The sale has unfortunately received a mixed reaction, as some fans are decrying the limited nature of the book will prevent them from ever reading the complete Harry Potter story. On his blog, Star Trek novelist Dayton Ward offers his an intelligent and well-mannered perspective response. I'll further point out that it's hard to criticize anyone who would invest so much time and energy into a unique product that so few will read; not only has Ms. Rowling forsaken that satisfaction and feedback, she also used the opportunity to raise $4 million for her favorite charity. There's no better gift, especially at this time of year; kudos to Amazon.com for being a significant player in this transaction.

Related posts:

• Dumbledore Is Gay
• The Deathly Hallows
• Demon of the Gibbet
• A casual fan's review of Harry Potter 7: The Deathly Hallows
• Hufflepuff, The Missing Pokémon

To put this in context: First, Harry Potter was denounced for promoting the wrong religion (witchcraft); now, The Golden Compass is at fault for denouncing all religion. Both are award-winning series of youth literature that have turned millions of youngsters into readers and have sparked the imagination that many parents fear television and video games are suffocating. Yet books that encourage critical thinking are being blacklisted because they're teaching kids how to think, instead of what to think. Such a shame.

Besides, there are several flaws with the argument. The Golden Compass (called The Northern Lights upon its original British publication, and the first in a trilogy) is set in a universe parallel to our own. Although that fantasy world does have its own Bible and creation myth, it's still a work of fiction and cannot be considered analogous to damning our real world's Christianity. And even if the book's assault on its own fictional (and obviously corrupt) religion is to be construed as a promotion of atheism — what of it? Why is that particular philosophy being demonized? No one complained when The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe promoted Christianity. If we are to decry religion in Hollywood, shouldn't we at least be consistent?

I don't care what religion you are, just as it doesn't matter what religion I am. Regardless of our creeds, there should be at least three positive acts we can all agree on: reading, thinking, and imagining. No less a mind than Albert Einstein once wrote: "Imagination is more important than knowledge. For knowledge is limited to all we now know and understand, while imagination embraces the entire world, and all there ever will be to know and understand." So please, let us collectively embrace imagination, in whatever form it takes. The world needs more thinkers, and I lack the hubris to say Einstein would be wrong in this matter.

Related posts:

• This Will Be A Novel Long Remembered

• Why did Dumbledore drink that goblet full of poison again?
• Whatever happened to that evil teacher who caused Harry to write on his hand?
• Who the heck is Mundungus Fletcher?
• How many freaking Horcruxes are there, and how many has Harry identified?

Hiphopguy23 realizes the "true" fans loved this book because it answered all these unanswered questions and, "Oh look, J.K Rowling mentioned a purple-belly HackleSnork on Page 145 of Book 1 and now she talks in detail about it in this book!" Meanwhile, Hiphopguy23 is trying to figure out what in blazes a purple-belly HackleSnork is and why it is more dangerous than a yellow-tailed DingleBerry.

Nonetheless, like a trooper, Hiphopguy23 stayed all the way until the end…well, mostly the end. The last chapter / epilogue was pure sap and utter trash. Hiphopguy23 read three paragraphs of the epilogue and then found something more productive to do, like trying to see how long he could hold his breath. But the reason Hiphopguy23 (mostly) finished was because he wanted these questions answered:

1. Will the special magic truant officer be after Harry for skipping school for a year?
   
2. Does Harry Potter die at the end?
   
3. Does Harry Potter die at the end and then come back to life completely unexplained?
   
4. Why did Snape kill Dumbledore?
   
5. Is Dumbledore really dead?
   
6. No, seriously, is Dumbledore really dead?
   
7. Will Harry continue getting out of impossible situations by his foolproof magic spell — Deus Ex Machina?
   
8. Was this book really worth the $34.99 cover price and did anybody actually pay that much?
   

J.K Rowling answers some of these questions, but not all. Hiphopguy23 gives this book a generous thumbs down.

Related posts:

• The Deathly Hallows
• Dumbledore Is Gay
• The Tales of Beedle the Bard
• Hufflepuff, The Missing Pokémon
• Demon of the Gibbet

My response: So what? What's the purpose in her revelation at this point in the franchise's life? Dumbledore has been dead for more than two years, and his sexual preference never proved to be a factor in the role he played at Hogwart's, in Harry's life, or in the fight against Voldemort — all of which are now closed chapters. Is this just Ms. Rowling's attempt at generating more controversy and thus inciting sales now that the summer months of The Deathly Hallows ' release are past? Granted, she's already released other details that were not in the books, but those were substantive. Anything else is immaterial.

Related posts:

• The Deathly Hallows
• A casual fan's review of Harry Potter 7: The Deathly Hallows
• The Tales of Beedle the Bard
• Demon of the Gibbet
• Hufflepuff, The Missing Pokémon

I didn't mind any of the deaths — not Hedwig, or Dobby, or Madeye, or Fred; this is war, after all. But I did mind Tonks': not only was the actress who played her really cute, but it left Teddy with no parents (or grandfather), with only Harry as a godfather… much as Fred and Lily left Harry with no one but Sirius.

My problem is with the first half of the book, which consists of little more than random, frustrated exploring and Harry wondering, "Why does this look familiar?" Once they get captured and brought to the Malfoy's, though, things started to heat up.

Now, the parts of The Deathly Hollows I didn't get:

• How did Harry know the Horcrux in Gringott's was the Hufflepuff cup?
• What was that whole thing about Voldemort's soul keeping Harry alive? All talk of souls and spells aside, the only reason I can see why the Killing Curse didn't work was because it was cast by the Elder Wand.
• How will Harry dying a natural death undo the Elder Wand? All he has to do is be defeated or disarmed, even if he's not in possession of the Deathstick at the time.
• How did Neville pull the Gryffindor Sword from the Sorting Hat? I understand the precedent set by The Chamber of Secrets, but still, I thought the sword had been stolen by Griphook?

I think I still prefer The Half-Blood Prince and even The Goblet of Fire to this one.

Related posts:

• A casual fan's review of Harry Potter 7: The Deathly Hallows
• Dumbledore Is Gay
• The Tales of Beedle the Bard
• Hufflepuff, The Missing Pokémon
• Demon of the Gibbet

Naturally, I'm looking forward to the book more than the movie. As I previously commented, the fifth book was more voluminous than it needed to be, serving as a dull but perhaps necessary bridge in the series. Its successor, on the other hand, was my favorite of them all (with Goblet of Fire running a close second), with an ending that left me eager and excited for the next book — something none of the other five books had done.

I'm one of the rare few who has read each book only once, though, so I will likely see the movie anyway, just to refresh my memory as to some of the vital details of which Rowling is fond of not reminding her audience. Watching the film will certainly be a succincter reminder than rereading the book.

But it won't be the only such film vying for audience's attention this year. I remember in March 2000, when I first told someone about the Harry Potter books, she thickly asked, "Is it about a bunch of rabbits?" Apparently, Hollywood has finally realized the opportunity to cash in on that confusion.

Related posts:

• The Tales of Beedle the Bard
• Dumbledore Is Gay
• The Deathly Hallows
• Hufflepuff, The Missing Pokémon
• A casual fan's review of Harry Potter 7: The Deathly Hallows

The underlying concept for these films is that every myth, legend, or rumor you ever heard, from King Arthur to King Midas, is true. The artifacts of these tales are stored in a high-security museum, and Noah Wyle's character, with his genius intellect and short attention span, is its new protector. In the first film, Hitler's Spear of Destiny is stolen; in the second, the storeroom of Solomon's biblical wisdom is revealed. In each, Wyle is sent overseas, where he meets a headstrong woman, wins her over with immature innocence, and beats the Bad Guys and their nefarious booby traps.

Yes, these films are as predictable as they sound; no, I can't say "But despite that, they're actually quite good." The series borrows from Indiana Jones, Casablanca, and everything in between, without doing any one thing better than its source — unsurprising, considering the quality company The Librarian is trying to keep.

But I can imagine these films being perfect for a younger audience. Wyle's character is enough of a caricature of an accidental hero to be entertaining; the plot is evenly paced between action and exposition; and there's no nudity, vulgarity, or violence beyond Power Ranger levels. Adults will enjoy the dry wit of Bob Newhart, Wyle's employer and mentor. So, for these reasons, the films warrant having been made, and I anticipate a third to close out the trilogy.

Coincidentally, I went from watching Wyle, best known in geek circles for his starring role in The Pirates of Silicon Valley, to watching the actual Steve Jobs deliver his MacWorld keynote speech. A recent hardware malfunction had me a week behind in such news, so I downloaded the entire 105-minute video from iTunes to get the scoop straight from the horse's mouth. I have no interest in either an iPhone or an Apple TV, but it was an entertaining presentation nonetheless. It makes me wonder: What would Apple be without Steve Jobs?

Related posts:

• No related posts.

I've commented to several people, "I hope the film is better than the book." Knowing Potheads to be almost as fanatical as Trekkers, I half-expected this sincere comment to be met with outrage. Yet, without fail, their response has been, "How could it not be?" I'm surprised that other people have found this fifth book in the entry to be a slow and tedious, if somewhat necessary, bridge between the outstanding fourth and sixth books in the series. It's nice to know that not everyone is blinded by what is considered to be the genius of J.K. Rowling.

Of course, she's no Gene Roddenberry.

Related posts:

• Just an old country doctor…
• This Will Be A Novel Long Remembered
• The Tales of Beedle the Bard
• The Sky's the Limit
• The Deathly Hallows