I have just finished re-reading the book and I stand by my earlier comments. My brain was sort of muddled the first time I read it, and I was hoping I’d have a better outlook the next time but no. It’s not that J.K. Rowling’s book was bad; in fact, the death of Dumbledore made me cry, which shows that Rowling is still good at evoking emotions (either that, or I’m just too mushy). It’s just that you wish to go back to the crisp and solid narratives of the first three books, when every scene seems to make sense, whether while they’re being read or when you finally get to the end. Books 5 and 6 share this flaw — that Rowling seems more concerned about preparing the readers for the next installment than giving a real conflict for what was being presently read. For Books 5 and 6, I had the impression that Rowling was influenced by the fact that the first 3 books had been turned into a movie; sometimes, it feels like reading a screenplay than a novel. I don’t attribute this solely to Rowling; I may have been so influenced myself such that instead of creating the characters in my head, I think of the actors. In any case, nothing, short of whining about how films dilute real literature, can really be done about that.

I’ll be watching Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire on Wednesday. So more Harry Potter after I get to do so!