The boy who should have died.

Before I begin, I would like to state that from the very start, I disliked J.K. Rowlings.  The moment I picked up the first potter book and began to read, I thought, oh, this is a fine Roald Dahl book.  As I read on, it changed to, well, there seems to be a bit of sneaker hill* thrown in here for good measure.

It is not that I disliked the story, it was the sheer hacky-ness of it that turned me off.  So, I read the first one, and didn’t pay attention until after the fourth book had been out for a long while.  At that point, I went to the local library (copiague at the time), and picked up the the second, third and fourth books all at once.  I read them all in several sittings and wondered what all the fuss was about. 

Not a bad yarn, but it seemed to be a mish-mosh of every Dahl book pretty much ever, with the sneaker hill plot, and a dash of scooby-doo thrown in for good measure.  Rowling wised up in the last few books, adding a dark tone and lethality that she no doubt thought would separate her from any such comparisons.  It fooled pretty much everyone who worships her un-original feet.  Not me. 

I believed then, and also now, after completing the final book, that she is not fit to lick Mr. Dahl, or Mrs. Littles bootspittle.

The last book was pretty much the same as the rest.  The darker tone, and corpses tossed around shamelessly seemed tacked on, as if to say, ‘take me seriously!’  Mrs. Rowling, there is something called dark humor, and tact, that a ‘childrens’ author can use to insert gravity in a subtle fashion.  A kind of wink and nudge to the adults who also might choose to enjoy the stories.  None of this ‘tragedy’ could disguise the fact that this book was a bloated fetch-quest, filled with cop-out answers and an ending that should have earned her a Marie Antoinette-like beheading from her throng of loyal fans.

I, for one, am glad to see this literary travesty come to an end, and hope that Mrs. Rowling will retreat from the writing desk and spend the rest of her days happily wading through her Scrooge Mcduck sized money bin.

Bottom line.  Harry should have died.  Then I might have at least a shred of respect for her body of work.  But the marketing machine rolls on, eh J.K.? 

I think the last page should have revealed the true meaning of her initials. 

Just Kidding.

*Sneaker Hill was a book written by Jane Little in 1967.  If you choose, hunt down a copy and read what pretty much amounts to a prequel.

3 replies on “The boy who should have died.”

  1. ! says:

    You try so hard to be a nonconformist. Whether or not you actually believe this little review of yours, you desperately tried to fill it with as much pretension as possible. I find this to be true about most of your commentaries on things, whether it be religion, movies, books, songs, relationships, basically anything. I get what you’re trying to do: have that sort of shock factor that your blogger idol Tucker Max does of “I cannot believe he just said that!” but you edge on the transition to “Oh come on, now he’s just trying too hard”, with a roll of the eyes and a click of the x on the top right hand corner. There comes a line between offensive while funny and fake while juvenile. If you think it’s not noticeable, it is. You have to try to hang below that radar of transparency, so that shock factor is still there, without it just being a desperate plea for attention. When Tucker Max crosses that line, it’s not funny, it’s annoying. But he’s Tucker Max, so no one cares. When you cross that line, it goes the same way. But you’re no Tucker Max.

  2. Tobas says:

    I wish I could say it was about “shock factor”, but the sad truth is that I believe the things that I say. I have also felt this way about the potter series from the start, even before it became the phenomenon it is now. I understand how my view on relationships in particular can nettle you my dear, and I am sorry for that. However, I am aware of your affinity for Mr. Potter as well, and I knew that you would not look kindly upon my observations.

    I didn’t think being anti-potter would ever be something considered non-conformist, especially not at the time. All I am saying is that my opinion has not changed, and I am not the only one to draw the Dahl, Little comparison. Those were my favorite books growing up, and I hate to see this ‘witch’ (no pun intended) reaping huge rewards off the backs of those talented and original authors.

    As for religion, well, I think there are more than a few people who have known me long enough to know that I have always held it in contempt. If it seems shocking, then so be it, but I am certainly not going out of my way to be so. I have very concrete opinions on certain issues, and they happen to be mostly unpopular. I suppose people who don’t know me will just have to take my word on that, but you, I think, should know me a little better.

    I say what I feel, and none of it is said in a false attempt at raising tempers. This is just who I am, and how I express it.

  3. Tobas says:

    And you are correct, I am certainly not Tucker Max.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *