What's With All The Bloodlust?

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 167018

---  "eggplant107" <eggplant107 at ...> wrote:
>
> Katherine Coble <k.coble@> wrote:
> 
> > I'm continually amazed, and now kind of
> > disappointed, at all of the posts which
> > seem to be almost GLEEFUL in their hope 
> > that Harry die.
> 
> Actually there aren't all that many posts wishing Harry
> would die, just mine. ...But if Harry dies, a character
> you've loved for many years, well, that will stay with
> you. I'm not predicting this but sometimes late at night
> I wake up and wonder if JKR will take it up to a even 
> higher notch; not only will Harry die but Voldemort 
> will win. ....
> 

bboyminn:

First I don't think there really are that many people who
are WISHING Harry would die. I think there are far more
who THINK he MIGHT die, and can justify that thought by
referencing many literary forms and genres.

Yes, the hero dying is a very valid path for an author
to pursue; especially if said hero dies a very noble and
heroic death, and in doing so is also able to defeat the
'Dark Lord' of the story. 

In literature, a hero's death is not always a hero's 
shame, it is far more often the central point of pride 
and glory for the hero. So, JKR could certainly come up
with a very valid literary path that leads to Harry's 
death. Even those who see that as a good and noble ending,
most likely still do not want Harry to die, but can accept
it if he does.

Personally, I hope very very much that Harry doesn't die,
but at the same time, I can see the story potentially 
going in that direction, and can see a great storyteller
pulling it off in a way that leaves us satisfied. 

Equally, if Harry does not die, and by some stretch of the
imagination 'lives happily ever after', that too will take
a great feat of storytelling. 

Either way, once the book is written and read, and is laying
on the shelf, the measure of the ending will be how 
satisfied we are as readers. A good author can make 
either ending work, if they truly are a good author. 

So far Harry hasn't exactly had an easy time of it, if he
represents the 'puppy' then he has been kicked more times
than I can count. Yet isn't it the very fact that he is
so downtrodden, yet so resilently heroic, that we like 
him?

So, my central point is that some people might /think/ 
Harry will die, and as readers they might see merit in 
that ending if it is done well, I seriously doubt that 
very many of them are /wishing/ or /hoping/ that Harry 
will die. As a person, admittedly fictional, he is our 
friend, and we never wish friends dead. But we as 
readers can accept things that we as friends can not. 

So, I don't think those who /think/ Harry /might/ die 
are engaged in bloodlust or puppy kicking, they are 
simply accepting it as one of many very possible literary 
outcomes.

Personally, I'm very much in the 'Beyond the Veil and 
Back' camp. Or I have thoughts, that if Harry has to
die, it is merely a technicality. That is, he has to 
die by some measure, and in that instant of 'technical'
death, Voldemort becomes vulnerable and is killed. Then
Harry is revived. It happens all the time in real life.

So, even 'Harry dying' is not a solid fixed event, it
can go in may directions and have many variables, and
doesn't necessarily have to be permanent death.

Now, I'm sure, you are all ready to rush in and point
out that in JKR's world 'dead is dead, and never to 
return'. I agree, if you are totally, truly, and 
completely dead then you are dead. But what if you
are only 'sort of' dead? Again, in real life people
are brought back from 'technical' death all the time;
they don't even need magic. 

So, death is not necessarily bloodlust, and dead is 
not necessarily dead. 

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn