which with the help of Dobby the house elf, again barely escape before Voldemort arrives. They take with them the other prisoners which include Luna Lovegood who was kidnapped by the deatheaters, Olivander the wand maker who was kidnapped by Voldemort so as to gain more knowldge about the Elder wand, and the goblin Griphook, who worked at Gringotts bank. Harry steals Malfoys wand to replace his own shattered wand and they end up staying for a time in Ron’s newlywed brother’s house were with the help of Griphook the Goblin, they enter into Voldemort’s most prized associate’s (Bellatrix Lestrange) bank vaults and steal another Horcrux, Helga’s Hufflepuff’s cup.

Griphook though escapes with Griffidors sword before Harry and Ron could use it to destroy the cup. They hijack a dragon (which is never explained if it is actually Norbert/a who was mentioned earlier in the book and who was a pet of Hagrid’s before it was sent away to some dragon keepers). They escape (again. Thats the sixth escape attempt that the gand made in the entire book!) by blasting away from the gaurds and wizards with the dragon, break out of the bank and escape far away to some lake with the Horcrux now in their hands (why does this remind me so much of the destruction of the Death Star in Star Wars? Who knows? :rolleyes:).

They go to Hogmeade, the wizard village nearest to Hogwarts and get saved by the innkeeper of the Hogs Head, who we find out suddenly is the brother of the dead Albus Dumbledore. What a coincedence! Next, we find out that there is a passage from Hogs Head to Hogwarts via a secret tunnel which leads to the room of Requirement. Here, the gang get reunited with the students of Hogwarts. Snape escapes from Hogwarts and word gets sent out that Harry is at the school. Voldermort decides to lay siege at it and a HUGE battle begins between the forces of the Jedi and the dark si…, I mean, the forces of the good wizards and the deatheaters. Harry meanwhile searches for the Horcrux which is an item of Ravenclaw. He finds out with the help of some ghost and Luna Lovegood that is Ravenclaws tiara. Harry finds out that Ron and Hermoine entered into the chamber of secrets and destroyed the the cup Horcrux. A skirmish with his rival, Draco Malfoy and his two big friends, Crabbe and Goyle, ensues after the tiara gets found. During the fight, it gets destroyed (along with Goyle). During the fight. many people and allies and family members die, including Ron’s brother Fred, Remus Lupin and Tonks, Colin Creevey, etc…

After witnessing Freds death, the guys sneak into the shrieking shack were they witness in the shadows Voldemort killing Snape. Snape exhudes his thoughts in the form of a silvery liquid which Harry collects, with Voldemort having left.

The guys go back into the castle to witness alot of sadness. Harry feeling shamed hides beneath his cloak and sneaks into Dumbledores office where he puts Snapes thoughts in the Pensieve and finds out that… Darth Vader is actually his father and that he was destined to be the antichrist!

Ok, I made that up! He finds that Snape was loyal to Dumbledore all along and that Snape killed Dumbledore out of agreement with each other so as to protect Draco Malfoy from making the biggest mistake of his life (Draco was appointed by Voldemort to kill Dumbledore). He finds out that inside himself, Harry has a piece of Voldemorts soul, making him a living Horcrux and that the only way to destroy it would be that he would have to die. Harry, heeding Voldemorts callings that he would end the battle if Harry gave himself up, goes off to the forest and lets Voldemorts strike him with the killing curse.

Harry though isn’t quite dead, and find out that he is in some sort of Limbo which looks very similiar to Kings Cross Station. He finds an ugly baby crying and Dumbledore. They share a conversation where Dumbledore explains that Voldermort couldn’t have killed Harry because since Voldemort was ressurected using Harry blood, the same blood which his own mother gave him when he was conceived and the same mother who saved him with her love from Voldemort. Harry goes back to the real world but decides to pretend that he is dead. Voldemort is extremely happy and parades Harry’s ‘dead’ body around. Another smaller battle occurs in the area surrounding Hogwarts, in which Neville Longbottom, on Harry’s orders chops of Nagini’s head, destroying another Horcrux, to Voldemorts anger. Harry hides by hiding under his invisibility cloak and reveals himself to Voldemort and everyone present. After five minutes having a dumb, cliched conversation with Voldemort where he reveals that he is such a smart alec that he found out that not Voldemort, but Draco Malfoy is the owner of the elder wand. In fact, Harry is so smart that he even found out that since he stole Dracos wand in the escape from Malfoy manor, he (Harry) is now the owner of the elder wand and when Voldemort tries killing Harry with the same said Elder Wand, it refuses to kill it’s Master and the curse once again redounds on Voldemort, killing him once and for all. A great feast begins celebrating Harry’s victory, Harry decides to give up the deathly hallows (except the invisibility cloak. He wants to use it to steal the Presidents biscuits and secret documents so as to give them to Wikileaks and use them to gain alot of cash!). He uses the elder wand for one last time to fix his old wand and that’s that. The people who dies are ignored because ‘Voldemorts dead!’, we go nineteen years into the future where Harry now is a tall man with graying hair, a pot belly, smoking a pipe, wrinkles and wishing he was a cowboy. He married Ginny Weasley and has three children who he was cruel enough to name one of them ‘Albus Severus’ (oh come on! Who’d name their child that? Oh yeah…:rolleyes:). Every thing is well, Harry’s scar doesn’t hurt anymore, J K Rowling has tons of cash in her pockets, everybody’s curiosity is satisfied, and the author of this thread has finally, after two mind numbing hours, finished writing the summary for Deathly Hallows. And I haven’t even started with the actual thread for crying out loud!:eek:

Maybe when you’ve written and sold over 400 million books, created a fantasy world as complete as Harry Potter’s, contributed through films a trillion dollars to the international economy, found yourself to be the richest woman in Great Britain, and captured the imagination and loyalty of multiple generations (so far) of readers, I’ll have time to read your post.

J.K. Rowling resolved every single question posed in the original premise, she completely developed the characters through countless conflicts, each of which led to the final plot resolution, foreshadowed the ultimate ending in the very first book – and overcame evil incarnate with the self-sacrifice of her main character.

I can’t wait for your seven-book series that does the same, or better.

Of course, as always, you are entitled to your opinion.

[quote="WetCatechumen, post:2, topic:227515"]
I thought it was fantastic.

Harry conquers death by submitting to it, and Voldemort, in trying to flee from death and conquer it by force, becomes overtaken by it. Furthermore, by conquering death, Harry frees all of his friends from the curse of death from Voldemort.

[/quote]

You are right but, that is only one of the good qualities of the book. I like it how Harry is so brave to give himself up but there are alot of other bad things in the book which just spoil it.

Anyway, continuing my thread, what is so wrong with this book?

1. Harry is such an unlikeable character in this book.

I'm not going to call Harry or any other character obscene names no way but Harry here isn't a role model. In the first two books, Harry is your ordinary boy, not perfect of course but still likeable and sympatethic and virtous. In the third book, Harry and Ron briefly break off their friendship with Hermoine but they eventually become good friends again. In the fourth book, Harry fights with Ron and they briefly become enemies but Harry in his heart wants to get reconciled with Ron and when they get reconciled, he works hard in the rest of the book to not break off their friendhsip again.

In the fifth book, Harry really is what you call, an angry little idiot. Many people found his angry behaviour, with him shouting at his friends and elders shocking and unbrearable and they were right. Harry's behaviour was rather shocking and irritating. However, I think that Harry's behaviour was made there on purpose not so that he may seem more powerful and domineering but to bring his flaws out even more and that at the end of the novel, he would elarn a valuable lesson and learn to control his temper. This is what happens when he pities Luna Lovegood for the death of her mother and really changes his attitude. In the sixth book, his temper while still present sometimes, is lessened but sort of comes back again when he witnesses Snape killing Dumbledore. We have sympathy for Harry's anger because he is right to be angry.

But here, Harry just isn't likeable. He seems angry for no other reason than to make him look tough. He got turned into a self pitying fool who thinks about nothing but himself. But thats not what exactly bothers me. What bothers me is that Harry never goes through soemthing which redeems him of his anger and frustration and self pity. It's not enough that he sacrificed himself to Voldemort because he loved everyone else; he was still an angry fool when he sacrificed himself. That's like saying that although Christ was mean and hated His own Mother, He still is good because He is God and He dies for us. This is what Protestants picture Christ, a totally false picture because Jesus LOVES His Mother more than all the creatures and angels put together. But if it were true that Christ hated His own Mother, even if he died for us, I wouldn't be in a religion where we adore a man who hated the women who fed him and loved him and who broke his own word.*

And this is what makes this Protestant position so utterly abomnable and implausible:mad:. Christ loved the Sweet Virgin Mary, and still does, more than the whole Universe and the heavens put together. I am in a religion where I am certain that this man loved His own Mother and where I am certain that He gave Her to us so that She may take care of us. Nuff said.

It was a fantastic book and series.

Can you do better?

I can be a bit of a joker can’t I? When I put those jokes making fun of the plot holes and the hackneyed plot, I didn’t mean to offend anyone but to lighten the mood. I am not a millionare nor have written a seven book series which has brought children away from television and into books but I can write a review and voice my opinions:). Thats the fun of having opinions because we can share them. If you don’t want to read my post, I honestly say that is fine by me.

I’m not one who hates Harry Potter. In fact, I love the Harry Potter books and have read them all. I just think that the seventh wasn’t as good as the others and am voicing my opinion. It’s not like I am insulting J K Rowling, is it? Criticism isn’t insulting, it it is kind. It goes out of bounds when you make personal hurtful remarks. Besides, Rowling isn’t a woman who can’t take criticism, unlike Stephenie Meyer who honestly, can’t take criticism (‘the meanest rejection I got was from Little Brown and Company…’ Excuse me Meyer but, they weren’t being mean, they just didn’t want to publish your book.)

Being serious here, I’m not going to respond to some stupid hate mail or comments which people may send me. If you like a book then you are free to like it and you are free to change your feleings about it over time. Things go bad though when people become obessed with an other-wise good book or worse, when people get obsessed with an other wise bad book like the unhealthy Twilight series. I have the right to speak against something that is bad or provide criticism for some book which I did not like so much.

There are people who hate Twilight for good reasons: they say that is is unhealthy, that it makes girls obsessed, that it is nothing but the dirty fantasies of some woman and they are right: Twilight is all that. There are people who hate Twilight because they choose to not go with the flow. Thye treat themselves as superior while they treat Twilight fans as vermin. That is bad. And then there are people who like Harry Potter so much that they censure those who innocently offer constructive criticism, and that is bad, because Harry Potter really is just a book.

I’m not saying that you people are like that, I’m just saying that you should all beware that you are not like that.

That said, I wish you all best wishes and Mary bless you all and protect you under Her mantle. I’m going to continue with my thread and may this post serve as a warning to not judge people rashly.

Harry is such an unlikeable character, cont.

It would have been good if Harry during the first parts of the book became rather nasty and self pitying but would later do something or have something happen to him that makes him remove this nastiness.

In the beginning of the book, Harry leaves the Dursleys for the last time and never sees them again. Dudley shakes Harry’s hand in gratitude, to Harry surprise; it was the first time Dudley ever showed Harry a sign of friendship. Uncle Vernon almost shaked Harry’s hand while Aunt Petunia cried, not because of Harry and Dudley finally becoming friends but because her ‘Dudders’ became such a ‘gentleman’ (to Harry’, Hesta and Diggle’s disgust).

lets change the scenario: instead of Dudley shaking Harry hand, lets say that the Dursleys leave without so mucha goodbye, leaving Harry feeling as empty and humiliated as ever before. That could be enough to make him feel a little angry later on.

Now, later on, and after they have destroyed the locket Horcrux, Harry, being obsessed with the Hallows, goes off for a walk leaving Ron and and Hermoine alone. He contemplates the Hallows when he unexpecteadly meets Dudley. They share a conversation where Dudley timidly asks Harry for forgiveness for the ways he, Uncle Vernon and Aunt Petunia treated Harry. It could be that Harry become a little shocked as this would be so unexpected. He could even say something sharp to Dudley, to which the latter says something that makes Harry think upon himself and his behaviour; smething that makes Harry feel ashamed of himself and the way he treated others. He realizes that it isn’t about him but about the people. It isn’t a quest for vengeance, it is a quest to protect and save the world.

I’m not saying that by having written something like this in the book, Rowling would have done an absolute good. There are other ways to show Harry changing for the better. I’m just saying that Rowling failed to redeem Harry and his flaws.:frowning:

[quote="philipmarie, post:6, topic:227515"]
But here, Harry just isn't likeable. He seems angry for no other reason than to make him look tough. He got turned into a self pitying fool who thinks about nothing but himself. But thats not what exactly bothers me. What bothers me is that Harry never goes through soemthing which redeems him of his anger and frustration and self pity. It's not enough that he sacrificed himself to Voldemort because he loved everyone else; he was still an angry fool when he sacrificed himself.

[/quote]

[quote="philipmarie, post:6, topic:227515"]
That's like saying that although Christ was mean and hated His own Mother, He still is good because He is God and He dies for us. This is what Protestants picture Christ, a totally false picture because Jesus LOVES His Mother more than all the creatures and angels put together. But if it were true that Christ hated His own Mother, even if he died for us, I wouldn't be in a religion where we adore a man who hated the women who fed him and loved him and who broke his own word.*

[/quote]

Okay I split this part of yours in two because I did not see any of what you're describing in the first bit and I also cannot comprehend how that even logically adds to the second.

When I read about Harry's decision to give himself up to Voldemort, I saw someone no different from other characters in movies/books/comics who figured that self-sacrifice was the only way for the side of good to triumph. The anger you described is not on the level I understood when I read it.

And self-pitying? You would be too if you were destined to fight the most evil entity of your race and would either have to kill or be killed in the end. Think about it. What if you had to make that choice? There will be no angels to intervene and help you. God will not be there to take over your responsibility. There will be no deus ex machina in the last moment. The fate of the world rested on your decision.

I think with all that pressure, yes I think a person is entitled to even just a fair amount of self-pity.

I do agree that people who are really into a fandom sometimes tend to feel attacked by what is meant only as a divergent opinion. Everyone has their own right to feel however they want about Harry Potter, J. K. Rowling’s abilities,etc. I personally like reading everyone’s views, from one extreme to the other!

My problem with the 7th Harry Potter book (I read the whole series, each book more than once, except the last, which I read once, put down, and never touched again) is that it seems to be pro-euthanasia. Dumbledore, whom J. K. Rowling said in interviews was pure good (i. e.; not a bad antagonist) planned that, since he was weakening, it was fine for Snape to kill him, when the time came.

I had been hoping for a more Christian-friendly explanation of Dumbledore’s death. It disturbed me A LOT that Rowling gave that message. Not that I shouldn’t have expected it, but I had been hoping for more integrity.

CeciliaS

I don’t think that Dumbledores death was actually euthenasic, because he agreed to get killed for a greater good, i.e, protecting Draco from Voldemort.

We would all fear dying and perishing at the hands of evil but, if J K Rowling wanted to make Harry more likeable, she could have written a bit where Harry resolves to not complain about his ordeals and face evil without complaint. I’m not saying that Harry could not have been entitled a little self pity or even a lot, I’m just saying that he should have at least tried getting rid of his temper and actually feel ashamed of himself for always shouting at Ron and Hermoine.

When I say that Harry became a self pitying fool, I’m not speaking about the final final part, when in the pensieve and through Snapes thoughts he finds that he MUST die. There was real fear there and nobody can blame him. Everybody, even the saints, is afraid of facing death*. When he faced Voldemort in the forest, that was really brave, so much so that his brave act had the effect of protecting all the others from Voldemort’s curses (although Rowling could have explained this bit a bit better).

Whe Harry is a bubmbling fool, I’m spekaing about the middle fo the novel when the guys are already on the road to Voldemorts Horcruxes.

*Except Christ and Mary of course, because Christ at Gethsemane actually feared the pain He was going to suffer and the pain He was going to cause His Mother. Lets not go off topic please.

2.The book lacks imagination.

J K Rowling is an excellent author. She doesn’t obviously write pure English like James Joyce or JRR Tolkien but who cares? Who on earth wants to read Joyce’s works where you can’t understand a single word? And although Tolkien has been a great influence on the fantasy genre and his works are masterpieces, they aren’t a light read like Harry Potter. These two authors books are there more to be studied than to entertain.

Tolkien created a believable fantasy world, whose history and milieu were actually the focus of the book and not the characters. So if you read the Lord of the Rings, don’t expect to read some elf’s tale of finding his own race, or some Hobbits tale of finding his uncle but be prepared to read alot of description and history of a place which doesn’t even exist, which in itself isn’t bad at all but as I said, is not attractive.

Now Rowling’s Harry Potter… even though the book focuses on Harry Potter and is rightly called a coming of age novel, Rowling created a world which is absolutely believable. Magic obviously doesn’t exist, but we suspend our disbelief in order to enjoy fantasy novels and dwelling inside Hogwarts. House elves, Veelas, dragons, Ewoks… wait, no, not Ewoks!

Rowling has done her research well and among the best things of all is that her fantasy world is based off the general mythology of fantasy creatures, which she wrote with their own tweaks and eccentricies. For example, dragons have been imagined for thousands of years as huge, scaly lizards. Yet it isn’t necessary that in every work where dragons are portrayed, they have to have wings, or that they have to breathe fire, or that they be a hundred feet tall. We have dragons who shoot out water instead of fire (the Bible which is not a fictional work), dragons who share a telepathic connection with their masters (Dragonriders of Pern, Eragon), dragons who live underwater, dragons without wings, etc… Rowling chose to give her dragons the usual lizard look and wings, but also created other species for them (among them is the Hungarian Horntail).

Honestly, I didn’t read the entirety of any of your posts as I don’t have that much time and while you are of course entitled to your opinion, I disagree.

Concerning the “lack of imagination” is that I like the fact that outisde of the use of magic it’s believable. I do enjoy books that create and entire fictional world (I’m currently reading the most recent Drizzt trilogy) but the fact that you can read the HP books and in some ways relate it to real life is a plus for most people as it’s not (nor does it seem to be meant to be) a complete departure from reality. I look at it as more of this is what life would be like if some fantasy stuff were true but you still had to live a normal life. But that’s just me.

And as far as Harry being an unlikeable character. Consider being 17 and essentially having the fate of the world resting on your shoulders… how likeable would you be? lol

J K Rowling even created her own version of elves. Tolkien was among those authors who depicted elves as beautiful tall people with pointy ears and silky hair, but Rowling chose to depict them as ugly little things who treat themselves badly and even sadistically, but she still kept the definition of the word 'elf': a species which is diffirent from our own.

But Stephenie Meyer's Twilight and the rules which she set... oh no, oh no!

First, there is nothing wrong as I said, of making your own version of vampires but really, Stephenie Meyrs vampires not only suck blood, they just suck!:D It's not that she wrote that vampires sparkle in the sun but the idea of a sparkling vampire is just dumb. She hasn't made vampires scary and neither did she make them interesting. They can see into the future, they have super speed (a super speed which is so super which takes the Volturi two months to get to America when it only took Bella two days to get from Italy to her town by commercial transport!), they are absoloutely beautiful, so beautiful that even their breath is beautiful...:eek: and they have super strength. So, Meyers vampires are practically invincible, which makes them too perfect and so makes them uninteresting.

But if you created a fantasy world, goodness gracious man, then follow the rules which you set. We all know of the plot holes which Twilight contains, whether it be in the illogical decisions which it's characters make or in breaking of the rules which Meyer set, so I'm not going to mention them. But Deathly Hallows contains plot holes, not only in some illogical decisions which the characters make, but in the breaking of the rules which Rowling herself set. I'm going to list a few of these here:

-The invisibility cloak which Harry owns is one of the Deathly Hallows and is said as having impenetrable concealement of the wearer 'no matter what spells are cast at it.' Yet, Mad eye Moody's magic eye could see through Harry's cloak in book four and I think it used magic to work. Also, even though Xenophilius Lovegood never said it and I'm not saying that it necessarily should but, don't you think that since the deathly hallows make the possessor the master of death, the invisibilty should be a shield which protects you against spells? Even Fred and George invented clothes which protect the wearer from spells and hexes, why shouldn't the infallible invisibility cloak too? In the series, the cloak doesn't protect Harry from spells, because in book six, he gets hit twice by a spell while under the cloak: by Draco when he was spying on him and by Dumbledore when they got back from the cave.

-What about this ownership thing of the Elder Wand? In the book, we learn that the Elder Wand is passed from one wizard to the other by murder or by being beaten. It also says that the wand would not give itself up so easily... how on earth then did the elder wand give itself to Harry when he so easily stole Draco's wand from him? He didn't fight Draco in a one on one wand duel like how Dumbledore and Grindelwald fought each other.

Even if the elder wand did give itself up so easily, it is implausible because Draco wasn't holding the Elder wand in his hand when Harry stole it: we all know that the Elder Wand was in Dumbledores tomb where instead of getting snapped, it remained intact. Does the Elder wand have a magic interaction with the non-elder wand it's master is holding? Because if it does, it is never explained in the novel.

I think it would have been better if when Snape killed Dumbledore, he would have automatically become the Master of the elder wand, instead of Draco becoming it's master because of Snape and Dumbledore's agreement to save him. Not only that but Harry would not have become the master of the wand, the message that it is not your powers that matter but what you are matter, and another deux ex machina would have been avoided. The third choice here is meant for Voldemorts last stand, when he dies not because Harry killed him or because somebody else killed him but because, since the elder wand refused to kills it's own master, the curse Voldemort was going to put on Harry backfired on himself. It was so anti-climactic.

What if Voldemort really did become the master of the elder wand? He would have become a bigger threat and been more scary. And not only that, what if when Harry faced Voldemort, the latter forced him to engage in another duel with him so as to see who was the better of the two? While Voldemort drew his sword, Harry could have spotten an unprotected nagini by his side and cast the Avada Kedavra curse on it so as to kill it, destroying another Horcrux, before getting 'killed by Voldemorts curse'.

Oh, and I read the last post. We suspend our disbelief and totally believe that an author should twist and turn his plot even if it includes having it's characters going into extremely dangerous or even silly situations, but these events must be coherent. It is rather exciting and scary to read about aliens invading earth but some movies just get spiled because of plot holes. For example, the film Signs has aliens attacking earth... thats scary and we suspend our disbelief because in this world, it could be possible for aliens to attack us. Everything gets ruined though, when these aliens who have technology maybe billions of years more advanced than ours, can't figure out how to open a door or even blast it open...:shrug: Not only that, we also find out that they are... allergic to water. So these aliens are dumb enough to actually visit a planet that is mostly covered in water. Don't tell me that they couldn't have known, because with their technology, I deem it impossible for them to not know that they are allergic to water.

When exactly did the language used in the title of this thread become acceptable in polite society, let alone a Catholic environment? :eek:

I really am not aware of any language which I may have used that may have offended somebody (except maybe english teachers with me bashing around and ruining every aspect of the english language!). Would you please specify where I used such laguage?

It’s the word in ALL CAPS in your title. Did you seriously not recognize that as offensive and borderline obscene language. Only 20 years ago, you would not have been allowed to say the word on radio or TV in the context you have without paying a hefty FCC fine.

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly the standards have fallen.

[quote="Corki, post:17, topic:227515"]
It's the word in ALL CAPS in your title. Did you seriously not recognize that as offensive and borderline obscene language. Only 20 years ago, you would not have been allowed to say the word on radio or TV in the context you have without paying a hefty FCC fine.

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly the standards have fallen.

[/quote]

I'm more amazed at how sensitive people are to the effect of combinations of letters. I suppose it "stinks" would've been more acceptable? Like it or not they essentially mean the same thing given the context.

It may not be professional and you certainly wouldn't see me using it in an email at work but it's not obscene and if you find it offensive I would say it's very unfortunate that you allow something as simple as a word to have such a profound effect on you.

Not to mention that it's completely off topic... if you have that much of an issue with it but nothing to add to the thread just report it and leave it be, let the moderators do their job and decide if it's offensive.

Also, “mother” separated from the compound has spread & become acceptable, e.g., “This morning’s commute is going to be a real mother” on a local radio station after a blizzard.

I nearly had apoplexy when my Mom said she was getting an Apple laptop “because Windows sucks” – took a minute she was quoting my brother and probably didn’t realize the origin.

[quote="philipmarie, post:1, topic:227515"]

Note: This is not a hate-thread but rather it offers constructive criticism.

[/quote]

:p Sorry, but after reading your thread title and then seeing this note, I had to chuckle at the juxtaposition. If you want to start a thread with some honest civil discussion, you may want to choose your thread titles more carefully. ;) :D

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.