Harry Potter plot-holes

By: Lauren Davidson/Columnist

Posted: 2/19/08

In my 20th year of life, I find that there are very few things that I can rely on as being constant. However, despite my ripe adulthood, I find that my devotion to a series of children's novels has yet to waiver. Yes, I am of course referring to the best young adult literature ever written: the Harry Potter series.

However, no piece of writing is perfect, and I thought I'd take some time to talk about some of the plot problems I find with the work.

In the fourth book, after seeing Diggory die, Harry is taken from Hogwarts to the station at local Wizarding town, Hogsmeade, by carriages drawn by creatures he cannot see. We learn at the beginning of the next book that they are called "thestrals," or bony versions of horses that can only be seen by people who have witnessed death.

So why the lag? Why couldn't Harry see them the first time he was around them after a death? And for that matter, shouldn't he have been able to see them the first time, as he witnessed his mother's death as a baby? Or wouldn't most of the wizarding kids at least be aware of such an animal?

And in the fifth book, Harry doesn't use Sirius' two-way mirror for contact. Sirius tells him straight-out to use it whenever he wants to talk, but instead Harry spends half the book trying to come up with ways to reach his Godfather. Very weird.

On a similar note, why doesn't Harry simply find a painting of Dumbledore to communicate with him in the seventh book? I read an interview with Rowling at Carnegie Hall this past summer, and the biggest reason it was done was "it really would be too easy and [we] wouldn't have had a plot."

Fans might remember this interview as being the same one that finally cleared up yet another plot-hole: the issue of Dumbledore's (lack of a) love life. In reading over the script for the sixth movie, Rowling actually had to scribble in the margins of a scene where Dumbledore had lines in which he reminisced about a former (female) love. Rowling's comment to the director? "Dumbledore's gay!"

It has always bugged me that Harry and his friends didn't have cell phones when they were constantly in situations that could be helped by them.

However, I can hardly blame Rowling for wanting to keep the plot more interesting and create more difficulties for the characters.

Plus, you finally learn in the seventh book that Harry was born in 1980, so the books are supposed to be taking place in the early-to-mid 90s.

I guess in 1997 there were still some people who didn't have cell phones, but I maintain that it seems well within the reach of wizarding technology. She really ought to have considered setting the book even further in the past to avoid certain technological expectations.

In a fictional universe as detailed as Rowling's, it would be almost impossible not to run into indescrepancies after seven books. I maintain that despite these plot-holes (and there are many more), the books are still brilliant works that we'll be reading and dissecting for years to come. Or maybe that's just me.

Lauren Davidson is a junior English major. She can be reached at 581-7942 or at DENopinions@gmail.com.