NO SPOILERS!
I received my copy of HPatOotP Saturday morning and just finished reading it last night.
Awesome awesome awesome. The backstories of the major characters are even more filled out than in Goblet of Fire (which also revealed quite a lot about the characters), and the rich tapestry is coming together in ways that not even the most feral fans could have imgined.
Rowling certinaly isn't slowing the pace one bit, the characters continue to grow and become more complicated as they get older and their world evolves and we start to explore new places in both the Muggle and Wizarding worlds. This book is truly a turning point in the series where many of the characters "come of age" so to speak and transform (tranfigure?) themselves from students of wizardry to full-blown wizards and witches capable of handling themselves in real world situations, while learning to cope with the ever-so-painful time of the teen age years.
Phew! My only regret is that I'm done with the 5th book and the release date for the 6th installment hasn't been announced yet. But don't take my word for it.
Article comments
1 - Kevin Murphy
Just as Goblet of Fire was something of a departure from the prior books, so too Order of the Phoenix is something of a departure from all the others too. My nine year old who is still toward the beginning doesn't seem to like it as much and calls it confusing. My twelve year old is much further along and seems pretty excited. I too wasn't as enchanted in the beginning, what with adolescent Harry, but I was very satisfied by the end.
I still found it a page turner throughout, and I like that not only do we get new, memorable characters, but all the old ones, and I mean all, have a role in the book. While it has a bit less whimsy, and had something clearly added just because it was needed later, it does have more rounded characters, more Harry and friends rather than just Harry saving the day, and the book still shows that character matters.
2 - Gandalf
I for one see too much 'inspiration' from LOTR in Rowling's work. It is a page turner & a good read for kids but I'm not sure it has any of the moral fibre of Tolkien's work.
3 - Craig
I would agree. I think Tolkein is more of a "hard fantasy" genre as opposed to Rowling's style/tone.
But I think LOTR has been hugely influential in other areas (movies, television) as well. Otherwise, the books wouldn't stand the test of time.
4 - Kevin Murphy
Yes, Harry Potter and LOTR are both fantasy, but they are very different. I don't see any "inspiration" from LOTR.
There is clearly a moral dimension to Harry Potter as well.
5 - Gandalf
Really? I see enough. Especially in the main characters & magical tools Rowling chooses to employ. Dumbledore(Gandalf), Dementor(Black riders),Voldemort(Sauron), Mirror of ....(Mirror of Galadriel)are way too similar. Toned down for kids maybe...
6 - Kevin Murphy
Sure, there are some superficial resemblances between the two since they are both fantasy tellings of the struggle between good and evil. But that's all I see.
Dumbledore is an old man while Gandalf is a spirit greater than a man in man form. Gandalf is the grey pilgrim of no fixed abode while Dumbledore is the headmaster of Hogwarts. Dumbledore uses a wand, while Gandalf uses a staff. Gandalf "dies" and returns, Dumbledore doesn't. Sure, they both have the classic "wizard" look - peaked hat, flowing beard, and all that, but look at how the sorceror in the sorceror's apprentice from Fantasia was drawn.
Dementors dress in black, Nazgul dress in black therefore they are the same? Black has been the color of evil for western culture for a long, long time. Dementors are evil creatures in the service of wizards who switch to their true allegiance; Nazgul are the wraiths of great human kings under the complete control and domination of Sauron.
Voldemort is the big bad guy; Sauron is the big bad guy, except he's really only the henchman of the really big bad guy (Morgoth). Voldemort is a human; Sauron is a spirit greater than a man that once could choose any form but is now must take a hideous form of black malice. Harry directly and personally confronts Voldemort in each book (these clashs are the climax for each one), Frodo never directly confronts Sauron. I will grant you that as evil, just because you beat them once doesn't mean they are fully vanquished so they keep coming back.
The mirror of Galadriel, which shows you many things, some which are true, some which aren't and the mirror or Erised which shows you only your hearts desire are both magic "mirrors" (although Tolkien spiced it up a bit by making Galadriel's not a wall mirror) but then magic mirrors have a long and illustrious fantasy pedigree ("mirror mirror on the wall, who's the fairest of the all?").
Both authors make use of pre-existing narrative forms (e.g. the struggle between good and evil), pre-existing cultural norms (e.g. the color black as a marker of evil), and fantasy conventions (e.g. magical spells, magical apparatus such as magical mirrors, and magical creatures) to tell their own stories. LOTR is much more concerned with the corrupting effect of evil on the individual (Saruman is turned to evil, the ring exerts a corrupting effect that eventually turns Frodo) while Harry Potter is more concerned with the courage it takes to confront evil. Sauron wants to make Frodo is his slave, Voldemort wants to kill Harry.
7 - gandalf
Gandalf & Dumbledore are similar in concept. The wise older guy who is there to hold the story together.
Dementors have the bad breath , suck out positive emotions, pierce your heart with coldness... Because they have form doesn't make them any different from Nazrul.
Voldermot arises after starting out in exile. His name cannot be spoken.His red eyes gleam when angry...
Sure there are a lot of embellishments. She's smart enough to mix n' match.
8 - Kevin Murphy
Gee, I never considered that Tolkien invented the wise older guy who is there to hold the story together.
Gee, I never considered that Tolkien invented evil creatures that inspire terror.
Gee, I never considered that Tolkien invented the plot device that evil thought vanquished returns to be fought again.
LOTR is a great work, greater than Harry Potter IMHO, but that doesn't mean that Rowling was overly inspired by Tolkien (unlike others, e.g. Terry Brooks). They are much different in tone, style, and storyline.
9 - gandalf
Hmm... strident tone.
yup he didn't invent any of those. And I agree that they are quite different in style & tone. Just that the array of similarities points at an obvious influence(overt or not).
There has been criticism about the moral implications of the Harry Potter series. Mostly religious I guess but they have their good points. This article does raise some serious issues (even if you don't support the religious intonations).
10 - Phillip Winn
I'm a Christian, about as Christian as one can get, but those who attack Harry Potter are full of garbage. Don't mistake the paranoid ramblings of a few extremists for the mainstream view.
For that matter, the majority of Christians might actually think HP is wrong, but its still silly.
Not that I'm a fan - I'm not - but they seem like healthy books/movies to me, and when my kids are older, I'll be fine with them having them.
11 - Kevin Murphy
Wrong again, Gandalf. I'm not strident, I'm mocking.
My point is that both authors have made use of the prior art in storytelling and existing western culture. Absent LOTR, I think Harry Potter would be identical to its current version.
And surprise, surprise, a very Catholic Oxford Don wrote a tale with a much different moral complexion than an unemployed school teacher of unnoted faith. And there are some who say the age of miracles and wonders has ceased.
12 - Natalie
No. The age of miracles and wonder will happen when western bleeding culture gets over its unimaginative, by-rote condemnation of the color black. Give us a villain in puce!