Monday, July 30, 2007

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

(I posted this on my site already, but wanted to put it here as well because we're always talking about Harry in this group.)

NO SPOILERS (in this section):
I finished Book 7 a couple of days ago and really wanted time to let it sink in. The book is 600 pages long, and there’s just something about the Harry Potter books — they FLY. I read them so quickly, and yet I always feel like I’m not reading them quickly enough. I remember the climax of Prisoner of Azkaban, in the Shrieking Shack, where I was willing my eyes to move more quickly, wishing I knew how to skim (I don’t skim; I read very carefully and slowly, always have. It truly sucked when I was taking Victorian lit). By the time I got to the climax of this book, I had that same feeling.

The book has its slow moments; by page 450 I was starting to stress out that certain key things weren’t going to be resolved, but I was being silly. Just as I never lost faith in Joss Whedon even when Angel and Buffy weren’t quite going the way I wanted them to, I shouldn’t have lost faith in J.K. Rowling. The ending was spectacular. I always say writers have a horrible time of it when it comes to series — whether it’s books or TV — and they’ll never satisfy everyone when it comes to the end. But even though my bets were on it finishing completely differently, I loved it. She satisfied me.

Now, SPOILERS AHEAD. Please don’t read on if you haven’t finished the book.

What I LOVED about the book:
So many people speculated that Harry was going to die in Book 7, to the extent that psychologists were making LOTS of money selling their advice to anyone who would listen on how parents would be able to help their child deal with the grief. Stephen King and John Irving begged Rowling last year at a charity event NOT to kill Harry. Yet when I thought it through, it seemed like the only way it could end. Good can triumph, but sometimes major sacrifices have to be made. I thought anything less than Harry’s death would be a cop-out. And then… she didn’t kill him. He survives at the end of the book. And it worked. Yet Rowling still gave us the scene of what would have happened if Harry had died, for Voldemort hits him and he appears to die to all around him, even though he’s conscious and only pretending. We read about poor Hagrid picking him up and sobbing his giant tears all over him, carrying him back to Hogwarts. We see Voldemort proclaim victory, and feel the dread fall over everyone that not only is Harry dead, but the world has suddenly become a dark and awful place. All of the death that happens at the end of the book seems like a horrible waste to everyone, and they stand there, shocked at what has happened, losing faith by the second. In including this scene, it was like Rowling was saying, “See? This is why I couldn’t have killed him. It wouldn’t have worked.” Of course, in my vision, both of them died, but I was much happier having Harry live.

The huge battle scene at the end. It is EPIC. You can just imagine it on the movie screens, as the former members of Dumbledore’s Army show up in the Room of Requirement one by one, followed by the Order of the Phoenix. Then the battle raging on while Harry is trying to maintain his focus, with the portraits on the wall screaming their encouragement, McGonagall enchanting everything she can — including the desks — and screams and sparks from wands flying everywhere. The battle was amazing, and we can feel Harry’s dread as he realizes what he must do, and walks quietly away from this incredible war to his own inevitable death.

When I read Half-Blood Prince, there were two things I predicted for this book, and they both came true (so I don’t feel too badly about being wrong on the Harry dying thing). I believed that Harry MUST be the final Horcrux, and I believed that when Dumbledore said, “Snape, PLEASE” that he was begging him to kill him, and Snape did it against his will. By about halfway through the book, I began to lose hope on the latter, at least. But it all turned around in the end. Snape’s final act is to pull out his memories for Harry so he can see what really happened over the past several decades, showing how Snape was actually with the good guys all along, just as Dumbledore had been letting on. (It also seems clear now that the reason Dumbledore kept refusing to let Snape become the Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher was that he knew Voldemort had levied a curse on the position so no one could hold it for more than a year, and he didn’t want to risk anything happening to Snape.) Snape was a good person, but he was also an angry and resentful person because he’d been bullied by the person most like Harry — Harry’s father, James. So his resentment of Harry and his bad treatment of him make sense, yet it also makes sense that we’ve been seeing him protect Harry all along, because for as much as he hated James, he loved Lily with all his heart. When the doe Patronus appeared in the snow, I was convinced it was Lily (if James was a stag, she must be the doe) and it was so perfect to discover the twist that it was actually Snape’s.

Neville being a hero. I’ve always loved Neville, especially since we found out in Goblet of Fire what had happened to his parents (one of the movie’s omissions that I thought was a terrible shame) and why he lives with his grandmother. Suddenly he went from being this bumbling bit of slapstick to a serious character who felt deep pain and had been through a fate that was probably worse than Harry’s. Neither one had parents they could actually talk to, but where the deaths of the Potters had been quick, the Longbottoms had suffered greatly. I LOVED that of all the people around, Harry tells Neville to destroy the last Horcrux. (Also the scene of him rushing through the halls carrying screeching mandrakes was pretty funny.)

Harry finally getting a hold of the stone, and his parents appearing. I cried. That scene was SO beautiful, with Sirius looking so young, his parents telling him how proud they are of him… it was SUCH an amazing scene and finally brought all the sadness of the previous six books to a different conclusion, I was very sad when they suddenly disappeared as Harry faced Voldemort. Why make these people go away when he needed them most? But I suppose Harry had his reasons.

Mrs. Weasley being the one to take out Bellatrix. WICKED. (Though I could have done without her calling her a bitch, as much as the moniker fits.) Loved that scene.

What I didn’t like about the book:
The loooooooooong section of them wandering aimlessly trying to remain unseen, Apparating and Disapparating and Ron and Hermione having a lover’s quarrel and Harry starving and moping and on and on. While I’ll admit my attention never wavered, it was in this section that I REALLY missed Hogwarts and all of the other people in the book. It was here I began to worry that Snape really was a horrible person who’d taken over Hogwarts and was being awful to the students in the name of Voldemort, that we’d never see Neville and Ginny again, that this was going to end in a forest and not on the school grounds. But then again, having been through that doubt, it made the ending all that much sweeter.

Dumbledore not telling Harry about most of the stuff and making him figure it out. Yes, it was character-building and blah blah blah, but come on, the fate of the wizarding world rests in Harry saving it, couldn’t Albus have given him a little bit of help?

Dudley showing remorse and Harry suddenly thinking he’s a good guy. Readers LOVE to hate Duddikins, so please let us continue to despise him. Don’t make it all lovey-dovey when it comes down to it. Saving him from the Dementors or no, it doesn’t make sense that Duddy would wait until the moment he’s saying goodbye to act all in love with Harry, when he’s had all summer to do it, even if it were in a subtle sort of way.

The quick deaths. I know that’s the reality of war, but we find out Lupin dies when he appears to Harry, and then there’s a line near the end where the narrator says that Harry was sad about Lupin and Tonks, and until then I don’t remember reading anywhere that Tonks was dead. (I could have missed it, though.) It felt a little too much like Anya’s death in “Chosen.” Quick, with no chance to mourn it, even though we were very close to these characters.

The Epilogue. It was vague and weak and all happy-happy-joy-joy look at how lovely we all turned out… yet it told us pretty much NOTHING. We don’t know where they all ended up working, we don’t really know anything about them at all. JKR has said she wanted it that way, but I would have preferred the book ending before it. Until then, it was gorgeous. It’s not nearly as bad, but reminiscent of that movie A.I., which was a perfect perfect film right up until Osment’s character goes underwater and stares at the Blue Fairy, and you imagine this little boy staring at her for eternity. The screen goes dark, and I was in tears thinking, “What an awesome ending.” And then… the movie comes back up and we have to suffer through another 40 minutes of robots and aliens and CRAZY stuff that completely ruined the movie. The epilogue didn’t ruin the book for me, not by a long shot, but it was just entirely unnecessary.

NOW… if the epilogue disappointed you as much as it did me, then check out this article, where JK Rowling talked to a bunch of kids on The Today Show and revealed what, in her mind, actually happened to the characters. It’s WAY more interesting than what she wrote in the epilogue, making you wonder, Geez, Lady, why didn’t you just write this stuff out in the epilogue instead? Luna and Neville possibly being together? Harry and Ron as Aurors?

So what did you think? Let's talk about it openly in the comments, so if you haven't read the book, don't read the comments. :)

I’m dying to hear what everyone else thought!

Thursday, July 19, 2007

Great Cottage Read

Recommended by Deanna (aka ragdoll)

What the Dead Know by Laura Lippman

I had never heard of Laura Lippman before reading this novel last week while on vacation up north at our cottage. In terms of characterizing the novel, I'd have to say that it's a really well written, well conceived piece of literary/commercial fiction. Does that even help? Do you often buy books based on genres?

Anyway. Based on real-life events that happened in the Baltimore - Washington area in 1975, Lippman's novel tells the story of the two sisters, the 'Bethany girls,' who disappear from a shopping mall together one afternoon in the 1970s. Fast forward a couple of decades to where the book opens: a woman gets into a freak accident, crashes her car, and then is found walking down the road trying to flee the scene. When the police question her about the accident, she refuses to tell them anything except that she's one of the long-lost, thought dead Bethany sisters.

The rest of the novel unravels this mystery: is the woman, now in the hospital, truly a Bethany girl or is she someone looking to use that story to escape prosecution and/or punishment? And I have to tell you, it's completely compelling. I sat and read the book in its entirety over the course of a beautiful summer day where I could have been swimming, playing with my nephew and hanging out with my family. All things I always enjoy...unless I've got my nose in a completely addictive, totally well written thriller like What the Dead Know. Damn good summer reading and perfect for book clubs, I should think.

If you don't believe me, check out what Kate thought.

You can purchase online at Amazon, Indigo, or in your local bookstore.

Tuesday, July 17, 2007

Should TinTin Be Resurrected?
Publisher's Weekly had an interesting news story today on the book, TinTin in the Congo, which has disappeared for several years because of its overt racism. TinTin goes to Africa, and the Africans are depicted to look like monkeys in that old, early 20th century stereotypical way Africans were drawn. Little, Brown has brought the book back out, and Borders has announced they will be carrying it, but in the adult section. Should they?

The argument for the book is that it's an historical document, and that we should look at it as such and see it in its historical context. Is it true, however, that things like this should be kept around because if they aren't, we're doomed to repeat it or something? I'm not sure I'm comfortable with that reasoning. First, it's suggesting that racism is something that happened in the past, and isn't continuing to happen. Do you really think that all adults seeing that book would look at it as a historical document? I think many would be offended, still many others (unfortunately) would find it funny. There's that small segment of the population -- historians, professors, academics -- who would look at it the way Borders intended, but I don't think the rest of them would.

I remember finding a book once a few years ago, maybe it was at my grandparents (I can't remember) and it was a copy of Little Black Sambo. As soon as I opened it I felt my stomach turn. I flipped through it, shocked at how blatant the drawings were, how stereotypical the language was, and how offensive it was. But maybe some part of my brain clicked into what was really going on with what I'd found. Did I suddenly see something bigger -- that while I understand racism was rampant in the early 20th century, it's things like this that bring it to life?

For that reason, should the book be made available?

Here's the complete article from PW, or you can go check it out here:

U.S. Borders stores will stock the popular but controversial children's book Tintin in the Congo in an adult-oriented section of the store because of material the retailer says "could be considered offensive by some of our customers."

The book by Belgian artist Herge, which was first published in 1931, will be published in the U.S. for the first time this fall by Little, Brown Books for Young Readers. Part of a series of 24 books centered on the adventurer Tintin, the book depicts black Africans that strongly resemble monkeys and dialogue widely considered racist. It was removed from the children's section of U.K. Borders stores and reshelved with the graphic novels last week following complaints of offensive material.

Borders in the U.S. released a statement about the book after PW raised the issue last week. Spokesperson Ann Binkley said the retailer carries some titles from the Tintin series in its children’s sections. She added that the Borders is, "committed to acting responsibly as a retailer and with sensitivity to all of the communities we serve. Therefore, with respect to the specific title Tintin in the Congo, which could be considered offensive by some of our customers, we have decided to place this title in a section of our store intended primarily for adults—the Graphic Novels section. We believe adults have the capacity to evaluate this work within historical context and make their own decision whether to read it or not. Other “Tintin” titles will remain in the children’s section."

Meanwhile Dara La Porte, manager of the children's department of Politics & Prose in Washington DC, decided after seeing a U.K.-published edition of the book in 2005 not to sell it because of the racist content. "We got it in back a year and a half ago and returned it. We don’t carry it. If Little, Brown has changed it in some way we might consider carrying it," she said.

In a statement on its Web site, Little, Brown acknowledges the book "may be considered somewhat controversial as it reflects the colonial attitudes of the time it was created." A belly band with a similar statement will be wrapped around U.S. editions of the book.

Monday, July 16, 2007

Three Summer Books
Recommended by Fionna

Black Swan Green by David Mitchell

to kick things off, my first recommendation is black swan green, by david mitchell. i'm about halfway through, and loving it. if you're at all familiar with the adrian mole series from the '80s and '90s, you'll love this -- it's similiar (alienated, loser-ish 13-year-old boy in a small town in '80s england deals with life in a tragic/comedic way), but a bit more serious. You can purchase online at Indigo,, or, or check your local bookstore.

Don't You Forget About Me, edited by Jaime Clarke

in non-fiction, i just finished a really cool collection of essays about john hughes, called don't you forget about me (edited by jaime clarke). a bunch of different authors and writers talked about different themes in john hughes films (everything from clothing to sexuality to feminism to socio-economics -- i swear, it isn't as dry as it sounds!) and the impact the films had on their lives. for a ferris bueller / breakfast club / some kind of wonderful junkie like myself, it was an absolute treasure to read! You can purchase online at Indigo,, or, or check your local bookstore.

Shopaholic and Baby by Sophie Kinsella

for silly summer reading, i read shopaholic and baby. my chick-lit tastes (hey, everyone needs light summer reading!) usually run to marian keyes, but this was okay ... cute, fluffy and funny, but predictable. :-) You can purchase online at Indigo,, or, or check your local bookstore.

Monday, July 2, 2007

Harriet the Spy by Louise Fitzhugh

Recommended by Kulsum

I'm sure some of you may have already read this book, but I wanted to share the revelation it was for me to read this novel last week. I had never heard of it (not being born and raised in North America perhaps), until my writing mentor recommended that I read it in order to get comfortable with the narrative voice that I myself am exploring in my writing project.

What a wonderful, simple story it is. Harriet is a young girl who copes with her first experience of loss, and separation from someone she loves. A young, observant girl who notes down everything she sees without censorship or judgement, Harriet eventually has to pay for her frankness, and is thrown into an emotional tailspin while trying to negotiate her her sense of self in the midst of the crisis she has found herself in.

Despite this rather heavy-handed synopsis, the book is funny, sweet, and beautifully written. It predates Judy Blume, but has all the same sensibilities. I let out a great big whoosh of breath at the end of the book because reading it had made me remember so much of my own childhood and the simple pleasures I found in making up games and stories and all sorts of people in my head. Or peeping out the window and watching the neighbours, wondering about their lives.

I highly recommend this book if you haven't read it yet. And a re-read if you have. It's a classic, a quick read, and best of all, it makes you happy like eating chocolate makes you happy.

It's available online at or, or in the US at

Sunday, July 1, 2007

The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls

Recommended by: Sarah

I would like to add a recommendation: The Glass Castle by Jeannette Walls. It is a memoir written by a gossip columnist at The New York Post: she was haunted by the irony of outing the secrets of celebs when her own past was vaulted in secrecy. The book begins with her riding along in a taxi and watching a homeless woman root through the trash, when she realizes it is her mother. When she asks her mother later what she should tell people about her life, her mother looks at her with not a blink and says, "the truth." The truth of this woman Jeannette's life is incredible in its terrible poverty and neglect coupled with spirited genius and love in a family that is never boring. I couldn't get over it; and, it's funny.

It's available online at,, and