f13.net

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5119836.stm


Nothing startling, Rowling doing publicity interviews for paperback VI is all this came from.

But she does say 2 people die, it was going to be 3, but now it's 2.


IMHO - killing Harry would be the laziest imaginable ending - and I don't think he's one of the targets.

We need a poll!
Personally I am voting Ron, Hermione, or lastly Arthur Weasley (Ron's father) . Although I am surprised that more than 2 arent dying. If there is any sort of happy ending I would have expected the list of deaths to include those of Snape and the entire Malfoy family.

The author herself hints at who will be dying in this artcile- Interview (http://www.suntimes.com/output/entertainment/cst-nws-pot27.html)
In it she states:

Just as surprising the article states she is now the richest woman in Britain with a net worth of more than $1 billion (Source-Forbes. Wasnt this spot always held by the Queen previously?

Yeah but if she kills off Harry it'll have that whole The Matrix/Neo & Agent Smith symmetry to it. You know, Harry's the anomaly (he shouldn't have survived) but his existence allows for the "resurrection" of Voldemort, blah blah blah.

I agree with your thinking. I just think its to obvious an ending to be true.

Snape and Ron.

imo.

Possibly Ginny instead of Ron. But certainly a Weasly.

Hermione doesn't seem the dying sort, Neville has too good an epilogue to kill him off, Draco can't die as to keep the redemption storyline alive Snape would have to sacrifice himself for Draco, and none of the other kids are significant enough for anyone to give a crap if they were canned.

If you want a dark horse, Harry's Aunt Whats-her-name remains a loose end, and given the set up is all about how Harry has to get over all the angst to allow everyone else's love to save him I can't see this one being left hanging.


I rather assumed it's 2 from the important and good characters, I think there is still scope for any amount of death eaters, Dark Lords and general evil doer carnage, as well as plenty of collateral damage amougnst the neutrals and people we don't care about.

tbh, if this is the path she takes then it's more about bad plotting then about symmetry.

This reasoning would be vaild prior to book 6, but at this point we have specific, measurable, achieveable, relevant, and time-bound goals for the destruction of Voldemort, and unless Harry is a horcrux they don't involve Harry's death. No matter if Harry survives, no horcrux = no Voldemort.

If Harry is a horcrux then JK Rowling is dead to me.

Ah, I haven't read book 6 yet.

Unless she gets into some SERIOUSLY convoluted plot twists, there is no way harry could POSSIBLY be a Horcrux.  They were all made before Voldemort began his rise to power.  The very fact that Harry was the unexpected event that lead to his failure somewhat rules out Harry as also being part of his guaranteed imortality.  Remember, Harry was the event that caused him to have to resort to his Horcrux fallback plan in the first place.

I agree with you on the Weasley, which is why I said Ron or his father. However, I dont agree with your guess of Snape. Not to say Snape wont die to avenge the death of Dumbledore, but from her quote you can see she is obviously talking about two of the good main characters. Snape doesnt fall into that group.

It's a while since I read VI, but my interpretation was that the last horcrux was created at Godric's Hollow by murdering Harry's parents.


Then RUN AWAY! RUN AWAY! Get out of this thread! Before we go spoilerific. VI changes too much to have a meaningful discussion.


You absolutely certain of that?

Or do you just not consider him 'main' enough?

Snape's final scene with Harry puts him in the good and probably main character list until proven otherwise imo.

It's okay I already know the main spoiler which is why I haven't read the book yet (I get too depressed reading about favorite main characters dying).

She should have killed Richard and Judy with her own, pointy fingers.  That would have been a wonderful ending and saved a books worth of tree.

I hate Richard and Judy.

But at least Judy gets her norks out publically.

When have YOU ever done that for us ?

Oh, I consider him main. I just dont consider him good. He killed Dumbledore.

Not to mention in his final scene with Harry...the only reason he doesnt kill Harry is that Voldemort forbid it, wanting to do the job himself.

Trouble is, for your statement to work, you'd had better be real sure that he did what you think he did for the reasons you think them.

And that's by no means certain.

A few years ago, I bought the first three books on a whim.  Never got around to reading them, or seeing any of the movies.

This thread kind of makes me glad for that.

Everyone posting in this thread other than Kenrick: if you see me approaching with an automatic rifle, please don't make me run after you.

My guess:

Padme and Mace Windu.

Snape will go out like a bitch.

Harry's parents.

The people who should really be shot for this? The idiots who put this on the news as if it was actually NEWS.

BBC.

Slow news day over here mate, unless you're an England fan.

http://www.nypost.com/news/nationalnews/spidey_unmasked_nationalnews_dareh_gregorian.htm

Yeah, them too.

My guess is that there are only 3 really important main characters: Harry, Ron and Hermione.

I suspect at least one of the "Big 3" will bite it in the end of the series. I'm guessing either Harry or Ron since JK has said she is basically Hermione. (Though if she kills her, expect to see her getting psychoanalyzed by shrinks on the internet.)

Out of the rest of the cast, I'm not sure. Maybe Neville or Hagrid.

I also hold out hope that Draco Malfoy will redeem himself and that Harry will get to kill Snape personally.

I don't think you've spotted what Snape is actually doing in that scene. It has nothing to do with people not killing Harry.

Of course I could always be reading way too much into stuff.


Draco's and Snape's redemption is pretty much nailed on imo, aside from Snape's exit you have the fact that the Sorting Hat came right out and said that Slytherins will be required to defeat Voldemort (book five?).

Okay so what is it you think he is doing? Because all I read was him shaking in rage and doing his best not to kill Harry because Voldemort would squash him.

He was teaching Harry what he needed to do to win.

1) Don't fight evil with evil 'No unforgivable curses for you'.
2) Don't try to do it alone 'Your father would only fight me 4 on 1'.
3) Listen to what I was telling you all year 'Blocked, and blocked again until you learn to close your mind and keep your mouth shut'.

This is Snape remember, the above is the most pleasant way he's ever taught Harry in 6 books. Also the refrain about Snape not being a coward is probably important.

As I said - I may be reading too much into this. But I don't think so.

The scene where Snape kills Dumbledore also has too many clues, as do all the precursors Dumbledore gives us about death being the next big adventure, and not that big a deal, and how one of Voldemort's weaknesses is that he doesn't understand that; then we have the scene where Dumbledore and Snape are seen arguing in the distance. It's pretty clear that Dumbledore had told Snape that if push came to shove he had to kill Dumbledore to maintain his cover.

Rowling doesn't waste Snape or Dumbledore dialogue, it almost always means something. And they almost never say anything that is flat out wrong - often misleading but almost never incorrect.

What he said.

Well its certainly an interesting analysis and it will be fun to see if it proves accurate. I admit I hadnt viewed in that way.

My impression is that Snape asked, and received, permission from Dumbledore in those last minutes to kill him.  Both of them could read minds, and there's every reason to think they had opportunity for a quick chat before the deed was done.  If he hadn't done it, Snape was dead - he'd given his oath, so at this point one of them had to die.  There is also the matter of protecting Draco; by Snape doing the deed, Draco didn't, which has at least held onto a shred of his innocence.  The last big clue is that Dumbledore was well aware of the curse of the dark arts post, and had to know that by allowing Snape to take the position, that would be the end of him with the school.  Dumbledore made light of it ("I've had a hard time keeping people there..." or some such), but he routinely did so when he wanted to keep the depth of them from others. 

Either way, I think Snape will certainly be key to the downfall of Voldemort.  Him leaving the castle are somehow a requirement of that end, whether he means it to be or not.  I'm not certain, but very nearly so, that he's still on Harry's side (or at least, against Voldemort). 

As for who dies, I think at least one of the three main kids will go.  I hope it isn't Harry - a better ending would be where he lives, but as a not-quite Hero who has suffered terrible loss.  No black ending for him, but no happily ever after either.  Death is too tidy and empty, and I think Rawling is better than that.

Everyone loves a necroposter, right?

'tis so obvious that Snape is a good guy that I thought some of you were joking when you didn't think that.

Dumbledore's comments to Draco about mercy (this and his action to make Harry immobile rather than defend himself are the most telling); Dumbledore's genuine pleading to Snape to which Snape responds by killing him (with 'an expression of real hate on his face' -  ie: to what he had to do / to Voldemort / to himself); Snape's outburst at Harry "No, Potter!" is still in the role of teacher and as other said his words provide instruction; Snape's furious response to being called a coward; Hagrid's comments when Harry tells him Snape killed Dumbledore that it's not true and was probably just an act because Snape needed to keep his cover; etc, etc. It is obvious that Snape killed Dumbledore because the situation was untenable; Snape's cover needed protecting, Draco needed protecting, Harry needed protecting... and Dumbledore was always the wise, caring, teacher role, so a sacrifice is most in keeping with his character.

It's not a problem knowing all this, the series has always been straightforward in general areas and the 'clues' are written in to push that along. The only surprising thing I've found in the series is when Cedric died - it actually shocked me. Apart from that it's stardard predictable fantasy fare.

Cedric was asking for it. 

You get into a narrative flow and try to be that good.  You'll be stone cold before the end of the chapter.

:)

He was a red shirt.

Ensign Lebowitz!

"Re: Rowling unashamed shilling - 2 characters to die in Potter VII"

Too few, too late.  I never really understood the fascination with this series... especially by adults.

It's fun to read.  That's pretty much it.

I found the first one to be cheerful, funny and nice and short. Then once you get tied to a series I just have to finish it, even if I feel that the quality has not been sustained. I do think she's done a good job with Harry though, his unattractivness especially.

Only real thing I think she got wrong is that she held off the main storyline for too long, not dropping enough plot points in books 1-4, then had to go hell for leather through 5 and 6, and they came out a little forced as a result.

Also, apparition. I worry about apparition. It has all the hallmarks of laying down a lame ass plot device deployable at a moments's notice to save the hero in an utterly lame manner. What's worse, it hasn't served any purpose yet.