![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
ladyhadhafang.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
deathtocapslockWell, here it is. The final chapter. :) We made it. :D
Summary of the Story: You know how this one goes. Once upon a time, three brothers were traveling down "a lonely winding road at twilight". The brothers come across a river, and because they're wizards (of course. XP), they manage to get over the river -- which pisses Death off, especially considering that everyone else managed to drown in the river previously. (*Wonders about the previous travelers*) Death pretends to congratulate the brothers and asks them for what they want as prizes for evading him. The older brother, who's combative, asks for the Elder Wand. The second brother, who's "arrogant", asks for the Resurrection Stone, and the third brother, who's "the humblest and the wisest of the brothers", asks for the Invisibility Cloak. (Smart idea at the time. :P)
First brother dies of his own stupidity. Second brother kills himself to be with the girl he loves. Third brother (ugh) goes to meet Death willingly. Reader is busy headdesking and mumbling incoherent curses.
Dumbledore's Commentary: Starts with an actually quite cute (if a bit creepy) anecdote about how Dumbledore used to love that story when he was a kid (though Aberforth preferred "Grumble the Grubby Goat"). Possible foreshadowing? YMMV. :)
And then we get *this* load of crap:
"The moral of 'The Tale of the Three Brothers' could not be any clearer: Human efforts to evade or overcome death are always doomed to disappointment. The third brother in the story ("the humblest and also the wisest") is the only one who understands that, having narrowly escaped Death once, the best he can hope for is to postpone their next meeting as long as possible. This youngest brother knows that taunting Death -- by engaging in violence like the first brother, or by meddling in the shadowy art of necromancy, like the second brother -- means pitting oneself against a wily enemy that cannot lose." (94-95)
*Beat*
Honestly, Dumbledore, if you hadn't basically set Harry up to commit suicide for the Greater Good (and made him a Master of Death in the process), I'd actually buy this argument.
Then he goes on about the idea that the Hallows are real is a load of crap and misses the point of the original story and blah blah blah -- except oh wait they turned out to be real in the most horrible way possible GODDAMMIT --
*Dumbles Rage-O-Meter braces itself*
Easy there. *Sighs* My hate will make me powerful...my hate will make me powerful...okay, let's continue. XD
Blah blah blah isn't death tragic and irreversible blah blah blah starting to wish baeraad was here so that he could give Dumbledore a good spanking blah blah blah Godelot blah blah blah hang on a second:
"But which of us would have shown the wisdom of the third brother, if offered the pick of Death's gifts? Wizards and Muggles alike are imbued with a lust for power; how many would resist the 'Wand of Destiny'? Which human being, having lost someone they loved, could withstand the temptation of the Resurrection Stone? Even I, Albus Dumbledore, would find it easiest to refuse the Invisibility Cloak; which only goes to show that, clever as I am, I remain just as big a fool as anyone else." (107)
...
Well, at least he admits he's a hypocrite. Granted, he takes some time to brag about how "clever" he is (and to that I say, fuck you, sir. You are a humble servant of the Light -- something infinitely greater than you could ever be -- and that should be enough for you. #bitch mode), but it counts. A smidgen, that is. :P
Dumbles Rage-O-Meter: 11. *Explodes again* *Beat*
Poor Rage-O-Meter...I should really fix it, but honestly, I think it's suffered enough. Still... :(
And it's over. Phew.
So my conclusions on THE TALES OF BEEDLE THE BARD?
Awful.
If it had been a neat little tie-in for information about the Wizarding World, I think I would have liked it (or at the very least, it wouldn't have been as infuriating). Instead, it mostly serves as a vehicle to show what a "great writer" JKR is, and how "wise" Dumbledore is, and how "selfless" Harry is -- here's a hint: none of these are true. (Okay, maybe the JKR one was a little harsh, but...yeah)
On a scale of one to ten, where does it fall?
Less than zero.
It's pretentious and self-important, the Aesops are more unbalanced than a game of Jenga, and Dumbledore's commentary is so infuriating that it was hard to find room to make jokes at times.
I appreciate it was written for charity, but that's perhaps the only benefit of the doubt I can give it.
It's safe to say you can skip this one, and if you've chosen not to read it -- then I count you highly, highly fortunate. :)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play some KOTOR II to cleanse my mind.
Summary of the Story: You know how this one goes. Once upon a time, three brothers were traveling down "a lonely winding road at twilight". The brothers come across a river, and because they're wizards (of course. XP), they manage to get over the river -- which pisses Death off, especially considering that everyone else managed to drown in the river previously. (*Wonders about the previous travelers*) Death pretends to congratulate the brothers and asks them for what they want as prizes for evading him. The older brother, who's combative, asks for the Elder Wand. The second brother, who's "arrogant", asks for the Resurrection Stone, and the third brother, who's "the humblest and the wisest of the brothers", asks for the Invisibility Cloak. (Smart idea at the time. :P)
First brother dies of his own stupidity. Second brother kills himself to be with the girl he loves. Third brother (ugh) goes to meet Death willingly. Reader is busy headdesking and mumbling incoherent curses.
Dumbledore's Commentary: Starts with an actually quite cute (if a bit creepy) anecdote about how Dumbledore used to love that story when he was a kid (though Aberforth preferred "Grumble the Grubby Goat"). Possible foreshadowing? YMMV. :)
And then we get *this* load of crap:
"The moral of 'The Tale of the Three Brothers' could not be any clearer: Human efforts to evade or overcome death are always doomed to disappointment. The third brother in the story ("the humblest and also the wisest") is the only one who understands that, having narrowly escaped Death once, the best he can hope for is to postpone their next meeting as long as possible. This youngest brother knows that taunting Death -- by engaging in violence like the first brother, or by meddling in the shadowy art of necromancy, like the second brother -- means pitting oneself against a wily enemy that cannot lose." (94-95)
*Beat*
Honestly, Dumbledore, if you hadn't basically set Harry up to commit suicide for the Greater Good (and made him a Master of Death in the process), I'd actually buy this argument.
Then he goes on about the idea that the Hallows are real is a load of crap and misses the point of the original story and blah blah blah -- except oh wait they turned out to be real in the most horrible way possible GODDAMMIT --
*Dumbles Rage-O-Meter braces itself*
Easy there. *Sighs* My hate will make me powerful...my hate will make me powerful...okay, let's continue. XD
Blah blah blah isn't death tragic and irreversible blah blah blah starting to wish baeraad was here so that he could give Dumbledore a good spanking blah blah blah Godelot blah blah blah hang on a second:
"But which of us would have shown the wisdom of the third brother, if offered the pick of Death's gifts? Wizards and Muggles alike are imbued with a lust for power; how many would resist the 'Wand of Destiny'? Which human being, having lost someone they loved, could withstand the temptation of the Resurrection Stone? Even I, Albus Dumbledore, would find it easiest to refuse the Invisibility Cloak; which only goes to show that, clever as I am, I remain just as big a fool as anyone else." (107)
...
Well, at least he admits he's a hypocrite. Granted, he takes some time to brag about how "clever" he is (and to that I say, fuck you, sir. You are a humble servant of the Light -- something infinitely greater than you could ever be -- and that should be enough for you. #bitch mode), but it counts. A smidgen, that is. :P
Dumbles Rage-O-Meter: 11. *Explodes again* *Beat*
Poor Rage-O-Meter...I should really fix it, but honestly, I think it's suffered enough. Still... :(
And it's over. Phew.
So my conclusions on THE TALES OF BEEDLE THE BARD?
Awful.
If it had been a neat little tie-in for information about the Wizarding World, I think I would have liked it (or at the very least, it wouldn't have been as infuriating). Instead, it mostly serves as a vehicle to show what a "great writer" JKR is, and how "wise" Dumbledore is, and how "selfless" Harry is -- here's a hint: none of these are true. (Okay, maybe the JKR one was a little harsh, but...yeah)
On a scale of one to ten, where does it fall?
Less than zero.
It's pretentious and self-important, the Aesops are more unbalanced than a game of Jenga, and Dumbledore's commentary is so infuriating that it was hard to find room to make jokes at times.
I appreciate it was written for charity, but that's perhaps the only benefit of the doubt I can give it.
It's safe to say you can skip this one, and if you've chosen not to read it -- then I count you highly, highly fortunate. :)
Now, if you'll excuse me, I'm going to play some KOTOR II to cleanse my mind.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2011-03-21 07:40 am (UTC)That capricious stick which would betray its owner at the drop of a hat (or another stick).
no subject
Date: 2011-03-23 11:31 pm (UTC)If the stick was so dangerous why the Albus "The Paragon of Virtue" Dumbledore haven't destroyed it as soon as he got it?
Also, why is Harry "The Power of Love" Potter keeping the wretched thing? Destroy it and be done with it.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-23 11:57 pm (UTC)The black stone with is jagged crack running down the center sat in the two halves of the Snitch. The Resurrection Stone had cracked down the vertical line representing the Elder Wand.
But this is yet another large fail by Rowling. We're told that a Horcrux has to be 'properly destroyed' to eliminate the fragment of splintered soul lying within; *magically* destroyed, in fact, as Hermione tells us:
That’s a problem we’re going to have to solve, though, because ripping, smashing, or crushing a Horcrux won’t do the trick. You’ve got to put it beyond magical repair.
So ... the Stone Hallow has been magically broken, beyond magical repair, a big crack running down its centre ... and yet IT STILL WORKS!
I see this as just one more big example of Rowling please-don't-think-about-it-or-else-my-story-will-fall-apart FAIL - the Stone is magically broken but still magically works, folks! - but I dare say a Rowling apologist would hasten to invent a way around it - the Hallows are so super-dooper they'll still work after they're, uhm, broken, you see. Which would support the idea that they *can't* be broken. Uhm, as Hallows.
Anyway, I've read a couple of stories which have dealt with how Harry has to manage/hide the Elder Wand. He never thinks about lobbing it into a volcano or Mount Doom or anything like that.
Also, why is Harry "The Power of Love" Potter keeping the wretched thing? Destroy it and be done with it.
Harry not only doesn't do that, he tells the whole world about it!!! The first person that Harry meets is going to disarm Harry of his regular wand - which will then make the attacker the MASTER OF THE ELDER WAND, of course - and then use Veritaserum or Legilimency (Harry being useless at protecting his mind, of course) - to determine where it is hidden.
That Elder Wand garbage is probably the worst example of a deus ex machina in anything written outside of a primary school.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-24 12:26 am (UTC)Yes, all other Horcrux are 'properly destroyed' (o.k. so Harry is only temporary dead but he is still dead for a time) but the Resurrection Stone is "destroyed" but functional?
Somebody should write a epilogue-compliant fic in which Voldy comes back because DD haven't destroyed the stone. XD
The idiot told the world about it? And then went and became an Auror?
That is beyond stupid.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-24 12:46 am (UTC)Which of course means that the person who killed him became MASTER OF THE ELDER WAND!! Since that is the most popular, most well-known, guaranteed way to become owner of the death stick.
...
Uhm, except, that was Voldemort, see, which meant that Harry wasn't the owner of the wand when he said he was at the end and ...
OH! LOOK!! CHOCOLATE FROGS!!
:-)
The idiot told the world about it? And then went and became an Auror? That is beyond stupid.
Yes. The first bar brawl Harry was in as a trainee Auror would have seen his wand knocked out of his hand - by a drunk, a thrown chair - and mastery of the ELDER WAND passed to someone else.
I've often maintained - only half tongue in cheek - that this was the real way to get rid of the hold of the Elder Wand. For Harry to walk into Knockturn Alley with a gang of Auror mates and shout "SLYTHERINS ARE LOSERS!" at the top of his voice. In the ensuing brawl the mastery of the Elder Wand would be passed to so many, so fast - from Harry to A to B to C to ... - no one would be able to keep track of it. The ultimate shell game.
So at the end no-one would know who the master was. Given as how there's apparently no spell to detect the owner, it's all guesswork anyway. Funny about that.
no subject
Date: 2011-03-25 03:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2011-03-24 12:17 am (UTC)