Predictable I'm sure, but I have faith in Rowling. None of the books have really disappointed me so far, though the ending in a few of them have angered me (in 5 and 6).
Oh well that's dissapointing , but then I am sure book 7 is going to be predicatable and awful anyway.
I am still annoyed about
the loss of sirius without an explaination... it was a curtain....
If I may quote the book...
Quote from Dumbledore, to Cornelius »
"...you will find several Death Eaters contained in the Death Chamber..."
The curtain was in that Death Chamber. Clearly it is of mystical origin and kills anyone who passes through it. It was probably locked in the Department of Mysteries for that very reason.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Uncle [T]utor of the [T]'s Winner of Weekly Contest 46!
Deathly Hallows? A place? Hmm. I'm a little disappointed as well... An uninteresting title. Hopefully the book will be better than the title.
I think you are thinking of "hollows." "Hallow" means to consecrate, so unless it is used in a different way in British English, the title doesn't even make grammatical sense to me. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Consecrations" would, but I've never heard "hallows" used as a noun.
The AP story on cnn.com has it spelled "hallows" while the one on Yahoo! has it spelled "hollows." Is this a localization thing, like the philosophers/sorcerers stone? I still contend that "The Deathly Hallows" makes no sense in American English...can someone in the UK give me some insight into this?
Well, I have faith in Ms. Rowling that she'll incorporate the title somehow into the final showdown. However, it isn't a very good name, I'll admit, but I'm still looking forward to it all the same.
I'm sure the book will be a lot better than it's title. I don't see how the book will be predictable because I was always surprised in reading the books prior to this one.
If you've only seen the movies, then I'd suggest reading the books. They're a heck of a lot better because it's not in fast-forward mode. Then again, you might have ADD and not finish the book and say you'd rather watch the movies. O_o
JK puts lots more into the books than you realize... for instance, it's easily dedeucable that *MAJOR SPOILERS*Mundungus has the locket, Snape is good, and Remus Lupin is James Potter.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I don't think I'm going to try [dreamblade], since my girlfriend and Magic are expensive hobbies already-oxymoron
Quote from flamebuster »
I would love to see a Pagan movement claiming "Organized religion is poisoning our youth! Let's ban the Pope!"
Play Fire Emblem? Like pirates? Think Fargus is manly? Join the project today!
Well, I don't really care about the name of the book, as I don't think it should affect how good the book it. I do like how it could be a play on words, with Deathly Hollows instead of Deathly Hallows. And although I admit that there are many conclusions to the book that seem obvious, I think anything can happen. Rowling could put something in that surprises all of us, I believe.
I'm not sure how I feel about HP anymore. The book title/titles don't really bother me, but...
Rowlings has made it fairly clear that she is going to kill Harry just so that other people can't make more HP books later, and I'm fairly opposed to that idea. When all is said and done, it's still a children's book series, and I don't find that to be a fitting ending for a children's book series. Plus, her reasoning is simply lame
JK puts lots more into the books than you realize... for instance, it's easily dedeucable that *MAJOR SPOILERS*Mundungus has the locket, Snape is good, and Remus Lupin is James Potter.
The first two are correct and rather obvious. The third one is incorrect, pretty conclusively.
And yes, this title will make sense. In 2003 a company called Seabottom reported on early registration of titles for Harry Potter. Two of the titles orignally claimed were "HARRY POTTER AND THE HALLOWS OF HOGWARTS" and "HARRY POTTER AND THE HOGWARTS HALLOWS." This would seem to indicate she has been throwing around these ideas for awhile.
Here is a breakdown of the word Hallow. It should help make the title make sense.
Now as for what it means. I have heard and thought of multiple ideas, but after recent books we obviously will not know until it is released. Firstly, a horacrux should be considered a hallowed object. Seeing as Harry is sadly but likely going to die it would make sense for him to be a deathly hallow. Furthermore, if you do not believe that a lot of Book 7 will focus on the night at Godric's Hollow then you have not been paying very close attention. Trying to put together a time line of those events has proven to be almost impossible. It is where the novels began, and it is where they are likely going to end. That is spelled with an o, not an a, however, so you may disregard it if you like. Godric's Hallow, Godric Gryffindor. It is going to play a key role in the book, to be sure. If you look around the web you can find hundreds of theories for what happened that night, I don't really subscribe to any. Back to the topic at the hand, though, the book title. The event in question also happened on Halloween which does fit in with the spelling of the title. Halloween has shown to be a very important part of the books and will likely still be important. Wikipedia also notes that Halloween is:
Many European cultural traditions hold that Halloween is one of the liminal times of the year when spirits can make contact with the physical world and when magic is most potent (e.g. Catalan mythology about witches, Irish tales of the Sídhe).
Which fits in with the idea that we may make contact with Sirius or another dead character. The fact that magic is most potent might be relevant as well.
Rowlings has made it fairly clear that she is going to kill Harry just so that other people can't make more HP books later, and I'm fairly opposed to that idea. When all is said and done, it's still a children's book series, and I don't find that to be a fitting ending for a children's book series. Plus, her reasoning is simply lame
That also irates me, frankly because that concept is generally thought to be overdone and cliché, as with the starting setting being "It was a dark and stormy night..." .
Quote from Shaharazad »
It's a double entandre. It's refering to a place, the Deathly Hollows, but it's a play on the word Hallow.
That's double entendre; also, it isn't a double entendre, because there isn't really a sexually suggestive meaning, Shaharazad.;) It is, however, a pun.
Quote from Microsoft »
Hallow
transitive verb
1. make holy: to make somebody or something holy
2. respect greatly: to have great respect or reverence for somebody or something
Then there's SorryGuy's definition of Hallows.
Quote from Microsoft »
Hollow
adjective
1. not solid: having empty space inside
2. concave: sunk deep into the surface of something
3. not full-toned: resonating or echoing as if in an empty space
4. insincere: not sincere or genuine
5. meaningless: lacking meaning or substance
6. hungry: having the feeling of an empty stomach
noun
1. cavity: a hollow or concave place or area
2. small shallow valley: a sunken or low-lying area of ground
verb
1. vt make cavity in something: to form a concave area or cavity in something by removing contents
2. vti make or become hollowed: to make something hollow, or become hollow
The news said that Rowling was planning to kill off Harry. Way to end such a series.
I'm not sure how I feel about HP anymore. The book title/titles don't really bother me, but...
Rowlings has made it fairly clear that she is going to kill Harry just so that other people can't make more HP books later, and I'm fairly opposed to that idea. When all is said and done, it's still a children's book series, and I don't find that to be a fitting ending for a children's book series. Plus, her reasoning is simply lame
This has bothered me too, not because of the fact I think it is confirmation of death, though. I was more peeved by the way the mainstream media reported on it. Here is the actual transcript in question:
Richard: All the papers that have been promoting this interview today clearly want us to ask you do you kill off Harry Potter, which is a ridiculous question because are you likely to say yes or no? Obviously not. You couldn't
possibly answer that, but have you ever been tempted to do him a little more harm than he has suffered
Judy: He's suffered enough, he's been though the mill.
Jo: How could I? Every year of his adolescence and childhood he saved the wizarding world and then no-one believes him - he spends his entire life saving the world, and next term he is back at school being bullied.
Judy: There is this great Harry Potter who has just saved your entire school and all your skins.
Jo: And everyone just thinks he is a bit annoying.
Richard: I was dodging around the death bit, because I know you can't answer that question, But you know how Conan-Doyle got sick up to there of Sherlock Holmes.
Jo: Yeah.
Richard: So pushed him off the cliff at the Reichenbech falls, I'm not asking if you have done that obviously, but have you ever been tempted to bump him off because it is such a huge thing in your life.
Jo: I've never been tempted to kill him off before the end of book 7. I have always planned seven books and that is where I want to go, where I want to finish on seven books. But I can completely understand the mentality of an author who thinks well I am going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author written sequels as they call them, so it will end with me and after I am dead and gone, they would be able to bring back the character and right a load of...
That doesn't really say to me he is going to die. A lot of the books themselves do support his death, though, but I will hold out hope. I give Harry a 25% chance of survival. Since the final battle will likely occur in the ministry maybe he can trapped him in the room of love.
In fairness, the original article that was created about this(at Reuters) is no longer accessible for whatever reason, but, Rowling's thoughts there are fairly cut and dry.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Thoughts?
If I may quote the book...
The curtain was in that Death Chamber. Clearly it is of mystical origin and kills anyone who passes through it. It was probably locked in the Department of Mysteries for that very reason.
Winner of Weekly Contest 46!
I think you are thinking of "hollows." "Hallow" means to consecrate, so unless it is used in a different way in British English, the title doesn't even make grammatical sense to me. "Harry Potter and the Deathly Consecrations" would, but I've never heard "hallows" used as a noun.
The AP story on cnn.com has it spelled "hallows" while the one on Yahoo! has it spelled "hollows." Is this a localization thing, like the philosophers/sorcerers stone? I still contend that "The Deathly Hallows" makes no sense in American English...can someone in the UK give me some insight into this?
*****
ricklongo and RicardoLongo on MTGO
*****
Visit my gaming blog: http://www.gamingsweetgaming.blogspot.com
****************
Check out Rick's Picks, my PureMTGO article series
****************
If you've only seen the movies, then I'd suggest reading the books. They're a heck of a lot better because it's not in fast-forward mode. Then again, you might have ADD and not finish the book and say you'd rather watch the movies. O_o
Play Fire Emblem? Like pirates? Think Fargus is manly? Join the project today!
Magic Coffeehouse pwns.
CENT SPORTS!!
http://www.centsports.com/?opcode=94009
If you like sports or sports betting and you want a chance to win free money, you will love it.
Rowlings has made it fairly clear that she is going to kill Harry just so that other people can't make more HP books later, and I'm fairly opposed to that idea. When all is said and done, it's still a children's book series, and I don't find that to be a fitting ending for a children's book series. Plus, her reasoning is simply lame
And yes, this title will make sense. In 2003 a company called Seabottom reported on early registration of titles for Harry Potter. Two of the titles orignally claimed were "HARRY POTTER AND THE HALLOWS OF HOGWARTS" and "HARRY POTTER AND THE HOGWARTS HALLOWS." This would seem to indicate she has been throwing around these ideas for awhile.
Here is a breakdown of the word Hallow. It should help make the title make sense.
Now as for what it means. I have heard and thought of multiple ideas, but after recent books we obviously will not know until it is released. Firstly, a horacrux should be considered a hallowed object. Seeing as Harry is sadly but likely going to die it would make sense for him to be a deathly hallow. Furthermore, if you do not believe that a lot of Book 7 will focus on the night at Godric's Hollow then you have not been paying very close attention. Trying to put together a time line of those events has proven to be almost impossible. It is where the novels began, and it is where they are likely going to end. That is spelled with an o, not an a, however, so you may disregard it if you like. Godric's Hallow, Godric Gryffindor. It is going to play a key role in the book, to be sure. If you look around the web you can find hundreds of theories for what happened that night, I don't really subscribe to any. Back to the topic at the hand, though, the book title. The event in question also happened on Halloween which does fit in with the spelling of the title. Halloween has shown to be a very important part of the books and will likely still be important. Wikipedia also notes that Halloween is:
Many European cultural traditions hold that Halloween is one of the liminal times of the year when spirits can make contact with the physical world and when magic is most potent (e.g. Catalan mythology about witches, Irish tales of the Sídhe).
Which fits in with the idea that we may make contact with Sirius or another dead character. The fact that magic is most potent might be relevant as well.
That's double entendre; also, it isn't a double entendre, because there isn't really a sexually suggestive meaning, Shaharazad.;) It is, however, a pun.
Then there's SorryGuy's definition of Hallows.
The news said that Rowling was planning to kill off Harry. Way to end such a series.
Richard: All the papers that have been promoting this interview today clearly want us to ask you do you kill off Harry Potter, which is a ridiculous question because are you likely to say yes or no? Obviously not. You couldn't
possibly answer that, but have you ever been tempted to do him a little more harm than he has suffered
Judy: He's suffered enough, he's been though the mill.
Jo: How could I? Every year of his adolescence and childhood he saved the wizarding world and then no-one believes him - he spends his entire life saving the world, and next term he is back at school being bullied.
Judy: There is this great Harry Potter who has just saved your entire school and all your skins.
Jo: And everyone just thinks he is a bit annoying.
Richard: I was dodging around the death bit, because I know you can't answer that question, But you know how Conan-Doyle got sick up to there of Sherlock Holmes.
Jo: Yeah.
Richard: So pushed him off the cliff at the Reichenbech falls, I'm not asking if you have done that obviously, but have you ever been tempted to bump him off because it is such a huge thing in your life.
Jo: I've never been tempted to kill him off before the end of book 7. I have always planned seven books and that is where I want to go, where I want to finish on seven books. But I can completely understand the mentality of an author who thinks well I am going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author written sequels as they call them, so it will end with me and after I am dead and gone, they would be able to bring back the character and right a load of...
That doesn't really say to me he is going to die. A lot of the books themselves do support his death, though, but I will hold out hope. I give Harry a 25% chance of survival. Since the final battle will likely occur in the ministry maybe he can trapped him in the room of love.
In fairness, the original article that was created about this(at Reuters) is no longer accessible for whatever reason, but, Rowling's thoughts there are fairly cut and dry.