Despite my previous adamant assertion that Dumbledore is dead, I’ve been forced, reluctantly, to reconsider the issue. After reading two lengthy essays, I am forced to at least conclude that the option is very much available: Dumbledore may not be dead.
There’s a buzz in fandom this morning (HT to Glenn Lucke, who tried to make me and La Shawn “twitch” with this story): J.K. Rowling said in an interview that two characters will die in Book 7, and she’s included some intriguing comments about Harry’s fate:
â€œI have never been tempted to kill him off before the final because Iâ€™ve always planned seven books, and I want to finish on seven books,â€ Rowling said Monday on TV here.
â€œI can completely understand, however, the mentality of an author who thinks, â€˜Well, Iâ€™m gonna kill them off because that means there can be no non-author-written sequels. So it will end with me, and after Iâ€™m dead and gone they wonâ€™t be able to bring back the characterâ€™.â€
There will tons of speculation about this, but I say it’s no big news. Rowling likes to play with the media, and by the way, we need to keep the hype going until the book is released! Let’s do a quick analyzing of the important comments: Continue reading
I promised some posts on alchemy. I’m getting there. I’ve been working with a Jungian view, but this weekend I’ll be picking up Titus Burckhardt’s book on alchemy, and I want to work a bit with both views before post significantly on that topic.
Until then, brush up a bit on literary alchemy as it relates to Harry Potter in The Alchemists’s Tale and The Alchemical Keys to the Last Harry Potter Novel, both by John Granger.
Most of my Harry Potter work of late has been spent on a paper on Voldemort, something that I plan to submit to a few HP conferences (which is why it’s not appearing here presently).Â I’ve said all I want to on Dumbledore at the moment, and I plan to move on to a series on alchemy.Â As soon as I get a few minutes to write, I’ll get started on it.
Just prior to the release of Book 7, I plan to post at great length my predictions (read: wild guesses)Â for the book, many of which are not formed yet.Â This is entirely for fun, of course, and my disclaimer about Narrative Misdirection should always be understood as a caveat to all my predictions.
That said, another forum in which I participate has a thread dedicated to our speculations about what will happen in Book 7.Â On a whim, I plunked down a few of the thoughts that have been rattling around in my head, and I thought I’d share them here.Â IÂ plan to develop the “Harry as uniter” thesis a bit further over time.Â Let me know what you think! Â Continue reading
And you thought Laura Mallory’s attempt to getting Harry Potter banned in Gwinnet County, Georgia was over.Â She’s actually taking her case to the state.
It occurred to me last night that it might not be possible for Snape to use Avada Kedavra without malicious intent. I’m working from memory so correct me if I am wrong. When pseudo-Mad-Eye was teaching the class about the Unforgivable Curses he said that in order for them to be effective one must mean them. He said something like if one of the students tried one on him it would do no more than give him a nosebleed. And when Harry attempts the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix in the Ministry of Magic it had little effect. She told him that he needed to desire to cause pain â€“ to enjoy it.
This would cause problems for the good-Snape advocates.
Good points. And what about all the evidence throughout the series that Snape is good and has been doing the right thing?
So how do I see Snape generally and the murder specifically? I believe Snape’s repentance was genuine â€“ and I think his devotion to the Dark Arts was genuine. All along he has been conflicted. On the fateful night on the tower his loyalty had swung to Voldemort, perhaps because of either his unbreakable vow to Narcissus or something else.
I started some conversation in the comments section, and feel free to chime in over there (and/or here as well).