SPOILER ALERT: do not read if you haven't read the book yet!!!
jk rowling spins out another awesome chapter of harry potter adventures. i just finished...moreSPOILER ALERT: do not read if you haven't read the book yet!!!
jk rowling spins out another awesome chapter of harry potter adventures. i just finished reading it and i'm feening for more.
i read a couple of other reviews and some people were disappointed in the lack of action this book had. i'd have to disagree. while there was significantly less adventures than the previous books, rowling still managed to maintain an aura of mystery. some questions that were running through my mind as i read:
1. who the hell is the half-blood prince? i was disappointed cuz i was sure it was voldemort; how could rowling be so transparent? so i was surprised when it turned out to be snape.
2. that was another question i had: was snape really a good guy or a bad guy? even when he murdered dumbledore, i was half-expecting it to be a hoax, to allow dumbledore to escape. even when dumbledore was finally encased in a tomb, i was fantasizing about harry glancing into the distance with the realization that dumbledore is still alive; kinda like how professor X did when jean grey died in X2. and i'm still expecting him to pop up later on in the 7th book as a surprise good guy, that he was working for potter's side the whole time.
3. when are ron and hermoine gonna hook up?! i swear, they should put some hot and heavy sex scenes in these books already. the kids are already 16; lord knows they've all got more than a little wand action goin' on.
another reviewer criticized the book for focusing too much on voldemort's past. while i can see how that can be kind of a drag for some people, i found in fascinating. i don't know if rowling has done her psychological research, but voldemort sounds like a certified antisocial psychopath. i thought this added more depth to the entire saga, rather than took away from it. and it's not like there wasn't ANY action. sexual and otherwise.
i guess the only critiques i'd have to give the book is as follows:
1. snape's admission that he is the half-blood prince. it kinda came out in the middle of a battle so it was rushed and didn't allow enough time for harry potter to register the news. as a reader, i was imaging the battle scene in my mind: all the confusion and the chaos. it was hard to really let the news sink in that snape was the half-blood prince because there was already so much going on. maybe if rowling had written it so that harry felt the battle scene melt away as snape's admission struck fear into his heart. or something like that! or maybe if rowling had written it so the truth came out as snape was killing dumbledore.
2. some of the twists and turns were a little sloppy. like when it came out that rosemerta had been cursed. there was nothing in the book that suggested that. i like it when authors drop little hints here and there that are very easy to overlook but come rushing back to you once the twist is revealed. one twist that was good was when harry suddenly realizes that snape is working for the other side. shoo, i should've been rowling's creative writing consultant. get a share on some of them royalities, ya dig?
perhaps i would've been disappointed if this had been the last book. but i'm kinda looking at it as a build-up to the finale. now that we have a first-look into voldemort's insanity, i'm soooo looking forward to reading how harry kicks his ass.
another question: what a shame that dumbledore's death was all in vain. harry found a note saying that the horcrux they thought they had stolen was a fake. and the note was written by RAB who the hell is RAB?? so glad the 7th book is out this month, though there's a slim chance i'll get a hold of one until more copies are made. tsk!
EDIT: oh, shit, it comes out in JULY? goddammit.(less)
let me start off by saying that my review of this book is totally biased for two reasons.
first, look at the cover. the boy was fine as fuck. i'm a fan...morelet me start off by saying that my review of this book is totally biased for two reasons.
first, look at the cover. the boy was fine as fuck. i'm a fan for his fuckableness if not for his musical genius.
second, i've already crowned him the king of rock n' roll despite what others may have said contrary to that. anyone who can dress up like a blinged-out adult karate kid and have performers after him (ie., michael jackson, prince) follow suit has GOT to be the king (if not a queen) in my eyes.
but i digress. i'm an avid reader and can read almost anything in a couple days or less so long as i have nothing else to do. however, i have come across books that have left me snoring in disappointment. this book was NOT one of them.
"me and a guy named elvis"... the title says it all. author jerry schilling reminisces about his first-hand experiences with the king of rock n' roll. they had become football pals when schilling was but a young tween of 12, and elvis was 19 and already making musical waves with his first number one single, "that's all right." i'd have to say that the blossomings of their childhood friendship intrigued me the most. i was transported to the 50's when elvis' music was new and raw, a time when gyrating hips were probably perceived to be the dance of the devil. the image was clear-cut: elvis was danger. the girls loved him. the guys wanted to be him. and the adults wanted to lock up their kids for all eternity.
then it just got depressing. without delving into too much detail, one can see the price elvis paid for being famous. if you have to read the book in segments (unlike myself who likes to read the entire book at once), don't allow too much time in between each sitting. i finished the book in 2 days, eager to read about what crazy shit elvis and the memphis mafia got themselves into next. i think the fact that i remained so engrossed in the story was what made me cry bitter tears at the end. and i've been a fan for all of a week by that time (thanks to an american idol special that featured celine dion "singing" with the late king).
but i warn you all to remain close to the book for another reason. schilling also talks about his own career development as a film editor while trying to be friends with elvis. and while he might've been fabulously skilled at his trade, there is something lacking in his writing.
i think the fact that i was reading about elvis himself and the fact that i was already curious to read about his life is what made me give the book 4 stars instead of 5. unfortunately, it felt more like a chronology of events with a smattering of emotions thrown in for good measure. i would've liked to have read a more vivid description of emotions in schilling's stories. it almost felt as though he was holding back for some reason. even when he described the fights between himself and elvis, it sometimes didn't read more than a line as simple as, "i was furious with him." i'm like, okay, schilling, HOW furious were you with him? were you cursing him out in your head? were you about to explode with rage? did you hate him in that very moment?
perhaps when you're that close to a living legend it's hard to be objective, or even honest about him for fear of tainting a running legacy.
one of the few times i felt something tug at my heart strings was when schilling described how devastated he was over the schoking news that elvis had died. there was the numbness and the shock. then the outpouring of anguish when he finally came to terms with his best friend's death. and i wept with him.
i've gazed upon his beautiful face (on youtube) and basked in the molasses of his voice. but now i'm even more sorry that i never had a chance to see or experience elvis as close as schilling did. now i have to read more books on elvis. let the fetish continue...(less)