Someone told me Rowling said she might kill Harry so that no one will write another book after she dies. I know it sounds wierd, but Harry not only has to kill Voldemort, but also find and destroy like 6 horcuxes.
2006-07-23 08:56:43 · 22 answers · asked by iBrooke 4 in Arts & Humanities ➔ Books & Authors
Yes I do. Although Rowling hasn't admitted to whether she will be killing him off or not, she's always been adamant that she's writing seven books. With Harry being alive at the end of the seventh book, it gives fuel for someone to write another book... and face it, would even the most die-hard fan be able to capture the same magic she has? I hope that none of us can resurrect Harry.
2006-07-23 10:39:43 · answer #1 · answered by Rachel O 7 · 7⤊ 3⤋
It would be the traditionally literary thing for Rowling to do. Harry's mom's love for him is what saved him from Voldemort the first time, right? (Admittedly, I've only watched the movies, but I know people who have read the books). This would mean that love must conquer evil. It stands to reason that Harry's love for his friends (which is a running theme throughout all the books) is what will save them and conquer Voldemort...Plus it would make Harry a Christ-like figure, which is the traditionally literary thing to do. Lots of books and movies do this because sacrificing yourself is the ultimate sacrifice. Saying some spell would be taking the easy way out if you ask me. The best part about it would be that millions of kids all over the world would totally freak out if she killed off Harry. I think that would be awesome.
2006-07-23 16:08:19 · answer #2 · answered by elizabeth_ashley44 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It really could go either way. Killing off Harry not only maintains the realism of war, in that the good and the innocent can die, but it also prevents people ripping off the character years in the future, which is something JK Rowling is worried about. I do think that one of the trio is going to die otherwise it would be cavity-enducing otherwise.
2006-07-23 19:23:27 · answer #3 · answered by starchilde5 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Rowling can't build up all of this hype about a major character dying and not have it be Harry. Especially after the one that died in book 6 (I don't want to ruin it for those who haven't read it!), it would be a major letdown if Harry wasn't the one to die.
2006-07-23 16:30:19 · answer #4 · answered by EvilFairies 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If you are in possession of information that a crime is about to be committed, you are legally bound to tell the police. Do not keep this information about the Rowling person and his or her plans for Mr. Potter to yourself.
Call 9-1-1 immediately so that you don't put yourself in jeopardy.
2006-07-23 16:01:01 · answer #5 · answered by Goethe 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't know what will happen to Harry, but I love JK Rowling and I hope she will continue to write and start another series.
2006-07-23 16:00:10 · answer #6 · answered by Sue Chef 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I really don't know I would like to see Harry Potter live on because he is the star and really the hero of the story. Long live Harry Potter.
2006-07-23 20:20:35 · answer #7 · answered by busthead213 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yes, for the book to have a sound ending, Harry has to die. Possibly sacraficing himself to kill Voldemort
2006-07-23 15:58:52 · answer #8 · answered by crazy_airforce_guy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he will die when he kills Voldemort, because since V attacked him they seem to be linked in lots of ways to do with their powers - like the snake language and their wands. HP must die for V to die coz the last of V's strength is tied up in Harry.
2006-07-23 16:06:31 · answer #9 · answered by bertha 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think so. She would be burning a bridge she might wish to cross again. She may want to revisit Harry at some point in the future, and she needs to keep him alive for that.
2006-07-23 16:31:13 · answer #10 · answered by B J 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋