[HPforGrownups] Re: Harry's Putative Death/ female characters

[Richelle Votaw]

No: HPFGUIDX 42118

Darrin wrote:

> Does the Elixir actually resurrect? We know it extends life. We know
> it can heal someone on the edge of death or else Voldemort wouldn't
> have wanted it.
> But does it actually resurrect someone who is dead? If it does,
> great, but if it doesn't, then the theory doesn't work.

Well, you never know.  If Snape's really such a great potion master and
Dumbledore has in fact had him working on something that could be it.

> I realize that the popular sentiment will be to have Harry live, but
> I really don't want to see some grand sacrifice undone by a few drops
> of liquid. Either it's a sacrifice or it isn't.

If Harry doesn't know anything about the Elixir (or whatever it is now that
I've got Snape working on it) it will be a sacrifiice.  If Harry truly
belives with every fiber of his being that he is going to die so that
Voldemort can be destroyed, whether Harry is resurrected afterwards will
have no effect on the sacrifice Harry made.  To use the Christian theology
parallel for a moment, Jesus sacrificed himself on the cross to save
mankind.  He was resurrected three days later, but still that didn't take
away from his sacrifice.  Now back to Harry again, if Harry is willing to
suffer and die believing it to be the only way, it won't change the
sacrifice if he is resurrected.  Take Ron at the chess game for example.
For all he knew the Queen was going to stab him through the heart when she
took him.  Instead he's bashed over the head and in a little while he's
fine.  Does that take away from his sacrifice?  Not at all.  As long as the
person doing is *willing* to give up their life it is still a sacrifice.

> This is the same reason I don't like the theory about Snape or D-Dore
> or anyone else being behind the spell that saved Harry when he was a
> baby. It undercuts Lily's sacrifice.

I agree there, I don't think anyone but Lily had anything to do with that.
How much she really knew about it, I don't know, but I believe that she did
it on her own.  Whether she knew if it would really work or not is yet to be
seen.  It may have been she had it planned the whole time, since she found
out Voldemort was after them, or maybe she was a bit like Hermione and
remembered reading it somewhere and was willing to try.

> Considering the debate about the lack of strong female characters we
> had a while back, I would think critics of the female characters
> would not want to see one of the most powerful acts by a female
> character turn out to be the work of a man.

Which brings up another point.  However it ends up that Harry destroys
Voldemort (and he's got to, whether he lives or dies!)  I don't think it
will be Sirius, Lupin, Snape or even Dumbledore that helps him figure out
how to destroy Voldemort.  I think it will be McGonagall.  Why?  For one
thing, she's a prominent character who really hasn't done anything
outstanding in books 1-4.  She teaches, gets Harry out of trouble at times,
takes points at times, etc.  But nothing truly phenomenal.  She deserves a
big role somewhere. (And no, I don't think she's evil.)  Second, a little
mythology connection.  Minerva, as I'm sure we all know, was the Roman
goddess of war and wisdom.  She communicated with owls.  She also helped
Perseus defeat Medusa by telling him how to go about it (look at the
reflection, not directly at her).  An interesting parallel would have our
Minerva McGonagall telling Harry how to defeat Voldemort.

Richelle