Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
discussion
So, er...some questions.
I like the way you think, Lindis
Brown wrote: "Hate to break it to you, sugartits, but i can guarantee with 100% certainty that i've read more books than you. However the main thing i'd like to address is your next comment."Reader's interpret..."
I find the first sentence in this post to be very offensive. It’s one thing to argue opinions, but to actually call someone “sugartits” is just plain rude. It wasn’t even directed towards me and I was offended. You have to remember that you started a thread about YA books, therefore YA’s will be interested about the topic of discussion, and although I’m sure that most children see and do worse on a daily basis, there is no reason for name calling. For the most part, you sound like an intelligent person, however, that one word made you seem very childish.
@Ace - Indeed. And the wizarding world and Hogwarts did provide a home for Voldemort, in the same way that it did for Harry. We can see this clearly in Book 6 and a little in Book 2. At school, Voldemort was a popular student, with both professors and other children. It was his own personality that sent him down such a different path from Harry. @-hainekhen- - Yes, we might be over-analyzing, but it's fun!
"I find the first sentence in this post to be very offensive."And? So what?
well, it is pretty rude and cursing can be offensive.
Still not getting the importance of that.
Låurelei wrote: "Still not getting the importance of that."As it wasn't directed towards you, I guess that doesn't really matter now does it?
"It wasn’t even directed towards me and I was offended"Word for word, what you said, in the same reply that had: "I find the first sentence in this post to be very offensive."
Lindis wrote: "Mark wrote: "thefreestman wrote: "Why couldn't the eagles just fly Frodo to Mordor to begin with?"Because when they tried to send out a request they sent it to the wrong thread."
He he he th..."
Thanks!!
Capsguy wrote: ""It wasn’t even directed towards me and I was offended"Word for word, what you said, in the same reply that had: "I find the first sentence in this post to be very offensive.""
Are you pointing out the repetition? That is there but there's no contradiction in two statements that say the same thing... so... what point where you trying to make?
Was answering Capsguy because he refused to make any sense
I think every woman/girl should offended by 'sugartits' although I'm betting you're going to hear one or two comments about 'the female'
thefreestman wrote: "I don't know her name, cba to look"Anyway I looked and I shouldn't have gone on what capsguy was saying as he never actually mentioned that there was two of them... and was actually attempting to accuse one of them of something as was only attributing the two comments to one person... it was this something that i was trying to figure out so thank you freestman
I didn't realize there were comments after the reply to mine. DELETED
thefreestman wrote: "Mark: there were not two women, Donna (the female), made both statements. capsguy was correct.Lauralei: dont even"
Actually, that means that my original point was correct and he was making absolutely no sense...
No, you just suck at comprehensionRead the conversation flow and you'll see.
If I make a statement to John, and Mary gets offended by it, later on Mary can't go on about how if a point isn't directed to you, it doesn't matter, because she was just twisting her panties over what she just contradicted herself with.
Sorry, copied wrong quote, wonder why you thought I made no sense.Here you go:
"It wasn’t even directed towards me and I was offended"
"As it wasn't directed towards you, I guess that doesn't really matter now does it?"
message 119:
by
Natalie loves Orlando Bloom!
(last edited Apr 16, 2011 08:58AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
im the biggest hp geek evr! more than any1.. i realy think. no ofence my opinion
Palice wrote: "Brown, I feel like you googled 'flaws' with Harry Potter plot and then started asking it here. As a reader, you should try to understand it yourself, not look for answers from others. Everyone has ..." ive done more than u brown
message 121:
by
Natalie loves Orlando Bloom!
(last edited Apr 16, 2011 08:57AM)
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
i found that dobbys was the most tragic, as he saved evr1, and then died... but then freds was very sad:(
wut about u?
Brown wrote: "he was insane and wanted to rule the world? i totally missed the part in the story where it said that. Sure he was what can bed defined within the confines of the story as 'evil' but he just wanted..."not mad exactly...desperate for power and dominations seems more appropriate....and sounds bettr:)
thers a difference....
Well that's just splitting hairs.
Brown wrote: "Are american soldiers in Iraq evil?they're killing people, causing injury and pain
are they evil?"
I guess that this is just my opinion, and I certainly don't want to bring religion into this, but, I was raised that, even God, forgives what soldiers do, they are fighting for their country. So I don't put them in the catagory of "evil"
Brown wrote: "Superman causes pain injury and ruin, is he evil?Batman too come to think of it.
Heck didn't God (although i am an atheist) flood the world and murder billions?
is God evil?"
Now you're just trying to start something! LOL : )
Sid wrote: "I like the way you think, Lindis"Why thank you Sid, at least somebody does! LOL : )
Ace wrote: "Brown: I guess you don't remember, but Tom Riddle was dark even before Albus ever met him. Saying that being in Albus' care contributed to him going bad is completely off the the mark in my opini..."Well said Ace. Also, Tom wasn't really in Albus's care. Dumbledore was only a teacher at that time, not Headmaster. He just happened to be the one that was sent to tell him about Hogwatrts, it could have been anyone! Dumbledore was the only wizard that Riddle ever feared, because Riddle knew that Dumbledore was a very powerful and wise wizard and Dumbledore didn't trust him. Dumbledore was the only one that didn't buy into Riddles charming personality. Riddle could get any wizard to trust him. He sought out wizards that he could manipulate and learn from. He knew he couldn't manipulate Dumbledore, so you can't say that he was under Dumbledore's care.
I cried when Dobby died, but not at many (any?) others. I don't know that that makes his death the most tragic though.
Ace wrote: "Wow, we really got off topic here, it seems. I guess to get back to topic, I'll ask a question.Which death seemed the most tragic to you in Deathly Hallows?
I can't really decide, as they all s..."
What about Fred? I cried when Dobby died. I cried when Fred died? But for some reason, Lupin and Tonks didn't effect me as much. I guess that's because they were older, and had lived more of a life. And they weren't a cute little creature that had recently found his freedom. Also, while the fact that they left behind little Teddy was tragic, knowing that Harry was his Godfather and Harry WAS going to live. I knew that between Harry, the Weasleys, grandparents and the rest of the Order of the Phoenix, Little Teddy would not lack in the departments of love, care, or happiness.
J.K. Rowling even said that she did that to create another "Harry" but in a better suituation.
Capsguy wrote: "Sorry, copied wrong quote, wonder why you thought I made no sense.Here you go:
"It wasn’t even directed towards me and I was offended"
"As it wasn't directed towards you, I guess that doesn't r..."
That does make sense now.
dobbys or freds was the most tragic...:(
ikr! i totally luv dobby! and fred is sooooooooo funny!
freds was the worst, but i <3 tonks.......
lost:P wrote: "Brown wrote: "he was insane and wanted to rule the world? i totally missed the part in the story where it said that. Sure he was what can bed defined within the confines of the story as 'evil' but ..."there is quite literally no agenda or motive told to us in the text.
Not even in an ambiguous Dostoyevsky The Double way either, just a blank hole, also known as a plot hole, when looking at Voldermorts motives
Lindis wrote: "Brown wrote: "Are american soldiers in Iraq evil?
they're killing people, causing injury and pain
are they evil?"
I guess that this is just my opinion, and I certainly don't want to bring reli..."
sorry to inform you that the soldiers murdering people in Iraq are not 'fighting for their country' America was not and is not at any threat from Iraq and are seen as the rest of the world as global terrorists.
I don't think anyone's imaginary friend from any religion would forgive them for that, because they're murdering people for political agendas, not some obtuse sense or right or wrong morality.
Brown wrote: "lost:P wrote: "Brown wrote: "he was insane and wanted to rule the world? i totally missed the part in the story where it said that. Sure he was what can bed defined within the confines of the story..."You are not informing me of anything that I don't already know. That was just my opinion. And I can see a valid point in your opinion too, thanks. : )
1. Why did Voldemort want to take over the wizarding world?Two complementing reasons: first, Voldemort worshiped power. He saw himself as the most powerful wizard, and thus worshiped himself. Though Rowling doesn't acknowledge it, this is in fact the ultimate sin, Pride, whereby one worships oneself in lieu of God (Cf. Satan's fall in Isaiah 14:12-14 and Ezekiel 28:12-18). Second, since Voldemort worships power, and he views "Mudbloods" and non-wizards as less powerful, he desired to "purify" the race by ridding it of all the magically impotent...in the same way that Hitler desired the "ethnic cleansing" of the Jews. The parallels between Voldemort and Hitler and between the war in the wizarding world and WWII become increasingly apparent as the books progress.
2. Why didn't the wizards use guns?
Wands are presumably more effective, although I wouldn't want to be on the business end of a dragon-heartstring-core 50 caliber sniper rifle.
3. Why didn't Harry buy his friends birthday presents?
Harry is a douchebag. :) Or maybe, as has been said, it wasn't reported in the books, but we're meant to think that he did. This is also the answer to the oft-asked question, "Don't characters in books ever go to the bathroom?"
Whenever I read the books and from interviews I read with J.K. Rowling, the simple reason to why Voldemort wanted to take over the world, both muggle and wizarding world, was because of the very simple fact that he was just evil. Yes he did kinda have a sad childhood but it was not so important as to say why he became evil. The sad childhood and his dislike for the Orphanage was more due to the fact that it made Harry able to relate to Voldemort - they both had lousy childhoods and Hogwarts was their first real home for both of them - this plays a significant part in all the books - that Harry and Voldemort are so much alike, but that they are also so different: Voldemort = evil and Harry = good. (anyway that is what I think anyway).
Voldemort is first and foremost driven and motivated by fear of death. He sees death as something to be avoided at all costs, and he devotes his whole life to the pursuit of immortality. The first murders he committs (of his father and grandparents) at the age of 16, is in order to create his first Horcrux. As we know, he creates a total of seven Horcruxes which bring him as close to immortality as he can hope to get. Voldemort sees death as a weakness, something which becomes clear at the age 11 when he tells Dumledore that that his mother couldn't have been a witch or else "she wouldn't have died" at childbirth. When he uses his powers to kill others he sees it as triumphing over death and being in control of it.
Also, Voldemort looks at himself as a born "leader". He feels that his magical powers gives him the right to rule over "weaker" people without the same abilities. He is not alone, many wizards (especially pure-bloods) share this view, which allowed him to gain so many followers.
Voldemort detest muggles because he sees them as inferior and unworthy to live. (There are many cases in the world where people have had this view of someone who is different, which has resulted in horrible situations and homocide.) One could agrue that his hatred has been fueled by the muggel father who deserted him and the people in the orphanage where he had a difficult childhood.
Voldemort is considered to be very extreme, but throughout history there have been many figures very similar to Voldemort. Many compare him to Hitler, and J.K. Rowling herself has drawn parallells between Voldemort and Stalin.
One of the reasons why I'm such a big fan of the Harry Potter books is because I find Voldemort to be a very believable villan. He is not just an evil force, he is a real person with twisted motives and ideas. He is driven by the worst of human qualities.
Brown wrote: "Superman causes pain injury and ruin, is he evil?Batman too come to think of it.
Heck didn't God (although i am an atheist) flood the world and murder billions?
is God evil?"
fallacy of sweeping generalization...not all those who injures are evil...it depends on the intent...Voldemort's intent has malice.
I have a question too. In the scene with Dumbledore in the King's Cross what exactly was the wierd distorted baby like creature?
I know I am not being pretty clear but here is a excerpt from the book- .... It had a form of a small child, curled on the ground, its skin raw and roug, flayed looking and it lay shuddering under a seat where it had been left, unwanted, stuffed out of sight, struggling for breath. I have read the book twice but I couldn't find any explaination of what exactly that thing was.
Harry Potter and the deathly hallows
I thought it was the part of Harry's soul which had been Voldemort, the 'Horcrux' part which was destroyed when Harry allowed himself to endure the Avada Kadavra curse. That creature is quite similar in description to the baby-like thing in Book 4 from which Voldemort rises again. I don't know though, that's just what I thought when I read it.
Yeah, it was the part of Voldemort's soul in Harry which was destroyed when Voldemort tried to kill him. That's why Harry was repulsed by it, and why he said to to Voldemort: "I've seen what you'll become otherwise" during the final battle when he tries to convince Voldemort to feel remorse.
ya its kinda complicated......
the whole supply of time turners was smashed when they invaded the ministry in HP 5.
I believe that the child like creature is what's left of Voldemorts soul.Since he split his soul so many times, all that was left was a small piece, small, pitiful, and unloved. The only part of his soul that remained in his "body".
well he was small and unloved from pretty much the beging of his life.
all discussions on this book
|
post a new topic
Batman too come to think of it.
Heck didn't God (although i am an atheist) flood the world and murder billions?
is God evil?