![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
hallo, death!
Saturday, 21 July 2007 02:27 pmI know I spend a lot of time fulminating about JK Rowling and her more or less dodgy writing abilities, but the fact remains, I've spent the last 24 hours bouncing about in happy expectation of the last Potter novel, largely unashamed to be acting like a fifteen-year-old girl. En route to Deathly Hallows collection at 8am this morning, I had that joyous anticipatory stomach-fluttering that you get when you wake up on your tenth birthday. (Or when you're about to head out for a hot date, an analogy I'd be happier to use if my copy had had the adult cover. However, since apparently the adult cover shipment to SA was inexplicably delayed, they're not yet available. Strange but true). I've now spent all morning on the sofa, forcing myself to read at a more or less seemly speed. All this points to the inevitable truth: Rowling may not craft the world's most deathless prose, but her world damned well pulls you in whether you like it or not.
I realise that many of you may not yet have acquired or read the book, and, with![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
strawberryfrog's dire warning resounding in my ears, I shall cunningly conceal heavy spoilers behind the cut. Suffice it to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the book: it makes a far more coherent and logical thing out of the disparate elements of the series than I would have thought possible. It unleashes moments both of genuine pathos (tricky, when everyone's braced for multiple deaths) and neat plot twists, a phrase I'd never have thought I'd apply to Rowling.
( Accio spoilerage! click at your peril! )
So, there we have it. That was Harry Potter, that was. I am fascinated to see what Teh Internets, not to mention the academic community, are going to make of the thing as a whole. The more interesting question, though, is whether kids twenty years down the line are going to go all round-eyed at the thought that we were actually there for the book releases, or if they'll be all "Harry who?" My suspicions are towards the latter. I think the books aren't really interesting as literature so much as their identity as momentary iconage of the zeitgeist. They don't say as much about the Boy Who Lived as they do about the lives of his readers.
I realise that many of you may not yet have acquired or read the book, and, with
strawberryfrog's dire warning resounding in my ears, I shall cunningly conceal heavy spoilers behind the cut. Suffice it to say that I was pleasantly surprised by the book: it makes a far more coherent and logical thing out of the disparate elements of the series than I would have thought possible. It unleashes moments both of genuine pathos (tricky, when everyone's braced for multiple deaths) and neat plot twists, a phrase I'd never have thought I'd apply to Rowling. ( Accio spoilerage! click at your peril! )
So, there we have it. That was Harry Potter, that was. I am fascinated to see what Teh Internets, not to mention the academic community, are going to make of the thing as a whole. The more interesting question, though, is whether kids twenty years down the line are going to go all round-eyed at the thought that we were actually there for the book releases, or if they'll be all "Harry who?" My suspicions are towards the latter. I think the books aren't really interesting as literature so much as their identity as momentary iconage of the zeitgeist. They don't say as much about the Boy Who Lived as they do about the lives of his readers.
