NB to save space, I've moved most of this rewiew here The book is not all disappointing. Although, after the exuberance of the early books, imaginative possibilitis seem to occur with pitiful rarity, here we do have dragonpox leaving pock marks and green hued skin, and Hermione has perfect answer to tiny evening bag problem in her. extension charm. It seems literally anything can fit into her beaded purse from invisibility cloaks to tents to paintings and a library of books. For first time since flying broomstick, I think I want one of those. And the book explains some mysteries of muggle tragedy that we attribute to ordinary bad luck, negligence or misadventure, transferring them to a world where such accidents are granted meaning. For example, wizard-caused deaths are seen as train crashes and gas leaks. Shifts in cultural mood can be attributed to the presence of dementors, whom muggles can’t see though we can feel their despair.
The three children are on a quest for three objects, as on a grail quest. Perhaps most interestingly, Rowling disconnects the grail from the cup imagery and returns it to the stone it is in Wolfram von Eschenbach’s Parzival I wonder if Rowling might have been laying the groundwork for a more interesting story that she later abandoned? Because Percival is also the name of the oldest Weasley child, who separates from them but comes good in the end, prodigal-son-like. It is Ron who withdraws the sword from the lake. It seems as though they were being set up to be revealed as the rightful kings. But this story is not pursued.
Here are just a few of my main objections:
Bewildering lack of drama: TOo much chatter, not enough action!Other people, and occasionally elves, pop in to fill in yet more of the backstory. Annoyingly, we don't see what would have been far more interesting scenes; Ginny trying to steal the sword, the fall of the Ministry of Magic. Instead, we watch never-ending chatter and hand holdings. Which brings me to:
nauseating romantic relationships: dressing her couples in the literary equivalent of matching sweaters, Rowling can never resist an opportunity to point out who is with whom. All weddings are boring but this one is tedium infinitum (or it might be if there were a spell to create it, but why would anyone bother?) Worse still are
inconsistencies in Rowling’s conception of death: Rowling doesn’t seem to have a strong idea of what death actually means in her imagined world. She can't hold back from over-simplified expressions, for example, death is like a nightmare she writes at one point, which is utterly ridiculous, the image stripping the ultimate crisis of meaning and dignity. Later, despite continuous warning that death is the end and you can’t bring people back, when ever they are needed, the deadest of characters manage to turn up.
Repetition, especially, of Polyjuice potion: This transforming potion was refreshing when first used but it’s past its use by date now, becoming a virtaul much of a get out of jail free card. Disappointments: for instance the domestication of the main characters. Fleur, who once represented her country in the tri-wizard tournament is last seen worrying about dirty dishes and about where her houseguests should sleep. No, Fleur, no! Be haughty and superior and French and don’t do this! Please, JK, have something better in store for Harry, Ron and Hermione! (The ‘nineteen years later’ bit stuck at the end seems almost tragic).
Another most adult image that sits very oddly with the tediously juvenile romances is the phallic symbolism of the wand, which is almost blush-worthy. Voldemort demands Lucius' wand and compares its length to his own, a foe conjures a white handkerchief from end of his and came quietly. For his birthday, Harry receives a book from Ron: how to charm witches and proclaims with all the excitement of adolescent discovery, that ‘it's not all about wandwork'. Later, wizards boasting of their wands. Why would a woman write this? Could it be an expression of penis envy? I doubt it. Freud may have been to attatched to his own to realise this, but most women are rather like Seinfeld's Elaine who on learning about shrinkage 'I'm glad I don't have one of those'> But by the end, there has been so much discussion of wands, of what wood and which hair they are constructed from, that I couldn’t help but thinking of Tom Cruise’s character in Magnolia. To misquote; Respect the power of the wand. JK, how could you?
(image is from a medieval manuscript of Wolfram's Parzival)
No comments:
Post a Comment