Whoever they are. Tell that to anyone you see who is about to buy the book- I couldn't find any lines to drive past yelling it to.
Ordinarily, I'm a non-violent person whenever possible. But I think such actions could be considered "justifiable homicide".
Since we don't have Book handy, I'll put the "burning" theological question to Preacherman. (I suspect they are the same person anyways.) Do people that give, maliciously not accidently, away the endings of movies and/or books go to the "special hell", usually reserved for child molesters and people that talk at the theater?
I finish the book only once so far. I was working over the weekend and read it whenever possible. Actually, I started reading it while I was cleaning my M16. (Some people can watch TV and clean rifles. I can read and clean.)
Is this thread spoiler friendly or not? You neglected to specify, Preacher, but it seems kinda obvious it'd be hard to discuss the book without SOME spoilers.
Just to play safe.
************SPOILER WARNING***********
The ending was somewhat of a shocker, if it really happened the way everyone thinks it does. I suspect Snape did NOT kill Dumbledore. Completely out of character.
I didn't feel too especially bad when Dumbledore croaked. He intentionally put Harry in bad situations. He KNEW that the Muggle family was torturing the kid. Not abusing, flat out torture. He did NOTHING to stop it. Not a single freakin letter, not a single word, NOTHING. He obviously saw it going on, and could have stepped in. He didn't. He only stepped in when they were about to kick Harry out of the house. Dumbledore treated Harry as a weapon, not as a person. He only started telling the truth after Harry already figured it out. When it was convenient.
Snape on the other hand hated Harry, but saved Harry's life repeatedly. To be fair, Harry did routinely break the rules. He occassionally was slightly malicious in punishing Harry without complete justification, but there was always some cause. Yea, he played favorites a little too much, but when it came down to it, Snape didn't go out of his way to risk Harry's life the way Dumbledore did. Snape never tried to manipulate or bend the truth for Harry either, that I saw. Dumbledore intentionally manipulated Harry. He might not have lied, per se, but he sure as heck was always bending the truth, withholding information, or giving only partial truths.
Harry I'm proud of. He'd always been a relatively honourable kid. He probably should have told off Dumbledore a lot earlier than he did, but to each their own. I would have personally told Dumbledore to shove it. No amount of supposed 'protection' was worth the torture inflicted upon that kid. Funny how this alleged protection never seemed to be around when Harry's life was in danger.
Lupin, Sirius and Mad Eye were the only people that gave a damn about Harry and actually treated him with an ounce of respect. Dumbledore screwed over Sirius. He KNEW Sirius was innocent when he was sent to prison, and let him take the fall. Heck, he HELPED put Sirius in prison. Mad Eye is an interesting character. You could say the fake Mad Eye was just that, a fake. My take on the situation was that the fake Mad Eye was for all intensive purposes the real Mad Eye for most of the Triwizards competition. He showed Harry real ways to defend himself, helped Harry whenever possible, and actually did care about his well-being. Not just keeping Harry alive, he wanted to safeguard Harry's well-being. Lupin, well, heh. Funny. Dumbledore seemed to have access to a large amount of wealth, but it seems like Lupin keeps looking shabbier and shabbier. Funny. That. So much for taking care of one's own, eh?
Most of the Harry series seemed to be flat out sadism towards Harry, with Dumbledore usually letting it happening. He always stepped in whenever it served his own purposes, but would walk out as soon as it was convenient. He wants a weapon. He didn't seem to care too much about the person, most of the time.
