Rowling to kill off Harry?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

What if Snape turns out to be a true double agent for Voldemort? Would his death still give rise to mourning?

[Gertrude]

Not possible. He's good, end of story.

Next.

[Mich]

Not possible. He's good, end of story.

Next.

[Filippa Eilhart]

actually, gertrude, i think it would be so much more interesting if he died and left everyone in doubt.

[Vagrancy]

Lyanna: Kudos to you. Very well-argued.

My theory is that Harry is the final Horcrux, so gets himself killed (or kills himself) so Voldemort can die.

Yeah, I've a bad feeling this might happen too. I'm sappy and I really don't want Harry to die, but what with all the hints that he and Voldemort being so intertwined with one another, it seems all the signs are pointing down this way. As for the other deaths, I'm willing to wager Snape is gonna bite it, and probably in a tragically redeemed way too. Some Weasleys are going to die too, and I have a horrible feeling that Fred and George may be the two 'unexpected' deaths that JK was talking about. I think Ron and Hermione are safe, and I think Ginny is too. Neville may do that whole 'belated blaze of glory' thing and die too, which would make me sob awfully. I have a feeling this is not gonna turn out to be a happy book.

[Bronn Stone]

You're kidding me, right? I don't have that much time, but Dumbledore is an idiot in Sorcerer's Stone.

--Dumbledore stores most precious object in the world in Hogwarts.

--Evil killer dark lord of doom wants said precious object.

--Hogwarts is the only wizarding school in Britain.

--Therefore, Hogwarts is the future of the UK wizarding community.

--It would really suck if dark lord came and murdered all those kids, wouldn't it?

--Well, at least the precious object is guarded fairly decently.

--Oh, wait.

--A three-headed dog. Luckily for Dumbledore and company, the killing curse hasn't been introduced into the plot yet.

--A plant that slowly strangles you to death if you sit on it too long. Big pointy spikes might have been a bit more effective.

--A chess set. A fucking chess set.

--A key that's flying around a room, WITH the necessary means to get to it. It doesn't even matter that "accio" hasn't been introduced to the plot yet, this is just retarded.

--A magic fire that can only be safely traversed if one has the right potion. And there's a riddle right there telling you how to get said potion. Look, Dumbledore, you don't leave out the antidote. You can leave the riddle if you want, but then what you do is fill every goddamn bottle with poison.

Dumbledore is retarded.

You presume that the point of the traps is to protect the Philosopher's Stone.

You are dealing in a world of magic where there are true prophecies. I hate to disagree with Lyanna on any matter HP, but I think the reason that Dumbledore does what he does is that he knows EXACTLY what is going to happen up to a certain point. He knows that whether Hogwarts survives or not will depend on Harry overcoming Voldemort. He probably also knows that the final showdown will be when Harry is 17. The traps were not intended to protect the Stone - Harry was going to do that. But Harry must believe it is real and must believe he is in danger when Dumbledore knows he is not. They are traps designed so that a trio of sharp eleven year-olds can overcome them. Because those eleven year-olds will someday be the key that brings down Voldemort.

Voldemort is consistently written. He gathers power of all sorts but is blind to what Dumbledore (who knows an AWFUL lot about magic) claims is a power even greater - the power of love. It is a power that Voldemort underestimated when he tried to kill Harry as a child and continues to underestimate. I am hoping we will understand better after the final book.

I personally think that the reason Dumbledore said he trusted Snape is that he knew exactly when Snape would betray him. If I know that you will turn and betray me in November it means that I can trust you in September. It also fits in perfectly with the reasons he doesn't smack down Malfoy in Malfoy's feeble attempts to kill him. I am guessing (and I think it well supported in the text) that the reason Dumbledore doesn't fight back against Snape is that he (and the Dark Lord) know that it is important for some as yet unrevealed reason for Draco and not Severus or some other adult Death Eater to kill him.

BTW, I apply the same logic to Rhaegar and Lyanna. Rhaegar has read a prophecy, in a world where real prophecy CAN happen, and knows that certain things must be in place to save Westeros from the Others. And until we see what was in the book Rhaegar read, we can't really judge whether it was right or wrong for him to run off with Lyanna or move slowly to remove Aerys from the throne or meet his death on the Trident.

[Mercury Poisoning]

You are dealing in a world of magic where there are true prophecies. I hate to disagree with Lyanna on any matter HP, but I think the reason that Dumbledore does what he does is that he knows EXACTLY what is going to happen up to a certain point. He knows that whether Hogwarts survives or not will depend on Harry overcoming Voldemort. He probably also knows that the final showdown will be when Harry is 17. The traps were not intended to protect the Stone - Harry was going to do that. But Harry must believe it is real and must believe he is in danger when Dumbledore knows he is not. They are traps designed so that a trio of sharp eleven year-olds can overcome them. Because those eleven year-olds will someday be the key that brings down Voldemort.

*snip*

I personally think that the reason Dumbledore said he trusted Snape is that he knew exactly when Snape would betray him. If I know that you will turn and betray me in November it means that I can trust you in September. It also fits in perfectly with the reasons he doesn't smack down Malfoy in Malfoy's feeble attempts to kill him. I am guessing (and I think it well supported in the text) that the reason Dumbledore doesn't fight back against Snape is that he (and the Dark Lord) know that it is important for some as yet unrevealed reason for Draco and not Severus or some other adult Death Eater to kill him.

If Dumbledore knew what was going to happen ahead of time, all he had to do was kill Quirrel himself. I find it hard to believe that the all-mighty Dumbledore couldn't take him.

Voldemort is consistently written. He gathers power of all sorts but is blind to what Dumbledore (who knows an AWFUL lot about magic) claims is a power even greater - the power of love. It is a power that Voldemort underestimated when he tried to kill Harry as a child and continues to underestimate. I am hoping we will understand better after the final book.

That's another thing--Voldemort sucks. Anybody who has the power to kill someone with a a couple of words and a stick should be able to conquer England in a matter of a few weeks, and get some better enforcers while he's at it. Instead, he's managed to kill about half a dozen wizards in two years.

[Bronn Stone]

If Dumbledore knew what was going to happen ahead of time, all he had to do was kill Quirrel himself. I find it hard to believe that the all-mighty Dumbledore couldn't take him.

Yes Dumbledore could have killed Quirrell. But that would not have helped Harry grow into what Harry needs to be. And since that is the key to the path of victory that Dumbledore has foreseen, he has every reason to follow it. The path Rowling is having the characters follow makes a lot more sense given the setup than the path you describe does.

That's another thing--Voldemort sucks. Anybody who has the power to kill someone with a a couple of words and a stick should be able to conquer England in a matter of a few weeks, and get some better enforcers while he's at it. Instead, he's managed to kill about half a dozen wizards in two years.

Voldemort is at far less than full strength. Revealing himself with such overt acts would have brought the wrath of Dumbledore down on him. Lying low was the best strategy for him. Every day he is getting stronger and now his minions have removed the only wizard he was ever known to fear. We also don't really know if Avada Kevadra has any deleterious effect on the caster. But I'd be surprised if one could crank out a few hundred of them and still be ready to sit down and have tea and scones.

Now for reasons only he knows, he wanted Draco and not one of his other cronies to kill Albus. We will find out just how much Draco's refusal will cost Voldemort's plan in the final novel.

[SonOfJaqen]

I'm sappy and I really don't want Harry to die, but what with all the hints that he and Voldemort being so intertwined with one another, it seems all the signs are pointing down this way.

Definitely the signs are pointing to Harry's death - HOWEVER - this is completely inline with building suspense. If Harry seemed invulnerable, it would trash a major feel to the book. She needs to create the sense that Harry could die and will die so that when he escapes death it will be thrilling.

-SoJ

[Mallory]

Announcing that a main character will die brings more publicity and debates like so. Keeps people entertained while she's still writing the finale

okay but i still do not like it. She's already so famous and this is the very very last book! everyone is going to read it no matter if she tells us or not. At this point, if she had not said anything, it might genereate just as much publicity!

[davos]

Not possible. He's good, end of story.

Next.

Sorry. He's not. I've read a number of explanations that try to find a rationale that proves his actions are good. I've not been able to buy any of them. You don't kill someone, especially Dumbledore, without being bad. Nothing else makes sense.

Most Snape is really good theories are centered around Snape's killing of Dumbledore being an arrangement made between the 2 of them to further some greater plan. Persumably this plan would, when carried forward, allow Harry, with the aid of Snape and others to finally and perminately defeat Voldemort (for Dumbledore to plan on sacrficing himself, the gains for doing so would have to be very great indeed). I have several problems with this. One, the series in ultimately Harry's coming of age story. The purpose of the death of the mentor is to force the protagonist to come into his own. To this point Harry has both been under Dumbledore's protection and direction. For him to take his place in the world he needs to finish the story without Dumbledore. For Albus to have in the works such a long range plan that involved his death, a triple agent, the ability to predict to some degree the circumstnaces of his death, and how would give an opportunity to win the war with Voldemort. If this is the case then even in the last book Dumbledore would not truely be gone but would instead be still guiding the actions Harry and others through whatever his plan would be. Dumbledore's death would be robed of its significance and the story would not truely be Harry's.

Furthermore, we have spent much of book 6 seeing that Dumbledore is far from infalliable. While brave and wise he makes mistakes, misjudges people, and is generally, while certainly of the highest quality, still very human. If he has been able to lay down long range plans such as would be the case with most of the Snape is good senarios, then this character development in the last book would overturned. To make such plans work Albus would almost have to be supercompitent with a profound ability to acurately judge how people would act. Which doesn't make sense in the light of the rest of book 6.

So I can not buy that dumbledore planned his own death with Snape, or at least planned for a contingency that Snape would have to kill him to be able to continue his plans. Which means that Snape was not acting under Dumbledore's orders when he murders the man who had been protecting him all those years. Which makes Snape pretty damned evil. Maybe not purely evil and maybe not a creature of Voldemort's (Snape could easily have his own agenda) but still not one of the white hats.

I have other reasons for believing this but those are the most significant. I could of course, be wrong, but I don't see a senario that explains Snape's actions sufficiently and also makes sense with the direction of the story. JKR may prove me wrong but I at this point don't see a way it could be made to work effectively.

[Xray the Enforcer]

http://www.dumbledoreisnotdead.com/

[Lint]

Although Harry isn't my favorite character in the series, I would be very, very upset if she did kill him off.

I sort of doubt she will because I don't feel that Potter's story is meant to end with his death. He's hardly had a chance to live like a normal kid with all the business of Voldemort and the Dursleys. It would be a cruel injustice to have his life plagued by Voldemort and then to die by him.

I wouldn't mind if Snape was one of the characters to die. I don't really buy into him being a good guy anyway. There would have to be some seriously great story or reason behind his actions to redeem him in my eyes.

[Besselfunction]

Well, IF Snape and Dumbledore swore an unbreakable vow that Snape has to do anything in order to be able to protect Harry in the end, you could be wrong, davos. Snape`s situation was the following: either refuse to kill Dumbledore (which would have uncovered his alliance with Dumbledore) and by this destroying the possibility to be close to Harry when he faces Voldemort. Alternatively he kills Dumbledore without hesitation and maintains this option, which, in the end, could be the deciding factor in the final fight between Voldemort and Harry. Because lets face it: Harry won't stand a chance in a fair fight against Voldemort. If he, despite all odds, defeats Voldemort in single combat without help, this will be much more cheesy and unrealistic than Snape being a turncloak and interfering in some way.

And concerning "Harry=Horocrux":

I dont think Harry will be one of the seven Horocruxes. But what I believe is that as long as Harry lives, there will still be a part of Voldemort left. The ending I would like best is the one where Harry manages to kill Voldemort, gets back to Hogwarts and is healed at the infirmary. There Ron&Hermione realize that Voldemore managed to survive by transfering a part of him to Harry who takes control of poor Harry and starts killing little first-grades. Thus, they see no other possibilty than to kill Harry.

[Mich]

So I can not buy that dumbledore planned his own death with Snape, or at least planned for a contingency that Snape would have to kill him to be able to continue his plans. Which means that Snape was not acting under Dumbledore's orders when he murders the man who had been protecting him all those years. Which makes Snape pretty damned evil. Maybe not purely evil and maybe not a creature of Voldemort's (Snape could easily have his own agenda) but still not one of the white hats.

Snape tells Dumbledore about the unbreakable vow he made with Narcissa. Dumbledore tells Snape he will honour it, Snape refuses. They argue over it (hence the rumour that they weren't getting along), Dumbledore wins the argument. When the time comes it saves Draco and something was already wrong with Dumbledore who may have been dying anyways so no big loss

Snape is GOOD darnnit!

[Bronn Stone]

And concerning "Harry=Horocrux":

I dont think Harry will be one of the seven Horocruxes. But what I believe is that as long as Harry lives, there will still be a part of Voldemort left. The ending I would like best is the one where Harry manages to kill Voldemort, gets back to Hogwarts and is healed at the infirmary. There Ron&Hermione realize that Voldemore managed to survive by transfering a part of him to Harry who takes control of poor Harry and starts killing little first-grades. Thus, they see no other possibilty than to kill Harry.

I hope you never write books for children.....

[Merentha]

actually, gertrude, i think it would be so much more interesting if he died and left everyone in doubt.

[felice]

You don't kill someone, especially Dumbledore, without being bad.

I could argue that Dumbledore deserves to die, for being so stupid and secretive, but that's beside the point.

Most Snape is really good theories are centered around Snape's killing of Dumbledore being an arrangement made between the 2 of them to further some greater plan.

I don't think it was an advance plan; I think there was a telepathic conversation at the time of the confrontation in which Dumbledore convinced Snape that it wasn't worth blowing his cover to save him. Quite possibly Dumbledore was already dying from the potion, so Snape would have been showing his hand for nothing.

One, the series in ultimately Harry's coming of age story... For him to take his place in the world he needs to finish the story without Dumbledore.

Is it? Maybe, but Rowling could easily disagree with you about that and/or what it requires.

[Altherion]

Snape is GOOD darnnit!

Not really. The most you can say is that he's not a traitor. The murder of Dumbledore aside, he's still a rather nasty creature based on everything else we know about him. He may not be serving Voldemort, but he's still not good.

[Gertrude]

What about the possibilitiy that the part of Voldemort that Harry carries with his is extinguished when Voldemort dies. Could it turn out that that part of V was what gave him his powers and my removing it, his powers go with it? He doesn't die, but is 'burned out', to borrow another's terminology. Just thinking out loud here.

And Snape IS good. Don't give me logic and theory. I WANT him to be good, therefore he is.