QUOTE(kckaye @ Aug 5 2007, 09:17 AM)

Yep. Misunderstanding.

I'm just as satisfied with a happy ending as much as the next person. I personally think that DH would have ended perfectly if JKR didn't include the crapologue. That part felt forced to me. Yes it was nice to see Harry have a family and all that, but it just felt like I've said a number of times...too perfect. I don't understand why she felt the need to add those four pages? Does it add anything to the story? IMO it doesn't. Harry seemed pretty happy to me at the end of the final chapter of the book. Why not just leave it at that? Let the fanfiction writers take over. I agree there are many better written happy endings, and to me having her write the 100% perfect epilogue cheapens the ending imo.
Yeah...personally, I would have preferred a better wrap-up at the end of the last chapter to the epilogue. And while I understand why she wanted to show Harry with, basically, what he saw himself with in the Mirror of Erised in book 1, I think that point could have been made more elegance and subtlety.
Imagine, as an epilogue, a short scene of Harry as an adult: He is visiting Hogwarts to give a guest lecture for DADA. He finds the Mirror of Erised, and as he smiles into it, memories of his younger days flooding back, his reflection smiles back at him; for him, it has become a regular old mirror, for he has become a perfectly happy man.
Now THAT, for me, would have been a perfect ending <3 It would have, in a way, brought the series full-circle.
Ah...C'est la vie...
QUOTE(joseybird @ Aug 5 2007, 12:04 PM)

I agree with you that the ships JKR intended to write came off poorly done. That's one reason why I don't like the ending. It's HOW she wrote it. IMO it was crappy..and not just in book 7. IMO she should have just ended it with Harry wondering if Kreacher would make him a sandwich....that last page actually brought a smile to my face.
Yeah, I just think that the epilogue's problems were mostly unconnected from the fact of OBHWF (I also generally put more stake in "bi-partisan" criticism

).