Ch 1 wasn't anything like as punchy or attention-getting as Ch 2. I think it was good to have the book NOT start the same way that all the previous books have done, and I think that it opens things up by giving us an overview of what's going on in the adult world, and in the muggle world. I rather enjoyed it, but it was Ch 2 that really grabbed me.

ita sez: But it might not be telegraphing -- it might be a justification for a revelation in the next book.

Hec said: At the read-and-post LJ folks loved Chapter 2 because of the backstory, and (possible) plot misdirect. Also there was some feeling that it's setting stuff up for the last book.

My feeling is, if it doesn't work within the context of this book, it doesn't work. It's unsightly and I felt very much lectured at. Maybe it's a function of this being aimed at younger readers, but my feeling was "I know this already. I know that Snape is supposed to be a double agent and that everything he does has to have a justification to both sides, neither of which will truly trust him. And because Rowling is calling my attention to it, it's clear that this is going to be the crux of the book; ergo, Snape will betray Dumbledore and the school."

I've seen some folks theorizing that Dumbledore isn't truly dead, and that this was all part of the plan, but I doubt it. I think Rowling, despite her tendency to exposit at length, is a better storyteller than that, and has more respect for her readers. I might be wrong, but if she's going to cheat on Dumbledore's death she may as well bring Sirius and James and Lily back too, and Ginny can bring Cedric to Ron and Hermione's wedding, and Dobby can lead the socialist house-elf revolution while Buckbeak and the unicorn make doe-eyes at each other.

A big part of Rowling's success is that she doesn't lie to kids. She tells them the world can be a really rotten place no matter who you are or what you do. I think that to take back what's happened would be dishonest, which was why I liked the ending so much. It went beyond the consolatory "next-year-at-Hogwarts" formula and pointed the characters into the great unknown. Brave choice, I think, since I suspect some readers will be reluctant to follow.

I may well be wrong, but I hope I'm not. If the series ends badly I'm going to feel like I wasted a lot of shelf space on it. These books are thick!

Oh, I don't think that Dumbledore's going to pull a Gandalf. I mean, okay, there's the whole Phoenix thing, so it's conceivable, but I think that runs counter to what he stands for and I think that it goes against the kind of story she's telling; the mentor figure dies so that the boy can do the whole Rites of Passage becoming a man thing. But I totally think that Dumbledore knew he was going to die - he's spent the whole book preparing Harry to take over when he's gone, helping him understand his enemy rather than teaching him useful skills. I think Snape has told him about the Unbreakable Vow and that he's making damned sure that Snape keeps to it. I don't know whether it will turn out that Dumbledore was actually dying slowly of his injuries already, but either way I think he knows he's going to die and that he's consciously accepted this as a worthwhile sacrifice. It puts Snape in an untenable position, but it really consolidates his position with the Deatheaters, and I think that's what the argument is about - Snape saying that D is asking too much, taking too much for granted etc.

I don't think that there's any question of JKR lying to the kids, but I think that Chapter 2 misleads them, in the same way that all the Mad Eye Moody stuff misleads them. All the data that tells us Snape is a good guy is right there in plain view, but because Harry still doesn't trust him, and because he clearly doesn't LIKE Harry, we're supposed to assume he's actually a villain. That's what Harry assumes. But I think Harry's wrong. Much like the Mad Eye Moody stuff, where there were clear pointers that he was NOT a good guy - but because he was nice to Harry, because the child he transfigures into a ferret and beats to a pulp is Draco, Harry's rival, Harry thinks he's a good egg.

Two things:

Has it been discussed that Snape possibly made an Unbreakable Vow to DD? Can the party who you made the vow too let you out of it?

And I agree with Knut and Fay. Rowling IS a better storyteller than that. DD is dead and might continue to help out via Fawkes or his portrait in the headmaster's office. And because she's a great storyteller, I am totally on the wave that Harry AND Voldemort die.

I've heard that theory bandied about, and it's plausible. Maybe more so than my own romantic Snape/Lily interpretation of events.

Astonishingly, I now do think it's possible that Harry might be dead as a doornail by the end of Book 7. I don't think it's likely, but I do think it's possible; if you'd asked me a month ago I wouldn't have, but now? Who knows.

(Incidentally, this whole 'OMFG!!!111!! YOU BITCH!!!!' response from the 'shippers post HBP boggles my mind.)

(Incidentally, this whole 'OMFG!!!111!! YOU BITCH!!!!' response from the 'shippers post HBP boggles my mind.)

It's Kitten Board all over again. Extra Deluxe Craxo.

I like the Snape was following Dumbledore's orders theory, though I have not yet decided if it's the one I subscribe to. I was discussing it with a coworker, and she didn't believe it, because why would Dumbledore immobilize Harry and make him watch Snape kill him? Apart from the fact that it's yet another awful, traumatic event to which Harry has borne witness, she thinks that Dumbledore must understand that if Harry saw Snape kill Dumbledore, there's no way he could ever trust Snape again. In other words, this is the most unforgivable thing that Snape could possibly do, in Harry's eyes, and Dumbledore must know that. So if it turns out that Snape is still loyal to the Order of the Phoenix after all, Harry is still never going to believe him. I still haven't made up my mind one way or another. But this same coworker insists that Sirius/Remus has no basis whatsoever in the books, so we clearly don't see eye to eye on all things HP...

t waves wand at HBP "Kittens"

Accico Craxy!

Kate, as for your coworker's question: it helps that Harry doesn't trust Snape, for Snape to be more trusted by Voldemort.

Misdirection, yes. There is lots of that. And, OK, I'll concede that there might have been some scheming going on between Dumbledore and Snape, although in part I think the theory comes from a place of Snape-worship. (Ducks.) But, nope on the second chapter. Not saying the first chapter was strong, but as Fay said, it's in keeping with the other books. The second, on the other hand, was uncharacteristically clumsy and heavy-handed misdirection, if misdirection it was. I stand by my opinion.

And I like Aimée's ending.