Do we need any more death cases?

[Hitomi]

No: HPFGUIDX 89891

nkafkafi wrote:
> 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.

Hitomi now:
Hi again!  Gomen ne Neri, I don't want this to sound overly 
argumentative, because I don't mean it that way, but just to squash 
a stereotype, I've read quite a few books that had main characters 
die for no seemingly good reason.  Much to my chagrin.  Not to say 
Rowling is that kind of author, but until Books 6 and 7 are out, 
another main character's death is still a possibility, neh?


> 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).

Hitomi now:
And I totally agree with you on all these points, though I consider 
DD, Harry, and the Weasleys to be main characters, and I honestly 
expect at least one of them to die.  (I feel as though we're talking 
about Book 5 again, you know, before it was out, and we were all 
speculating who was going to die ;) )
 
> 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.

Hitomi now:
I personally believe that the air of apprehension once surrounding 
Book 5 will only increase as we hear more on Books 6 and 7.  I agree 
that I don't think Rowling will kill a major character without 
reason, but will probably see a few more go.  I loved Sirius as a 
character, but if DD or Harry dies, I will be far more upset than I 
was over Book 5.  I'm not entirely sure how much of this speculation 
is just me expecting the worse, so that I can be pleased if it 
doesn't happen, or if I actually believe Rowling would kill off such 
loved characters.  She constantly alludes in interviews how Harry 
might not live, and sometimes I think she's joking, but then others 
I think she might just be laying the idea out there, so it doesn't 
come as so much shock.  I guess my point is this:  if Rowling does 
kill of such characters, she'll give a reason, I don't think we need 
to worry about that, Neri.  DD's death could be a mentor-passing-on 
kind of thing for Harry, leaving him on his own.  Harry's death 
could be an ultimate sacrifice.   These are just made-up, non-
sensical theories at the moment, but good examples of what I'm 
trying to convey nonetheless.

 
> 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 now:
Again, I see and agree with your point.  Neither do I think Rowling 
will kill a main character just to make the books seem realistic; 
not when she could easily kill off secondary characters, such as 
Cedric, make the same kind of impact, and not completely devastate 
the reader.  The plot wouldn't move nearly as effectively without 
some of the essential characters, anyhow.  She doesn't HAVE to kill 
a major character to maintain realism, but if we're talking reality, 
how real would it be for Harry, LV's main target, to not lose 
someone else close to him?  Not very.  LV could easily use someone 
Harry's loves as bait; and we know Harry'd take it.  He wouldn't 
sacrifice a stranger over his own life or beliefs, much less one he 
cares for deeply.  Harry, if he is *the One* as we are told, and as 
I believe (I feel so Matrix-y), will have to embrace his destiny of 
pretty much saving the world, and he might have to lose someone else 
to LV for such an epiphany to occur.  Because Sirius's death (at the 
end of Book 5) left him depressed, resentful, and slightly bitter.  
All very normal, human responses, but I suspect Harry will be very 
depressed in the next book, just as he was very angry in the last.  
And then, perhaps, he will accept his fate, or will pass on in Book 
7.  

A rather cliche idea, I know, but again, it conveys what I'm trying 
to say.  We don't know what's coming; JKR has left things very open-
ended.  So, I'm not saying anything definite, not when she could 
still kill the character the entire series is named after.  But I do 
think she'd give us a reason if she killed a major character, just 
maybe not the reason we would want.  And THAT is very realistic.

 
> 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 now:
He made the difference last time, neh :-)?  And I think we all 
expect at least some of the secondary characters to die.  That's 
kind of a given.  It is a war after all.

 
> 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.

Hitomi now:
Not for this, no, but maybe for another plot element.  And this is 
me arguing mostly a person philosophy, but isn't fiction supposed to 
be a person's view of reality?  And that, in retrospect, makes it 
truer than any nonfiction out there.  Fiction is someone else's view 
of life, of the universe; as lone as it is *their* reality, then it 
works.  Everyone has their own idea of what reality actually is; a 
conglomerate of your experiences, up-bringing, personality traits, 
beliefs.  Which is what makes characters like Umbridge and LV so 
sinisterly scary, not to mention evil.  Was what made Hitler so 
evil; MLK such a hero; Napolean such an intimidating force.  Major 
figures in history and in fiction skewed reality into what they 
wanted it to be - most of the time hopelessly wrong, but sometimes 
so beautifully right, that it opened up once-impossible 
possiblities.  A book should be an extension of that; I don't see 
any point in trying to shelter children from it.  And considering 
JKR never wrote with any specific target audience in mind (said so 
in another interview - I've read way too many ;) ), she's not trying 
to protect anybody, she's just writing her own version of reality.  
And reality does include death; it's the inescapable phenomenon.  
Besides, JKR keeps saying there are things worse than death, it's 
one of her most reiterated points in Book 5, even though we're not 
entirely sure what she is referring to (though we can make very good 
estimates).  

Perhaps, like Tolkien, death will be more a passing on - "the-next-
great-adventure."  LV is the one pining after immortality.  I expect 
Rowling to express death realistically in her writing, I wouldn't 
like her novels nearly as much if she didn't.  But, according to 
her, there are worse things (which I'm sure we all agree with), so I 
doubt the subject of death will be the worse to come in the next two 
books.

 
> 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. 

Hitomi now:
Again, not trying to be needlessly argumentative Neri, but who 
says?  The readers.  We don't know where JKR is going with this, 
it's her plot.  So maybe another death is most necessary.  We don't 
know.  I sincerely hope not, but I'm not going to throw away the 
possiblity, if you know what I mean.  And the war could make the 
next two books a whole lot darker; JKR said it was going to get 
dark, and Book 2 wasn't exactly sunshine and daisies.  I guess I'm 
just letting myself expect the worse, as well as hope for the best.  
Makes the whole aura permeating the Harry Potter series more 
exciting, at any rate.

    
> 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 :-)  
 
Hitomi now:
Exactly my point as well.  I completely agree :P

 
> 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 :-)
 
Hitomi now:
I'm so sorry!  Gomen nasai!  But I didn't spoil L-Engle's works, at 
least, not really.  "A Wrinkle in Time" is really good, just to give 
a small recommendation.  I guess, because I haven't read any of 
these books since adolescence, I kind of take it for granted that 
others have read them (most of my friends have).  And LOTR is 
usually a shoe-in.  Anyway, I am sorry, and wasn't the ending to 
Amber Spyglass just awful? ::bleh::  Gotta love angst >_<  

About Card's works: Human, Quim, and Ender himself die in later 
books, too, though, and I know some others characters do as well, 
they just weren't quite as major.  And we know Bean is going to die, 
what with the genetic modification, and Alvin, too, in the Maker 
series, because of what Peggy sees in their future.  Just some more 
examples; I do love discussing books :-).


> 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.

I agree on this as well, but I trust JKR.  And if she kills another 
major character, she'll give us a reason, or at least a semblance of 
understanding.  She's never left us hanging in disappointment 
before - more like excitement for the next installment.  She 
definitely knows what she's doing.

~ Hitomi, who thanks Neri for this thread, because it brought up 
subjects I otherwise wouldn't dwell on; and who also still holds on 
to the hope that no more main characters will die, either

P.S. for those who care: I'll respond to my old threads from a 
couple of days ago.  I didn't forget, just been busy :)