*Spoilers Spoilers Spoilers*
If you haven’t read the book, I suggest you first waste your time, get indignant at everything you’re being told by someone you probably thought of as a cheerful story-teller, be angry for a day and sorely disappointed for two and then come back here.
The humour and the light, rather happy surprises (who cared if Cedric died? I didn’t.) together made what I consider to be her signature. Without them, the books would scarcely be more entertaining than my Computer Architecture notes and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows could’ve been written by professor Binns, for all its worth. See, I’m still not being malicious, I still love the books 1-5.

I appreciate intriguing characters. The more complex they are, the better. But no, the Harry Potter books have no business setting out to portray characters that are simply too big for the kind of frivolity that the books are and ending up with broken lifeless ones. Besides, they have no business being maddeningly boring.

Just what was wrong with Dumbledore being idealistic and anti-dark-arts? The attempt to show him as an escapist (“for the greater good”), vulnerable and power-hungry (I’m only guessing how she wanted him) was not backed up by the literary skill demanded of the idea, thus erasing the identity of the character successfully, but replacing it with nothing.
I wish Rowling had been satisfied with her larger-than-life people and evil villains. Snape was accidental spice, forget him. That does sound unfair but that she couldn’t make anything decent out of Wormtail’s betrayal+gratitude, for instance, makes me wonder if Snape, Mcgonagall being a fool at the end of book 6 and regaining poise in book 7, James teasing Snape, etc. weren’t all accidental after all.
There’re lots more to be said, the introduction of hallows (for what earthly purpose, I cannot conceive), Voldemort reminding me irresistibly of those villains in my idea of the cheapest movies and being an ass in general (come on, Riddle was definitely smarter than the toe-rag that was Voldemort in HP7), the last chapter and the name “Albus Severus” which sucked worse than the rest of the book, etc., but I suppose I’ll spend the rest of this post by paying tribute to a book of unmistakable quality I read immediately after having lived through HP7.
And I’m leaving out the technical details like why Voldemort’s Crucio didn’t hurt Harry anymore because I couldn’t care.

I had the pleasure of reading The Scarlet Pimpernel by Baroness Emmuska Orczy, a book with style, plot, intrigue and most importantly, characters that were “complete”, in a manner of speaking. I read both HP7 and this one in one sitting but it was sheer entertainment, and not the dreadful let-me-just-get-this-done urge that drove me to finish the latter.
Set against the horrors that follow the French Revolution, with an exquisite heroine and a dashing aristocrat for a hero, the book is fast, adventurous and essentially romantic. And the flamboyant style employed adds to the effect.
The only aspect that I found rather foreign in the impressive style of writing was the repetitive use of certain phrases. What was even more unbecoming was the adoption of the same phrase or expression by the author and the characters, while referring to a particular incident.
Nevertheless, a splendid job by the author.