Am I the only person who thinks Harry Potter lacks a personality? I mean, in general? He's such a stereotype he's almost a jelly mould for whatever behaviour J.K.R. needs him to exhibit in this book. Funny for a kid who spent his most impressionable years in a cupboard under the stairs being neglected, ignored, bullied and emotionally abused by the people who were supposed to be caring for him. I'm sorry but directly comparing their two upbringings I'd say Harry is more likely to turn into a serial killing sociopath than Voldemort...
At the least he's going to have some serious issues; emotional detachment, inability to empathise, severe behavioural problems, aggressive and violent behaviour... I mean I know it's funny and all to have the stereotypical 'horrible family upbringing' but you have to follow through on it at some point. What annoys me most is that having set up the potential for a really interesting, edgy, anti-hero type guy to emerge (Harry Potter sails dangerously close to the dark side) we just get fobbed off with this damn cliche.
Yes, Harry; of course pushing the people you care about as far away from you as possible is the best way to keep them safe. I mean, you dumped Ginny so obviously she's in no danger at all, right? Instead of still being in danger because you obviously haven't stopped caring about her; and now because you're no longer in a relationship she's out of your circle of control and therefore much harder for you to protect. Why is it ALL heroes seem to think this is a good idea? And why do they ALL become over-melodramatic, self-sacrificing and needlessly messianic towards the final scenes of whatever fiction they're involved in? And why, WHY for the love of GOD do they haemorrhage all remaining traces of personality and become as interesting as your average bank statement?
As for the book, I really hope Snape isn't actually evil - he's a much more interesting character when he's one of the good guys. To me, it'll be a measure of the quality of Rowling's writing which way the Snape thing goes. If he's actually good after all, so much the better and that'll be nice to see. If he genuinely is bad then that's like selling out on the character. I liked the fact that Snape was a 'good guy' who was still a bit nasty and unpleasant. Saying he's evil all along is like saying "yes, kids, you're right: you really can tell the bad guys by their fake, glued-on beards." It's too obvious and lacks imagination.
I also have a theory;
I'm definitely sure that Dumbledore knew what he was doing. I'm positive that Dumbledore had ordered Snape to kill him rather than blow his cover, if the situation arose. You only have to look at the way it's written - Snape was furious about having to kill Dumbledore, but he had no choice. And Dumbledore begging Snape, pleading with him... come on, when has Dumbledore ever done anything like that? He's always been calm and in control. He'd never beg for his life. He was obviously begging for Snape to come good on his promise and kill him.
So why? Well, I think perhaps Snape, in his position as Voldemort's closest and most trusted servant (which he most definitely is now, after killing Dumbledore) Snape will be in a position to help Harry even more than Dumbledore could have. Dumbledore knew his time was coming, which is why he told Harry everything about the Horcruxes so that he could continue on without him. At any rate, it's definitely clear to me that Snape did what he had to do under Dumbledore's orders. Dumbledore had a solid reason to trust Snape, and his judgment of people has never been wrong so far. And more importantly, Dumbledore would never beg for his life. Being as noble as he was, the only thing he could have possibly been begging for was for Snape to finish him off, in order to save someone else. When Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him, he sacrificed himself to save Snape, Harry and, yes, even Malfoy. Because Dumbledore is the man ;D
When Harry chased him down as he fled from Hogwarts, Harry threw every single spell he could think of to stop Snape. The former Potions Master could have retaliated, could have killed Harry (or at least struck him down), but he didn't. In fact, he made no aggressive moves at all; the only thing he did was defend himself.
P.S. Harry is a Horcrux. Think about it. And it's something that'll come into play in the final confrontation with Voldemort, too. I have a sneaking suspicion he'll be left scar-less at the end of it. Either that or he dies, I guess, but I don't think Rowling's the kind of author to kill off her main character at the end of all things.
And on the topic of the final confrontation... some people have been saying how unbelievable it will be, with Harry, whose technically only a seventh year, facing off against Voldemort, one of the greatest wizards of all time. But there's a rule that seems to apply to mosty confrontations:
Whenever a villain is clearly more powerful than the hero, when they fight, the villain will be weakened to the point that his powers are at the exact same level as the hero's.
Voldemort will definitely be at some kind of disadvantage during the fight, I think it's the fact that Harry's the only Horcrux left at that point? It'll be interesting to see how Rowling decides to play it.
Ooh and to end on a 'Rambling' note, IF I WAS TO HEAR THE WORD 'SNOGGING' ONCE MORE, I WAS READY TO SEE HOW MUCH FORCE IT WOULD TAKE TO SEND THE BOOK OUT THE WINDOW!!!
Note: The above is not neccesarily all mine, although I do believe and have the same opinions as those who wrote it, thanks to Matt for pointing out I forgot to prreviously say this. I was under the impression I had.