Disappointment

[Cathy Drolet]

No: HPFGUIDX 177502

Well, I certainly didn't expect all this hubub over one little comment.   I think I"ll return to not posting after this.

Carol said
>>"Bloody horrible" seems like an exagerration to me.<<

CathyD now:
To you maybe not to me. Nor to my DH (Dear Husband in this case) who despises it almost as much as I do.

>> Sure, it has flaws, including plot holes and inconsistencies. Sure, some of our favorite characters died, but we knew that was bound to happen. Sure, some of the things we anticipated from the interviews didn't
happen, but does it really matter, for example, that no character performed magic late in life? Can we really judge the book by its failure to conform to expectations based on interviews? Can we fairly and realistically expect a book to echo our own religious, philosophical or political views and judge it as "bloody horrible" if
it doesn't? <<

CathyD:
Here, lealess can answer this one better than I can, and is expressing my opinion as well.

>>What I got in DH was a book that lauded stupidity, instinct, breeding ("blood" and house), passivity, and loyalty over learning, planning, choice, effort, and individual responsibility; that threw out or literally killed off every difficult story line in favor of trite resolutions (house-elf liberation comes down to Hermione/Ron kissing, werewolf liberation and integration come down to one-sentence death, house division comes down to Slytherin all bad, yes, even Snape who some continue to view as exclusively selfish and one-note in his 
motivations, and Slughorn, who some continue to view as hapless and lesser of two evils, and Draco, who some continue to view as cowardly and weak); that seems oblivious to its own double standards for 
heroes versus bad guys, not to mention lessened standards for female characters (Hermione the gatherer and food preparer); and perhaps worst of all, was put together so sloppily, with plotholes, deus ex 
machina galore, 180 degree changes in character (Kreacher, Snape, Dumbledore to some extent), differing degrees of protection on Horcruxes, echoes of other works (locket=one ring, Molly=Ripley), too much teasing about Dumbledore's past, and groan, on and on and on.  So, JKR did not fail to meet my expectations.  She just fell far below my standards for a viable piece of fiction and far away from my 
personal convictions.  <<

CathyD:
Sorry, didn't quite know where to snip that one.  DH fell, not just so far below my own standards, but I think it fell way below JKR's standards as well as va32h is about to point out.

va32h said:
>>It does not seem strange to me to condemn a book for not meeting the expectations set by the author in her six previous books. 

Any expectations I had of DH came from what I read in the first six books.  I don't think thousands of readers pulled ideas like "house unity" out of our collective behinds with no basis for supposing that 
such a theme might bear fruit. <<

CathyD:
As well as dozens of other ideas that thousands of people had.  

va32h:
>>And honestly, I know you don't mean it this way but pleas to "read it again" just come off as terribly condescending, IMHO.  It's as if the fault cannot possibly lie in the work, but only in the reader and if 
we would just look at it this way or that way or try harder, we'd like it, just as we ought to. <<

CathyD:
Couldn't agree more except I think some of the people who are pleading with the disappointed to "read it again" are meaning to be condescending.   

va32h:
>>I have, in fact, read the book about three times now, not counting the times I re-read certain passages for the purpose of discussion. And it isn't getting any better for me, sorry. <<

CathyD:
I haven't read it again.  I have re-read certain passages looking for something or other, but I will not read it again as a whole book.  Not unless I have some catastrophic thing happen to my brain and I forget I've read it the first time.

lealess again:
>>What I don't like about saying these things on this forum is that either someone will feel I have to be saved from my own opinions and become a born-again DH-evangelist, or someone will take the tiny instances in which I have misspoken and address those instead of addressing the whole thing.  Such is life.<<

CathyD:
Which is how I feel about my initial little post stirring up this big pot.  

Perhaps the disappointed should start a new e-mail list so we can voice our own opinions without fear of someone rushing in to try to save us from ourselves.  







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]