Harry Potter 7

[Young Val]

i don't feel that we know Bill or Charlie well enough to be properly affected by their deaths. Percy's (after being redeemed of course) or a twin's death would be absolutely devastating.

[neo-dragon]

Why is it that everyone seems to think that Rowling's goal in writing this book is to give her fans one last emotional sucker punch? Maybe who dies is more a matter of what progresses the story in the right way rather than what reaction the death itself will elicit. I mean, killing a character should be a means to an end, not the end itself, otherwise it's just morbidly gratuitous. That being said, it'll be hard to justify any guess for who will die until we know more about the story than its title... Well, other than Voldemort since he's the bad guy. He's obviously the most likely candidate for a death. So much so that I wonder if he even counts as one of the two.

[Qing_Jao]

My husband's much more of an Arthur geek (perhaps expert would apply, though he'd hesitate to say so), so I'll print some of this out for him. Or, just get him to sign up. Heh. This is so interesting.

[Young Val]

Why is it that everyone seems to think that Rowling's goal in writing this book is to give her fans one last emotional sucker punch? Maybe who dies is more a matter of what progresses the story in the right way rather than what reaction the death itself will elicit. I mean, killing a character should be a means to an end, not the end itself, otherwise it's just morbidly gratuitous. That being said, it'll be hard to justify any guess for who will die until we know more about the story than its title... Well, other than Voldemort since he's the bad guy. He's obviously the most likely candidate for a death. So much so that I wonder if he even counts as one of the two.

***series spoilers through book 6 and predictions for book seven***

i don't think her goal is to simply illicit an emotional reaction; the deaths i've mentioned will also serve a "purpose" (if they are to happen in the way i suppose that they will).

that being said, i think that much of book seven will be possible to "predict." rowling lays enormous groundwork for all of the events in her books, at least she has thus far. it would be odd to imagine that she hasn't done so for the 7th as well. by taking what we already know as fact in the prior books, what we know about rowling as a writer and a story-teller, and what we know abou literary convention in general, i think that "educated guesses" are completely easy to make, and i think that rowling encourages them (she's been quoted as saying that Sirius' motocycle will return, and that a "clever reader" will be able to find out where it's been all this time. although i freely confess that i haven't been able to figure that one out yet. she's made other similar statements that encourage her readers to try to work out what happens next). i've had probably at least an 85% success rate with my theories concerning past books.

and though i don't think that character death should be done solely for an emotional reaction, i think without one the death is essentially pointless, as it demonstrates that readers don't care about the story. all of the deaths should produce a response, and i think all of the deaths she's written thus far (of both "good" and "bad" characters) have done so. it's part of what makes her a good story-teller.

the deaths that the readers predict is very telling, because it highlights what they think the thematic arcs of the series are.

for example; i personally think the Harry Potter series is a Hero's Journey. i think that in order for the series as a whole to be sucessful Harry has to complete a character arc, and symbolically reclaim or obtain everything that was taken from him or that has been absent from his life since his childhood. for this reason, first of all, i think he will live. secondly, i think he'll create a family; through dating Ginny, he'll become a part of the Weasley family. thus i believe that Ginny, and Mr. and Mrs. Weasley will all survive. He'll need a link to his biological family, thus Lupin, the last remaining loyal contemporary of his parents, will live as well.

another big theme (that i see, anyway) is redemption. Thus i believe that Snape is truly good and will sacrifice himself for the order, thus achieving redemption and paving the way for Draco to redeem himself as well (but live). this is where the Percy theory also comes in. Percy is another character who has "betrayed" those he loves in a sense. and he'll most likely have to be "punished" for it. i imagine that will be done through his death (after he, hopefully, reunites with his family, which would, of course, make it that much more tragic).

there's also a lot of duality in the series. muggle/magical. and other things. Hagrid is the symbolic embodiment of this aspect, being, first of all, a "hybrid" if you will. half-wizard, half-giant. and he is the symbolic bridge in the story. the person who, literally, brings Harry from the muggle world to the magical one. he also transports the first years from the train to the castle by water. Harry must have a place in both worlds. although Hagrid is purely symbolic in this sense, and Harry could certainly return to the muggle world were Hagrid to die, symbolically, i don't think it would suit. therefore, i also believe that Hagrid will live.

Bill and Fleur will live. their marriage, set to happen at the beginning of book 7, reinforces the idea of creating family, and faintly underlines the idea of different identities binding together in the face of evil, her being from Beauxbatons and all. (recall the sorting hat suggesting inter-house unity, and inter-school unity? huge theme from book 4. think Captain Planet "when your powers combine...")

Hermione will live, for what i hope are obvious reasons. she is, of course, the only strong (as in constantly present) female in the series. she is also indispensable to Harry when it comes to fighting the good fight. for that reason i hope, and believe, that Ron, too, will survive. although rowling has HEAVILY forshadowed his death.

Harry's classmates, like the Weasley's are bound to suffer a loss as well, just as a result of sheer math. it's a war. people die. Neville, Luna, Seamus, Dean, Lavender, ect. ect. can they really ALL make it out alive?

[Young Val]

I honestly don't see what people like in these books. I might believe that her children's series has some redeeming quality - if it was children that were reading it. I'm all for getting kids to read more (even if it's this kind of BS fantastical story). But this tripe has gotten millions of supposed adults to spend even more millions of (wasted) hours reading kiddie fare. As if the intellect of Western adults could get any less mature...

sorry. i just noticed this. i love the line "even if it is a BS fantastical story." on an Ender's Game forum. which is, as much as i love it, just as much of a "BS fantastical story."

that's all. just made me smile. carry on, kids.

[locke]

great analysis!

Actually, she's the main reason I'd be mildy depressed if Harry dies. Unless she dies too, then all will be well.

There is this really crass part of me that wants to say, "but if they hook up at least once before one of them dies what's there to be depressed about" But I don't really believe that so I won't say it.

wait...
s***. too late.

[AnthonyByakko]

I honestly don't see what people like in these books. I might believe that her children's series has some redeeming quality - if it was children that were reading it. I'm all for getting kids to read more (even if it's this kind of BS fantastical story). But this tripe has gotten millions of supposed adults to spend even more millions of (wasted) hours reading kiddie fare. As if the intellect of Western adults could get any less mature...

sorry. i just noticed this. i love the line "even if it is a BS fantastical story." on an Ender's Game forum. which is, as much as i love it, just as much of a "BS fantastical story."

that's all. just made me smile. carry on, kids.

Thanks, mom. But at any rate, a quick review: being on an EG board =/= loving EG. I remember being on the Audiogalaxy message boards for quite awhile, despite never using the AG service (a music downloading site.) But like I said, thanks mom. When looking up from you looking down, you almost do seem mature.

[Young Val]

oh, honey. i might be pretty, but i'm definitely not mature.

[starlooker]

Damnit. Now I have to reread the books to find out how she's foreshadowed Ron's death.

*growl* (small growl. Picture a kitten growling. Or, um, is that purring? Whatever.)

I've never been good about picking up on stuff like that.

[Rei]

The reason why I say Bill or Charlie might die is if she needed another character in the book to do something rash. Particularly, Mrs. Weasly. I'll admit that while I don't know what that might be, killing one of her children, especially one that is not needed for their role in the rest of the story, would be an extremely effective way of doing that. And I don't think killing Percy would quite have that effect, although maybe after he is reconciled. But still, I am not entirely convinced that it would work as well. And there will almost certainly be jokes about fewer mouths to feed if any of the Weasleys die, made by Draco et alii.

[puppets]

Okay I just read the whole series for the first time ever.

I can tell you with assuredness who I think will die.

Ron will die. In book 3 the get Professor Trelawney. Now though she tends to be false about her predictions, they always hold some truth... when she warns Lavender Brown to be wary of a young red headed man. Thats Ron in book 6 when he dates her to make Hermione jealous. Well, during the christmas feast there are 13 people sitting down at the table. She states the first person to leave the table will die a horrid dreath. Ron and Harry stand up at the same time. When she asks who stood up, Ron says who cares. I doubt Harry will be killed also, mainly cause if he dies, then Voldemort lives, and I don't think J.K. Rowlings will do that.

Also I think Hagrid. I believe if you look it up in wikipedia, she says shes killing off 2 characters. I;m not sure on that though. But if she kills 2, I think Hagrid would be a definite choice, mainly because he would have a more profoud affect on Harry, almost as much of one as Ron would.

So yea Ron's death is forshadowed in book 3, i beleive, whichever book Trelawney is first introduced.

[Young Val]

hmm, i hadn't actually considered those particular things, puppets. but while i don't know that they directly imply death (at least not Ron's specifically) i'd forgotten all about the "beware a redheaded man" thing. which is really cute in hindsight. thanks for reminding me of it.


here are some (specifics later, when i go get my books) of the more blatant warnings that Ron is going to kick it. (need i remind you that ron is my FAVORITE character in the series and i have and will continue to make an extremely strong case as to him being perhaps the most heroic as well. but that's for another day. i will DIE if JKR kills him off).


so, Kirsten, don't read this bit if you want to find the foreshadowed bits on your own.


Philosopher's/Sorceror's Stone: Ron sacrifices himself in the transfigured chess game so that Harry and Hermione can move forward. many people argue that this will foreshadow events in book 7 when the trio sets off to face Voldemort, Ron will sacrifice himself so that the other two may forge ahead.

Prisoner of Azkaban: Ron awakens to Sirius standing above him, holding a knife. we know now that Sirius did not intend to kill Ron, but it's an incredibly tangible death scenerio.

Goblet of Fire: Ron is the thing that Harry will "most miss" and is taken beneath the lake for one fo the triwizard tasks. again, we know that Ron was never in any real danger, but Harry believed that he was, and rereading those passages, the imagery is full of death.

Order of the Phoenix: some BIG ones in this book. When Harry walks in on Mrs. Weasley trying to get rid of the boggart, he first sees Ron's body lying on the floor without understanding that it's not truly Ron. the boggart cycles through the rest of the Weasleys, playing on Molly's worst fears, but it begins with Ron, and for a moment Harry is convinced it is the real Ron before remembering that Ron is actually downstairs. Ron is also attacked by a demonic brain in the department of mysteries, which is written off pretty quickly, but which Dumbledore solemnly says that there are some injuries that do deeper damage than what is physically apparent. Ron also still has scars on his arms from this attack.

Half-Blood Prince: Ron is accidentally poisoned. Harry saves him with a Bezoar.



there are tons more, but those are the big ones i can think of without referencing my books...



if she kills Ron i'll start an absolute riot, i swear i will.

Weasley is my king!

[Petra456]

I don't think I could handle Ron's death. I'll join in on your riot.

[neo-dragon]

Ever wonder how much of Rowling's "foreshadowing" is really just coincidence? I suppose that practically every author has a few strokes of accidental genius though, where the readers find their own deeper meaning where none was intended. Then there's outright red herrings...

[Mahatma]

*raises hand*

I will also join in said riot if Ron is killed.

[LilBee91]

I shall as well, if such a riot has reason to occur--but it better not!

[Young Val]

Ever wonder how much of Rowling's "foreshadowing" is really just coincidence? I suppose that practically every author has a few strokes of accidental genius though, where the readers find their own deeper meaning where none was intended. Then there's outright red herrings...

....of course. i hold out quite a lot of hope for Ron. and there's a hefty amount of foreshadowing that he'll live as well. but the point is that Rowling meticulously crafts her stories. nearly everything mentioned is deliberate, and will be of some importance later on. it's part of what makes her books so popular.

if people want to get on my back for over-analyzing Harry Potter, you'd think they'd jump on my application of queer theory.

[Jebus]

I agree with neo. My prediction is that Snape will die. Voldemort will obviously die too but I don't think he counts since he has to die.

I also put forward that Snape's death will save or in some way seriously aid Harry et al. (And I'm glad to see miss 85% success rate agrees with my reasoning)

It's too silly and obvious to kill off Harry, I trust Rowling to do better than that.

At the end of the day though, I don't really care who dies, because it's the last book.

And to AB, get outta here ya joy-bandit, take your misering somewhere else.

[anonshadow]

As far as Ron dying goes--

Kelly pointed this out, and I agree: JKR is meticulous. She likes symbolism. Whether or not you like her books, you have to admit that she plans everything to the t.

In the first book, during the chess game, Ron chooses to be a knight. If he wanted to be safe, he could have chosen to be the king, or even the queen, but he chooses to be a knight--and knights rarely last to the end of the game. Moreover, his actions during the game reflect those that a true knight might take. And a true knight would sacrifice himself to save his best friend.

In the third book, he says, "And from now on, I don't care if my tea-leaves spell die, Ron, die - I'm just chucking them in the bin where they belong."

A lot of people read into the fact that JKR chose to italicize it, and the fact that Ron's name is in between two "dies."

And, in the third book, Ron tells Sirius that he'll have to kill all three of them if he wants to get to Harry. Does this end up happening? Of course not. But the willingness is there.

While Harry tries to shove Ginny away because he thinks that his relationship with her might turn her into a target, he doesn't really consider the fact that Ron has already been identified as the thing he would miss most (Goblet of Fire). If Voldemort wanted to hurt Harry, I imagine that the next logical step would be Ron.

It's also worth noting that Trelawny, in one of the books, goes batty at the Christmas feast because Ron and Harry get up from a table of 13. In the books, this happens two other times--in one, Dumbledore is the first to rise, and in the other, Sirius is. She doesn't make a point of it like she does there, but the fact remains that it has held true before.

In books 1, 3, and 5, Ron is badly injured. In books 2, 4, and 6, he is not. It seems a little unnaturally crass for her to follow a pattern like that, but the pattern is there.

There's also (and this is the most worrying, to me) that Ron gets associated with the veil in OotP (pg 774, for those interested). Harry thinks that he hears Ron whispering behind it, which is... troubling.

Edit: And, the most obvious pointer--

One of the Weasleys will die. There are too many of them, and they are all too deeply embroiled in all of this to skid out. Fred and George are also rather likely, in my mind--there was that "U-No-Poo" nonsense, and that... will certainly not endear them to Voldemort.

[Mahatma]

In books 1, 3, and 5, Ron is badly injured. In books 2, 4, and 6, he is not. It seems a little unnaturally crass for her to follow a pattern like that, but the pattern is there.

There's also (and this is the most worrying, to me) that Ron gets associated with the veil in OotP (pg 774, for those interested). Harry thinks that he hears Ron whispering behind it, which is... troubling.

But what about the poison in year 6?

And I'd completely forgotten about the voices behind the veil... eek!

[anonshadow]

Seriously injured during the final blow-out, rather.

[neo-dragon]

I agree with neo. My prediction is that Snape will die. Voldemort will obviously die too but I don't think he counts since he has to die.

Yup, Voldemort and Snape. If Voldey doesn't count, I don't have an educated guess for who the second death will be, except that it won't be Harry.

[starlooker]

Without rereading the books, but with rereading these posts and being reminded of things I will say that I do believe one of the Weasleys has got to go. Prediction: Not Mrs. Weasley, basically because I think writing about her mourning will be more literarily satisfying than writing about her death/absence. Also, I agree that we're not connected enough with Bill and Charlie to make them significant.

Honestly, it's got to be Ron. The more I think about it. Ginny's a red herring (red "hair"ing, even. Sorry. Hanging around my father too much. Forgive me.). But when Voldemort was around the first time, people significant and wonderful and special died. Because I think she's going to want us to remember the ruin that he can cause. Granted, Dumbledore did this in part. But Dumbledore was old, wise, and saw death in its proper perspective. He'd lived. Therefore, it's got to be someone young. We've gone with Harry through feelings of orphanage several times, and we've gone through feelings of outrage (Cedric). But we haven't gone through the loss of a brother figure.

Damnit. I don't want Ron to die. I won't riot, but I don't want him to die.

Question: What do you all think will be Neville's fate? I keep waiting for him to burst out with some wonderful brave act to redeem his parents and his pride.

Or, well, he could die, too. But that wouldn't be correct. For him to accomplish something and LIVE to accomplish more would put his story in the correct arc. Both he and Luna need to achieve some kind of self-peace because they've lived such shadowed lives, alienated in some way from others up till this point.

The more I think about it, the more I think Ron's willing self-sacrifice is what would put his story in its correct arc.

SHOOT. Double, double damn.

Oh, and by the way, I'm on the "Voldemort dies/Harry doesn't" side of the debate.

[Jebus]

It's also worth noting that Trelawny, in one of the books, goes batty at the Christmas feast because Ron and Harry get up from a table of 13. In the books, this happens two other times--in one, Dumbledore is the first to rise, and in the other, Sirius is. She doesn't make a point of it like she does there, but the fact remains that it has held true before.

Interesting, this alone is enough to convince me. What tables did Sirius and Dumbledore stand up from?

[puppets]

Anon, you make every point I had thought and more. Sadly I believe Ron will be the one to die. I've been using that point about both Ron and Harry standing up from the table first, but everyone says that it is talking about Harry. I disagree anywho. J.K. probably knows that Ron's death would have one of the biggest impacts.

Also, would any of you be surprised if Neville turns out to be more than helpful in the next book? I have a feeling there will be much more of him and how he could of been the one.

And on another thought, whose to say Ron will necessarily die, maybe he will take the path Nevilles parent's took. And in retrospect, I believe that would have a more profound effect. For Ron not to die, but be insane to the extent Ron no longer exists.

[fawkes]

he could of been the one.

Must... resist... urge to corect...

Failing... Miserably...

I'ts could have, "could of" is used only in American language, and is incorrect there, too.

Sorry, it was driving me nuts.

[v-girl]

In the third book, he says, "And from now on, I don't care if my tea-leaves spell die, Ron, die - I'm just chucking them in the bin where they belong."

Isn't this in the fifth book? If I remember correctly, Ron says this after he takes the O.W.L. for Divination....

All this talk is making me want to reread books 5 and 6 again. I don't think I remember them as well as I should.

[puppets]

*shrugs* well I was born in America and aint nobody gonna be fixin our bad languagededseds.

*grins*

[Rei]

*gags*



That aside, I'm re-reading Half-Blood Prince. I'd forgotten how much I loved this one.

[puppets]

I would have to say that half blood prince is my favorite as well. I spose everything that happened in it more than just compelled me, and plus it was nice to see Ron and Hermione kinda react to their feelings towards one another.

[Rei]

***Spoilers***




I just finished HBP again, last night, and something has occured to me. Dumbledore emphasizes how the prophecy does not need to happen, but only happens because Voldemort is insistent upon living it out. And we all believe that Snape needs to redeem himself. Suppose Harry doesn't kill Voldemort. Suppose Snape does it instead. How else will he be able to redeem himself for offing Dumbledore? And it would not be entirely expected, because Voldemort will be assuming that the prophecy concerns only himself and Harry and it will not pass through his head that anyone else has a chance.

I could be way off, but I sort of hope it happens.

[anonshadow]

I have come up with a new theory about the seventh horcrux. I think it's Tom Riddle's trophy for "special services to the school"--you know, the one from all the way back in Chamber of Secrets?

Voldemort has always loved Hogwarts, and not only is the trophy significant to his years at school (which is almost reason enough in and of itself), it is hugely significant to his status as Slytherin's heir.

Thoughts?

[Rei]

hmm... That would be a fun twist. It would certainly give it a more definite purpose in the story.

[hive_king]

Not to mention the irony

[Luet]

As far as Ron dying goes--

In the third book, he says, "And from now on, I don't care if my tea-leaves spell die, Ron, die - I'm just chucking them in the bin where they belong."

A lot of people read into the fact that JKR chose to italicize it, and the fact that Ron's name is in between two "dies."

Or it could be a shout out to Simpsons fans. When Sideshow Bob appears in court trying to prove that he is trying to kill Bart, they show his chest tattoo saying "Die Bart, Die" and he insists that he really meant "The Bart, The" in german (which isn't even accurate german).