death of harry potter?

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".

Jam it back in, in the dark.

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.

There's nowhere I can't reach.