[HPforGrownups] Sending Voldie through the Veil (Was: Where will the "great battle" be)

[Scarah]

No: HPFGUIDX 161959

Sarah:
Sorry, I'm sure you know what's coming.  :)  I'm kind of allergic to
"Think of the children" as support or debunking of theories.

JKR in 2000:
"The bottom line is, I have to write the story I want to write. I
never wrote them with a focus group of 8-year-olds in mind. I have to
continue telling the story the way I want to tell it. I don't at all
relish the idea of children in tears, and I absolutely don't deny it's
frightening. But it's supposed to be frightening!"

"I cannot write to please other people. I can't. When I finish book 7,
I want to be able to look in the mirror and think, I did it the way I
meant to do it. If I lose readers in the process, I'm not going to
throw a party about it. But I would feel far worse if I knew that I
had allowed myself to write something different. Yet, I do have
parents coming up to me and saying "He's 6 and he loved your book!"
And I've always kind of been, "Well, that's great, but I know what's
coming, and I think 6 is a tiny bit too young." I've always felt
that."

Sarah:
She's already killed some beloved characters, and put still more
through some serious angst.  Allegedly, there were young readers that
sought therapy after reading about Snape killing Dumbledore.  The
point is, she *still* did it.  I totally believe her when she says
she's telling the story she wanted to tell, and it is sad and scary.
The books so far bear this out.  For me personally, the most
disturbing incident was a guy dismembering himself to use the limb as
a potion ingredient, but I like books that evoke a response.  Folks
that don't probably gave up after Cedric, Sirius and Dumbledore died.

Carol:
My concern
about AK in particular is that it's a Dark curse, the weapon of the
enemy, specifically created as a murder weapon.

Sarah:
I don't think that's going to happen either.  Harry has already shown
a remarkable inability for performing the Unforgivable Curses.  (Even
though they are now also a tool in the Auror toolbox.)

Harry already killed Quirrell, didn't he?  It could be argued that
Quirrell self-bubbled by touching Harry, or that it was accidental, or
a side effect, but the bottom line is that Harry laid hands on
Quirrell and Quirell died.  If this didn't divide Harry's soul, then
he should have plenty of options for Voldemort.

Carol:
Soldiers defending their country
suffer what used to be euphemistically referred to as combat fatigue,
including nightmares decades later and other permanent psychological
damage.

Sarah:
Exactly.  In my opinion, the only authorial irresponsibility will be
if Harry lives and this *isn't* shown.  He has to banish Voldemort
from this plane of existence.  It won't be easy.  Whether Harry shoots
Voldemort with an M-16 or gently shoves him through the veil, he's
killing him.  If he skips off into the sunset to marry Ginny without a
care in the world afterward, that is what I will have a problem with.

Sarah