death of harry potter?
 

Gee, did anyone watch the "death of harry potter" story on CBS evening show? Im on dial up and don't want to spend hours downloading the show, so what was it about (or post a link to where I can find a freakin description in cbs' site!)

Danke,

I didn't watch it, but it probably has something to do with Rowling announcing that two people will be dying in the next book.

Link

For those who missed the story and want to see the video, here is a link to the videos (the death of Harry Potter should be the second video):

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/...um=10&offset=0

Here is the text from the official CBS site:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...-SearchStories

I have read a few books in the past that actually did kill off the main character or one of the pivotal characters within the story, so I wouldn't put it pass her since it seems to be a recent trend.

Local newspaper here ran the story complete with quotes from internet forums on fans reaction. My favorite was one fan threatening to "cry for a year" if Harry was killed. Gee I hope she does it.

My guess is it will be the weasley twins. Probably get themselves into more trouble than they intended, or something like that. Or maybe snape & ron. I can't think of any logical reasoning as to why that would be. Just call it a random senseless hunch.

I've only read up to book 5, but base on what I have read I'm still going with Harry and Voldermort finishing off one another. Maybe Snape or Hagrid end up meeting their demise as a secondary guess, but I don't know if Rowling would want to kill off Ron or Hermione since they seem to be fond of one another (according to Wiki, but they are not always accurate) and they could both give some of the most accurate portrayals of Harry Potter as a person. Then again, I've seen stranger things happen and she would probably want to surprise her audience and not make it as simple as the Potter/Voldermort draw.

I'll probably change my mind after reading books 5 and 6, but this is my current guess.

It's more that Harry Potter could be the most unlikeable lead in children's litinary history.

The reason for it would be so that nobody could write a "Harry Potter" sequel after she was done with the series.

My guess is that it's not Harry, as that likely kills the series from continuing, no matter who writes it.

Isn't that the truth. In fact, I'm kind of rooting for Harry to die. LOL. I actually lost interest in the series while reading the 5th book... so I'll probably just read the spoilers online and that's it. lol.

Yeah I never botherd to pick up the 6th book because it was clear it was becoming a joke. It seems like it was always Rowling's intention to make Snape the evil villian, hence turning him into a murderor, yet somehow, lost in her amatuerish writing, he comes across as a hard working, fair man and Harry an ungrateful sticky little brat.

Everythin was always ::something bad happens:: "It's Snape it's Snape!" yells Harry, meahile Snape is saving orphans from a burning building.

Well I am pretty sure that he's gonna die. I mean, it's the last book and Rowling is like "hehehe it will be tragic" and stuff like that; fumo she said that she didn't want anyone to make profit by continuing the story in one way or another, so the perfect way to avoid this all would be Harry's death - it's easy as that.

Maybe it will be Ron and Hermione. Wow, that would be a feel bad ending for the series. Smote the love of the odd couple...

Eh, that interview was nothing we hadn't heard her say before (I could swear she was getting frustrated with some of the questions, especially the one about the "dark" turn of the third book).

It's quite useless speculating on deaths when they're in the middle of a war. I'd be more interested in who survives.

I'm gonna go out on a limb and predict that Hagrid dies. He's popular enough for it to have an impact upon readers and Hagrid is noble enough to make this plausible for his character. Hagrid's always been kind-hearted but somewhat bumbling. Having been expelled from Hogwarts as a youth and never truly being respected in the magician's community as would a full graduate, an act of martyrdom would seem an ideal way for Hagrid to redeem himself. And after Dumbledore's death and the fall of Snape, Hagrid has every reason to act without thought for his own safety.

Despite all the gossip, I don't foresee Harry dying, nor do I believe that Ron and/or Hermoine will be killed off either. While authors sometimes kill their protagonist, it is usually a monumentously poor idea to snuff out a character so popular as Harry, Ron or Hermoine. After concluding a seven-book series, it's almost imperative that an author bring satisfying closure to fans. Readers can accept the destruction of well-liked supporting characters and not become too vitriolic, as with Dumbledore, but remove any of the heroic troika and you're tempting riots.

Talk of the Potter series being carried on by a different author is just that: talk. There is currently no evidence to support that such a practice will occur. Rowling holds the legal rights to the usage of Harry Potter, the supporting cast, Hogwarts and every other fictitious location in her novels. For any spin-off series to be published, it would require Rowling's permission and all indications point to her unwillingness to allow that.

Hypothetically speaking, however, any new "Harry Potter" books would almost certainly focus upon a new set of heroes/heroines, either an established minor character from the book or a completely new one. Appearances by Harry would be religated to cameos at best. The universe would be the same but it would likely have a watered down, "seen it all before" feeling to it.

It'd be like the "Joey" spin-off from "Friends".

I frankly wouldn't mind Harry dying. In fact, an interesting finish would be having Harry kill off "he which shall not be named" in go down in a blaze of glory.

Well, ok. A campfire of glory.

Thank you. I was wondering if anyone else noticed that little bit of "ownership." Unless, of course, she decides to sell those rights..

*snicker*

Right. Harry Potter is a cash cow for the woman--she wouldn't lose the rights.

But, since I'm not a fan of Harry Potter (I've only seen the first movie)--WAS the Philospher's Stone REALLY destroyed as mentioned it would be in the movie. Or was it hidden again? The Stone is the only way Voldemort could do any damage to Harry.

Remember--Rowling said she wrote the last chapter in 1990 or so, and what if she got the idea of how to end the series while writing the first book?

"Hey. They're searching for the Philosopher's Stone. I think I may be able to use that in the last book. Yeah....I'll let people think it's been destroyed, then turn around and bring it back in the last book."

Because here's my question:

If the stone could have been destroyed--why didn't they do it in the first place, instead of just guarding the thing?!

I fully expect Snape to die assisting Harry. I still don't buy that he's one of Voldermort's.

- WraithTwo -

Harry will KILL SNAPE out of revenge for Dumbledore and with his dying breath Snape will reveal that he loves Harry and harry will kill himself.

It'll be great.

I think the 2 people will be harry's parents...

Well given that Harry Potter's life so far has pretty much followed the plot of Star Wars (I'm still not convinced Voldemort isn't his dad), it means Voldemort (Darth Vader) and Yoda need to die. I'm not entirely sure who fits the Yoda bill though, probably Hagrid.

Maybe Rowling has realised that ripping off Star Wars is a little obvious, even for her target audience and she's decided to steal the end of FFX instead with Harry fading away into glowing blobs right at the end.

I don't know and frankly I don't really care too much. It would be nice to see her come up with an original idea somewhere in one of the books though. Maybe Harry should die and Voldemort could win. Also, I really want Neville to turn out to be the one that kills Voldemort and see Harry shunned by all his peers for being a self-important little turd.

Leknaat - The stone gets destroyed in the first book. Chapter 17, Dumbledore says "As for the stone, it has been destroyed."

There's another thing that irks me, why on earth was the US version of the book renamed to "The Sorceror's Stone"?

I need to get my sister in on this conversation lol. She's the harry potter nut of the family, I just read them. She LIVES them. Writes fanfic, collects anything and everything harry potter, I think once she might have even started making up an RP game with HP characters.

Clearly, it's because people in the United States are idiots who do not understand the word philosopher.

I would not disagree with that.

I'd love to see Ron and/or Hermione snuffed out by surprise just as they're about to confess their love for the other. Mostly to spite an ex-girlfriend of mine who was a digustingly huge H/R shipper (hey, at the end of the day I'm a simple creature), but also because it would pack a lot more punch than the previous death scenes in the series, one of which was more puzzling than depressing and the other of which was lackluster.

Oh, and if Hermy or Ron are killed off...I'm torn as to whether I'd want the other to die as well. I'm more a fan of "live a long, lonely, tortured life forever yearning for the one you lost" than I am of "together forever in peace." Still, it would be cool to see the other go for revenge and get swatted like a fly by Voldemort.

...Is it wrong that I'm thinking such cruel things about characters in a children's story?

Well, Harry Potter novels are shaping into a more mature atmosphere. She wrote it with an evolving sort of atmosphere. Gets darker as it treks along. From how it's hinted? I'd say maybe a Ron-Hermione death. Or Harry's girlfriend maybe. Maybe Ron & Harry's gal die and Hermione & Harry end up together. Lord knows. We'll see though. People will bawl. And I will laugh ;D

What? Kill Hermy! Man, she is so cool. I always thought that Harry and Hermy would make a better couple...

She's made it pretty clear she's writing these books for herself and millions of other people wanting a copy is just happy circumstance.

Bets are on Harry - it doesn't matter to me anyway. I read the sixth book and the only character I really liked died in that one. I'll read 7 just to finish the series, but I don't think it's going to end in a way that I like. I think that has more to do with the fact that I was about 14 when I started the series, though. Don't get me wrong - I like it and it's been enjoyable, but I feel she's overstepping her boundaries lately with the kind of literature she's trying to write. To start something off completely aimed at middle school kids and then try to bring it to the epic, dark, brooding apex she's headed for is just weird. It was never intended to be incredibly heavy or intellectually stimulating reading, and you can tell. It's not her forte.

Evil Undead Wizard Harry Potter.

This is never going to happen of course, but I can dream can't I? ;_;

But do they SHOW it being destroyed? That's my question. Seriously. if they could have destroyed it before, why didn't they? They just hid it, and wasn't it by accident that people learned that it still existed? (Maybe it's the fact I just re-read "DaVinci Code," or perhaps I've seen this plot device used too many times.)

Because "Philosopher's Stone" sounds more like a stone detailing certain philosophical debates. And since most kids in the target age-group probably wouldn't know the story behind the "Philosopher's Stone," it was changed to "Sorcerer" since that's what Harry is.

I think Lupin and Wormtail, since Wormtail ended up with that silver hand after he helped ressurect Voldemort at the end of book 4. It might be reading too much into it, but silver is always the kind of weapon thats used to kill werewolves.

And Snape. Snape needs to die. I'd like it a lot more if Snape is truly evil and isn't good pretending to be evil all these years. I'm sure thats what will happen, but I prefer an evil Snape to a good one.

It was changed because it was throught that no one in the United States would understand exactly what the Philosopher's Stone was.

And about the deaths.

I seriously doubt that the announcement has anything to do with Harry/Voldemort dying at the end. I has been obvious since the prophecy at the end of Order of the Phoenix that one of them would have to kill the other. Also, I do not believe that she is referring to the possible deaths of Ron and/or Hermione as well. If I recall correctly from the article, Rowling said that "two people die who I had not originally planned on." or something to that extent. She says she has had the ending of the final book written for fifteen years. If one of the very main characters, i.e. Harry/Ron/Hermione/voldemort, is to die at the end of the book, it would most likely have been planned from the very beginning and would not pertain to this situation.

I don't think it will be someone who is so essential to the storyline, either. I think people such as Snape or Hagrid are too close to the central storyline to just kill off without having it planned before hand.

If I would have to venture a guess, I would have to say it would be one of the well known, but less important characters.
-A member of the Order of the Phoenix (Tonks, Lupin?)
-A member of the Weasley family?
-Draco or another Malfoy? (Failing orders, letting down Voldemort)
-Peter Pettigrew (Dumbledore says that he is indebted to Harry because Harry saved his life.)

Double Post:
Wormtail's hand won't be used to kill Lupin. Rowling has already stated this on her website.

I'm not talking about him using the hand to kill Lupin, I just mean as a general sign that he may kill him. She may end up killing Wormtail and Lupin, completing the deaths of the Marauders.

Wormtail's death would not be considered 'shocking', as Pettigrew has already allied himself to Voldemort, and failed on several of his missions. Such a death would be rather predictable, and most likely celebrated.

Tonks is too insignificant a character in the entire canon for her death to have any large impact upon readers. Most people would say "Oh, that's a shame." Then they'd move on, same as they did with Cedric Diggory's death.

Lupin's death would be a little more interesting, but there's no reason for him to die; it wouldn't serve any compelling purpose in the established plot. Lupin is there as a colorful background character. His role is more active, but he's similar to Professors Flitwick and Sprout in that he adds padding and substance without detracting from a lot. Lupin's role was temporarily significant in the history between Snape and James Potter, but he, Lupin, is fairly unimportant to the final arc.

A Weasley's death would be more dramatic. Someone in this thread suggested that the twins would die, and that'd be something. But I have my doubts that any Weasley's death but Ron or Ginny would have actual bearing on the series' outcome. Ginny is altogether too innocent to really be seen as a good martyr. She does have a history with Voldemort (as Tom Riddle) however, so a precedent exists. Ron would be a better choice, a Mercutio to Harry's Romeo. Historically, Ron's been a bit of a coward and it'd be a characteristic, if not totally predictable, move for him to take a bullet for Harry, or even better, Hermoine. Nevertheless, I have a gut feeling that Ron is safe.

Draco or Lucius Malfoy? Possibly, but like Wormtail, those deaths would only elicit cheers. Not a way to stun readers. Besides, I think it'd be more satisfactory to have the entire Malfoy clan locked up in Azkaban and tormented for the rest of their lives.

An interesting possibility, now that I think of it, is Sirius Black. He fell victim to a rather nasty mirror in The Order of the Phoenix and his fate was never fully resolved. Harry's insistence that Black is still alive, somewhere, is a likely catalyst for a "surprise" reappearance by Black just in the nick of time. Black is a surprisingly popular guy and I can think of a few Potter fans I know who'd be saddened by his confirmed death. Sirius's death would tie up some loose ends.

I'd say it's a good bet that Snape will die. But it won't be at Voldemort's hands. Instead, I feel that Harry will confront and kill Snape, seeing as he's never fully trusted the guy. Harry's angsty turn to the dark side makes this even more likely. Sure, Snape will probably reveal a darned good reason why he had to kill Dumbledore, illustrating that it was somehow for the greater good. Harry will not believe Snape and Harry will not care.


And no, Voldemort will not be revealed as Harry's father. During seperate trips through the Pensieve, under Dumbledore's tutelage, it's been revealed that the histories of James Potter and Tom Riddle are exclusively their own.

The room that held the veil Sirius fell through was a execution chamber of sorts (Dumbledore alluded to this at some point, or perhaps the Pensieve). Blacks death is the one that dissappointed me the most out of all the death so far in the series, so I'd very much like him to reenter the series but I've pretty much accepted the fact we won't be seeing him again.
Rowling has confirmed (somewhere, I can't remember exactly where she mentioned it) that he was gone for good and we wouldn't be seeing him again, but as I said before, he was probably the character I like the most out of the series so far.

I'm interested in the way book 7 is going to play out though, since the usual format of Harry going elsewhere before school starts and the events that occur through out time at school won't play a role in the new one. And he has a lot of ground to cover hunting down horcruxes in the next book, so I imagine this last book is going to be very very long. (I hope)

The other thing I'm interested in is how Voldemort is going to be defeated. To be honest Harry going toe to toe against him in a duel should in no way lead to him beating him. He doesn't have the skill to beat Voldemort magic on magic, sure he's talented in the DADA, but theres no way that can make up for the disparity between the two. Dumbledore held his own against him, so I find it very hard to believe that Harry can improve enough over the school break and manage to take him down that way, as Harry is no Dumbledore.

Yeah. No one but us dumb Video Game and Anime geeks......

Or maybe some of us who paid attention in school......

What? There are Americans who know what the Philosopher's Stone is?!

We're shocking Britain, folks......

not to get off subject, but how do you make those .gif sigs with animation?

There's a grain of truth in that. It's hard to like Harry very much, hard to respect the Weasley children, and easy to despise Hermione. Snape, on the other hand, is something of an asshole, but he's a principled asshole for most of the series. I haven't read beyond the fifth book, and don't intend to, so for all I know, he could be the root of all evil right about now.

But see, because she said that they were deaths that had not been planned on from the beginning and they are people that she ahd not planned on killing when she started writing, it leads me to believe that they will not be major characters and that they will be deaths that have no real impact on the major story line.

If Sirius Black was to make a miraculous comeback and arise from the grave only to fall to death again, one would think that she would have planned such a twist from the beginning and it would not be someone dying that she had not anticipated on. I suppose she could have planned on him coming back and not on him dying during the battle at some point. It just seems rather pointless and cruel to have him comeback for a last minute reunion only to have him killed off once again.

While I agree that the deaths were probably thrown in for shocking dramatic value, I disagree that some of the people should be tossed out because they have lesser roles in the story. The Tonks/Lupin love interest at the end of Half-Blood Prince seemed rather rushed and pointless to me. Either it was added just because or it is to have so bearing on future parts of the story. While I wouldn't dismiss the possibility of killing Tonks, I agree that it would be rather stupid and I hope that they don't spend time on that.

I have always been a supporter of the innocence of Snape. While I do believe that there will a confrontation of sorts between Harry and Snape, I hope that Harry doesn't kill Snape. I would also assume that a death of Snape would also have been planned from the beginning.

From Prisoner of Azkaban, I believe, and the scene at Christmas with Professor Trelawney I had always believed that either Ron or Harry was going to die at the end and considering that Voldemort most likely will be defeated, that leaves Ron to die. This was probably just a red herring thrown in, though, considering the reliability of Trelawney's predictions and Dumbledore's death in the book. Again, I believe that Ron's death would also have been planned out.

Considering that she has these books mostly thought out, I would safely assume that the death that she is talking about here would be relativley insignificant characters who are killed off for shock value;A member of the Order of the Phoenix, a less important Weasley family member (Bill, Charlie, perhaps one of the parents, Percy or even Fleur.), Death Eaters (Bellatrix and Neville?).

I would put money on something happening at this wedding and that strongly disfavors all the Weasleys surviving.

I would be pissed if this were the case. If this was going to happen, I could see it happening perhaps as it did when Snape came across Sirius again, Harry having found out Snape is innocent, then Sirius arriving. As I said though, I think he's dead for good.

I think he's innocent too, the evidence points to it and I'm sure thats how it will eventually turn out (Something to do with Lily helping him turn), but I think it would be much more powerful if he had been true to Voldemort the entire time and been leading Dumbledore along the entire time till the right moment.

I thought the exact same thing when I got to the end of book 6 and read that the wedding was going to happen. It'd be the perfect point to see event similar to the times before the death of Harry's parents, when things like that happened and a constant sense of terror. If one of the Weasleys goes, I would be guessing if Rowling really wants to shock everyone she might kill Molly, I think that would blow everyone away and have more impact than any of the others.

But then, you would assume that the security for this thing would be crazy, I mean, the event will be a whos who of people that Voldemort and the Death Eaters want to kill, I would have thought they would have made it unplottable etc to prevent it from getting gate crashed by Death Eaters.