As an artist, it’s hard to refrain from critiquing other artists, and from time to time I put in my ten cents worth, although not too often on paper. A few years ago, I read the sixth of the Harry Potter novels, and I scribed a fairly harsh review, stating that the Harry story was feeling old and worn, and J.K. Rowling had conjured up some pretty lazy writing.  Last week I saw the film of that book, “Harry Potter and the half Blood Prince” and I was pleasantly surprised. I actually thought the film was quite phenomenal, and it made me think about the last book in the series “The Deathly Hallows,” which I also read a while back. But instead of penning a new review on the Half-blood Prince, I thought I’d reinstate my thoughts and take on “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.”  Here it is:

She streams from her wand a never-ending flow of magical ideas, dropping spells and curses with such wild abandon, it’s hard to imagine her in reality not being the real deal.  I’m talking about the witchery of J.K. Rowling of course, and when her latest “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows” reaches the big screen, save for a hack director or screenwriter, it will no doubt be the best of the series, with battles on the ground and in the air, with sieges and fallen heroes, secrets and lies, dreaded Dementors and Death Eaters. It’s war. And this tale has more action and destruction than in her previous six books combined.   That one author could create such an elaborate and complex world, with so many characters carrying baggage of all shapes weights, and weave their intricate stories through this epic tale of good versus evil, proves that J.K. Rowling is indeed a goddess of imagination and creativity.  Sometimes, however, her charms are so thick and plentiful in “Deathly Hallows” it’s hard to follow the narrative. In fact, there are times when the narrative seems disjointed and unfocused. There are also some lengthy dead spots when, for example, Harry, Hermione and Ron, fugitives on the run from Voldemort’s newly formed government, take refuge in a tent, and later on a farm, not knowing what to do or where to go next, so they do pretty much nothing but wait and bicker, all the while hoping for inspiration and a new course of action to pop into Harry’s noggin, perhaps mirroring J.K. Rowling’s need for inspiration at that time. I also believe J.K. did not serve herself well delaying the introduction of the instrument called the Deathly Hallows until the 300-page mark because the quest for the horcruxes, leftover from the last book, begins to falter quite early on.  I think if she’d defined the quest with sharper goals from the start and built toward the climax in a deliberate and foreboding manner, her readers would have felt a greater level of tension.  Remember in “Lord of the Rings” Frodo braving obstacle after obstacle on his journey to Mordor to dispose of the ring in the fiery Mount Doom while Sauron’s armies rage against Rohan.  The plan is well defined early on, there are just obstacles to win over on the way. Still, these minor flaws in “Deathly Hallows” will vanish on the big screen.  Ultimately, the big finish is really big, and noisy—at least in my mind—and very exciting.  One thing I would have liked to see….  Spoilers coming!!!  When Harry is struck by Voldemort, I think J.K. should have deceived the reader into believing he was truly dead, and delayed the truth for as long as possible, building upon that shocking emotion as the news of his demise spreads inside Hogwarts.  There again, if I were J.K. Rowling I’d have all her fame, money, and power.  Boy, there’s an interesting thought.  Now how do I conjure that spell?  Hmmm, let me see.  All in all I really liked “Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.” It’s probably the second best of the 7.

Now that I’ve seen the movie of the Half Blood Prince, I’m really looking forward to the last chapter.

Reviews by David Marsh
contact me at davidm617@aol.com