Death (was Re: Why now? (other books / series))

[macfotuk at yahoo.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 110790

<snip>
> I (Laurasia) reply:
> 
> I agree. If Harry dies at the end of the series it will be because 
> he *has* to die. JK wouldn't just accidentally kill him off. The 
> death would have to be necessary for the well-being of the entire 
> wizarding and muggle world.
> 
> In other words, (if Harry dies, it will be because...) Harry *has* 
> to die in order to attain the 'happily ever after.'
> 
> If the only way Harry can stop Voldemort is to die, do you still 
> want Harry to win? Do you still want good to triumph over evil? 
> 
> As shown through Sirius' abrupt and unexpected death, JKR wants 
her 
> readers to be prepared for 'real world death.' Perhaps this 
> indicates that she will take the theme further 
<snip>

(MacFoTUK interposes here that she already has - MANY times - see 
below)

<snip>
and *not* give Harry 
> a happily ever after with a wife and a baby. Perhaps she wants to 
> show us that there are more important things than your own 
personal 
> contentment. 

<snip> (but I agree with most of what Laurasia wrote in the rest of 
that post - 110699)

MacFoTUK now writes:

I've for a long time unwillingly thought that Harry might (have to) 
die at the end. It's a neat way for JKR to make certain the series 
has 7 books and only 7 books as she says was always planned.

I hate the idea for two reasons - 1. my own fear of death (not alone 
in this I suspect!) - so how can a hero die? and 2. These are 'kid's 
books' - so how can the hero die?

Excuse me though one minute - just 'cos I and many others hate the 
idea of our own mortality and, therefore, that of a hero/character 
we have been identifying with all along doesn't mean shit doesn't 
happen (excuse my French if you are offended by this usage) and JKR 
has always shown she is a mature writer of very great ability who 
doesn't (isn't prepared to and doesn't believe one should) let kids 
off lightly. Death is a reality - it is one of the most basic themes 
of humanity - something each and every one of us shares in our 
future as a certainty and yet one which completely puzzles us and 
often frightens the bejasus out of us (or into us). 

In writing a series of books that have death so centrally as a theme 
JKR is writing a great piece of literature even if many other 
aspects of HP and the WW are much less likely to survive the test of 
time - especially its contemporary setting and escapist/mystical 
theme of magic.

The series opens with death: Harry's parents - what could be sadder? 
What could more rapidly cause us to identify with Harry and feel 
sorry for him and empathetic? Even in book one death remains a theme 
throughout - ghosts, the philosopher's stone (eternal life), 
Voldemort's indiscriminate (as well as targeted) murders of 
innocents and/or 'the good' as a reign of terror, the unicorn's 
death (again death, well murder, of innocence/great good/beauty, 
Voldemorts thirst for life AT ANY PRICE and, though we don't see it, 
Quirrel's death. JKR is not afraid to face kids with death even 
though some adults feel they should be protected because, IMO, she 
may hold with the view that kids respond best to the truth and to 
being spoken to as grown-ups rather than well meaning babying - I 
know what I liked best as a kid in tv programmes and books was the 
no holds barred approach (even if I'm a fantasy fan) rather than the 
everything in the garden is rosy (Enid Blyton) approach that 
placates the very young. Lemony Snicket's success (A series of 
misfortunate events series) stems from this same view though in fact 
I personally find his (?) writing extremely childish and Victorian 
melodramatic in many other ways.

Harry faces death in all the novels so far, with many many obvious 
examples such as the death of Percy which she was slated by some for 
at the time as being 'too much' for children. I don't have time or 
energy to do the complete list (not least cos it's so long!) but 
other examples include LV 'immortalising' himself as Tom Riddle, the 
Dementors' ultimate weapon being to convey an undead (soulless) fate 
in victims of their kiss, Voldemort having done some dirty deal to 
stay alive and his followers being called death eaters (they too 
want to cheat death it seems and this is likely to be what LV has 
promised them as the reward for their loyalty). The worst curse 
there is and the only one to which there is no counter curse, 
although the end scenes of OotP show that it can be dodged and 
deflected, is avada kedavra - the killing curse. JKR has repeatedly 
emphasized that to cheat death is to cheat oneself and Nearly 
Headless Nick's speech to Harry at the end of OotP seems to affirm 
this. In her recent Edinburgh interview she says we (her overly 
analytical fans) should ask ourself why LV didn't die the night he 
tried to kill Harry and got hit with his own curse and why 
Dumbledore didn't kill him in OotP (assuming DD can, which I think 
he can't, or won't). I believe this implies that to kill Voldemort 
will be to also sacrifice Harry and, therefore that Harry may have 
to sacrifice himself to rid the world of LV - DD maybe won't kill LV 
now because he won't kill Harry - Harry must be free to choose to do 
this for himself. Death may also be seen as the only means of 
redeeming LV, as well as saving the world from him. 

The veil could have tremendous (but still unrevealed) significance 
and in an earlier post (see 109302 and 109395) I already outlined a 
view I have that Harry may have contributed to Sirius' death (if 
that is what he is - dead - Lupin's statement that Sirius is d-, 
could mean disappeared or something else, though most others have 
told Harry that Sirius IS dead/lost forever). The DeathEaters also 
freaked to see Harry on the dais in the death arch/veil room and 
Lupin stopped him jumping onto it. I'm wondering if Lily didn't have 
a job looking into death, something the MoM clearly does do, and 
maybe the knowledge she had from her studies allowed her to come up 
with the defences she used to protect Harry. It is interesting to 
think that had she known that her actions might intertwine Harry and 
LV's fates so much she might have chosen his death rather than what, 
if he dies at the end, might be viewed as a rather miserably fated, 
if noble and necessary, life (namely to exist solely as a frequently 
sad, unloved and misunderstood hero destined chiefly to be the only 
weapon the WW has to get rid of nasty old LV). Perhaps DD's letter 
to the Dursleys (read Petunia) also stated that she HAD to protect 
him because he was all the world (WW or muggle) had as defence 
against LV. This is the simplest explanation I have for why she 
would take him despite it being so much against her will, at least 
from what we've been led to believe so far. If Harry IS the only 
weapon, as we have been led to believe the prophecy suggests, either 
DD can't kill LV on his own, or for him (DD) to do so would have 
unacceptable consequences.

Lastly. I have to say that my first reading of OotP was definitely 
coloured by the pre-hype from JKR that someone significant would 
die. She set up many instances where, variously, one thought Ron, Mr 
Weasley Sr, Hagrid and only at the end Sirius would be 'the' one to 
die. Reading this way spoiled for me, to an extent, what I knew even 
then was a book as well written as any of the others. Although 
Sirius' death was shocking it would have been even more so to me 
without the hype. I suppose this illustrates what JKR said in her 
Edinburgh interview, i.e. that we should be careful what we ask her 
to reveal, because 'knowing' ahead of time might spoil the reading. 
I know that after the first read I was left feeling that despite its 
being a very enjoyable read, OotP was the least of the 5 books since 
its main plot despite the gorgeously vile Umbridge was to kill 
Sirius. I always found the prophecy (enigmatic though it remains) a 
bit of a let down to hang the whole book on, but yes in hindsight I 
recognise that a lot was revealed or introduced in book 5, including 
new characters and unfinished new or ongoing threads like the 
lasting effects (if any) of the brain on Ron, the development of 
Neville and his importance (plus the breaking of what may have been 
an inhibitory wand), decline or outing of Fudge, the Percy mystery, 
Occlumency and legilimency, Snape's memories, introduction of 
thestrals (more death imagery), Luna (ditto), Tonks, metamophomagi, 
Grawp and so on.