Don't you think it would be a bit of a let down if Harry was killed by the Deatheaters?

I mean he's already escaped from Voldemorte about 4 times. Surely he couldn't be killed just after he has distroyed the ultimate baddy just by one of the ultimate baddies followers?

I think either Harry will kill Voldemorte and live or Harry will kill Voldemorte but will have to knowingly sacrifice himself to do it.

_________________

I've been confused about the Unbreakable Vow....I found this at a great site www.dumbledoreisnotdead.com :

[this site is dedicated whether or not Dumbledore is dead which is why they're looking at from the point of view of "if Snape didn't kill Dumbledore than why isn't he dead"...]

"If Snape Didn't Fulfill The Unbreakable Vow, Why Isn't He Dead?

There are three unanswered aspects to this question.

First, do unbreakable vows have a time limit? It's unlikely they do, because you'd think it would have to be stated when the vow was made, and no such time limit was set.

But if they don't have time limits, then it's sort of hard to enforce an unbreakable vow, isn't?

"Hey! You didn't fulfill your promise! You're dead!" "No wait! I just haven't gotten around to it, you can't kill me yet!"

Second, I believe if you re-read all of Chapter 2, you will see that the exact details of Draco's task are never spoken outloud in that scene, we only learn of the details later.

If the exact nature of what Snape's promising to do are not spoken exactly, but possibly only an understanding between the parties, what promise is he held to, exactly? Can he be held to details of a vow that weren't expressly stated? Am I watching too many lawyer shows on TV?
One of Draco's main tasks was to fix the vanishing cabinet so he could sneak his Death Eater pals into Hogwarts. Perhaps that's what Snape vowed to help with, and in that case, Draco suceeeded, so Snape's off the hook.

Third, this unanswerable question is based on the assumption that Dumbledore isn't really dead, so Snape didn't kill him, so he didn't fulfill the vow.

But what if the person you made the vow with thinks you fulfilled it? The world, including Narcissa and Bellatrix (and you, possibly, up until you read this site! thinks that Dumbledore is dead. So does that fulfill Snapes vow?

This one is possibly unanswerable until we can either dig out some more clues buried elsewhere in the book, or possibly we won't know until book 7."

[this is me not the site]I do think that dumbledore is dead...though the site is very persuasive if you read all the evidence...I found this the most interesting:[/me]

"The Flying Avada Kedavra

As soon as I read the description of exactly what happened the moment that Snape killed Dumbledore, little red flags were popping up in my brain, but I didn't pay attention to them at first. This was actually the very first clue that alerted me to this whole thing.

Every other time we've seen the Avada Kedavra performed, the victim simply falls over dead:





However, in Half-Blood Prince, when Snape curses Dumbledore with the same spell, Dumbledore violently flies up and away from the tower:



Why would this application of the Avada Kedavra be so different from every other time we've seen it?

Perhaps his spell was different because even though those were the words Snape said, he didn't perform the killing curse at all. Remember all the importance this book gave to "nonverbal" spells? Perhaps Snape said Avada Kedavra, but the curse he was really thinking, the nonverbal one, was a different curse, one that only made it appear that Dumbledore was dead.

In Order of the Phoenix, we learn something interesting and important when Harry tries to curse Bellatrix:



If Snape was really working on Dumbledore's orders to make it look to the world as if Snape had killed him, even if he had used the real Avada Kedavra, if he had not really meant it, if he really didn't want to kill Dumbledore, then isn't possible that the curse didn't kill Dumbledore, but only injured him badly?"

[this is me not the site]I really love that last bit about having to mean it when you use the Avada Kedavra curse. It really makes me think that either Snape is evil or Dumbledore isn't dead...but then that doesn't make sense to me because I believe that Snape is good and Dumbledore is dead

_________________
Proud Member of the The Evilishy Nazgûl Alliance for World Domination
{Beri}

*pause*







*long pause*





*applauds the maker of the site* BRAVO!

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

I think Snape killed Dumbledore, and that Dumbledore is dead. That hasn't changed.
I think that the unbreakable vows, being something magic, wouldn't have a time limit, nor do they allow the other person to kill you if you don't fulfill the vow. Doesn't the vow itsself kill you ... (or have I misread something?) I think it would all be determined to do with opportunity and what you think... if the vow is a magical force, perhaps it knows when it has been broken. Like a lot of magical things in Harry Potter, it can be argued out - but, I think it doesn't change that Dumbledore is dead. We "saw" him die - and burn. He's gone.

I think the reaction to the Avade Kedavra curse is to do with Dumbledore's own immense power, and perhaps Snape's emotion to the situation, and maybe even the vow as well, but I'd be more likely to put it down to Dumbledore's power. There is another Avada Kedavra curse in the books that does also have a different reaction. The one Voldemort performed on Harry. So obviously the curse can be affected by other magic... situational factors. I don't think it's surprising that Dumbledore didn't go out like everyone else we've seen die. He's the type to go out with a bang, and it may just have been Rowling's way to have him die "dramatically."

Which side Snape has aligned himself still remains to be seen. We don't know for sure anything yet... and I guess the terms of the vow have to be included in that. I think Snape could kill someone even if he didn't want to, if he made himself. I think his curse killed Dumbledore UNLESS some of Dumbledore's own magic intervined. Either way, he's still dead, so if that was the content of the vow, I think Snape could claim it fulfilled. (I think the vow contents were clear to both parties, as they were both away of what Malfoy's task was.) Hence Snape's still alive and kicking.

Interesting site, all the same. I'm not saying they're wrong, but I do think that people have to learn to accept death. It's irreversable, and that is a commen theme found in a lot of literature - I think because of it's relivence to our lives. I don't think, therefore, that coming up with theories as to why characters could be still alive is the most productive... so my personal beliefs are influencing me here. Anyway, speculation is always fun...


I remember reading in an interview with JK Rowling prior to the release of the fourth book that she may consider writing an eighth book if she really wanted to somewhere down the track. I don't think she's planning on doing that now at all, and I don't think she was planning on it then, but I think it may indicate that perhaps Harry does survive the seventh. I don't think she said it merely to put people off track, as no one had died at that stage... just an idea. And author's ideas can change over time...

Enough arguments for tonight, methinks.

_________________
<center>i love
doctor who

support Arwen!
[+~^$#?]</center>

This subject actually makes me REALLY angry. I don't think Harry will die at all, and when people argue with me, saying "Well, he HAS to if it will be a true and proper tragedy" but who says JK Rowling means for it to be a true tragedy. The majority of the people in the world don't even know what makes up a true tragedy, having never read Aristotle. There are no concrete hints pointing toward Harry's death in HBP, or in any of the other books...and Jo has a large and rather young (generally) fan base to satisfy, who won't understand anything about catharticism and will be devastated if Harry dies. I don't presume to know what Jo will do, and there is always the possibility, but I can't believe that she would kill off Harry...that would be too dark, somehow.

As for the similarities between LotR and HP, I won't even go into that. I've had my rant, and I'm done for now...

_________________
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v102/ladylembas/edmundban.png" alt="Image hosted by Photobucket.com">
<img src="http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v102/ladylembas/christianban.png">

I, too, agree with Herenya. Though the facts seem to be there --- I really don't think JK Rowling would write that heartfelt realizationg for Harry at the end if it wasn't. Unless she's just pure evil which I doubt it.

I've always accepted that Sirius is gone, and that Dumbledore, too, is gone. And it's good because now Harry is put into the position where he has to face Voldemort one final time without recklessly going in to it and half expects to get out of it unscathed. [Or maybe he will go in recklessly again, who knows].

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

Ah ha ha ha ha! But Ash - I mean Larien, don't you remember what Aristotle or Plato (one of the two - you can see how much attention I paid in class) that nothing is good unless it's a tragedy Ha ha ha! Okay. Anyways . . . kinda along the lines of what Kitoky said that she's always excepted Sirius' death, so have I. I was in complete and utter shock (not just because he's my favourite character . . .) and I didn't want to believe it . . . but it happened and there's nothing that can be done. And IN OOTP, lots of people were saying how dark it was . . . yada yada yada . . . too much death . . . but I think that through Harry's death, a stronger message can be seen rather than him just killing off the bad guy and winning and living a good long life. I think through sacrifice and an understanding of that sacrifice a message of sorts can be more easily seen and understood. And I think that if it happens (I'm not sying it will, for all I know, Hermione could jump out of nowhere, kill Voldemort and get killed in the process . . . or Ron or Neville or Draco or Crabbe or Lavender or Trewlawney) we will all understand why it happened. We may be all depressed and want to jump off a bridge when everyone dies, but at least there will be that cathartic moment when we feel real emotion.

Whoa.

Okay. Maybe went a little TOO deep. And it doesn't make anysense anyways, so that doesn't help. Okay . . . *runs away and ties hands as so not to type anymore incomprehensible stuff*

_________________
"So what? So plenty!"


Sig: Teh Nurr

I've met Eru & Eä & Ellie & teh Arweb & Naur & Elenya & POTR!

POLKA WILL NEVER DIE!

♥

Deep is always good, Montana ^.^ And thank you for the link. It's most appreciated!


It's obvious now that JK Rowling has set up her series with the intent of a children's book at the beginning while Harry was still young but now it's evolving into a much more adult reading with all the dark deaths and etc.

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

I would say so too, but in the interview she gave on July 16 to Emerson of www.mugglenet.com and Melissa of www.the-leaky-cauldron.org she said that people's comments on the books becoming darker suprised her, and that she saw the first few books as just as "dark." She thought that there were just as many disturbing images (Voldemort popping out of the back of Quirrel's head) in the first book as in the later ones. I would agree with you though, Kit, the books are getting darker. Or perhaps more mature is the right word.

Hmmm, yes mature seems more right. Maybe it's because Rowling doesn't read her books twice.

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

But perhaps how she mentally imagines the books hasn't changed... not all of what she would imagine - "see" - would go in the books, but it would influence how she views it.

Also, since they are her books, she probably has different perception on them... she's in control, so perhaps things don't "scare" her the way it may readers because she knows where it's all going.

I think mature is the right word. And deeper... and I think that that's because Harry is growing up. He's becoming more mature... and dare I say wiser?

_________________
<center>i love
doctor who

support Arwen!
[+~^$#?]</center>

From what we've seen in this last, book, yes I'd say wiser. But who knows. He might recklessly run into the field of danger.


People keep saying how Ginny's going to go with Harry on his journey but I don't really want that. Personally. I mean, it's always been Ron, Harry, and Hermione ever since the beginning and I think it'd have a special touch if it ended that way.

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

That's exactly how I feel, and so I was happy when he broke it off with Ginny. I think that they'll get together again afterwards (if neither of them die) but the 7th will (hopefully) just be Ron, Harry, and Hermione

_________________
Proud Member of the The Evilishy Nazgûl Alliance for World Domination
{Beri}

I agree about Harry getting back together with Ginny after ze book. I just don't want to read them...snogging. It's just....I can't picture it at all, but it's so weird.

_________________
<center>

THE HALLOWFEST 2010
<a href="http://www.arwen-undomiel.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=20958">information here</a>

</center>

Heeh, I agree, I heard enough about snogging in HBP. Was all the makeout talk in HBP a little weird to anyone else? I'm not naive (sp??) people kiss, its talked about a lot in other novels, but to me it didn't really seem to fit very well in HBP. A little bit woudl have been okay, but I felt it was a little excessive.

As for Ginny going with Harry, I hope it will be just Ron and Hermione with him. Remember, Ginny's also a year younger than them. Whatever happens, I am pretty confindent in saying that Ginny will get back together with Harry after he kills Voldemort. (that is if Harry survives it)

Ha ha ha! Jenny, Kitoky, I SO agree. The snogging in this book was a little over the top, but I think that may have been the point (in Ron's case). It was definately a bit strange reading Harry and Ginny snogging, but oh well. And about it being Ron/Harry/Hermoine at the end, I agree again! I mean, as much as I like Ginny and the others, like you said, it always has been H/R/H and I think it should stay that way. Hmmm. Maybe Ron and Hermoine will get killed defending Harry and then Harry will be overcome with grief and then commit suicide. OR it may be the other way around. Hmmm. I'm a little morbid. And TOTALLY off topic!

_________________
"So what? So plenty!"


Sig: Teh Nurr

I've met Eru & Eä & Ellie & teh Arweb & Naur & Elenya & POTR!

POLKA WILL NEVER DIE!

♥