Finished - lots of spoilers...

[bluesqueak]

SPOILER SPACE LOTS OF SPOILER SPACE MORE SPOILER SPACE SPOILER SPACE 
LOTS OF SPOILER SPACE MORE SPOILER SPACESPOILER SPACE LOTS OF SPOILER 
SPACE 
MORE 
SPOILER 
SPACE
SPOILER 
SPACE 
LOTS 
OF 
SPOILER 
SPACE 
MORE 
SPOILER 
SPACE
EVEN
MORE
SPOILER
SPACE
 > Carolyn:
 > Certainly the whole series has been about whether or not you can, 
 or 
 > should want to escape death. I read the quotes at the front of DH 
 > with relish and found the first half of the book very promising –  
> I really thought she would give us a grown up outcome, but sadly it 
>  didn't transpire. She's said that the end has been written since 
> she started, by which I suppose she means that awful epilogue. I 
> think that turned into a real hostage to fortune, because it 
> prevented her killing off any of the trio. I was reminded of that 
> time Harry had to do a stupid twiddle in mid-air to avoid being hit 
> by a bludger; I felt JKR had to do the same – first with Hagrid, 
>  who should have been deaded no question (what on earth stopped 
> Voldie?), and then Harry.

Pip!Squeak: 
I would disagree that a 'grown-up' outcome means a major character 
*must* die; I think JKR took her readers very neatly through Harry's 
decision to do something that he was convinced would result in his 
death. Emotionally, she took Harry up to the point of death and 
 beyond it. He thought he'd died.
 
 When you look at those quotes again, the first ends with 'Bless the 
 children, give them triumph now', which I think hints strongly that 
the Trio will triumph.
 
 And besides, of the three Trio, Ron has lost one brother and had two 
 other brothers permanently disfigured. Hermione has been tortured. 
 Both saw their families having to flee into hiding. Harry has lost 
his parents, his pet, his godfather, his headmaster, all his parent's 
 closest friends (including one person he didn't realise was his 
mother's closest friend). And you still want one of them dead? Didn't 
 they lose enough for realism?

Carolyn: 
> Agree with Pip!Squeak's identification of hoxboxes by chapter, but 
> still think she cheated by not indicating anywhere that there was A
> another legend (the DH) which some but not all of them played into. 
> The only hints I can think of were DD's interest in alchemy (never 
> satisfactorily explained), his insistence on Harry always getting 
> the cloak back and Ollivander's fascination with what could really 
> be done with a wand by the right wizard, whether for good or evil. 
> Although we got a lot of retrospective hints about places where 
> Voldie could have stashed bits of his soul, I really don't think 
> anyone could have predicted the DH dimension. So, can't see how she 
> can bring together a plot arc for us that only she knows about.
> > 

No, I've seen such plot arcs in both Joss Whedon (Buffy the Vampire 
Slayer) and the latest Doctor Who series. They're retrospective; you 
can't predict all of them, aren't supposed to predict all of them. 
What happens is that there's enough given the audience they can tell 
there is an arc (and predict some bits). Then it all comes together 
at the finale, and then you realise how seemingly inconsequential or 
disparate elements were contributing to the arc.
 
We now know about the plot arc. So now, we can look *back* and see 
how she stuffed the arc into the earlier books (fun). Basically, 
we've seen the Hallows (and Horcrux) arcs from Harry's POV, not from 
an omnipotent POV. 

We're in the same situation Harry is at the end of the story. Now 
we've gone through it, we can see the whole thing clearly. But not 
while we were in the middle of the action. 
 
Pip!Squeak

<and *why* does Yahoomort miss quoted material from the top two lines?
>