Unforgivable?

Yes, my sentiments as well. It felt like betrayal, which was part of the reason it made everything else more unforgivable.

I don't believe 4-7 are inappropriate for children, although of course it depends on age and maturity. It's also true that there is not way someone who has read 1-3, and knows 4-7 are out, is going to want to stop. It would be maddening.

I really do think that we are getting on JKR's case a bit much. After all, she has enthralled us all for over a decade. Let's just look at a horse's head for a horse's head. We are all feeling a bit empty that this fabulous series is actually over, and we are having a very hard time digesting that. We still want more.

I don't know about you, but I applaud JKR for the enjoyment she has given me.

I agree-- infact as I was reading the other replies I came to that conclusion. We are all a little bummed out (ok more than a little) that it's all over and this is what we are left with. Of course we are all a little disillusioned, I mean now what?

Sure, it's partly about the series ending. But we knew the series was going to end, that wasn't a disappointment that came suddenly with Deathly Hallows, and that really isn't why we would be "bummed out" with JKR. I don't blame her for stopping at the 7th book. I blame her for doing it badly.

Yes, JKR did provide us with something amazing, and I will always appluad her for the birth of Harry Potter and his world. But I will do so less enthusiastically, because I feel she has tainted some of her own work.

I must say that the last book did seem a bit anticlimactic in comparison with the rest of the series. It really could have done with a big celebration at the end, a huge upheaval of emotions, or even a sombre funeral for those who were killed, and the erecting of a memorial, perhaps at Hogwarts for the students and teachers and a Headmaster in fact, who gave their lives fighting against Voldemort.

That's exactly what I keep sayin. Everyone's like, you're only mad coz the series has finished. But it's more than that. I really believe that DH was one of the worst HP books by far.
When I finished readin HBP, I was ballin my eyes out and was sooooo gutted that Dumbledore had died. But I was really impressed with the book. With DH, I was just plain disappointed. Felt to me like J.K couldn't wait to finish and just wrote any old toot. Sorry but I can't give her a break. I'm still sooooo angry about Lupin.
Oh, and Teddy, I agree with ya 100% about the only decently written death bein Dobby's.

In war - thousands of soldiers die. there simply is not time to give a heart felt moment while bullets continue to fly. You have to keep moving.
it is not until it is all over, that you find out what happens to others that you knew.

Dobby's death occurred at a time where 'open warfare' as such - wasn't occurring. There was time for Harry to truly grieve, and have a moment.

I think that given Dobby's funeral, it would be fair to assume that similar ceremonies would have occurred for those who died at Hogwarts.

Maybe JKR did write this exactly the way it turned out. simply because it was different to what the 'theorists had predicted' I don't think necessarily makes it a 'lame Harry Potter book'. It is worthwhile trying to ask, why would she have written this?

re: the tent/camping boredom. In the gulf - so many soldiers just sit around not knowing what else is going on. Not doing anythig - unless an event suddenly occurs nearby for them to respond to. Perhaps she was trying to describe this. the difficulty of being out in the field - but not knowing when the next skirmish will occur. the boredom of waiting, but the difficulties of 'getting along' with each other - knowing you could die any day...

I think she wrote for 'realism' of war time really.

It's a contradiction, in that sense- because in the "realism" of war time, people don't die and come back because of some complicated soul connection. In the "realism" of war time, enemies are not defeated because of complex and slightly questionable weapon ownership at the climax of battle. In the "realism" of wartime, one does not touch an object of ultimate evil and then suddenly remember at exactly the right moment that one has done so. In the "realism" of wartime, a mother's love, unfortunately, is not enough to give her the skills to take down a seasoned killer.

JKR did not write the realism of wartime. She made a botched and heartless attempt to do so by killing off, in her viewpoint, expendable characters with a few added sentences.
Because, after all, realism and fairytales are two very different things- and you cannot have both in the same ending.

I will have to agree with everything said here.

DH was the crappyest book out of them all. It was so annoying to go from a really good series where each book made you want more and to know more in a good way to the last book and have people think " is that it?"

there was to much right at the end and during the middle of the book there wasn't enough. They were "lets go here, oh we got attacked okay then lets go there stay for a few days . . . i hear something so lets move oh damn we got attacked again lets move once more" it was BORING.

my only reaction to the first paragraph is 'wow'. I'm sorry the book upset you so much.

What I was trying to say is - I think JKR was trying to combine some of the realities of war into the wizarding world's final fight against Voldemort.

'realities' of modern warfare - includes periods of 'nothing much going on' for individual units; - includes periods of utter unpredictability - not knowing who can get you or when. I'm thinking the streets of Iraq here - and not knowing who really is on 'your side'. This - is what I think she was going for.

I have read interviews with soldiers in the gulf describing the 'periods of not knowing what's going on'. even the movie Jarheads shows this.

Why is it impossible for JKR to try to capture some of that within the wizarding world? War is not shooting, killing and bombing 100% of the time.

To ask for 'full reality' or 'full non-reality' - I don't think serves much purpose. for 'full reality' - there are no wizards or magic, let alone moments of coming back from death, souls etc. for 'full non-reality' there are no muggles or connection with the modern day world.

Why else do you think she wrote about things the way she did?

As a side note: It is good to know that we all have our own points of view. It is also good to know whether I have expressed myself well, or simply need to try again if I haven't succeeded! ah - it's all a learning opportunity.