Titling convention significant?

[Hitomi]

No: HPFGUIDX 89600

Amy Z wrote: 
> In the past, I've figured there were two possible reasons for 
JKR's 
> (again IMO) dull titles.  One is that JKR's ear for language is 
> simply not at its best (=in keeping with my own) when it comes to 
> titles.  The other is that she's aware that the titles are a bit 
> monotonous, but Harry IS, after all, the linchpin of recent 
wizarding-
> world history.  Thus, once in a while, when someone here deems 
that a 
> theory mistakenly puts another character besides Harry at the 
center 
> of the series, he/she will bolster his/her argument by pointing 
> out, "There's a reason the books are called "Harry Potter and 
the...'"
> 
> Well, what if that's all a huge setup for the big surprise in Book 
> Seven:  that Harry is not after all the center of the series?  
That 
> the whole story has been about the development of that other July-
> born son of Order parents?  Why would JKR even introduce the idea 
> that it could have been Neville, as she's just done in OoP, if it 
> isn't going to mean something?  What if everyone's wrong and it 
> really is Neville who must and will defeat the Dark Lord?*  The 
> ultimate way to symbolize that would be to name the book after the 
> true center of the story.  
> 
> The problem is, the new title would signal the twist.  If Book 
Seven 
> is called Neville Longbottom and the Final Secret or whatnot, 
well, 
> the secret would be out before we opened the book.  
> 
> I did say it was a late-night idea.  But I like the way it redeems 
an 
> aspect of the series I've always considered to be rather weak.

Hitomi:
I don't want people to think I'm immature for what I'm about to say, 
because I will explain why I said it:  I think Harry is *the One* 
and not Neville, and I think this theory is totally wrong.  Please 
don't be mad Amy, I'm not saying you couldn't be right, because you 
could be, and this isn't coming from my biased view of the fact that 
my favorite character is Harry, though he is.  My explanation will 
be as objective as I can possibly make it.

First, part of my reasoning why I think Harry to be *the One*.  I'm 
going to give this link (I gave it in one other post, too), because 
Maline does such a good job of explaining this, and giving the link 
saves loads of bandwith.  Besides, I am planning to post my rant on 
the prophecy soon.  PLEASE read it, so that you know where I'm 
coming from, and it isn't biased towards Harry ;)

http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt02.shtml

Second, and my main reasoning for why I don't agree with Amy, is the 
fact that this story, this epic Rowling has created, is Harry's.  
Even if Neville turns out to be *the One*, the story is still 
Harry's.  Every moment is from his point of view (except the first 
chapters of Book 1 and 4, for obvious reasons).  I don't think this 
aspect of the series to be weak at all, and loads of children's 
books have similar title patterns.  It's just a title, I find the 
book itself much more important, I'm sure you'll agree.

And yes, I too, believe JKR threw Neville in at the end of Book 5 
for a reason, and I think he has a large part to play, but if that 
concept of Neville hadn't been thrown in, we would all still see him 
as insecure secondary-character-Neville, who's story is kind of sad, 
but who seems to be growing into his own self.  People love to cheer 
for the under-dog, which is why so many want to believe Neville is 
*the One* over Harry, at least in my opinion.  But it doesn't 
completely add up (read the link!!!).

And I don't know if it's because I'm still a teenager, or because 
most of the people on this list are a whole lot older than me (I'm 
18, if anyone's curious), but I've always viewed these books as 
about Harry, and not because he is the "current-historical-lynchpin-
of-the-WW."  If you take away Harry, there is no story, it is 
entirely told through his eyes, and the very first chapter is 
entitled "The Boy Who Lived;" the book-titles aren't the only 
blatantly obvious ones.  And my defense of Harry doesn't come from 
the fact that the books are named after him, that's just exemplary.  
My defense stems from the fact that, yes, Rowling has created this 
entire world, and from most of the adults I've talked to, they seem 
to be most concerned with that, wanting that world expounded on, but 
the core of these books is *Harry* and *his* relationship to the 
rest of the WW, and that's mostly what the younger readers I know 
care about.

And I don't mean that I care about that because I love Harry.  I 
mean I care about that fact, because I was thirteen when the first 
HP book was released in the U.S., still thirteen upon Book 2, 
fourteen upon Book 3, and then fifteen upon Book 4.  I have related 
to these books, because any many ways, that WAS me in them.  I'm 
eighteen now, but Book 5 was by far my favorite, and mostly because 
of the way Harry acts.  A lot of adults and very young children 
don't get that, but my life still pretty much consists of massive 
amounts of teen-angst, and all through Book 5, I was going "YEAH!  
Go Harry!  Finally getting a little of your own back!"  The kid has 
been through hell and back again, and for some reason a lot of 
people think he should just forgive and forget, step back, be 
altruistic in thought and action.  The kid is always altruistic in 
action when it really matters (a.k.a. life and death situations), 
but he's not a saint.  NO ONE acts like that all the time, almost no 
one at the age of fifteen, and most of us have never been through 
even half of what Harry regularly goes through.  He's got every 
right to be just a little pissed off by the hand the universe has 
dealt him (which JKR also mentioned in an interview :-) ).  I know 
I'd feel cosmically shysted.

Lastly, my defense comes from the fact that JKR continually refers 
to Harry as "the hero of the books," "her hero," etc., and I doubt 
she'll drop her entire set-up of the last five books for a plot-
twist.  It just doesn't make sense.  I've read so many of her 
interviews, and so many editorials on her books, and Harry is the 
lynchpin (to steal Amy's word :) ) of the entire series.  Why would 
she suddenly change that later - in Book 7?  Again, I think Neville 
has quite a large part to act out, but these books aren't just named 
after Harry.  They ARE Harry's; they are his story.  Neville just 
happens to be a part of that story.  Otherwise, it would have been 
called "Neville Longbottom and the...," or "Hermione Granger and 
the..." from the beginning.

~ Hitomi, who suspects she is about to get seriously flamed by 
someone