|
Most are an improvement but the ones for hbp and dh are a step back. The original covers for those were already perfect.
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 02:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Yeah, I much prefer Kazu Kibuishi's covers. Pity they're paperback-only so that I can't really justify owning them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 04:59
|
|
|
So, you guys discussed the Cormoran Strike books here?
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2014 11:52
|
|
|
Here's something that people might be interested in: The first two (of three) Magician books by Lev Grossman are only $2.99 on Kindle today. I've seen them recommended in this thread so I figured I'd mention it. Book 1 Book 2 I guess the third book was just published last week too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2014 15:30
|
|
|
Davros1 posted:Sigh I guess I'm the only one who was happy that Harry and Ginny ended up together. Ha! Try being a Harry/Luna shipper.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
CountFosco posted:Ha! Try being a Harry/Luna shipper. I feel like Harry/Luna shippers are happy anyway because to be the kind of person who ships Harry and Luna you just have to be happy all the time and not be fazed by anything? Like me! 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2014 21:55
|
|
|
Speaking of book names, although it is one of my favorite books, the name Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire might sound cool, but for all the other books the title names either the final goal of the book (SS, CoS, DH) or the thing that drives the plot throughout the book (PoA, OotP, HBP). In my opinion, the fourth book should have been called Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
King of Foolians posted:Speaking of book names, although it is one of my favorite books, the name Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire might sound cool, but for all the other books the title names either the final goal of the book (SS, CoS, DH) or the thing that drives the plot throughout the book (PoA, OotP, HBP). In my opinion, the fourth book should have been called Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament. I've always agreed but in most circles it seems spergy to suggest that a book could've been better if it did something differently? So I've mostly gone into denial about it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
King of Foolians posted:Speaking of book names, although it is one of my favorite books, the name Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire might sound cool, but for all the other books the title names either the final goal of the book (SS, CoS, DH) or the thing that drives the plot throughout the book (PoA, OotP, HBP). In my opinion, the fourth book should have been called Harry Potter and the Triwizard Tournament. Goblet of Fire sounds more creepy and mysterious, though! I was just reading through GoF again (for maybe the third time?) and I noticed this: Remember back before the final book came out, and everyone was debating about whether or not Snape was a good guy or a bad guy? And no one really had any details to back up their claims one way or another, other than they trusted Dumbledore or they thought he made a mistake. I noticed this while reading, maybe it was a little easter egg left in to give a hint that Snape was ultimately a good guy. Right after Voldemort comes back and calls his death eaters for the first time:   Voldemort was aware all along that Snape was a double agent? When everyone comes crashing in to "Moody's" office at the end because they realize he took Harry:   If Snape is visible in Barty Crouch Jr's foe glass, doesn't that mean he's his enemy? Meaning... The enemy of Barty Crouch Jr. is our friend? Anyway, not sure if this stuff has been mentioned before because I never really got in to conspiracy theorizing too much before the last book came out. I always thought Snape was good, full trust in Dumbledore 
cloudy fucked around with this message at 18:40 on Aug 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 18:34
|
|
|
It was Crouch's foe glass though, not Voldemort's, and Snape was at that moment intending to do him harm. It's an interesting find though. Personally, I've always thought that considering Snape a "good guy" is pushing it a little bit, and it's one of the reasons I hate the epilogue. I mean, you have this genuinely awful person and (former?) supremacist making the lives of people around him miserable. Yet, everything is pretty much forgiven (and Harry uses him as the namesake of one of his children) because he served Dumbledore, something he only did as the result of guilt over Lily's death. Baronash fucked around with this message at 19:03 on Aug 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 18:53
|
|
|
I don't think there was any real attempt to hide Snape as a good guy in the early books. If anything he, and to a lesser extent Draco, served as perpetual red herrings for the real villains. In the first book for instance Harry is convinced Snape is the one trying to get the Stone for the entire book.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:28
|
|
|
JohnSherman posted:Personally, I've always thought that considering Snape a "good guy" is pushing it a little bit, and it's one of the reasons I hate the epilogue. I mean, you have this genuinely awful person and (former?) supremacist making the lives of people around him miserable. Yet, everything is pretty much forgiven (and Harry uses him as the namesake of one of his children) because he served Dumbledore, something he only did as the result of guilt over Lily's death. Yeah, always agreed with this. Just the way he treats students like Neville or Hermione is almost sociopathic and you can't really palm that off as being him keeping his cover in front of Draco or whatever. Some of that stuff feels like it belonged in the magic boarding school parody the series started out with and clashes with the stuff it evolved into.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
I remember reading some interview or something where Rowling said she was going to go with Triwizard Tournament, but later decided on Goblet of Fire because it sounded better as a title. And Snape was always a huge rear end in a top hat, to the point where he wasn't even a good teacher. He knew all the stuff, but he never really taught the kids or helped them, only ridiculed them when they got something wrong. When Harry takes his OWL he even thinks about how not bad potions is when he doesn't have Snape around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:08
|
|
|
Most of the series worked for me, that way, except for Umbridge in book 5. Umbridge was totally over the line in book 5.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:09
|
|
|
bobjr posted:And Snape was always a huge rear end in a top hat, to the point where he wasn't even a good teacher. He knew all the stuff, but he never really taught the kids or helped them, only ridiculed them when they got something wrong. When Harry takes his OWL he even thinks about how not bad potions is when he doesn't have Snape around. I've definitely had teachers like this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:23
|
|
|
howe_sam posted:I don't think there was any real attempt to hide Snape as a good guy in the early books. If anything he, and to a lesser extent Draco, served as perpetual red herrings for the real villains. In the first book for instance Harry is convinced Snape is the one trying to get the Stone for the entire book. I always liked how in the 6th book it actually WAS Draco trying to send all the cursed objects. (Of course it was more complex than him just being a bad guy). And I use the term "good guy" very loosely to describe which side Snape was on. He was obviously on Dumbledore's side: the good guys. I didn't close my eyes and skip over all the times he was really terrible or something. (Though I think that makes the character a lot more interesting, he's got some deep dark poo poo in his past that he's never able to overcome. But at least he chose to go to the good side and try to defeat Voldemort.) cloudy fucked around with this message at 20:29 on Aug 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 20:26
|
|
|
Did you folks forget all the times Dumbledore was "really terrible or something"?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 22:48
|
|
|
LaughMyselfTo posted:Did you folks forget all the times Dumbledore was "really terrible or something"? Dumbledore's behavior was actually more reprehensible than Snape's. So much so, that when Snape realized that Dumbledore intended to sacrifice Harry to defeat Voldemort, that even Snape was grossed out. Also, Dumbledore's ineptitude and lack of attention is how Voldemort ended up being created.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
api call girl posted:Most of the series worked for me, that way, except for Umbridge in book 5. Umbridge was totally over the line in book 5. I think the literal abuse with the pen was a touch too much but Umbridge was a brilliant critique on the insidiousness of bureaucracy. In a series with a malevolent snake wizard dude the most evil character is a bureaucrat who is just doing their job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2014 23:49
|
|
|
Inveigle posted:Dumbledore's behavior was actually more reprehensible than Snape's. So much so, that when Snape realized that Dumbledore intended to sacrifice Harry to defeat Voldemort, that even Snape was grossed out. Also, Dumbledore's ineptitude and lack of attention is how Voldemort ended up being created. Yeah, Dumbledore lucked out - the gleam of triumph was more a gleam of "oh boy I'm not actually raising Harry to die anymore (probably), which was a thing that I was doing until this very moment". It is beyond belief that Dumbledore could have expected Harry and Voldemort to be connected again all along, so you kind of have to face the fact that when Dumbledore's doing his wise old man thing in the first four books and reassuring Harry that he can totally beat Voldemort every time through the power of love, he is giving these hopeful pep talks to someone he fully believes is destined to die and for whom there is basically no hope.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 00:05
|
|
|
Voldemort = Hitler Lucius Malfoy = Goebbels Umbridge = Himmler?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
bobjr posted:And Snape was always a huge rear end in a top hat, to the point where he wasn't even a good teacher. He knew all the stuff, but he never really taught the kids or helped them, only ridiculed them when they got something wrong. When Harry takes his OWL he even thinks about how not bad potions is when he doesn't have Snape around. Of course he is, he's part of a grand tradition of Harsh Masters going back almost to the invention of the boarding-school genre (and who would have been very recognisable to anyone who went to school in Britain before the 90s; the trope is one of the things that gives the idealised schools depicted in the stories a connection back to reality). There's a reason this exists and became such an immediate, massive, lasting success and cultural touchstone, for instance.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 11:58
|
|
|
api call girl posted:Most of the series worked for me, that way, except for Umbridge in book 5. Umbridge was totally over the line in book 5. I thought Umbridge was the 'realist evil' in the books. Voldemort is this fairytale pure evil soul that most of us will thankfully never come across. It's hard to emotionally connect to. Umbridge is that evil bitch who taught you in 9th grade science class.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2014 13:49
|
|
|
Trin Tragula posted:Of course he is, he's part of a grand tradition of Harsh Masters going back almost to the invention of the boarding-school genre (and who would have been very recognisable to anyone who went to school in Britain before the 90s; the trope is one of the things that gives the idealised schools depicted in the stories a connection back to reality). There's a reason this exists and became such an immediate, massive, lasting success and cultural touchstone, for instance. This is true, out of all the teachers we see at Hogwarts only like 2-3 are competent teachers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
bobjr posted:This is true, out of all the teachers we see at Hogwarts only like 2-3 are competent teachers. Good Teachers Flitwick, Sprout, McGonagall, Slughorn, Lupin, Moody(?), Quirrell(??), Hagrid(???), Grubbly-Plank, Sinistra(The biggest ? of all, since we never see a single astronomy lesson) Bad Teachers Snape, Binns, Trelawney, Lockheart, Umbrage, Quirrell(?), Hagrid (???)
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 03:56
|
|
|
We never saw what sort of teacher Moody was, since it was Barty Crouch Jr teaching in his place the whole time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 04:41
|
|
|
And Binns may be dreadfully boring, but at least he spends his class time conveying information to students rather than bragging about his fictitious accomplishments, torturing spiders, or carving poo poo into the back of student's hands.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 04:55
|
|
|
Well change it to Barty Crouch Jr(?) who at least managed to teach his students something, unlike Professor Binns who only managed to teach Hermione.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 04:58
|
|
|
Astronomy was one of those weird classes we never knew much about, because it was either them drawing charts, or the OWL which is interrupted by Hagrid wrecked Umbridge and Crew's poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 05:11
|
|
|
I'm still pissed we never found out what the deal with Arithmancy was.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 07:58
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:I'm still pissed we never found out what the deal with Arithmancy was. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerology e: and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arithmancy
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:I'm still pissed we never found out what the deal with Arithmancy was. Magical maths, duh.
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 09:17
|
|
|
Xachariah posted:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numerology Yeah, but it was a separate class from Divination so what's the deal with that?
|
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 09:49
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:Yeah, but it was a separate class from Divination so what's the deal with that? Well it's mentioned in the books that Arithmancy is required to be a curse-breaker at Gringotts. So I'm guessing knowledge of Arithmancy is used for persistent spells like curses or enchantments rather than predicting the future. e: Since Hermione hated Divinitation and loved Aritmancy it could just be one of those things that muggle folklore misunderstood about magic. Sort of like magical cryptography rather than predicting the future, maybe? I don't know I'm just speculating. Hermione was required to memorise charts which is consistent with "muggle arithmancy" (since they assign letters to numbers) and could also be some kind of mathemagical tables. Xachariah fucked around with this message at 10:15 on Aug 14, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 14, 2014 10:11
|
|
|
This is Rowling we're talking about, it was "Magic + Math = magical accountant" maybe with a side of cryptography
|
|
#
?
Aug 15, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
 These are out in the UK now. "The beautiful new print editions were illustrated by the award-winning Jonny Duddle both inside and out, and also include a brand new map of Hogwarts castle and grounds, a biography of J.K. Rowling and some fun facts about the author. In addition to this, you will also be able to see new illustrated pages about Pottermore at the end of each of the books, including lesser-known facts from J.K. Rowling’s exclusive writing for pottermore.com, encouraging new fans of the stories to discover even more about the world of Harry Potter beyond the series." Has anyone seen them in the flesh? I want to see the first ever(?) official map of Hogwarts! edit: n/m, I found it in about 30 seconds on Google: 
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 11:03
|
|
|
PLEASE USE POTTERMORE!
|
|
#
?
Sep 5, 2014 23:57
|
|
|
So the gate goes into the forbidden forest? Then again since that forest probably has every dangerous magical creature in existence it's not like you can sneak through it anyway.
|
|
#
?
Sep 6, 2014 04:07
|
|
|
Link to October 7 news article: "JK Rowling’s cryptic tweets hint at return to world of Harry Potter" http://www.theguardian.com/books/2014/oct/07/jk-rowling-tweets-harry-potter
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 31, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Inveigle posted:Link to October 7 news article: "JK Rowling’s cryptic tweets hint at return to world of Harry Potter" Whoever said that Rowling is like a girl who won't stop talking about her last boyfriend hit the nail on the head.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2014 20:27
|
|