As I was leaving the movie theaters Thursday night, I heard a college-age man say, "Well, I guess there goes my childhood." It was a poignant thought, probably echoing the feelings of many people in his generation as the curtains were drawn on the epic tale of Harry Potter by J.K. Rowling. I couldn't help but agree with him - although I'm old enough that Harry Potter wasn't a part of my childhood per se, I have watched as it enthralled children, teenagers, and adults alike for the past decade or so. And so when the conclusion was reached in cinematic form, it was as if a childhood adventure had drawn to a close, sealing the door into adulthood for the vast number of children who had grown up with the boy who lived.
One of the things that struck me so odd about this journey was that I don't recall a similar even occuring in the past. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles didn't ever reach adulthood and finally defeat their nemesis once and for all. My childhood favorite, The Ghostbusters, never grew up, had children, and ended their adventure. Yet for the generation just behind me, their legend - their heroes - had become adults along with them.
I suppose one of the weaknesses of the final Harry Potter movie comes in the final minutes. So... if you haven't read the book and you haven't watched the movie, skip on to the next paragraph. Now, for those of you still reading, the weakness was that Harry Potter and friends all became adults, had children, married (and stayed married), and were back to say goodbye to their children as they traveled back to Hogwarts. The problem is that it seemed as if all the fun had been left far behind - it seemed that Harry, Ron, and Hermoine had left their adventures to the past and lived on for years in blessed placidness. Yuck. Who wants that?
And so I am perplexed. Is it better to end the story, or is it better that the adventures go on infinitely? Should the Lone Ranger have finished his tale? Should Batman be done once he's done. And what of Indiana Jones? The way that Harry Potter finished left me feelng melancholy - yes, I was happy to see the ending and it was an absolutely terrific movie. In fact, it was appropriate for the extroadinary and epic series of novels Ms. Rowling crafted, and which will live on as some of the best tales ever written (whether you believe it or not). Children will read those books for decades to come if not for longer. Fan fiction will live on for as long as the fans do. Yet I found the ending bittersweet. For as much as a story needs a conclusion, a conclusion likewise means the story is over. There is no further tale, there is no additional adventure, and all will be well.
Perhaps "happily ever after" isn't so grand after all?
So while it was fun to see how the story wrapped up in cinematic fashion, it was also sad to say goodbye to the characters a generation had grown to love. They were just as real to them as their friends - they grew up with them, they connected with them, they even looked up to them. It can't be understated how important it was that Rowling created Hermoine with such great academic qualities for little girls to look up to rather than more unsubstantial attributes. Endings are supposed to be happy when they end in such fashion, but this ending was also a "farewell."
I have a hunch that just as James Bond lives on, and just as Indiana Jones' adventures will continue... just as superheroes live forever, and as legends never die... I have a hunch that Harry Potter is not finished quite yet either. The question for J.K. Rowling is not if the story is finished. The question is, did Harry Potter accomplish his greatest achievement in youth, never to do anything greater for the rest of his life? If so, I consider that the most sad statement of all... because surely the generation that grew up with Harry Potter is only beginning to find their potential. Shouldn't Harry and friends be the same?
- J Frazier
http://www.theworldbreaker.com/
http://www.twitter.com/bluelightningtn
No comments:
Post a Comment