Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix: Second reading

[scarlettina]

I haven’t touched a Potter book since Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince first came out. Like most folks, I tear through these books on first read, wondering what’s going to happen next. Now, having finished rereading Order of the Phoenix, I find myself wanting to just write about the things I didn’t notice before, mainly because now I’m not whipping through the pages. I also wanted to write about the things I’m rediscovering that I’d forgotten because when I read quickly, I don’t often retain details.

Gut reactions as a fan
First, I found the book more affecting this time around. Like I said, I whipped through my first read. (Everyone I knew was bragging that they’d read it in less than one day and, well, I got competitive; I shouldn’t do that). At the time, I quietly felt like it was kinda lightweight, and I think it’s because I just speed-read right through, skimming quite a bit. So I’m sure that this time, I was more affected because I read more closely. I’m guessing it was also because there was real resonance for me in Harry’s loss, especially this year with other things so fresh. One way or another, the last confrontation and Sirius’ death just nailed me. I felt for Harry in all the unfinished business he had with Sirius, all the love, everything.

That said, I’d forgotten how irritating Harry is in this book. He’s angry and impatient all the time—not without cause but, wow, he’s just snappin’ at everyone, isn’t he? Some of it is his developing teenage temperament, of course, and I dig J.K. for being so observant and showing us Harry’s difficulty dealing with his growing into this in-between period of his life. It’s all over every conversation he has with adults especially. Harry may not be as likable in this book (at least for me so far), but his experience is genuine and easy to sympathize with. This prickliness is also easier for me to accept when I see Harry’s finer qualities: his compassion for Sirius’ frustration and depression, for example, and his determination to be prepared for what’s coming.

Hermione, this time around, just annoyed the hell out of me; she never has before. This time, I found her presumptuous and condescending. Her arranging the interview with Rita Skeeter without warning Harry especially bugged me. This was something I hadn’t remembered from my first reading, and I was flabbergasted when Harry arrived to discover Rita waiting for an interview that he didn’t know about. In previous books, I kind of identified with Hermione (head constantly in a book and all that), but this time, not so much. And the whole S.P.E.W. thing is enough already. I’m curious to see what my reactions to her are when I start rereading “Half-Blood Prince.”

I like Hagrid as a character, but this time around, I wasn’t excited about his subplot and it felt shoved into the story. While, sure, it had resonance because family is so much a theme in the book, I just found myself wanting things to move along already. And in the end, I didn’t feel like that subplot really added up to much. I don’t remember if it comes back in Prince; maybe it pays off there? A far more graceful, subtley-built subplot is how the centaurs play into the story. That, I thought, was nicely done.

I’m a Lupin fan, I’ve decided. Yeah, and he deserves it. I’m late coming to the party, I know, but at least I got there. :-)

Loved the invention of the Department of Mysteries, especially the Hall of Time. Wish her metaphor for death hadn’t been so heavy-handed and clichéd though: passing beyond the veil. With some of the other stuff she’s done in this series, that was just laziness.

Style and stuff
These reactions are more-or-less the order in which I had them, not the order of priority. Also? This is an incomplete list, mainly things I just feel like bitching about.

I made my first mental note about style when I realized that some of her adverb use was bugging the hell out of me. I like adverbs; because I do, I tend to police myself pretty tightly (adverb!) when I write fiction (which seems rare right now). What I don’t like are awkward adverbs—adverbs that clunk—and Rowling uses them enough for me to notice. The first word that made me pay attention was "anticipatedly" which I found just jarring; it may be the worst one in the book. And then I began to casually (adverb!) track the adverb usage. Other coinages I’ve noticed since are just grating (“repressively,” for example, after a dialogue tag). In one case (and I’m sure it’s not the only one), during a conversation between three characters, every single dialogue tag was appended with an adverb. My first thought was, “Wow, she doesn’t trust her readers,” and then I reminded myself that these books are intended, first and foremost, for a YA audience. Having never worked in YA and not reading much other than the Potter series, that may be an accepted convention with which I’m not familiar. Still seems excessive. I guess what a lot of this comes down to is what I’ve said about Rowling all along, which is that she’s a terrific storyteller, but not a great line-for-line writer.

There are redundancies that made me wince, want to get my green pencil, and line-edit the damn thing. (For example: "It could be a frame-up!" Ron exclaimed excitedly.)

I admire Rowling’s ability to nail character voice. Her gift here isn’t news to me; it’s one of the reasons the books succeed and one of the reasons I’ve enjoyed them so much. She’s really good at making choices—whether about sentence structure or vocabulary or both—that are individual and idiosyncratic. ("Wotcher, Harry!" No one says it but Tonks. Ron seems to use a little more slang than Harry. And no one speaks as precisely or with the kind of malice that Snape can conjure.)

For the most part, I think she threaded the plotlines through each other well, though as I said above, I couldn’t give a damn about Hagrid’s subplot and hope it pays off later just so I didn’t waste my time.

Okay, done praising, done bitching. Open for discussion. And in the meanwhile, on to Half-Blood Prince.

Comments

[girasole.livejournal.com]

I move in many circles wherein adults discuss Harry Potter; I am even more than a nodding acquaintance with one of the editors on this series. I love them passionately, and have since the very first book, before the hype, before everything.

Others have noted, sometimes at length, Rowling and adverbs. I never noticed, it never bothered me. I can't explain it.

Harry is so unpleasant in this book, but so true to his age and condition. I loved that. Half-Blood Prince I think is even darker and more passionate and an even better book. She is a master storyteller, and I think she is a damnfine writer too, I confess I don't see your problems with Hermione except in that she too is hitting adolescent stride.

I await your reactions to HBP too. And the last one, it brings tears to my eyes just thinking about it.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

I'm not sure why Hermione rubbed me the wrong way this time out. Certainly, the interview thing seemed like the most presumptuous thing she'd ever done, but that's me. I can't put my finger on it. I'll figure it out eventually (probably in therapy).

We'll have to stand on opposite sides of the room when it comes to Rowling's line-for-line writing, though. Character voice? Brilliant. Choosing her stories and exciting ways to tell them? Terrific. The writing? Can't be done, at least not for me. And her editor has to answer for some of it as well.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Oh, and ::icon love!::

[girasole.livejournal.com]

Snurched it from http://www.the-leaky-cauldron.org/ my favorite Potter site.

[gryphonrose.livejournal.com]

This book still pisses me off, as does most of the series. Rowling has an excellent ear for the kids' voices, and some of her other characters are good as well. But her plotting is and always has been abysmal.

This book and Half-Blood are in many ways the worst. In both she has to engineer things in a precise way--and have normally intelligent people behave like utter idiots--to set up a character death that could never have occurred otherwise.

It's a shame, too, because with a halfway-decent editor (or, at least, a decent editor who could actually make her listen and revise) the plots could have worked as well, and then these books really would be worth all the praise they've received.

Yes, I'm very picky about plots. And yes, mine is a very unpopular view about the series. But there you have it.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't have your opinion any other way, fella. :-) I see your point about Rowling's engineering, sure. But I also agree that her editor has a lot to answer for. (Adverbs!)

[gryphonrose.livejournal.com]

I vaguely remember reading somewhere that Rowling basically had that "star author" syndrome where she didn't really let the editor meddle with her deathless prose. If it's true, it explains a great deal, and lets the editor at least partially off the hook--often with the high-powered authors (as I'm sure you know) the editors are ordered to treat them with kid gloves and not to interfere. Which is pathetic and stupid but there you go.

[girasole.livejournal.com]

She is edited, carefully. You may not like the choices, but she is not the star author type. I can only go from the horse's mouth, as it were. I have met two of her editors.

[gryphonrose.livejournal.com]

In that case, I take back what I said defending her editors. Her poor plotting is as much their fault as hers.

[botgrrrl.livejournal.com]

The last one I read was Goblet of Fire. I'm waaaay behind. I enjoy the books while I read them, but as soon as I finish a particular volume, the plots just seem way too contrived.

[deedop.livejournal.com]

I've read the series out loud to Dave at bedtime. (Yes, to my husband, what of it? :-P) About halfway through book two, I decided to just start leaving out adverbs, editing in my head as I reached the end of every dialog tag. It makes for a far smoother read.

Also, character voice: reading out loud makes that part shine. I adore reading her dialog in character. I get rather silly with it, actually.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Honey, I was with someone for three years with whom it was a regular practice to read to each other. I love the intimacy of it. You'll get no taunting from me.

I'd love to hear you read her characters. We should read a piece of it together, each take a couple of characters and go for it. :-)

[deedop.livejournal.com]

Ha! That would be fun. I'll have to go back through and refresh my memory on which ones were my favorites. I recall having a pretty fun time with Rita Skeeter, for one. :-)

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

*nods* She does nail character voicing. (Though I must quibble, slightly, to note that Dumbledore speaks as precisely as Snape, if not with the same greasy menace.)

Hermione has always been presumptuous, officious, and condescending (with some times when she's either scared out of it or forgets to be), but usually gets away with it because she's so often correct in the things she's being presumptuous about. (I'm rereading HBP, and some of the stuff she does in there is as attributable to being a teenager as you correctly note the stuff with Harry is, in OOTP.)

I had serious trouble getting through OOTP mainly because of how badly I loathe Umbridge. I found it extremely difficult to believe she was that vicious and (my judgment) evil without being in league with (or having been approached by) the Big Bad. Personally, I thought she got lucky at the end of the book; it ought to have been dementors, for my money.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Re: Umbridge

Oh, I loathe her, too. She's there to be loathed. But I agree with you on the question of her alignment with Voldemort. (See? I'm brave enough to say his name! Nyah! ::grin::) And I, too, think she got off easy, absolutely.

[bedii.livejournal.com]

In his review of Order of the Phoenix in The New York Times Stephen King made a wistful comment along the lines of how "I wish I could have dreamed up a character as evil as Umbridge." (Pretty nice praise!) He also did a brief but fair defense of Rowling against Harold Bloom and Bloom's wannabees (Bloom having already pissed on the books from a great height)--it gave me the feeling that as someone who has suffered from attacks on his own books as trash he was damned if he was going to sit by while overly snooty reviewers took cheap shots at an author that was clearly getting better with each book released.

[quizro.livejournal.com]

I'm still grumbling that Percy wasn't the one to bite it. It's just one of those things I'll never let go of.

Maybe I should reread it too, because Sirius' death didn't affect me as much as I thought it should.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Well, like I said above, this year with the recent loss, Sirius' death cut pretty close to home, so I may have been sensitized beforehand. But I also think it's a weakness of the Rowling's choice of death metaphor (the veil) that leaches some of the drama away. It makes his death seem quieter and gentler than it really is.

Now, if ya want, I can get into a whole essay about how Death Is Quiet and Gentle even in--or perhaps especially in--battle but, well, let's not go there, shall we? :-)

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Ooh, and with regard to rereading the books? I recommend it. I'm doing it for several reasons:

1) I wanted to refresh my memory.
2) I wanted to compare my reading with the upcoming film's interpretation.
3) I wanted to set myself up for rereading Blood Prince.
4) I want to be primed for when I receive my copy of Deathly Hallows.

[mabfan.livejournal.com]

That said, I’d forgotten how irritating Harry is in this book. He’s angry and impatient all the time—not without cause but, wow, he’s just snappin’ at everyone, isn’t he?

I recall being particularly annoyed by this development the first time I read the book.

I'm also amused by your analysis of Rowling's use of adverbs. In his book on writing, Stephen King warns against using too many adverbs, but praises Rowling's books.

[scarlettina.livejournal.com]

Does he really? Wow. Well, to each their own.