Just for the record,

[fpb]

- I loved all the seven Harry Potter books, with one exception: I thoroughly hated the epilogue. I regard it not only as bad, but as unredeemable. Its message (destroy the bad guy equals live in peace afterwards) is both dangerously escapistic (was the world any safer after 1945? And what about the widespread hope of a "peace dividend" after 1989?) and plain incredible. What, nineteen years of unbroken peace? On what planet? If that is the chapter that JKR kept in her safe all those years, it should have stayed there.

Comments

[jordan179.livejournal.com]

Its message (destroy the bad guy equals live in peace afterwards) ...

Destroying the bad guy does mean that one lives in greater peace afterwards.

(was the world any safer after 1945? And what about the widespread hope of a "peace dividend" after 1989?)

In order: yes, the world was safer after 1945 than it would have been had Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union confronted each other with nuclear weapons; and there was a "peace dividend" after 1989 -- the 1990's saw immense economic growth and we are safer today, even in wartime, than we were when our enemy was a atomic-armed superpower. "Better" doesn't mean "perfect."

What, nineteen years of unbroken peace? On what planet?

We do not, in fact, know from the epilogue that the peace was "unbroken." Merely that nobody as deadly as Voldemort had appeared in that time. Presumably there were criminals, monsters, and such to deal with: it was in fact Harry's job to deal with them.

We also don't know what happens after those nineteen years. Note that 19 years would have nicely covered the Interwar Era of the 1920's and 1930's.

[wade-scott.livejournal.com]

Not to mention it reads like teen fanfiction. Seriously, had I read the spoiled, online version, I would have read the epilogue and thought it a hoax.

[stigandnasty919.livejournal.com]

I knew this would happen eventually..... You've posted something I agree with without any reservation....

[lametiger.livejournal.com]

I am assuming that you would relate better to the way Daniel Handler (on record as hating the "happily-ever-after" way of tying up stories) ended A Series of Unfortunate Events. I would characterize it as a "happier-but-not-exclusively-happy" ending.

Personally, I didn't have a problem with the Harry Potter epilogue. It is a reflection of Harry's perspective that even if not perfect his world was much more comfortable than during his Hogworts years.

As I was pondering your premise, I was struck by thoughts of the German parallels. The reparations forced on Germany after the Great War were a contributing factor to a Second World War, but the Marshall Plan is generally conceded as the reason Germany (at least in the non-Soviet sectors prior to reunification) became an ally of the US and UK instead of becoming a problem again. One could argue that the reason why there is an extended period of "peace" in the wizarding world after the defeat of Voldemort is because the Slytherins were able to keep their house intact rather than having it disbanded, nor were there witchhunts against former deatheaters and their families. I believe this explanation would fit well with the general worldview that Jo espouses. In other words, it was not only the defeat of the villain that leads to the happy ending, but enlightened leadership thereafter.

[super-pan.livejournal.com]

I just found the epilogue to be silly in so many ways, certainly one of them being what you said above. Sadly I barely remember much about the epilogue, or the last book at all. I just wasn't too blown away, and I couldn't tell if it was me or the book. Probably both.

It's still not cool to criticize JKR in certain circles around here, which I find to be just a little odd.

[pathology-doc.livejournal.com]

On what planet?

In Harry's world, the Wizarding World, YES.

This is a children's fantasy series - see it in context, for heaven's sake!