Posted on 07/21/2007 5:18:11 PM PDT by JenB
I think it’s first, because he was “exotic,” just as she was, and second, because he was needy. (And of course, he was kind, too.) She thought she could make him happy, but it’s clear in DH that he wasn’t going to let her do it.
That seems pretty obvious, really ... aside from his furry little problem, Lupin is thoughtful, understanding, wise, and generally a good guy. He keeps plugging along in very adverse circumstances. He's also got a bit of danger about him, both in what he does for the Order, and of course that he's a werewolf as well. He seems like the sort of guy that a lot of women are attracted to -- or say they are.
Lupin's attraction to Tonks ... well, guys are a lot more simple in that regard. She's attractive, smart, funny, able, and devoted to him.
Feh -- why mess with a wand when you don't need to? He can customize it on the fly!
No modern tragedies are tragedies, they’re just the new way of handling it. Existentialist writing is different. Modern tragedies have just as strong a standardized structure as classical tragedies, it’s just different. You’re just going to have to accept that there is a concept of drama called modern tragedy that has a different structure than classical tragedy and is most definitely NOT existentialism, of course even if you don’t admit it it still exists.
It depends on how and when Harry died. If his apparent death in the books had been his real death then it would have turned the series into a modern tragedy, a pointless death where none of his growth mattered in the end. Had he died in the final conflict and succeeded at taking down Voldy in the process it wouldn’t have been a tragedy, I don’t know if it would have been existentialism but it would have left the tragedy realm because his death and life would have mattered, he would have learned and grown and accomplished.
As for the “commercialism”, guess what, people write for money. The idea that something is inherently bad because it bows to commercial pressures is the most pathetic kind of literati elitism.
Very nice, profound comment.
I was emotionally ready for one of the Weasley twins to die, laughing and gallant, for the cause. I was NOT ready for brave little Dobby to die, and I wept buckets at that.
One of the greatest wishes I had was that once Bellatrix was dead, Neville’s parents would be released from the effects of Cruciatus curse, the way Harry was released from the paralyzing charm once DD died. Then Neville’s family, at least, would be whole again.
Nicest moments were the break-through strength of Neville, Mrs. Weasley, Snape, Aberforth, and Ron overcoming his fears of inadequacy. The weakest moments were the lost diadem section, and the destruction of the cup: they just felt rushed to me.
I have mixed feelings about the epilogue. On the one hand, it was too pat and too predictable with all the happy family growth. On the other, I was glad to see it wrapped up that life returned to “normal” because of the courage of the people who died.
I'm sure someone somewhere warned them that they'd go blind...
Yeah, but knowing how boys are, wizard blindness would be caused by getting poked in the eye by their experiment....
Dad: "Ahem...so how'd it go???"
Mom: "ARTHUR!"
Dad: "Harrumph! I mean, that's very bad of you!
Harry Potter discovers the TRUE reason that no magic can be performed outside of school under the age of 17.
Ok, guys, really! Look at my post 901. I want to know what you think!
I took that as Dumbledore wanting to see his family alive and well, the same way Harry did.
You compare a book that we are discussing with porn and homosexual propaganda, but it wasn’t meant as an insult.
Sure.
Interesting question. Probably because Dumbledore was hunting for the horcruxes, and those had to be destroyed before he took on Voldemort directly.
And so, in their duel in OOTP, we see Dumbledore seeking to capture, not kill, Voldemort. But he still wins, in that Voldemort fails to defeat him in the duel.
(The movie version really does justice to that particular part -- it really gives a sense of two awesome wizarding powers taking each other on.)
I think Harry snapped him out of that, because he went back and lived with Tonks until the end, and sent Harry the message that his judgment was spot on.
Maybe, but it seemed that the knowledge of the Horcruxes was late in coming to Dumbledore - he only suspected in the later years and then sought to interview those who could confirm his suspicions.
Just a bit of background: I am a huge fan of classic literature, works that stand the test of time, from Beowulf to the Canterbury Tales, through Shakespeare and Dickens, right up to modern classics like the works of Tolkien and Lewis. I have found the HP series to be every bit as engaging, even if it is not in the uppermost stratasphere of literary works. A lot of readers pass on the series because of the first book or because of the quality of the movies, and that is a shame. They are missing out on a wonderful surprise.
I was wondering if anyone would say that. I agree.
The only one I can think of is Snookums.
Sorry.
Yes, but HBP leaves the impression that Dumbledore suspected at least one horcrux even before Harry was born. Thus, he'd know he needed to destroy the horcrux(es) before he took Voldemort down.
Oh my gosh, do you know me?!?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.