Why it was necessary

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 89714

> Ginger wrote:
> 
> > Why is it necessary?  That question has pervaded many threads on 
> this 
> > list, most recently the "is too"/"is not" Snape is (not) a vampire 
> > thread.  The request for "why it was necessary" got me thinking 
> about 
> > why other things in the book were necessary.  
> 
> (Interesting Harry & Neville theory snipped)
> 
> > And that's why I think it was all necessary.
> 
> Can you explain what you mean by something being 'necessary' in the 
> series?
> 
> For myself, I don't know if it was necessary that Sirius die.  I can 
> speculate as to the author's purpose in killing off this character, 
> and then as to whether that purpose could have been achieved any 
> other way.  Even if the answer is no, that doesn't prove necessity, 
> because of the place of that purpose in the author's wider aims.
> 
> Please understand I'm not knocking the concept.  I just feel it 
> needs a bit more definition.
> 
> David

I'm not sure what Ginger means by "necessary," but when I asked the
same question in relation to the Snape!vampire theory, I meant (as
specified in my post) What does it accomplish? How does it advance the
plot or our understanding of Snape's motives? I still say that having
Snape as a vampire (or Ron as Dumbledore) serves no purpose. Both
Snape's motivations and Dumbledore's wisdom (it isn't omniscience) can
be revealed without resorting to stale devices like vampires and time
travel. Possibly Ginger was using "necessary" in some other way, but
as you've snipped her post, I can't really tell. I assume that her
concerns are the same as mine: character development and advancing the
plot. IIRC, she was arguing that Sirius's death will bring Neville and
Harry to a mutual understanding and friendship. That makes sense to me
in a way that vampire!Snape never can.

Carol