Everyone's Wild About Harry

There is a lot of Harry Potter talk going round the Internet these days, thanks mostly to an interview that J.K. Rowling did on British Television recently. In the interview, Rowling says that she’s “well on the way” to finishing the seventh – and last – HP book and that the ending, which she first wrote back in 1990, has changed “very slightly”.

Apparently, one character that was slated to die has gotten a reprieve while two others have unexpectedly gotten the ax: “…two die that I didn’t intend to die,” she said, and added, “A price has to be paid. We are dealing with pure evil here. They don’t target extras, do they?” Clearly, this woman has never watched much Star Trek.

Of greater import, she dodged the question of whether one of the victims would be Harry himself. While admitting that she understood the mentality behind killing off the main character in a series, she refused to speculate, saying “I don’t want the hate mail, apart from everything else”.

Well, as Tom Maguire would say. And speaking of Tom, his opinions on the subject are here. I’m not sure that I agree with all of his predictions but I will lay money that he’s right about the release date of the seventh book, especially since the release date of the fifth movie is now scheduled six days later. Meanwhile, Dr. Sanity pleads for Harry’s survival while The Anchoress argues that surviving Voldemort might not be Harry’s biggest challenge:

“And Harry…I can see him surviving the series - everyone wants to see Harry, Hermione and Ron live happily ever after - but what would the rest of Harry’s life be like? Perhaps he’d teach Defense Against the Dark Arts…but Voldemort vanquished it would all seem pretty pedestrian to him wouldn’t it? And rather purposeless? His parents would still be dead. Dumbledore, dead. Possibly Hagrid, dead. One or several Weasleys dead. Ron and Hermione probably wed.”

She compares HP with Hamlet and continues:

“Here is the interesting question…when a life has been lived with a sense of deep mission - as in either Hamlet’s or Harry’s case - and that mission has been fulfilled, what is the purpose of the life, thereafter? If the 18 year old Harry (or a 20-something year old Hamlet) have accomplished their goal, the thing that has driven them and given their whole life meaning and purpose, are we supposed to believe they can ever rest easy in a sort of “busywork” retirement? Perhaps this is why monarchs, old generals, popes, entrepreneurs, mother-hung rock stars and CBS newsmen can never willingly retire and live out their days. Without their sense of mission, life has no thrust and parry, no vivacity, no purpose.”

I don’t think anyone would want to read about Harry in his declining years – just as I don’t think anyone other than perhaps George Lucas would really care to read about Harry’s early years with the Dursleys. Rowling, or whomever, would have to come up with a new mission for him, something equal to the vanquishing of pure evil, and The Revenge of the White Ferret just won’t do.

Still, it is fun to speculate. But perhaps, as the Anchoress suggests, the best thing is simply to go back and re-read books 1-6 or, if you prefer, watch movies 1-4. You can never have too much Harry and 7/7/07 is still a year away.