Why should the potions represent the Weasley children, amd why should those particular potions represent those particular children? Just because there’s 7 of one and 7 of the other? It makes no sense.
I’m marking it down, all right. Marking it down in my blog entry on “really stupid things people are speculating about the last Harry Potter book.”
If Snape wasn’t acting on Dumbledore’s orders when he killed Dumbledore, then Dumbledore was wrong to trust him. It may seem a minor point, but Dumbledore was shown to have essentially perfect judgment. So if Snape really was evil, Dumbledore was flawed.
My guess is that Snape will somehow prove to HP that he was in fact acting on Dumbledore’s orders and Snape was on the side of the angels the whole time. I’m not sure how he’s going to do that, since HP always mistrusted Snape, and now thinks he’s absolutely evil. Perhaps Snape will sacrifice himself in an attempt to save HP?
Anyone want to speculate on when the book will be released? My guess is next summer.
Draco’s task was to fix that cabinet so the Death Eaters could get into Hogwarts.
Rowling hasn’t started book 7 and says she won’t do so for several months. With the movies coming out (Rowling has been heavily involved), is unrealistic to expect the last book before 2007, and I wouldn’t be surprised if it was 2008 or 2009.
Nope, also to finish the task if Draco failed.
As to the rest of the objections, sorry, I am wedded to the notion that Draco’s task was to kill Dumbledore. If I’m wrong about that being the task, I suppose I can live with learning that. But if Rowling pulls the old 10,000-year time limit escape clause gambit, I’m going to feel quite pissy about it.
I was joking, actually. There’s lots of fan speculation that the potions represent the 7 DADA teachers. This makes just as much sense.
Except that you’re forgetting this is a kids book.
The ones who’ll live:
Harry
Ron
Hermione
Draco
Those who’ll die:
Hagrid
At least two Weasleys, including either Molly or Arthur Weasley (but not both)
Either Neville or Luna (but probably not both)
Some teachers - Sprout, maybe McGonagall
I wouldn’t be surprised if Molly Weasley died saving her kids too, but it’s also entirely possible that she’ll just put up a really good fight, save the ones that are home and be there at the end to very poignantly mourn the lost ones. I can picture the Burrow under seige and Molly battling off the bad guys with series of ever-more-amusing charmed domestic tools.
There will also be:
At least one mid-flight battle
Drunkenness
A final battle at Hogwarts.
Maybe!
I thought I’d read that she’d already finished the last book, but now can’t find anything to confirm that; everything I find now agrees with you. But I’m anxiously awaiting it.
Where was that said?
Leading us to a couple of questions: How does smuggling a cursed HI!* opal necklace into Hogwarts advance that task?
Similarly, how does poisoning Dumbledore’s intended Christmas present from Slughorn advance that task?
*Sorry, I couldn’t resist.
Also, Bellatrix says to Harry something like, “You need to really mean it to make an unforgivable curse work!” (but better than that, my OotP is at home). If Snape didn’t want to kill Dumbledore, then he wouldn’t really have meant it, he was just doing it under D’s orders (remember the argument? I believe that was Snape trying to convice D he didn’t need to die). His spell was powerfull enough to knock Dumbledore into something like death, but not quite.
This, of course, is all wishful thinking, and me trying to think of ways Dumbledore is going to come back. I’m not sure he is, though, as I also think Harry need to face Voldemort alone in the end, and rely on his own power.
I’ll start with the cut and dried:
Dumbledore is dead
Rowling has said that “dead is dead,” and will not play games with the readers. This, and the basic alignment with the hero archetype, tells me that Dumbledore is really dead, but communication through the portrait or other means is likely and fits the hero archetype.
Harry will not die and is not supposed to die.
I find it interesting that people predicting Harry might die, talk about Rowling “seeing it through,” and “having the balls to go through with it,” so that when they are proven wrong, they can say Rowling chickened out. Their speculations were right – it’s Rowling who got it wrong! Harry will not die because it doesn’t make sense for Harry to die. Rowling has no intention or desire to kill Harry. When she doesn’t kill Harry, it’s because she’s not writing your fan-fiction, she’s writing her own books and following the narrative instincts that have made her rich and famous.
Snape is not evil
There really couldn’t be more evidence in the last book that there’s a lot more to the Snape-kills-Dumbledore that meets the eye. To take it at face value actually leaves more questions unanswered than some nature of an agreement between the two that Snape kill Dumbledore out of necessity.
Aw, crap. Here’s another prediction:
Cricetus will screw up coding and not use “preview”.
He was to build the cabinet to allow the Death Eaters to kill Dumbledore. His other (ham-handed) attempts at killing Dumbledore were done in desperation because he couldn’t fix the cabinet, and I don’t think they were Death-Eater Approved (R). I’d have to re-read those passages, because there’s something fishy about the explanation that comes later, and I wonder if there’s more backstory that we haven’t gotten, or if Rowling threw them in to heighten the excitement and then swept them under the rug.
I’ll have to re-read that, too. I was looking pretty closely at the time to what Snape said, because I never he believed he was evil, but I need to look again before I say any more on the topic.
I believe she has the very last chapter written. Besides that, nothing - apparently, it’s going to be two years before the last book comes out. Also, according to her site, it’s not going to be any longer than the others. I wish it was, though, especially since this is going to be the last one, besides maybe some charity books like the Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find them book.
Roiwling said a few years ago that she had already written (early in the series) the last chapter for the last book and had put it in a safe deposit box. Maybe that’s what you remember?
As far as Rowling “seeing it through” to kill Harry, I believe that she has consistently said that she has known how the series would end since the day the idea came to her. Whatever the ending, I can’t believe that she would alter it at this point. She would have no commercial reason to do so, certainly. Book 7 is a guaranteed monster best seller no matter what she does. I’ve never gotten the feeling that she lets herself be influenced by fan expectations and that she takes the story wherever she wants without fear. After the “Snape kills Dumbledore” development, I don’t think we can say that’s she’s afraid of being too dark or of shocking her readers.
Oh, it’s a kids book! You then go on to list who you think will die. So…in a kids book, anyone is allowed to die except the main character? I’m calling massive bullshit on that. Why should anyone be safe?
Umm… because he’s the hero? Supporting characters die far more often in children’s fantasy. In all fantasy, really. Wise Old Mentors are practically marked for death, but callow-youths-turned-heros rarely snuff it.