[HPforGrownups] Harry's happy death (Was Re: Harry, Sirius Black, and the power of posses

[Scarah]

No: HPFGUIDX 161681

Julie:
> Fairy tales are one thing, children's books are another.

Sarah:
Are they?  What is the distinction?  Harry Potter even has fairies in it.

Julie:
> Charlotte's Web is not a valid analogy, since Charlotte is
> basically Dumbledore to Wilbur's Harry.

Sarah:
Conceded, but I was rambling off a list of some things I enjoyed as a
child that contain character death and bad things happening to people
(or farm animals/arachnids).  My point was that the genre of
children's literature does not dictate perfect, blissful, fluffy
endings.

Julie:
> Wow. So JKR's message is if a teenager sees death/afterlife as
> preferable to life, we should applaud that sentiment and even
> rejoice when he is given (or chooses) his heart's desire. If
> it's too hard to live, boys and girls, embrace death because
> you'll get to see all your previously departed loved ones.
> No need to work on improving your unhappy life when you can
> just end it and get on with your reward.

Sarah:
I never figured Harry for a suicide risk, I think he will go down
fighting.  In the examples we have so far of him accepting his
imminent death, this is always the case.

Do you think his life is unhappy?  I don't.  Perhaps it was before age
11, but in the years since then he's grown to be vibrant, motivated,
clever, accomplished and surrounded by successful relationships.  More
than a lot of people get to do in 80 years.

Julie:
> So why shouldn't they just
> end it? Even if this isn't the message JKR intended, it's one
> could be easily interpreted from this type of ending.

Sarah:
But by "ending it," do they have the option to save the entire world
the way that Harry will be doing if he is fatally wounded during his
mission of utmost importance?

Julie:
> Not to mention, it rather ruins Harry's character. Yes, he
> embraced death in OotP when it seemed imminent. But if Harry
> deliberately--and joyfully--sacrifices himself to take out
> Voldemort, without making every effort to get Voldemort and
> survive (which is a human instinct in all of us), do you really
> think his parents, Sirius, Dumbledore et al, will embrace his
> presence in the afterlife?

Sarah:
A few points here.  I don't know about "joyfully."  "Acceptingly"
perhaps.  The way he was in OotP, or in GoF when he wanted to die
facing the enemy like his father, or in CoS when he tries to put his
affairs in order to the best of his ability in the time he has left.

Of course he will make his best effort to both defeat Voldemort and
survive.  Both simply may not be possible, and if he must choose...
(not that he may get a choice at all).

(More on the glorious dead below...)

Julie:
> Here they all gave up their lives
> at different times just so Harry could LIVE, and he doesn't
> hold onto that life with everything he has in him?

Sarah:
Dumbledore did not give up his life to save Harry.  Dumbledore gave up
his life to advance his strategy to destroy Voldemort.  A death that
is worthy of the hero Dumbledore is surely worthy of the hero Harry.

I'm sure Sirius wasn't thinking "I'd like to die today" but he went
down fighting evil, which Dumbledore says he would have wanted.  I
think Harry would rather die with his boots on, as well.

And now, Harry's parents.  Consider the way the first war ended.  If
it weren't for the Horcruxes, the first Voldemort war would have been
the only Voldemort war, and we'd be reading "Lily Potter and the..."
I believe this, the first thing in the series, is one of the most
powerful motifs and must be mirrored at the end in some way for
symmetry.

Julie:
> And sorry,
> Ron, Hermione, Ginny, Lupin, the Weasleys who love him like
> family, etc, but he really doesn't miss you, he's busy with
> his reward and really, you were just holding him back!

Sarah:
But who's to say any of them won't be toast as well by that point?
It's a war, people gotta die.

Julie:
> Okay, I admit I hate, hate, HATE the idea of Harry merrily
> dancing his way into the afterlife, and I hate even more
> the concept of those who died to keep him alive cheering
> his presence there.

Sarah:
Again, I don't know about "merrily dancing."  But I do think that
Harry will be successful in his endeavor, and he'll be welcomed as a
hero wherever he goes, including behind the veil.  If the other dead
people wanted him to live longer, there's not much they can do about
it is there?  I think they'll be happy to be reunited with him whether
he's 18 or 80.

Julie:
> I firmly believe they'd want Harry to
> live, and to truly LIVE, without the constant threat of
> death and destruction hanging over his head.

Sarah:
This may be where we differ.  I think Harry is living now.  I think
he's got a lot on his mind, but I don't think his life is some
oppressive burden.  I think he already gets a lot of enjoyment from
his relationships and adventures and successes.  If he survives the
war, he wants to be an Auror.  Being an Auror is not exactly sitting
on the porch drinking lemonade.  His dreams are to fight evil and have
drama and battles and conflict.  So, he won't be missing out on too
much if he goes taking out the darkest wizard in a hundred years.

Julie:
> Besides, if Harry still doesn't understand the value of
> his own life by Book 7 and won't save himself, then I know
> Snape will do it for him, teaching Harry a final life lesson
> in the process--and paying back that pesky life debt to James
> in full! (You heard it here first.)

Sarah:
Heh.  I actually believe Snape will be the one to (inadvertently)
deliver the mortal wound to Harry.  He'll be trying to help at the
time, though.

Sarah