To kill or not to kill and resolutions of the storylineWAS :Re: Disarming spell

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 185484

 Magpie:
> Oh--well, yeah, I would agree. I don't think the "standard" ending
is
> always bad. There's a reason that they become standard. <SNIP> So I
would argue that this ending isn't a big
> risk or a new thing on JKR's part, but not that it's a bad ending
> because of that. To be honest, it was the ending that I expected--
and
> not in a bad way. I didn't think Harry dying was necessary, or that
> Voldemort living was necessary.

Alla:

Right, I mean, I was not hundred percent sure that Harry will
survive, so I cannot say that I necessarily expected this ending, but
certainly wanted it.


> Magpie:
> I didn't think the Slytherin's resolution was that new either. I
> mean, yeah, there are a lot of books where the houses would have
come
> together, but once you realize that the Slytherins are just bad
guys
> there's nothing new about them crawling away in defeat. There were
no
> orcs that came to the side of the Fellowship, no storm troopers who
> switched sides in Star Wars. I believe the only Tellamarine who
> switched sides in Narnia was the Prince who rather did it Snape-
style.

Alla:

Oh well, I mean nothing is completely new of course, but yes I
thought it was rather fresh and original, not unique, of course, but
something that I have not seen much done with the twist JKR used.

You are right, of course there are books where the group of bad guys
just gets defeated and there are books where the group of bad guys,
or not really bad guys will come together with the group of good
guys, or not so good guys, rifts between them will be healed, we will
see that everybody is united and all is good with the world now. I
mean, what I wrote sounds a bit flippant, but I do not mean it to be.

I usually just do not buy a great deal of redemption stories - I
believe there are some people who will never change their evil ways,
but well done redemption story pleases me as much as anybody else, I
just refuse to agree that redemption ending is necessarily more
satisfying than not redemption one.

I am also saying that yes sure, I had read plenty of fantasy books
ending both ways that you described.

However to me the conflict between Slytherins and rest of the school
and its resolution still feels fairly original for the several
reasons.

I cannot remember many books of fantasy genre, where conflict similar
to what we have here is described and hints for unity are dropped,
but we do not see the unity itself in the book. One can say of course
that JKR just dropped the storyline and believe me, as I said many
times before, I argued for years that Slytherins are NOT being
prejudiced before and being misunderstood, that yes, they ARE bad
guys, just bad guys, just the villains of the story, nothing more. I
am being completely honest here, if this is what JKR intended, I have
no problem with it whatsoever. But I am NOT so sure that this is what
JKR intended, I mean, I am sure that she did not intend to pull the 
rug and
say, oh yeah look they are NOT bad, you all just being prejudiced
against it.

I see the hints in the text, which I am not asking you to accept, but
I am thinking that maybe this storyline was indeed written that
subtly that it could be ignored, you know?

I mean, Slughorn does return to fight, and while I wish that JKR
would have never said that Slytherins return to fight and left it to
the reader to decide, I think Pippin's interpretation of that quote
can easily hold water. How indeed would Harry know that Slughorn
returned with *friends of the remaining students*? Okay, families, I
get, but friends?

So, what I am trying to say is that to me the originality is here
only if I accept that Slytherins' redemption is written subtly and it
is not very glorious, glamorous, etc.

I mean, I cannot stand Draco, but he does save his friend from mortal
danger. Isn't that the deed of courage of JKR's favorite house?

I am not making sense, I am just trying to explain why I find
Slytherins' resolution to be original.

But I would agree that if they are just bad guys, it is not original.
I just think that she portrayed the kids whose minds are massively
swayed by poison and what it did to them, not that they are all bad.

But before you ask, yes, one thing goes against this argument of
mine - against the subtlety I mean, I have no clue whatsoever why the
Hat was left to sort.

So that to me implies that maybe Slytherins' role was simply to be
villains of the story, which is cool with me, I am just curious if
that is indeed what she intended.

Magpie:
> The Avatar ending too, I agree, wraps things up with the same kind
of
> closures. They do it different ways (Ozai de-powered instead of
dead;
> Azula locked up and insane instead of dead) but they're hitting the
> same points: the heroes triumph while being true to their better
> ideals as laid out in the text.

Alla:

Yes.

JMO,

Alla