Do we need any more death cases?

[nkafkafi]

No: HPFGUIDX 89866

Hitomi, Carol and Pippin had somewhat similar responses, so I'm 
combining posts. But first, maybe I should make my main points 
clearer:

1. Main characters in books are not killed just like that. They are 
killed only for a good reason.
2. JKR killed Cedric and Sirius so the reader would feel that no 
character, not even Harry, is safe, and she apparently achieved this 
goal.
3. In a sample of several fantasy/children books with BIG wars in 
them, the average number of *main* characters Killed In Action is 
around 1 (one).
4. Based on the above, a reasonable prediction is that we are going 
to see many *secondary* characters killed in books 6 and 7, but no 
main character killed (or one at the most).


Carol wrote:
JKR has said straight out that there will be more deaths and that 
some of them will be "favorite characters."

Neri answers:
Was the "favorite characters" part of the death warning that turned 
out to be Sirius? I believe that this announcement was well 
calculated to make the most out of Sirius' death, so while reading 
OotP for the first time, the reader will feel that any character is 
in imminent danger. This ploy, like many of JKR's devious ploys, was 
a major success, as evident by the number and variety of death 
predictions in HPGU. So I don't see any reason to kill more main 
characters and I would not be surprised if, by the end of the series, 
Sirius is the most "favorite character" killed. 

Carol:
In any case, as someone else has said, the war is about to begin, and
war means deaths--fortunately not on the scale of LOTR, much less real
wars like WWI or II, but deaths, nevertheless. And they won't all be
bad guys or minor characters.

And Hitomi:
She continually compares LV to Hitler in interviews, and everyone 
knows how many people died needlessly in that war. All I'm saying is 
that it would be entirely unrealistic if she didn't kill off more 
characters

And Pippin:
Because it's been prophesied that Voldemort will rise again, "greater 
and more terrible than ever he was," (PoA ch 16). What was so 
terrible about Voldemort was that the people who tried to stop him 
died "horribly" and "no one ever lived once he decided ter kill 'em." 
(PS/SS ch 4.) JKR has to maintain our sense that the characters' 
lives are in jeopardy and that Voldemort is a serious threat. 
Consider that if Sirius hadn't died, the DE's attack on the DoM would 
have been sheer buffoonery.

Neri answers:
Yes, in order to maintain realism, many people should die. But I 
still don't see any special reason why any of them should be one of 
the *main* characters. Just to illustrate the point, suppose Kingsley 
and Diggle would have died in the DoM instead of Sirius. I don't 
think the DE's attack would have looked like a sheer buffoonery in 
such a case. 

Hitomi:
what with over half the Order having been murdered last time

Neri:
Well, maybe Harry will be the one who made the difference this time 
around. But I won't be surprised if several *secondary* characters 
from the Order will die.

Hitomi:
Sirius's death was tragic, sudden, almost unreal and unmoving in its 
suddeness, not to mention inexplicaple. It was realistic, because 
that's how a lot of deaths are, especially during war <snip> There 
doesn't have to be a reason why she should kill anymore major
characters. Because when someone dies, we never understand the
reasons anyway.

Neri:
This is fiction, not realty. In fiction (or at least in *good* 
fiction) things don't happen without reason, most certainly not 
something important such as the death of a main character. If JKR 
wanted to kill Sirius in order to convey the arbitrariness of death 
in real life, then this was the reason for Sirius' death, and it was 
a good reason. But together with Cedric's death (which was similarly 
sudden) I think the readers got that point, so there is no need to 
kill more *main* characters for this.

I think the HP series is quite dark already. Harry's parents were 
murdered when he was a baby, he had to recall this murder again 
several times, and now he had lost Sirius too. The ancient House of 
Black is no more. Neville parents were tortured to insanity. The 
whole WW, in fact, still carries deep scars from the first war, and 
now lives in fear from the second round. This series doesn't require 
more deaths of loved characters.    

Pippin:
Lupin's little speech in OOP ch 9 about how Molly shouldn't worry 
because "it isn't like last time" when the Order was being picked off 
one by one gives me the heeby-jeebies. Two of the Order, Podmore and 
Sirius, have been picked off already and the war hasn't even gotten 
under way.

And Hitomi:
DD or one of the Weasleys dying wouldn't surprise me in the least; 
and I expect some of the lesser-known Order members to die. Harry 
dying wouldn't surprise me.

Neri:
I rest my case. JKR is nothing if not unpredictable :-)  


Spoiler warning for: The Hobbit, LOTR, Ender's Game, the Dark 
Materials series, the Sally Lockhart series (and no, this is *not* OT)
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Carol:
Three of the dwarves in "The Hobbit" are killed, at least one of whom 
(Thorin) is a major character.

Neri:
Yes, this fits my estimation: about one *main* character killed.

Hitomi:
As far as LOTR goes, Frodo, Elrond, Gandalf, etc. sail away into the 
Grey Havens. That's death, just a very peaceful death.

And Carol:
I think that for Tolkien, having to leave Middle Earth, as Frodo 
does, is sadder than dying.

Neri:
I think this is a matter of interpretation. I personally felt it was 
considerably better than dying, or why would Elrond have any problem 
with his daughter staying with Aragorn, and why had so many men in 
the history of middle earth wanted to reach the Gray Havens? In any 
case, this happened in a sort of epilog, a considerable time (I don't 
remember how many years) after the war itself. If JKR will have DD 
surviving the war, and tell us in her epilog that 5 years later he 
went peacefully to his next adventure, this is not like being KIA. In 
over 1000 pages of a major war, Tolkien had 1 (one) main character on 
the side of good KIA, and with all the many deaths of secondary 
characters this was quite enough to maintain realism.

Hitomi:
And when I thought of other children's books I read that contained 
death, Ender's Game immediately came to mind, along with Madeleine 
L'Engle's and Philip Pullman's works. Ender kills two boys in that 
book (one at the age of six, which was technically manslaughter, and 
one at nine in self-defense), not to mention he massacres an entire 
species at the end of the novel (he didn't know what he was doing). 
L'Engle has characters die in her books, and Pullman killed Frederick 
in the Sally Lockhart series, and lots of people in the Dark 
Materials trilogy (I hated the way Amber Spyglass ended). So, it's 
not uncommon.

Neri:
IIRC, in Ender's game none of the *main* characters died. The "Dark 
Materials" trilogy (I also hated the ending!) was indeed 
exceptionally dark. I seem to recall it actually had 2 main 
characters KIA. I did not read the Sally Lockhart series and 
Madeleine L'Engle's (and now they are spoiled for me, the proper 
punishment for my sins, I guess :-) 

Carol:
BTW, Tolkien considered having Pippin die "doing something brave" and 
changed his mind, instead having him "grow" both literally and 
figuratively. I think that will happen to the characters in the HP 
series as well, especially Harry, Ron, and Neville. I agree with you 
that none of them needs to die, though they will certainly make 
sacrifices. 

Neri:
Thanks for this interesting information about Pippin. I didn't know 
about it but it fits my thoughts exactly. Killing a good character is 
the easy way out. It is much more challengeable and rewarding to let 
him/her grow.



Neri, who hopes this makes some of the people around here less 
depressed.