[HPforGrownups] Re: Should Harry Potter die?

[Amanda Lewanski]

No: HPFGUIDX 2001

Rita Winston wrote:

> It would certainly be very literary if Harry carries out the
> prophecy, which everyone but him knows about, that the only way
> Voldemort can be killed (Voldemort CAN be killed, altho' evil will
> continue to exist) is if Harry (and it has to be Harry, not only
> because of his pedigree and horoscope, but all those parallelisms of
> both being orphans, both Parseltongues, V now containing H's blood,
> etc) dies in the act of killing him.

Um, must have missed something here. Where did we get this prophecy? I don't
remember it.

> Also, it would explain why Rowling has a fair degree of confidence
> that she is not going to write about Harry's life after Hogwarts.

You know, authors *can* decide that enough is enough in good taste, while
their characters are still living. Just like TV series can end before they
meander endlessly and their characters morph completely away from their
original conceptions. It's rare, but it does happen.

> Snape is determined to keep Harry alive
> despite hating Harry. Snape clearly has no desire to protect Harry
> from humiliation, hurt feelings, bad grades, and so on, but
> repeatedly protects him from death.

Snape is on the staff at Hogwarts and despite his constant bad temper is
(reputedly) one of the good guys. As a professor, he's going to want to
protect any and all students from death. Harry just seems to be in death's
way more often, and after all, the book's about him, so that's what we as
readers are shown. I'm betting there's lots of duels and stuff in the
Slytherin common room that he cleans up, too. It's part of a professor's job
not to let the students expire.

--Amanda