Ok, now that everyone I know who is into Harry Potter has read HBP, I'm going to post the posts that I put on "Spoiler Zone" before, so that I can get rid of that blog and clean up my dashboard. If you've already read these or if you don't care, you can skip them.

July 18
Ok, so about the Half-Blood Prince (and have I ever been dying to talk to someone about it)... This is going to be very fragmented and stream-of-consciousnessish. I'll probably go back and read the book a second time, more slowly, later this week; then I'll have more coherent things to say about it.

First of all, I'd like to congratulate myself on being right about Ron/Hermione and Harry/Ginny. I've been waiting for that since the Chamber of Secrets. However... all my other predictions that I posted a week or two ago were woefully mistaken. For example, the fact that Snape is not actually redeemable after all. (Although now Draco might be...hmmm). Sad, sad, sad. And now we know why he didn't try too hard to help Harry with Occlumency last year (do you mind if I just behave as if the Harry Potter universe is real and is happening concurrently with the books being published even though that would by chronologically impossible? Thanks.) And he treated Hermione so awfully not because she was Harry's friend (or not only because) but because she's not a pureblood.

As for the new and improved theories... could it be that R.A.B. is Sirius' brother Regulus Black? The narrator tells us that he died before Sirius, which fits with the content of the letter about the necklace. Hmmm...

Also, although I don't like to speak ill of the dead, I think this book's events invite one to question Dumbledore's decisions. Clearly he was wrong about Snape; he ignored all evidence to the contrary. And personally, I'm kind of annoyed with his whole martyr complex in this book--insisting on drinking the liquid in the lake, paralyzing Harry when Draco bursts in, acting all cavalier towards the psychos who have come to kill him. I feel that his death could have been avoided. (Except of course for the fact that it was a narrative necessity). *sigh*

And what was this whole Lupin/Tonks thing out of the blue. I thought the whole time that Tonks was going to end up being under the Imperius Curse or someone else on Polyjuice--the weird behavior, the different Patronus--and then she turns out to be just pining away after, of all people, Lupin? Needed a bit more foreshadowing there, don't you think? Maybe Rowling's been reading too much fanfiction.

By the way, I dreamed last night that Rowling had published the seventh book a day after the sixth, like "surprise, here it is--no waiting," but then it turned out to be really bad. Possibly my subconscious' way of preparing me for the two-year wait ahead.

July 20
(Partly responding to Lynette)
I know, it's weird to think that Harry wouldn't be at Hogwarts for the seventh book (although I think the chances of an eighth book are slim to none). Somehow it doesn't seem right, though. You can't just introduce a quest into a series in the final book.

But about the Horcruxes, here's my new theory (thought it out in the greenhouse today): what if Harry is the missing Horcrux? All this business about Voldemort transferring part of himself to Harry when he tried to kill him? And he had just recently killed H's mom and pop, so that satisfies the killing requirement. Like, maybe the scar is the locus of the Horcrux, which is why it is so connected to V. And that plays right into my theory about Harry having to die at the end of book 7. He'll have to get himself into some kind of situation where he and Voldemort die together--big heroic sacrifice and all that.

Hmm, that doesn't particularly explain why Voldemort would want to kill Harry, except of course that H's such a liability to him. Maybe he thinks he can reabsorb his soul-part if he kills Harry himself, which is why he doesn't want Snape or Draco or Bellatrix to do it. What do you think? Legit theory?

Ooh, courtesy of Mugglenet, an interesting tidbit: when cleaning out Grimmauld Place, Harry finds an old locket that they can't open. This fits with the theory of the initials standing for Regulus Black, who could have left the locket in the old Black mansion. Meaning it shouldn't be too hard for Harry to find later.

July 22
Hmm, been reading more online editorials and theories about HPB and HP in general. Pretty much the only thing I've learned is that I could literally spend days reading that stuff. I keep clicking and the hours roll by...

However, no matter how many times I read it, I just can't buy this whole "Snape's actually still good--he's just a double, double, triple, quadruple agent for the good guys." I accept that it's a valid theory with a fair amount of textual support (unlike some other theories I've read)--just not enough textual support. Or rather, perhaps, just not something that I think Rowling would do in her plot. Here are the reasons why:
1. People do not come back from the dead in her universe. Plus, Dumbledore has to be really dead in order to give Harry his moment of mentor-free heroism.
2. Killing someone is a big deal. Not something that you can do and still be one of the good guys.
3. After convincing us for so long to trust Snape and trust Snape and trust Snape and then hitting us with this huge blow of "oops, just kidding, he's actually evil," it kind of takes the oomph out of it to say, "oh, wait, fooled you again, he's good."

Oh, also learned after reading dozens of editorials, that none of my theories are actually original--everyone else thought of them too. Ah well.

July 25
So it seems like everyone I'm reading thinks that Snape was following Dumbledore's orders to kill him because "Dumbledore would not plead for his life"--referencing the line "Severus, please" (or something like that). This is a valid point, but what if the "please" was neither "please, I don't want to die," nor "please go through with the plan to kill me," but "please don't return to the dark side." That is, Dumbledore was pleading with Snape to justify his faith in him. Which Snape ignored and killed him anyway. I still think Snape is evil. I stand against the thousands of other Harry Potter fans who want Snape to be good. I say Dumbledore made a mistake in trusting him and that mistake cost him his life.

Also, can I just talk about how annoyed I am at the supposed ending of the Harry/Ginny relationship? I hate hate hate that "we can't be together because I'm the hero and it would be too dangerous for you" line. Bleh. Hated it in Spiderman. Hated it in The Man from Snowy River. Hated it in Buffy (each and every one of the eight or nine times it happened). Ginny needs to tell Harry to shove it and that she can handle herself. Which she clearly can. Grr.

Labels: HP

0 comments