Chapter 11 Bookstore is an independent bookstore chain with 4 locations in Atlanta, Georgia and surrounding cities. Our online site is Customers can browse our inventory, order books, CDs, and DVDs online, and read details about author appearances. Visit our blog for reviews, opinions, and news about books, music, and movies.

Tuesday, August 08, 2006

Does the Potter kid bite it?

So if you, like most of us in the office, follow the world of J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter (and who, in their proper and therefore book-obsessed mind, doesn't?), you've probably already heard about Rowling's recent reading with Stephen King and John Irving at Radio City Music Hall last week for a benefit.

The two aforementioned authors begged her not to follow through with what's been speculated as her plan to, in the forthcoming final Potter book, kill off the beloved character-but the fans had their say, as well.

(photo courtesy of Scholastic)

As reported by Publishers Weekly, she took to the stage to rock-star-like applause, one fan screamed out "DON'T KILL HARRY!", to which Rowling smirked back "No pressure there."

Had I been there, I'd have screamed out "DON'T LISTEN TO THAT KID, KILL THE POTTER BOY!"

In order for Rowling's storytelling prowess to fully maintain the levels we're beginning to place her at (i.e. Lewis, Tolkien, etc), she has to show loyalty to the story, to the world she's created, and not to the fans-in-witch-hats.

I maintain that Harry Potter's gonna die at the end of the next book. I've asked Zach, he disagrees.

What do you think? Let's take a poll. Potter, circa end of Book 7: alive and kicking, or a martyr to literary achievement?

-Russ Marshalek


Blogger zachary d smith said...

Yep. He achieves his goal of reuniting with his parents.

11:12 AM  
Blogger Noodle said...

I think that the Potter kid should die. You're right: Rowling has an obligation to remain faithful to her craft---not merely to hysterical 11-year-olds craving saccharine-coated endings.

11:25 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

i'll state that he'll live. however, it might be a cop-out in some sort of ghost-ish "anakin skywalker / obi wan / yoda" form where he can still interact with those still living.

i really don't think that she can straight up have him die at the end of no.7


12:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hes HAS to live. He's HARRY POTTER!

11:36 AM  
Blogger said...

(From Zach)

To clarify:

Harry Potter, for the sake of literary style and flair, should die in the 7th book; however, it won't happen. The tease is there, and likely he will get real close to death, but in the end he will live. How can I be sure? Because Rowling invested too much in the Peter Pettigrew storyline to simply neglect his debt to Harry. Peter will save Harry as it seems Harry is about to fall.
On the other side, look for Neville to die and likely a Weasley that isn't Ron. Snape should die, but he's the reprieve she recently referred to.
There we go Russ, all explained now.

5:57 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I haven't followed the series past volume one but will soon when my kids get into Harry Potter. However, I think that if Rowling had told either John Irving or Stephen King what to do with their characters, the reaction from the author and the public would have been quite different. I think she should stick with her original plan and not be swayed by public opinion. If she kills him off, she probably has something just as good as HP up her sleeve to follow.

9:02 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


12:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ohforpetessake. What a non-event: another blatant effort to create a pubicity storm and stir up hysteria. Not to worry, HPVII will sell copies aplenty. Yawn.

2:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think HARRY POTTER should die. End of story, period.

11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I think Harry will die BUT I think she'll bring him back in the beginning of another series. The reality of it is... that series has made too much money to let it die... if she doesn't do it on her own, the publishers are going to pressure her to start another "Potter" chapter so to speak.

9:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My ten-year-old and I discuss the books all the time. He loves them, as do my sister and I. It was difficult for my son to understand Rowling's need to kill off Cedric Diggory,and I agree with him (he's in the gifted program at his school). There is enough violence in this world-- killing off a beloved character is not necessary. I believe that Harry will come close to death and be saved by someone unlikely--Malfoy, or perhaps Snape, whose involvement with Lily Potter (she was the only one who showed him any kindness)will cause him to act and expose himself to Voldemort. This betrayal of Voldmort will result in Snape's death and readers will finally realize that Snape truly is a good guy. Rowling's whole THING is good overcoming evil. I don't believe she would end such a successful run by allowing evil to triumph. And killing off Harry would be considered an evil act to hundreds of thousands of children in countries around the world. So THERE!!

1:46 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home