The final fight

[Andy R Marshall]

I agree. The ending was rather weak. My g/f is doing a paper the last book for a college class (don't ask me how that happens). She used the scene between harry and big-V to kick the paper off and at the time I didnt realize it was a quote.
I remember saying, "Um, I think you can write better than this. This is kinda weak and runs on in one long, boring sentence."
"But it's a quote."
"Oh... OHHH! Now I remember why I thought the ending was weak."

[Marvolo]

Originally Posted by lamanna

I think there was good reason for the Harry-Voldemort fight being short. In my opinion I don't think a long battle would have made sense. Harry has never been magically powerful like Dumbledore or Voldemort. He could never match Voldemort in a duel based on magical skill alone. I think the final fight reminds us of this. Harry was up against the 'most powerful wizard of all time' and had no apparent powerful magical skills, so it took something extraordinary(elder wand's allegiance) to defeat him.

Harry outsmarted him, and that is why the fight was so satisfying to me. But, on a even keel, toe to toe, Harry Potter has absolutely no chance against Voldemort. I was never expecting an actual duel. I was expecting Harry to die and stay dead honestly. I liked it. I even liked the epilogue.

[Giovanna Clairval]

The scene was weak, in my opinion, too. It lacked tension (apart from the moment in which Draco's mum is about to check if Harry is dead).

She can be more inspired than that. Besides the "I liked/didn't like", legitimate reactions for a reader, if I put my critiquer's hat on, I'd say that she can write much, much better.

[KiwiBird]

Actually the final fight was okay, longer then that would have been unrealistic, and very hollywood'esc = bad. I know you all probably are dissapointed because you did not get to see a Dumby/Voldy like duel, but to me that would have made it bad. This seemed more real (despite the fact that everyhting seemed to fall into place rather easily.) The duel lies more in their previous actions and the words spoken.

It is clear Harry aint that magically gifted as Dumby or Voldy, but how many are? That said, he is above mediocare. To me he is most definitely among the more talented wizards, only there is talent and there is talent.

[dekket]

I always thought that Voldemort was defeated by his failing to understand the nature of the Elder wand, and wands in general. He was the mightiest wizard in history, but his power and ability made him arrogant.
Harry survived because he understood and accepted nature of the magic, even though he was nowhere near as powerful as his opponent.
It was a case of Brawn vs Brains.

[PTeppic]

Originally Posted by dekket

It was a case of Brawn vs Brains.

Quite so, and if the Brains don't use them very early on they'll get pounded by the Brawn. Which inevitably means a short "fight". Unless Voldemort was intending to toy with Harry, i.e. torture and/or humiliate him in front of everyone, then he would inevitably use Avadra Kedavra and just get it over with. Like a bully going for a right-hook to the face (or in other places, a .45 to the heart and/or forehead). For Brains to win means a quick win... though no doubt we'll see it slowed down and played out in the movie...

[Ivaron]

Originally Posted by lamanna

I might be over-analysing but, between Harry being the Master of Death(having the Hallows), sacrificing himself(accepting death) to keep everyone safe and Voldemort having Harry's blood(therefore, Lily's sacrifice) running through him, it was almost guarenteed that Voldemort couldn't kill Harry. By doing that he had defeated Voldemort without even killing him.

Well, this is exactly what the prophecy said:

"and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives ..."

What I want you to look at carefully is the "while the other survives" part. It doesn't say "while the other lives", it says "while the other survives".
In other words, something happens when one of them should have died but doesn't. What happens then? Well, the one who failed to kill "the other" can't live anymore; i.e. is doomed to die.

So, to put it blunt, the prophecy had two options:

1. If Harry survives something that should've killed him, Harry wins.
2. If Voldemort survives something that should've killed him, Voldemort wins.

# 1 was fullfilled, because Harry sacrificed himself, destroying the horcrux inside him, which allowed him to kill Voldemort.

The interesting thing is, that if Harry hadn't known he was a horcrux, he probably would've killed Voldemort first. In that case, Voldemort would have come back in a new body later on and not have Harry's blood in him anymore. In which case he would be immortal until Harry is killed, but then who would kill Voldemort? It's funny how the prophecy's weird wording actually says that the first to die-but-not-really-die is the one who wins.

At the moment Harry sacrificed himself, he won. Voldemort did have a chance of winning, but because of his nature and because he never knew about the horcrux he wouldn't have realised this himself. Voldemort could only have won if Harry never knew he was a horcrux. Which, in the end, makes Dumbledore's death meaningfull because it allowed Snape to tell Harry about the horcrux at the right time.

[Boaz]

I don't get how the ending was too short. After seven years of story over seven books, the last fourth of DH takes place within twenty-four hours... pages 522 to 746 in my American hardback. Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Griphook wake up at six in the morning at Bill and Fleur's and Harry finally defeats Riddle as the sun comes back up.

The final was like all the Potter books, Rowling gave a huge monologue by either a main protagonist or antagonist to explain what happened.

In a protracted fight, Shacklebolt, Arthur, McGonagall and others would have joined with Harry to attack Riddle... this would have changed the dynamic of the Voldemort-Potter seven book storyline completely.

I'm not saying the story is perfect, but it belongs to Rowling. We don't have to like the end, we don't have to enjoy the ending... I'm sure she'd like us to really be moved and we'd also like to really be awed by the ending... but this does not always happen. I feel this especially happens to long series where people really get attached to characters or really start to get psychologically linked to the setting. The emotional investments of the readers are so high that their expectations will be correspondingly high... and it's hard for the author to deliver.

I'd rather the author try to be thorough in covering all the bases at the end, than try and give me an ending that's nice and easy. Rowling, in my opinion, tried from the first book to establish the final confrontation. The part that love plays in protecting people, the horcruxes, the transfer of Voldemort's soul to Harry, Voldemort's use of Harry's blood, Dumbledore's interventions in the lives of Riddle and Potter, Snape's hatred for James and his undying love for Lily, orphans, abandonment, friendship, sacrifice, courage, cowardice, purity, trust, faithfulness, romance and remorse were all major themes and all were covered thoroghly in the ending.

Is Rowling's series the best thing I've ever read? No. Was it intruiging? Yes. Did she have a good idea of the intricacies of the full plot and ending when she wrote the first book or did she just wing it as the series grew? I have no doubt she knew all about the horcuxes, Snape, and the final fight when she wrote Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone.

It's her story, many of us enjoyed it. It's not perfect, but to say that she got it wrong is presumptuous at the very least, if not megalomaniacal.