For Christian allegory, you can’t beat dying and being resurrected.
(My bet on the dead Weasley is Bill or Charley. And I think Dumbledore will die, but of natural causes - old age).
True, Dangerosa, about ressurection. And in all these fantasy-stories-as-Christian-allegory things, it’s never the main character who dies and gets ressurected – Gandalf or Aslan, not Frodo or the the four siblings.
Maybe the Half-Blood Prince is someone ressurected from the ancient past?
That would be a pretty good twist for Book 7. About 2/3 of the way through the book, Dumbledore has a heart attack and drops dead. No Death Eaters, no curses, he just dies. Once word gets out, Voldemort and company stage an open attack on Hogwarts, with Dementors and other nasties in tow, knowing that Harry’s guardian angel isn’t around to protect him anymore.
I can see the fact that people drop dead of heart attacks in real life, but to me, that would feel like another Tasha Yar.
Didn’t Tasha Yar die of giant swamp monster attack? I never actually saw the ep where she died, but I always thought…
Yes, but what I was referring to was the fact she was a likeable character, but she was bumped of suddenly. It is a perfectly good literary device, but that doesn’t mean I have to like it.
If she kills off Dumbledore of natural causes, it’ll probably be peacefully in bed, surrounded by his many friends. I could see a sort of Dark Crystal moment with Harry. You know, where the dying Mystic is saying, “Gen, there are things I should have told you long ago…”
Of course, Rowling is unusual, and making predictions based on clichés is dangerous with her. One of the reasons she killed off Sirius that way is that she wanted a realistic war death Not a takes-out-8-million-of-them-and-dies heroically death, or a sacrifices-self-to-take-down-the-enemy-defences death, or a Shakespearean makes-5-hour-speech-after-dying death.
She wanted it to be sudden and senseless, as it often happens in war.
Yep. It’s settled. Rowling’s a sadist 
I was genuinely shocked by how she handled the death of Harry’s competitor at the end of book 4 (sorry, can’t remember his name). A casual, “Deal with the spare” by Voldemort and thats it. He was a decent person who simply happened to be the in the wrong place at the wrong time as happens all too often in real life.
I think something Really Big is going on with Percy and his behavior.
Whether he is under some kind of memory charm/spell or is an unknowing tool in the Death Eaters game remains to be seen. I expect him to either come to his senses and die fighting for the good side or be killed by Voldemort and in the last moments he tries to fight the man, realizing he was wrong about it all along and he is a tool.
I would like to see Arthur and Molly Weasley use magic.
I don’t think he’s either. I think Percy is sort of a mirror for the larger wizarding world in OotP: a decent but tragically short-sighted person who believes what he’s told and follows orders, and has the bad fortune to live in times when believing and following just isn’t good enough. I expect him to come to his senses once the battle lines are drawn and everything’s out in the open, although it could take a huge blow to wake him up (which is why I’m predicting Penelope’s death for early in HBP).
Arthur and Molly use magic all the time. Heck, Molly even cooks with magic. On the other hand, seeing the parental Weasleys in combat would be interesting…
I’d really like to see Lupin and Snape in a fight (with each other, not with Death Eaters). Those two SO need to have a good old air-clearing wizard’s duel, and hopefully spill what happened when Lupin went to talk to Snape about the Occlumency lessons.
I think that she handled it well because it showed how heartless Voldemort really is. He sees no worth or value in a human life and doesn’t mind destroying one. Voldemort doesn’t care if someone was a decent person or not, he just cares about himself.
Its not much of a twist. Rowling has described Dumbledore several times as looking “tired” or “old.” I also see him passing away quietly in his sleep - perhaps an illness. Rowling seems to want to make some points about death - that its natural and unavoidable, as well as that it can be sudden and unromantic. Plus, it would be a good way to expose her younger readers to the reality of modern death. Most people die quietly of old age.
So, this is just guesses and predictions right? Some have already been mentioned, others might be new. For books #6 and #7
1)Harry and Ginny – NOT. Harry and Tonks -start- to become an item.
2)Ron and Hermione – Maybe. Probably.
3)Hagrid is the half-blood prince. The prince is on his father’s side, which is why Hagrid is so galling to the Malfoys. His father gave up the rights of title to “marry a commoner”.
4) Neville is going to come into his own and do something incredible. He just has to become more confident.
5) Snape dies. But we do find out why Dumbledore trusts him.
6) Lupin becomes DADA in #7
7) The house elves and giants are powerful, and all must work together in order to help …#8
8) Harry kills Lord Voldemort… by redeeming Tom Riddle (redemption is a big thing in christian mythos. Though admittedly this sounds a bit star war-ish).
9) Harry doesn’t die for practical reasons. It would not be safe for JKR on the streets if she had Harry die. Some people take this stuff -way- too serious.
- I’ll be amazed at a plot twist and ask myself " How did I miss that? :smack: "
Uh, you do realize that Tonks is a lot older than Harry? OK, maybe he starts developing a crush on her (he’s about at the age where he would be developing crushes at the drop of a hat), but there’s no way she’s going to reciprocate.
And I like the idea of Dumbledore dying of old age. It’d be anticlimactic, but then, death usually is. And I don’t think anyone would actually be able to kill him in combat (certainly not easily), given how he’s handled Voldemort.
I haven’t re-read any of the books, but I seem to recall that she (Tonks) was older… but not decrepit (yet 
). Plus IIRC, she was very young acting. A free-spirit type. And Harry is certainly advanced for his age. By the time he finishes Hogwarts, he will have defeated Voldemort how many times? And given DADA lessons on the sly to how many? And all that.
Just asking, as a refresher for me, not spoiling for a fight or anything... isn't Tonks an Auror, and wasn't it after being around her that Harry thought being one too would be cool?
Dumbledore just dying by old age would certainly be something. For those speculating same, who do you see becoming new head of Hogwarts?
If Tonks is an auror, then she must be at least 20. When Harry graduates, he’ll be 17 and she’ll be 22. I don’t care how free her spirit is, it would be very, very odd for a 22 year old woman to date a 17 year old boy. I don’t think so.
Anyway, it’s not like it hasn’t been made obvious what’s going to happen with them, but I really, really don’t want to see Ron and Hermione hook up. First, the whole “bickering means a secret attraction” think is a cliché, and it’s disgustingly cutesy at that. I really don’t want to see that happen. Besides, it always seems like when there’s something important to be done, Harry and Hermione are able to interact as equals, and Ron is like their dumb sidekick who’s only there because no one wants to tell him he’s a liability. Who falls in love with the dumb sidekick? How can Hermione have be attracted to someone she has to practically babysit? I wish, helplessly, that the three could remain without romantic entanglement. It couldn’t end well.
I also think it’s silly to think Ginny and Harry will end up together. Ginny’s already stated that she’s over Harry. An adolescent crush is usually a fleeting thing, no? It’s not the sort of love that endures obstacles and separation. It would violate what’s been established already if they fell in love.
He was considering Auror work ever since the ersatz Moody made the suggestion in Book Four.
I think" Headmistress McGonagall" has a nice ring to it. She may not be the uber-wizard that Dumbledore is, waging the war between good and evil, but she’s definitely got what it takes to wrangle a castleful of prepubescent magic-makers into order.
We’ve already seen that McGonagall is the deputy headmistress (or whatever her title is), and she’s the one who took over the job temporarily when Lucius had him removed. So it’s probably safe to say that after Dumbledore dies (or retires), she would be next in line. Or, at least long enough for the School Governors to elect a new headmaster, but in the wake of the Second Dark War and Lucius’s outing as a Death Eater, I can’t see them choosing anyone else.
i do hope she doesn’t have dumbledore (during death) gasp out: “there…is…a…noth…er…pot…ter.”