Voldemort will win

[urghiggi]

No: HPFGUIDX 79078

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "jksunflower2002" <
mkeller01 at a...> wrote:

> This is the best theory I've heard yet.  It makes a great deal of 
> sense.  The only small thing I can add to this is that perhaps Harry 
> doesn't really have to die.  I've been throwing this out for a while 
> now, but I just can't help think that it will play a key role at the 
> end of this series, and it may fit here: "..... a sleeping potion so 
> powerful it is known as the Draught of Living Death." (chapter 8, 
> PS/SS.)  Snape brings it up in Harry's first potion lesson.  Could 
> they "trick" that portion of Voldemort's mind into leaving Harry?  
> Toad (who just can't see JKR really killing off Harry)

I don't know how she's going to accomplish what she has to accomplish with 
this big ending. What I do think I know, from the clues she has laid down 
throught the 1st 5 books -- not the tricky "fact" clues, but the moral/emotional 
ones -- is this:

1. LV must be defeated, with finality. He either has to die, or be redeemed. But 
he has to go. At the end of the series, there can be no possibility that he's 
going to rise to hex another day.

2. HP must be the source of LV's defeat. This can happen in some incredibly 
tricky and convoluted way, but in some manner HP's actions must result in 
LV's defeat. This does not rule out the participation of others, from Neville to 
Snape to Pettigrew. Remember, in LOTR -- Gollum got rid of the ring, but he 
was only there to do it because Frodo had spared his life previously, and then 
had stayed the course and carried the thing all the way to Mt. Doom. In some 
way, LV's defeat has to be the result of HP's choices/actions.

3. HP may or may not die, but if he dies, his death has to be an emotionally 
triumphant one -- a death that's perceived to be "worth it all" in some way.

That's about the sum total of what I think I know at this point, based on where 
JKR seems to be going. As much as we adults like to stand on our heads, 
trying out our theories, she's clearly striving to write some kind of "edifying" 
children's fiction -- stuff that will inspire the reader to live a better life. Yes, she 
is; don't laugh. To wit, the following key messages:

1. Your choices, not your bloodlines, are what truly define you.
2. Prejudice is bad, tolerance is good.
3. Love is more powerful than evil.
4. Loyalty to your friends and your ideals is important.
5. Even death cannot take away your loved ones from you. (They live on, both 
inside you and as individuals in a dimension you cannot penetrate while you 
live.)

This is pretty simplistic stuff -- and yet I think these kinds of messages play a 
big role in the emotional resonance of the books, and their ability to inspire a 
passionate following. Because she is obviously doing this edification stuff, it 
seems clear to me that, no matter what wild plot twists occur at the end, the 
following MUST be true:

1. Harry's struggles and journey must be seen as significant and productive. 
(No "it was all a dream" cheating solutions at the end.)
2. Harry has to win. He doesn't have to LIVE, but he has to win. If he dies, his 
death can't be seen to be dumb, arbitrary, accidental, trivial, or anything but 
triumphant, and absolutely necessary for the greater good.
3. Evil cannot win, in the end. Ergo LV cannot win, in the end.

If all the above does not turn out to be true of any solution she creates, then 
she will have constructed the biggest, most elaborate cheat in the history of 
children's fiction. What she'll do plot-wise to make it all work is a tantalizing 
mystery, but her emotional territory is a pretty consistent place so far. If she 
gives the lie to all that with her future work .... 

Well, no point in saying "if she does." I'd bet every galleon, knut & sickle in 
Gringotts that she won't.

urghiggi, Chgo