[the_old_crowd] On the epilogue

[elfundeb]

On 7/23/07, Mike & Susan Gray <mikesusangray at ...> wrote:
>
>   Gacked from another list. I'm not quite so positive about it, but she
> makes
> a very good case for the book as a whole and the epilogue in particular:
>
> http://chavelaque.blogspot.com/
>
>  .
>
> 
>

I think she makes some good points.  The function of the epilogue is clearly
not to convey the surface information.  It sets a mood, and beneath its
banal shippiness it tells us a lot, and not just Cheryl's point that it
illustrates Harry's normal family life, something he never had growing up.

In some corners there is disappointment because the defeat of Voldemort was
not accompanied by changes in the WW.  The Statute of Secrecy is still
there, the House system remains at Hogwarts, and there is no indication of a
new, less corrupt regime in power at the Ministry. JKR must have realized,
though, that this was too much to expect three young wizards to accomplish
within the boundaries of her story.  Their task was to defeat a wizard whose
existence pushed any debate of such reforms off the agenda entirely.

Voldemort's contribution to change was to expose the evil inherent in common
wizarding ideology to the general public.  Harry's defeat of Voldemort has
set the stage for changes in the WW, but it will be for the next generation
(or perhaps even the one after) to implement.  Underneath the surface
silliness of the Epilogue, it tells us that this process is happening:  (1)
Harry is comfortable with the possibility that his son will be sorted into
Slytherin, (2)  wizards seem to be less isolated from the Muggle world, or
else Ron would have magicked a car to Kings Cross and not bothered with
getting a muggle driver's license, and (3) barriers will break down further
in the next generation of wizards (Ron, in his own way, all but foretold his
daughter's marriage to Scorpius Malfoy).

So while I don't love the epilogue, it's much more valuable as written than
a would a catalogue of what the significant surviving characters are doing
for a living these days.

Debbie
who wrote this up this morning in response to something someplace else on
the net, but can't find the original posting anymore


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