HP - do you feel cheated?

The reason dating is included in the books is because Harry is growing up. He's not an 11 year old anymore, and the kids who started reading Harry when the first book was released AREN'T kids anymore. She's allowing Harry to grow up and allowing the readers to grow up with Harry.

I understand that but read any interview with Rowling about the subject and you will see how she struggled with that.

The book is not in the Libraries in the Teens section it is in the Kids section. I think she did a good job skirting the issue (no pun intended). What happened to the Asian girl Harry was so fond of in book..... 4?

The only thing that is left is the I like her but I'll pretend I hate her and vice verca with Ron and Hermione and we all know what happens with that 'relationship'.

Is it possible since Ms. Rowling wrote the book for her young daughter, that as her daughter grew, Ms. Rowling herself outgrew the story?

Hiya! I am glad to hear I'm not the only person who didn't forget poor Fred. 19 years later, the kids are named after everyone else*but* Fred. I thought that was strange. And where was Grandma and Grandpa Weasley at? It's just a shame she had to end it the way she did. Interesting about letting a 12 yr old write that last part...

This is a quote from J.K. Rowling herself in 2003 (Thank God I can paste now)

"I do look forward to a post-Harry era in my life, because some of the things that go along with this are not as much fun," she said. "But at the same time, I dread leaving Harry. ... I worked on it so hard for so long ... then it will be over and I think it's going to leave a massive gap."

I did not feel cheated.It leaves it open for anopther book,even thou she says that she is not writting another book.We'll see,look at singers,like Garth Brooks,who said he is retiring and then he comes out with a new CD or goes on tour.Retire's again,same story back again.No,I did not feel the "Nineteen Years" chapter was complete enough,but I did see that it does leave it open for another book.

Ms. Rowling has said in interviews over and over again, that she wants to be done with the story so I don't believe she'd take it back up after finishing it off. I would love to see her start a new series myself, one that has the same effect (or even more powerful) than the Harry Potter one. Now that would be magic!

craftcatcher,I do have to agree with you,there were places in the book where there was alot of "blah,blah,blah" and it would get boring.And yes it is necessary and sometimes long winded,but so is my pastor,lol.I did cry several times during the book,mnore than usual.It was kind of like reading,"Ole' Yellar",lol.And,I said to myself when people kept telling me this is the last book.That it wasn't.Ms.Rowling left it open to write more book's which I hope she does.In "Nineteen Years Later",it was not complete and left me with lots of questions.I was thing,"But,what happened to......." But,before that chapter even started I thought,wonder how the people acted towards Harry now.Was everyone over nice to him,did Mr and Mrs Weasley blame him for Fred's death.How did people act towards Draco and the other Malfoy's.I have a ton of questions in my head and probably so do alot more people and I think that Ms Rowling knows that.She left it open like that on purpose,so if she ever get's the itch to write again,she can.Then there are the adventures of the next generation too.

I love what she did with Snape as well. And I also agree with you about the "ninteen years later" - absolutely hated it.

I don't read the offspring books but I don't think this had any effect here. That ending was just too poorly written.

I've rarely heard people disliking 5 and 6. 5 is my favorite book

Ditto. I hated 5 and 6, specially 5. I guess its just because I'm a sucker for happy endings that's why I liked this book better. I liked the thought of adding 19 years later but I didn't like how it was written. It's sort of rushed and there wasn't really that much interaction between Harry, Ginny, Ron and Hermione. I wish she added more details or focused on the main characters a littler more than on the kids.

I like all of the books. I felt the "19 years later" bit was very poorly written. When I came to that I thought oh, how perfect, I can just imagine the fade in during the movie. blech.

rowantree,I have to agree,I loved all the books and I believe "Nineteen Years Later" was written in a rush,it looks like.She wanted to make it look like the end and she thought of adding that at the last minute to try and make all us think it was the end.Like in the last chapter it says that no one was sitting according to house table anymore.Then in "Nineteen Years Later" the children were to be sorted.Ok,that's quite a gap,nineteen years,what happened during that time?

ROFLMAO! So! I'm not the only one who wanted to know 'WTF?' when it came to the tents! They're shivering and cold in the snow! I kept wondering why they didn't just go to a warm beach climate, after all, they were just brainstorming, it's not like they needed to be in the same country. I didn't agree with Ron leaving either. When Dumbledore died, I thought this was a step in the right direction for Harry to finally grow up and do things on his own. Instead he just relied heavily upon Ron & Hermione and anyone else who happened by. I agree with you, and I think it's possible Ms. Rowling never intended for the story to go this far. I liked how Snape turned out but you're right, dumping it on us all at once was pretty strange.

lucyem,I really liked book 7.I thought it was more exciting and emotional then the other's.It was 19 years not 91.No Ms. Rowling did not expect it to go this far,but it didAnd as far as the tent things goes,I think,this may not be totally correct,but I believe that if they kept coming in and out of the country they would be noticed.

I liked the book, but I can't help but feel cheated. I don't think the story was meant to end the way it did. I honestly feel that there's a different ending and that she didn't publish that one because of the uproar over Harry's possible death.

Now that you mention it, Pyewacket, I remember reading about her saying that. My gut feeling though is that she didn't publish that final chapter and gave us what we got (nice way of putting it, isn't it?) instead.:)

You mention here that the "style" of the final chapter was well more immature in a way...that could explain it...If you remember the first book, while good, it was more on a childlike level...so if she wrote the final chapter the same time as her first book it could explain a lot---her writing style did improve with the later books--a lot different and not necessarily geared to just children as she knew by then children weren't the only ones reading the books

I was thinking Harry might die as well, but seeing as how kids grew up with this, I think they would see it as a horrible ending. All this hard work Harry put into saving the wizarding world, and he ends up dying. I think the kid-fan base would see it as unfair, and then start turning their back on the morals they learned from the book (like standing up for what you believe in) because they would think everytime you did that, you'd get killed anyway, so what's the point? I think that the good guy needed to prevail in the end.

I agree with you. I didn't want Harry to die, but as you wrote, in storytelling tradition, Harry needed to die. I know kids wouldn't have liked that particular ending, but better to have a great story with a strong ending than a great story with a weak ending.