# Two will die in Potter 7 **SPOILERS FOR THE SERIES INCLUDED**



## MA-Caver (Jun 26, 2006)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060626/en_nm/arts_potter_plot_dc



> LONDON (Reuters) - Children's author
> J.K. Rowling has revealed that at least two characters will die in the seventh and final installment of her bestselling
> Harry Potter series, but was careful not to say who.
> 
> ...



So who will it be... Voldemort to be sure... or maybe Harry? Or maybe Both. 

Maybe the Weasley Twins... sabotaged by a Death-Eater that planted overly powerful dung bombs. 

Ron? Hermionie? Arthur? Neville? Snapes?
Might be Snapes... Harry was pretty pissed off at him the 6th book. He might get Ron to help bother bother bother bother bother bother Snapes to death. 

Dunno, your guesses are good as mine. 
Who do you think it might be. Remember... Nobody anticipated the death of Dumbledore... though I personally think Snapes and Dumbledore faked the whole thing to fool "you know who". 

Gonna be fun... now if they can get the movies rolling along any faster.


----------



## Jonathan Randall (Jun 26, 2006)

I just read that, too. I think at least ONE of the big three, Harry, Hermione, or Ron, will go. Just a prediction. Can't wait for the book to come out, although I enjoyed the last one less than the others.


----------



## bluemtn (Jun 26, 2006)

MA-Caver said:
			
		

> http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060626/en_nm/arts_potter_plot_dc
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
*Voldemort*- yes.
*Harry*-  a strong possibility, but not leaning either way...
*Snapes*-  Another strong possibility, but I don't think Harry will do it.  Like you, I think him and Dumbledore had a plan.
Even bigger possibilities:  *Weasley kids* (not all of them will go).  Maybe even *Malfoy*...
*Hagrid*:  Slight possibility.

Red=  My definites
Blue=  Just strong possibles


----------



## Andrew Green (Jun 26, 2006)

Dumbledore had to go, otherwise everything remained "safe"

I imagine a lot more then 2 characters will die, probably means 2 "main" characters.  

Will likely be a couple important people, make things look bad.  Minister of Magic?  Hermione?  Some Weasley's?


----------



## Kacey (Jun 26, 2006)

I agree that Dumbledore is probably not dead - given the oaths that Snape is caught between, I think that faking Dumbledore's death was his way out, as well as "proving" to Voldemort that he was loyal.

As far as who is to die... Harry and Voldemort were tied together, and they cannot coexist - so I think it has to be one of them, at least... could be both at once, despite Voldemort's supposed severing of the ties between them.  I guess we'll have to wait one more month to find out!


----------



## Lisa (Jun 26, 2006)

My guess is that Snape will die because he will sacrifice himself to save Harry and Voldemort will die...or will he....*que music...

and then perhaps an 8th book?


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 26, 2006)

http://harrypotter.warnerbros.com/web/hogwarts/dailyprophet/article.jsp?id=hp5_bellatrixlestrange#


> *Helena Bonham Carter to play Bellatrix Lestrange in HARRY POTTER AND THE ORDER OF THE PHOENIX
> *
> Helena Bonham Carter has been cast in the role of Bellatrix Lestrange.
> 
> ...


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 27, 2006)

It says two will die that she did not intend to die.  There will likely be many deaths in HP7.

Personally, I have to wonder about Mr. or Mrs. Weasley - members of the Order of the Phoenix are all suspect as are the death eaters.  No doubt Lucias will die - perhaps at the hands of Snape.

I, too, don't believe Dumbledore's really dead.  Something about that potion he drank towards the end and the way things were kinda backward in that cave ... been promising to review that theory for Sam and haven't gotten around to re-reading that chapter.

Ahhhh ... theories ....


----------



## Swordlady (Jun 27, 2006)

My fearless prediction is that Harry will sacrifice his life to destroy Voldemort.  The prophesy stated that "One cannot live while the other survives", but there isn't a guarantee that _both_ will survive.

On another note, I also liked Dumbledore, but the man is _dead_.  I'm pretty sure that he intended Snape to kill him for "the greater good".  Rowling already stated that those who died in the books _aren't_ coming back to life.  That also goes for Sirius.

I also hope that the OoTP movie isn't rushed like the GOF movie.  The last movie was entertaining enough, but someone who _didn't_ read the book might've been totally lost.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 27, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> My fearless prediction is that Harry will sacrifice his life to destroy Voldemort.  The prophesy stated that "One cannot live while the other survives", but there isn't a guarantee that _both_ will survive.
> 
> On another note, I also liked Dumbledore, but the man is _dead_.  I'm pretty sure that he intended Snape to kill him for "the greater good".  Rowling already stated that those who died in the books _aren't_ coming back to life.  That also goes for Sirius.
> 
> I also hope that the OoTP movie isn't rushed like the GOF movie.  The last movie was entertaining enough, but someone who _didn't_ read the book might've been totally lost.



I agree, makes me feel like they could've done extra scenes ala Peter Jackson's expansion of the films Lord Of The Rings, to accomidate and (try to) fill those gaping holes in the films. 

No, anyone who died in the books won't be ressurected but then Sirus didn't really die did he? Same for Dumbledore... I have the same theory. Snapes being absolutely *trusted* by Dumbledore would've known about an antidote or even a well guarded potion that would defend against the Avada Kedavra curse. Or as Georgia theorized that the poison that he drank in the cave was a defense against it. That his death was a ruse to ensure Snapes' confidence with Voldemort. (wince) Also Dumbledore was famous for not telling Harry EVERYTHING that he needed to know... even though he realized that he should've in the OoTP. He did boast that he had a remarkable brain-power and might've wisely decided to keep with-holding vital information to protect Harry. 

Great series of books it is. I'm glad a friend of mine talked me into reading The Sorcerer's/Philosopher's  Stone.


----------



## Kreth (Jun 27, 2006)

I suppose I'll have to break down and read through the series. After all, if the past is any indication, I should have a few years before the next WoT book...


----------



## Jade Tigress (Jun 27, 2006)

I heard on the Today Show this morning that it is probable that Harry will die. I think it may turn out he will be a stronger presence after his death if it turns out that way. I believe Dumbledore is probably dead, but like I think will happen if Harry dies, they will become stronger somehow after their death and still remain active characters in the books, kind of like Voldemort. Since the characters are getting older it can leave for the introduction of younger wizards to continue the battle and still have the original influence of Harry the whole time.


----------



## mrhnau (Jun 27, 2006)

MA-Caver said:
			
		

> Who do you think it might be. Remember... Nobody anticipated the death of Dumbledore... though I personally think Snapes and Dumbledore faked the whole thing to fool "you know who".



Punk! I've not read the latest book yet... just finished Order of the Pheonix a few nights ago. kind of ruined it for me... blah...


----------



## Kacey (Jun 27, 2006)

mrhnau said:
			
		

> Punk! I've not read the latest book yet... just finished Order of the Pheonix a few nights ago. kind of ruined it for me... blah...



Maybe we should start putting spoiler warnings on threads like this!


----------



## Andrew Green (Jun 27, 2006)

Wasn't Snape forced to make a magical promise, that he could not get out of as it was inforced magically?  Making the whole "faked it" thing impossible?


----------



## shesulsa (Jun 27, 2006)

Kacey said:
			
		

> Maybe we should start putting spoiler warnings on threads like this!



Good idea!  Done!


----------



## Swordlady (Jun 27, 2006)

mrhnau said:
			
		

> Punk! I've not read the latest book yet... just finished Order of the Pheonix a few nights ago. kind of ruined it for me... blah...


 
Well...there is this "condensed" version of HBP floating around the Net: http://home.earthlink.net/~ladyirony/hbpcondensed.htm

It is a parody (sorta), though the writer managed to include all the important plot points.


----------



## Swordlady (Jun 27, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> I suppose I'll have to break down and read through the series. After all, if the past is any indication, I should have a few years before the next WoT book...


 
I refused to read Harry Potter when the books first came out, because I thought they were "just for kids".  But I picked up "Sorceror's Stone" while babysitting out of curiousity - and instantly got hooked.  This was around the time the first movie was released in fall 2001.  I promptly picked up the rest of the books, and read through all of them within a month.  Despite the lengthiness of the books (OoTP topped off at 900+ pages), it is fairly easy reading, and the stories flow very well.  Oh yeah, I read through OoTP within three days, and HBP within two - just to give you a frame of reference.


----------



## mrhnau (Jun 27, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> Well...there is this "condensed" version of HBP floating around the Net: http://home.earthlink.net/~ladyirony/hbpcondensed.htm
> 
> It is a parody (sorta), though the writer managed to include all the important plot points.



I'll wait for the book. I got all the books up to Order of the Phoenix for free, so I'm waiting until I can get a deal on the next one. I wanted to read Order before the movie, so I can wait for the next one  who knows, I might get it for free too! hehe


----------



## Kenpodoc (Jun 27, 2006)

1. Dumbledore is a phoenix so he will rise from his ashes.
2. Harry and Voldemort have been inextricably linked from the begining so both will die.
3. At least one Weasley will die, probably not Ron.
4. I'm sure that there will be many more deaths.  I suspect haggrid also dies.

Pure speculation on my part except for Dumbledore's return, the Phoenix metaphor has been worked on in too strong a manner for him to not rise again.

Jeff


----------



## Kreth (Jun 27, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> I refused to read Harry Potter when the books first came out, because I thought they were "just for kids". But I picked up "Sorceror's Stone" while babysitting out of curiousity - and instantly got hooked. This was around the time the first movie was released in fall 2001. I promptly picked up the rest of the books, and read through all of them within a month. Despite the lengthiness of the books (OoTP topped off at 900+ pages), it is fairly easy reading, and the stories flow very well. Oh yeah, I read through OoTP within three days, and HBP within two - just to give you a frame of reference.


My son has the whole series, I'll have to borrow them. He also keeps telling me about a series called The Inheritance Trilogy. The first book is called Eragon. I may have to read those as well...


----------



## Kenpodoc (Jun 27, 2006)

Kreth said:
			
		

> My son has the whole series, I'll have to borrow them. He also keeps telling me about a series called The Inheritance Trilogy. The first book is called Eragon. I may have to read those as well...


The Harry Potter series is just plain good story telling. these are long stories with interesting characters which lead to most people wanting more (Adults and children.) The story telling was so effective that Jealous writers of books for adults got them removed from the adult book lists to the childrens lists.  

Eragon's first book is good but rather standard fantasy fare.  the second is less good but My 12 year old loved it.

Jeff


----------



## Kreth (Jun 27, 2006)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> Eragon's first book is good but rather standard fantasy fare. the second is less good but My 12 year old loved it.
> 
> Jeff


Is it more children's fantasy? I'll take a look at the first book, I guess. Another series I'd like to read through is the River of the Dancing Gods. I read the first book before it was a series and loved the satiric style. Plot elements like a trucker-turned-barbarian with a magical sword named Irving just made for a fun read. And yes, before anyone comments, I have read most of Xanth and the Mything Link books. :lol:


----------



## Swordlady (Jun 27, 2006)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> 1. Dumbledore is a phoenix so he will rise from his ashes.


 
I will actually be _very_ disappointed if (and a _very_ big "if") Dumbledore comes back. His death couldn't have been faked; there was no way Snape could've cheated out of an Unbreakable Vow. It has been established time and again that magic can't be fooled. I still think that Snape killing Dumbledore was premeditated - _by Dumbledore himself_. 



			
				Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> 2. Harry and Voldemort have been inextricably linked from the begining so both will die.


 
Yup. Not only that, Harry's death would be Rowling's only way out of the series. She has been insistent in writing no more Potter books after the seventh. Not that she needs to, now being one of the wealthiest women in Great Britain. 



			
				Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> 3. At least one Weasley will die, probably not Ron.


 
Nah...I don't think Ron will die either. He and Hermione will probably wind up hooking up in the end. Too much build-up in their relationship.

If a Weasley dies, it'll probably be Molly. Or maybe one of the twins. Just my guess.



			
				Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> 4. I'm sure that there will be many more deaths. I suspect haggrid also dies.


 
This being the *last* book, there will probably be an epic battle - with a very high body count.

My predictions: Harry, Voldemort, at least one of the Weasleys (Molly or one of the twins), Snape (or Draco - not both), Hagrid, someone from the Order of the Phoenix (Tonks, Moody, or Lupin)...and this is just for starters. We could probably count on a bittersweet ending...


----------



## Ceicei (Jun 27, 2006)

If a Weasley dies, it will likely be Arthur.  Think about it... Arthur is one of the characters with a link to the "human world".  If he were to die, wouldn't there be possibility of more danger spilling over into the human world?  That'll provide for quite a twist!  The other Weasleys (besides Arthur and Ron) are not strong character roles in making a definite mark with their death.

Another thought is McGonagall.  She was second in command at Hogwarts until Dumbledore's "death".  She also is a major character with the Order.  She plays a very pivotal role, so having her die would ramp up the danger.
- Ceicei


----------



## Ping898 (Jun 27, 2006)

Ceicei said:
			
		

> Another thought is McGonagall. She was second in command at Hogwarts until Dumbledore's death. She also is a major character with the Order, so having her death will definitely heighten the danger. She plays a very pivotal role, so having her die would ramp up the danger.
> 
> - Ceicei


When I read the article, she was my first thought after one of the big 3 being killed.


----------



## Kenpodoc (Jun 27, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> I will actually be _very_ disappointed if (and a _very_ big "if") Dumbledore comes back. His death couldn't have been faked; there was no way Snape could've cheated out of an Unbreakable Vow. It has been established time and again that magic can't be fooled. I still think that Snape killing Dumbledore was premeditated - _by Dumbledore himself_.


Sorry but I'm sure you will be dissappointed.  Look back at the death scene.  It was premeditated by Dumbledore for sure and done in a way to ensure that a "phoenix" would survive. Voldemort returns from "death" in a bad guy manner, Dumbledore returns in a good guy fashion.  The series is not really Harry vs. voldemort. It is dumbledore as the essence of evil vs dumbledore as the essence of good.  Harry while generally good is the conflicted more normal human stuck in the middle.

Jeff


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 27, 2006)

From another HP thread from yet another discussion board (Kevinswatch.com)



> *Rowling: 'I may kill Harry Potter'|the Daily Mail wrote:*
> 
> 
> Rowling: 'I may kill off Harry Potter'
> ...



Now think ye upon this... Rowling is a very smart lady. I call this a red herring because it fuels the buzz on the seventh book. So everything is now just speculations and theoretical rhetoric. The woman is worth billions now and even more so. Richer than the queen they say. Hell, if she was ambitious enough she could vie for the crown herself couldn't she? Heh  
But either way... book seven is going to be yet another international best seller (even without all the hype now attached to it). 
Hmm, mebbe I ought to start writing a book about a group of kids who study various styles fighting an evil with martial arts ... (of course... in a cave now-and -then  :uhyeah: ). I can get you guys to help...


----------



## tradrockrat (Jun 27, 2006)

I think Dumbledore has more in common with his pheonix than anyone realizes- he died for sure, but ...

Harry isn't going to die

Snape isn't THAT much of a bad guy

Blacks brother never died - he's the guy who stole the locket from the cave.

There will be lots of deaths in the next book.

These are all just guesses of mine - feel free to ignore them.


----------



## Swordlady (Jun 27, 2006)

Kenpodoc said:
			
		

> Sorry but I'm sure you will be dissappointed.  Look back at the death scene.  It was premeditated by Dumbledore for sure and done in a way to ensure that a "phoenix" would survive. Voldemort returns from "death" in a bad guy manner, Dumbledore returns in a good guy fashion.  The series is not really Harry vs. voldemort. It is dumbledore as the essence of evil vs dumbledore as the essence of good.  Harry while generally good is the conflicted more normal human stuck in the middle.



Eh...still not convinced.  Dumbledore's portrait appeared in the Headmaster's office; that wouldn't have happened if he was still alive.  Also remember that the petrify spell he put on Harry immediately wore off after he died.

The only reason why Voldemort survived was because of his Horcruxes.  I strongly doubt that someone like Dumbledore would go *that* route to ensure his survival.

If Dumbledore appears in any form in book seven, it'll most likely be in some kind of "spirit" form.  I'm pretty sure his presence will continue to be felt in some way, shape or form - even though he *did* die.

Edited to add: Ceicei, I guessed that Molly would die - not because of her overall "significance" in the books, but because of her protective nature.  I could see her dying to save someone in her family.


----------



## MA-Caver (Jun 27, 2006)

Swordlady said:
			
		

> If Dumbledore appears in any form in book seven, it'll most likely be in some kind of "spirit" form.  I'm pretty sure his presence will continue to be felt in some way, shape or form - even though he *did* die.



Well even if he did that... Harry could very well (sneak in) the head-master's office and speak with Dumbledore via his portrait. If I'm not mistaken that is how previous headmasters (including Dumbledore himself) was able to get help in running the school. Priors were honor-bound to help out the present head-masters via their portraits on the walls of the office. 

The seventh book might be hefty as Harry still has to find the remaining horcruxes and if Rowling is as detailed on this search as she's consistently been with the whole of the story line then it'll take Harry a bit to seek them out, otherwise destroying Voldemort won't be that easy. 

Someone told me today I'm taking the whole thing too seriously... am I??


----------

