In a more 'normal' Potter book, you might have expected to see a little more discussion of sexuality, though you have to remember, these are still perceived by many as 'kid's books' and were NEVER going to have sex in them.

But THIS book is set in what you can only call wartime, and the concerns of fighting Voldermort and his supporters clearly take center stage. Distractions like sex and Quidditch were clearly never going to be a consideration for the finale, I think.

Hey, you got a nice passionate kiss between Ron and Hermione finally, whaddya want? It was kinda funny as well as touching, coming as it did at the beginning of a battle, with Harry standing there feeling awkward and trying to rush 'em along.

If I want to check out sex with imaginary teens, I'll go watch 'Debbie Does Dallas,' thanks...

...and I agree almost entirely with what you say. Considerations of the crisis they were in, the brotherly-sisterly feelings (think Luke and Leia) and the discomfort they were experiencing, clearly pushed sex into the background.

I was interested in your take on the birthday scene between Harry and Ginny, I'm going to have to re-read that one now! Interesting that as a guy, I hadn't considered the possibility of either of them having immediate sex in mind...who says men think about sex more than women? Heh

And I can't quite agree with you about Harry and Ginny, although it's true their romance went oddly onto the back-burner at the end of book 6 and into the final volume. I have to wonder how likely that would have been in a real relationship, though there was clearly still a lot of tension between them. But I thought that Rowling initially led into the relationship well - a slowly building interest on Harry's part, jealousy, a concern over Ron's reaction, all leading into a passionate, public kiss and embrace. Rowling did well describing the feelings of a young guy about a girl he's falling for - the jealousy, the uncertainty, the 'pit-of-the-stomach' feelings...she seemed to have a good grasp of boys' inner thoughts and feelings.

In the end, though, I'd just repeat that sex was NEVER going to be a consideration in these 'kids' books,' except as a very, VERY carefully hidden subtext.

FWIW

Lest we forget this was originally a children’s series about good versus evil if you want more sex I suggest purchasing a copy of SWANK and leaving the big books to people who can appreciate a story line without the sex. I suppose a closed minded individual such as yourself hated Lord of the Rings because there was nothing erotic in it... Possibly you can retort that there was too much to be done that they were at war in The Lord of the Rings. I can in turn come back saying Hallows was war also. Go rent some porn and leave this wonderful story alone.

The argument that these are children's books and thus should be devoid of sex is sunk by the fact that book 6 is laced with teen hormones. We are not asking for full on intercourse here. Just an acknowledgment that these 17 year olds are really 17 year olds. As to the claim that sex is impossible during war time, that is simply absurd. People actully made babies during the Blitz, ya know.

Thank you for bringing up the ending of The Golden Compass. Naming your kid Lyra! Pullman should not be so rewarded. I have never been so disappointed in the ending of a series. Before the Deathly Hallows came out, I was terrified that it would be another The Amber Spyglass. Apparently I had reason to fear.

Uh - are you out of your flipping mind?

And no, I'm not a dolt. We are a liberal household and talk with our less-than-12 year old children about many things, including sex. So don't go all blue state PC on me. Your suggestion simply cracked me up. Of all the moronic suggestions, yours absolutely gave me the best laugh.

Stay away from my kids.

What with all the unflattering comparisons of Harry Potter to His Dark Materials, I've been wanting someone else to compare the endings. I have to agree with you about it being completely ridiculous. While Golden Compass was wonderful, it quickly ceased to be a children's series after The Subtle Knife, in my view...I read it at 15 and felt that I was still too young to get it. I don't think it was because I was dumb or naive, but I just thought...where did all of that come from? I was relieved when Harry Potter ended with solid and sensible closure!

I'm wondering how they're going to film the ending if His Dark Materials turns into a success (which seems pretty much guaranteed) and Amber Spyglass makes it to film.

Good grief! The Harry Potter books were "unrealistic" because there was not enough SEX?!

This. Is. A. PG. Book. It was NEVER supposed to focus on romance - it's an adventure series! It's SUPPOSED to be plot driven! The fact that it also does include the element of romance occasionally, is due to Rowling's philosophy that "everyone needs someone". Rowling does not DO romance. She dabbles in it, and hastily withdraws before she mires herself in it too deeply. The most enjoyable facet of Rowling's romantic sub-plots are their cheeky subtlety and rarity. Just because we weren't explicitly told about it, it doesn't mean there wasn't any. Rowling frequently leaves things like that to her readers' imaginations.People are already griping about the decreased pace in the action - if there HAD been more UST in this book, people would be saying that one-third of the book was devoted to a bunch of kids and their raging adolescent hormones.

It's like saying that Frodo was a one-dimensional character because he presumably never got it on with anybody - even Sam. It must seriously detract from Tolkien's writing that the only main character who got himself a girlfriend during the course of the series was Aragorn. And all that time closeted in Elrond's house at Rivendell, where was the UST? Damn, how unrealistic!

Of all the "Deathly-Hallows-sucks" arguments I've heard so far, this one is by far the most outlandish and hilarious.

If you want realism in the HP books, why don't you discuss Rowling's subtler allusions - how Ginny was about to offer Harry her virginity for his 17th birthday, how it's hinted that Lupin and Tonks had a shotgun wedding, how Rita hints that Dumbledore was a pedophile who sodomized Harry and Harry killed him in revenge and how there's a strong likelihood that Ariana Dumbledore was raped as a child by those Muggle boys? That enough "realism" for you? Or should Rowling have gone into more details?

It looks like the movie has had the religious aspect taken out.

Still looks like it is going to be amazing, though

Given the environment: constant fear and threat of evil, I can understand that libidos would be reluctant, not to mention physiological responses, if you take my meaning.

Plenty of time to play with each other's gonads after the forces of evil have been subdued. (There's GOTTA be more to life than that, anyway!)

Lady Mirth:

Of all the "Deathly-Hallows-sucks" arguments I've heard so far, this one is by far the most outlandish and hilarious.

I agree. A few more points:

1. Hermione is the think-berfore-you-act type. Even if she wanted to have sex with Ron, she wouldn't have done it spontaneously, stress or no stress.

2. While it's pushing it to call book 7 a children's book, it is about children. If the kids had started having sex, it would have taken away from the innocent-but-brave-kids-defeat­-the-evil-wizard-and-save-the-­world mystique that has been a theme of the series from the beginning. If the characters had been adults, would you have felt the same way about them as you do?

Wow! Even Harry Potter has to be defiled by porny attitudes. How can you argue with the success of Rowling. Her books sell to a very wide market. You start including a sexual theme in there you've lost her largest market, kids. By the way not all teenagers lack self control.

Lady Mirth:

Good grief! The Harry Potter books were "unrealistic" because there was not enough SEX?!

This. Is. A. PG. Book. It was NEVER supposed to focus on romance - it's an adventure series! It's SUPPOSED to be plot driven! The fact that it also does include the element of romance occasionally, is due to Rowling's philosophy that "everyone needs someone". Rowling does not DO romance. She dabbles in it, and hastily withdraws before she mires herself in it too deeply. The most enjoyable facet of Rowling's romantic sub-plots are their cheeky subtlety and rarity. Just because we weren't explicitly told about it, it doesn't mean there wasn't any. Rowling frequently leaves things like that to her readers' imaginations.People are already griping about the decreased pace in the action - if there HAD been more UST in this book, people would be saying that one-third of the book was devoted to a bunch of kids and their raging adolescent hormones.

Agreed, was amazed myself that so many were upset about having kids kissing or dating and such. I think she was actually very restrained, considering the temptations and the amazingly unsupervised nature of living arrangements at Hogwarts.

It's like saying that Frodo was a one-dimensional character because he presumably never got it on with anybody - even Sam. It must seriously detract from Tolkien's writing that the only main character who got himself a girlfriend during the course of the series was Aragorn. And all that time closeted in Elrond's house at Rivendell, where was the UST? Damn, how unrealistic!

Tolkien was amazingly sexless in his writings, though you forgot to mention Sam the Fertile and his earth-mother wife Rosie (and their many subsequent Hobbitlings). Frodo is oddly celibate, but then he's kind of a Christ-figure anyway, no?

And Aragorn and his never-ending courtship...sheesh, just HOW long had he been 'going with' Arwen, anyway? :)

Of all the "Deathly-Hallows-sucks" arguments I've heard so far, this one is by far the most outlandish and hilarious.

Are people saying that it 'sucks?' I thought it was good, and that opnion was generally favorable.

If you want realism in the HP books, why don't you discuss Rowling's subtler allusions - how Ginny was about to offer Harry her virginity for his 17th birthday, how it's hinted that Lupin and Tonks had a shotgun wedding, how Rita hints that Dumbledore was a pedophile who sodomized Harry and Harry killed him in revenge and how there's a strong likelihood that Ariana Dumbledore was raped as a child by those Muggle boys? That enough "realism" for you? Or should Rowling have gone into more details?

I'll admit that I hadn't gotten all of these - everyone else seems to have seen through Ginny's 'offer' on Harry's birthday, for instance. I had thought that Remus and Tonks were in love and planned to marry, too?

Rita's sleazy angle on Harry and Dumbledore, and poor Ariana's fate, though, seemed clear enough.

...what you consider 'porny' about the post in question. I disagreed with the poster too, but "defiling?" Please.

People have sex, and the characters are young people wth a naturally-burgeoning interest in same. No reason to think there's anything wrong with asking quesitons about that, although I too think that the books were kid-targetted and thus unlikley to have anything more than a suggestion of sexuality (kissing and dating, let's say).

We're not being prudes here. Of course it's okay to ask questions about the sexuality of the characters and wish there was a bit more UST. It's just that this particular poster is panning the entire book solely due to the lack of adult-level UST, completely disregarding the fact that it is read by a very young readership. It's like saying, "it doesn't matter if this stuff was originally meant for kiddies, and a lot of kids will be reading this, if you want to write a great book you have to saturate it with realistic, young adult smut. Otherwise you are a coward and a cop-out as an author."

Not that's sick, IMHO.