Spoiler Warning

[justcarol67]

--- In HPFGU-OTChatter at yahoogroups.com, "P. Alexis Nguyen"
<alexisnguyen at ...> wrote:
>
> On 7/19/07, Lee Truslow <specialcritters at ...> wrote:
> > I'm not the only one that thinks it wasn't all that revealing!!
> >
http://www.amazon.com/NY-Times-Released-Early-Review/forum/Fx2KME5D081OEJH/TxL6R51SQM6WPT/1/ref=cm_cd_ef_tft_tp/104-3558435-1123931?%5Fencoding=UTF8&cdItems=25&cdAnchor=0545010225&asin=0545010225
> >
> 
> I'm with you.  It wasn't revealing at all.  While there were things
> that were technically spoilers in the "review," there was nothing that
> could truly spoil the book for you.  There were no answers to the big
> questions - well, there was that note telling us what Deathly Hallows
> refer to, but it didn't explain anything.  In other words, it's much
> akin to HP being a detective/mystery novel and the review giving us
> one or two new clues.  It's nothing major, and I don't understand all
> the big fuss being kicked up about it.
> 
> But then, I don't mind spoilers since I believe that book reading is
> as much a journey, but then, that's likely why I don't understand the
> seemingly-intense anger that some people are feeling.
> 
> ~Ali
>
Carol responds:
Since the title is "Deathly Hallows" and we don't find out what they
are for quite some time, I'd say that it qualifies as a significant
though not a major spoiler. Releasing the review at a time when the
rest of us were waiting with anxiety and trepidation for the book to
appear, it was unethical and irresponsible, especially in a newspaper
known for its integrity, to print a review two days before the book
came out in opposition to the author's own frequently and vehemently
expressed wishes. (As for the store that sold the reviewer the copy!)
At least the Baltimore Sun, which also published a review with a
supposedly legally obtained copy of the book (how was that possible?)
prefaced the article with a spoiler warning. The New York Times didn't
even have the courtesy to do that.

BTW, I didn't see the photos of the epilogue (an even worse violation,
IMO, since it reveals at least some names of characters who survive),
does anyone know whether it was authentic? (I saw the photo of the
first page and someone's hand. That one was definitely the real thing.)

Even the most minor spoiler for a book which most readers want to read
unspoiled, and which the author and her publishers have worked so hard
to protect against leaks, is IMO reprehensible.

Carol, grateful that her pleasure and pain were unspoiled (except for
her own single peek ahead, which was her own choice and no one else's)