Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by inked

Oh, really! Then you assume that the prophecy intends only Harry?

I do. At the very most it includes both Harry and Neville, but I'm certain it doesn't exclude Harry - or we'd be dealing with some extremely bathos and anticlimax when Harry finally gears himself up to battle and discovers it was all a mistake...

Plus, when does the prophecy become active in regard to the action? It is a miniature prequel if you will. It is primarily Delphic in construction, it has many potential interpretations - corpus throughout.

We don't know when the prophecy will become important - it certainly isn't at present. It has different interpretations now (though not many) because the series is not complete. When the series is finished, the meaning of the prophecy will not be open to interpretation.

I suspect that if you extracted the prophecy from the books and tried to read them without it, you would find the task most difficult and without a single binding thread of such importunance or importance.

Perhaps when we have more of it, the prophecy will give us what it fundamentally lacks - a reason. What it says at present is:

The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches... Born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies... And the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not... And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives... The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies...

What theme or 'single binding thread' does this illuminate? It's a vague nod to the 'chosen one' motif, but that's not a surprise in any novel with a single hero. It doesn't say why Harry is chosen, what the purpose of the battle is, why one of them must die... You could easily read the books without it as it now stands.

And I quite agree that there is no book to which critical deconstruction can not be applied, but would contend that it is valueless in most cases as the critics rarely accomplish much. (See THE PERSONAL HERESY by CS Lewis!)

Do you read much criticism yourself, apart from Lewis?

[inked]

Sorry to be so long in replying, Sun-Star, work et alia have limited my Mooting.

I have read quite a bit of criticism over the decades. Deconstructive techniques are but one form. We can discuss the various general techniques at your pleasure.

It is not that criticism is always wrong in any technique or not useful in its own peculiar fashion (depending on the assumptions), but rather my conviction that literature and poetry are meant to be enjoyed and may well be challenging or upsetting or conventional or otherwise. I think the work itself should be interacted with as whole as finished and presented by the author. That is what elicits response. And that response then becomes reflective and may move to a critical approach out of appreciation or revulsion or challenge to the reader's accepted thought patterns.

You may or may not have read Dorothy L. Sayers THE MIND OF THE MAKER (I cannot recall at present). I think it an excellent work of criticism in the most distant approach. Yes, I know that it to be an explanation of the Trinity by analogy, but it throws quite considerable light on the author as vehicle through which comes the finished product. And I came to this self-criticism so to call it by a profound appreciation of the author's corpus. Fascinatingly, the detective novels and the theological writings and the plays and poetry she authored became more intriguing. I am still profitabley re-reading her works each time.

Now, as regards the prophecy in the HP series, I have this constant niggling suspicion in the back of my mind that what we have taken to be a sole reference to either Harry or Voldemort "the hand of the other" by which one or the other must die, may, in fact, refer to Wormtail's silver hand. Purely speculative, of course, but if read that way it casts a whole new possibility onto the prophecy. And, since we have in the Arthurian corpus the response of the others to the nascent King, and their reactions drive the story, I think it quite possible that Wormtail's response to either SERVE Voldemort or Harry in the end a major plot mechanism capable of an unexpected and yet consistent plot twist. (All of this a critical assessment in which only the tale is involved. I really do not think that knowing any details of JKR's life will answer that question. It may be fun, once the series is completed to see if any correlations exists, but I am predilected to think not. That was what JRRT said about his own materials, as you recall. And Lewis as well.)

Charles Williams also offers some insights worth pondering in his reviews for the TIMES of the then current material (circa 1930's and early '40's). This is a review of criticism as a tool to which I am alluding within the context of the reviews individually.

See, I am ecletic critically. There may be something to Freudian criticism but not nearly so much as commonly supposed. I usually read that for entertainment or in periods of hypotension . Then to move onto the allegations of most critics that THEY have achieved the Elysian field and Golden Mean in this life and are THEREFORE capable of impartial assessment whilst employing every vagrant impulse of which they assess the author(s) without recognizing their own "influences" is always good for the contemplation of humility (O would some powe the Giftie gi'e us...)!

[sun-star]

Originally Posted by inked

Sorry to be so long in replying, Sun-Star, work et alia have limited my Mooting.

Me too

I have read quite a bit of criticism over the decades. Deconstructive techniques are but one form. We can discuss the various general techniques at your pleasure.

If you like, but not here, I think. Before long this thread will be required for post-HBP speculation

It is not that criticism is always wrong in any technique or not useful in its own peculiar fashion (depending on the assumptions), but rather my conviction that literature and poetry are meant to be enjoyed and may well be challenging or upsetting or conventional or otherwise. I think the work itself should be interacted with as whole as finished and presented by the author. That is what elicits response. And that response then becomes reflective and may move to a critical approach out of appreciation or revulsion or challenge to the reader's accepted thought patterns.

I agree, but for me good criticism enhances the pleasure that comes from literature and the interaction with a work. What we're doing here is literary criticism of HP, and it's fun - speculation, discerning patterns, themes, archetypes etc. Reading that Granger article you posted sends people back to the books with a different perspective on them, more than they might have found on their own. CS Lewis knew the value of criticism, despite his dislike of the personal heresy (an argument which he won, by the way - you don't find as much of that kind of criticism now as there was in his day). He was a great critic in his own right, of course - I particularly like his writings on Jane Austen. And Tolkien, too, brought both linguistic and cultural sensitivities to bear on medieval literature in a manner which still delights those who study it. It's true that some critics talk nonsense, usually those who impose their ideas on a text instead of letting their interpretation grow out of what they read. However, I think that the good critics outweigh them, so it's not quite fair to say 'critics rarely accomplish much'

[Spock]

Originally Posted by sun-star

I think that the good critics outweigh them, so it's not quite fair to say 'critics rarely accomplish much'

I'm reminded of the axiom "those who can, write, those who can't become critics"

[sun-star]

Some do both: Lewis and Tolkien are good examples, as I said.

[Spock]

...sigh...

[Nurvingiel]

Originally Posted by emily leonard

mabey your right about reading to much into it but i do think that it might meen sumthing . and dumboldore is a fab carrictor but he did anoy me when he told harry everything in 1 chapter

Completely fair buddy! What annoyed me was that he still didn't tell Harry everything. I'm sure that Dumbledore knows more about the Prophecy and other important information - maybe even about Harry's family (see Harry's Grandparents thread).

I like the prophecy because it is different from others by how we have seen it so far - adding to the backstory. I think as more information is revealed, it will advance the plot. Also, I think having it in his possession would have given Voldemort an edge, but Neville put a stop to that when he destroyed it.

Poor old Harry. Book six isn't going to have a happy start; he's in for a rough summer. But he does have one consolation: when he turns sixteen, he'll be allowed to use magic outside of school. He can't just use it willy nilly (since that would violate the Statute of Secrecy), but he can use it on Petunia, Vernon, and Dudley, because they already know he's a wizard. He can also use it to speedily accomplish household chores, and generally make life a little more pleasant.
I'm really interested to see how that plays out. Mwahaha...

[Spock]

I thought he'd prefer to go live with Sirus. Looking forward to the new book in June (preordered in Jan )

[Elessar the Elfstone]

I think it will be fudge,
I remember somewhere (don't know where ) JK saying therwe would be a new minister for magic

[Nurvingiel]

I think there will be a new Minister of Magic too. Fudge might not die, but he sure looks like a moron since he denied that Voldemort returned.

Originally Posted by Spock

I thought he'd prefer to go live with Sirus. Looking forward to the new book in June (preordered in Jan )

I agree. (Have you read book OotP?)

[Pytt]

Since someone will die, she have said that, or is it just a rumour? I hope Fudge is the one saying goodbye. He turned so completely from the nice, a bit clumsy man I had got the impression of in OotP so I don't like him a bit anymore.

I thought it was totaly clear that Harry would go to Sirius and live, but I might have got the wrong impression.

[Spock]

I think so, I had to get the books out of the order they were written, from the library, one at a time....so I'm not sure but I think I read it....confused ? me too.

[azalea]

Uh, I don't think it should be a spoiler at this point, but I'll put it in gray just in case (do not look if you haven't read book 5!):

Harry can't go live with Sirius.

Sirius dies in book 5.

Furthermore, in book three

it is made clear that he can't live with him because of Sirius' outlaw status.

AND

Dumbledore has hinted -or even said outright, I can't remember - that living with the Dursleys offers him some kind of protection, although we don't know exactly how. Most surmise it has to do with the fact that Petunia is his blood relative on his mother's side, and there's further speculation about the nature of his mother's death in relation to Harry's surviving Voldemort's attack, so these might be tied together.

[Spock]

RATZ, I can't see anything except a grey line and block. How do you do that???

[Radagast The Brown]

Originally Posted by azalea

AND

I think Voldemort says Dumbledore cast a spell, in the fourth book to the Death Eaters, that protects him near his relatives. So he couldn't attack Harry at the Dursleys.

[Pytt]

Yes. Dumbeldore has made a strong protection spell on the Dursley house, making Voldemort uncapable of touching Harry there. The strongest reason harry can't/couldn't live with Sirius, I think.

[Spock]

**Just a news note** JKR will be reading from the new book (from a castle in Scotland) in July....a couple dozen kids are going to be chosen to join her. Lucky youngsters.

[azalea]

Originally Posted by Spock

RATZ, I can't see anything except a grey line and block. How do you do that???

spoiler ... /spoiler is the tag(?) to use.

[Finrod Felagund]

Originally Posted by Nurvingiel

Also, I strongly doubt that Salazar Slytherin is a half-blood, given his apparent attitude.

Voldemort is a half blood.

[Finrod Felagund]

..I justt read a theory...what if the Half Blood Prince is Snape?!?!?

And I thought...Krum is in these darn books...he's gotta serve a purpose...maybe he's the prince?