Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows question

I think you have the makings of a writer. You can sit there and kill off characters because you think you should without getting attached. People like me can't do that. I can't say "It's getting way too cheery around here! Let's kill our neighbor's dog! We need some action!"

I know to the normal mind there is a big difference between the two, but when it comes to me, it's pretty much the same.

I was told by my sister, the mother of two boys, that she and the other parents she knew had the same reaction when Neville had his big moment in Deathly Hallows. They cheered! Neville was their child, who isn't the brightest or most competent or most popular. But when it counts, he is brave and loyal and effective and has earned the love and loyalty of his friends. It was as important for Neville to live and thrive as it was for Harry. JK Rowling is after all a parent too. And don't forget, this is children's literature.

Er.. I'm not sure. I think Snape and Lupin were some major characters. I mean, both are somewhat connected to Harry's parents and him. I'm a die-hard fan of Harry Potter, so of course the minute I finished, I wrote a letter to J.K.Rowling. Apparently, I was one of the lucky few she actually took the time to respond. I asked about the deaths of some of the characters, that maybe it was a bit too much for the whole series.

J.K.Rowling replied and said that for her, some of the characters were too precious to let go. Especially characters like Harry Potter, since he suffered through a lot of trauma and deaths in his life. For once, it was actually his time to be happy with the person he loved: Ginny.

Anyway, I'm pretty desolate that you asked this question.

I think the people who did die were enough. Rowling chose to kill off people that had lasting impressions on us. The hurt Harry felt for Dobby is an example of my point. Also, who Rowling chose to kill leaves unanswered questions, even with the epilogue. How did George feel when Fred died? I, unlike many out there, actually like Ginny as a character, and I wouldn't want her to die. Same goes for Neville. He had an enormous role in DH and so did Ginny. Harry deserved his happy ending but he wouldn't have if Neville/Ginny died.

Snape died, Fred Weasley died, Lupin and Tonks died, Albus Dumbledore died, Sirius Black died, Voledmort died, Bellatrix Lestrange died, Dobby died, James and Lily Potter, Alastor Moody died, and more; I think J. K. Rowling did a good job on how she set the series up and I don't think that anyone else should've died. Enough Said

I absolutely agree, she didn't kill off anyone we REALLY cared about. Having said that, I really really wish she had got rid of Ginny, I certainly didn't care about her!

Neville die?!?!?! :O NOOOO! No no no!

I was certain Harry would die in the end and for me it would have made more sense than the ideal and happy ending.

I heard that J.K. was actually going to kill off Ron. But then decided against it. I think that a character that was kinda like Ginny and Neville was killed. Fred...or was it George? And also:
*Lupin
*Tonks
*Lavender...the list goes on.

I disagree, as well. Lupin did have a big part. He was becoming a father figure for Harry. It broke my heart when he and Tonks died. I also was attached to Snape. If you read carefully through the entire series, there was something about Snape, subtle clues that Snape really did care for Harry Potter. His character kept me intrigued the whole series. Also, you guys are forgetting that Hedwig died *cries cries cries*

Snape, Dumbledore and Sirius Black is enought. Harry cann't died.

i think there are already more than enough people who died in this story, and a lot of them are pretty important role and likeable character.

maybe ginny should die and then harry becomes upset and then luna tries to cheer him up and they both end up together! ye!!!!

Hey, Dumbledore, Snape and Fred are dead. That's as much as I can take.

If Ginny had died I would have been devastated. But her character wasn't really that developed. I don't really like love stories, so for me to say that they needed a better love story is really strange. But there was nothing. It was really quite random.

Any writer that is designing death in a story has to make that decision based on a few things, not the least of them being "How does this further the story?"

Random killing of characters is bad form. Every single death in the books was decided for a reason.

The point is, if Neville had died, how would it have furthered the story? It would have been a senseless death with no immediate repercussions. Living and rallying the D.A. and killing Nagini are HUGE. Killing him off would have been detrimental to the end of the story. (It also strengthens the notion that his end of July birthday was important in that HE is very likely the chosen one, but by Voldemort marking Harry as his equal, the burden was transferred to Harry. I've always believed it was Neville who was the object of the prophecy.)

Ginny dying? Why? What does it serve? How would it have furthered the story and moved it along? If you killed her off early, it would have likely emotionally paralyzed Harry, Ron, Mr. and Mrs. Weasley...several key players in the destruction of Voldemort. Killing her in the last battle? Why? Most of the kids survived thanks to the efforts of the adults.

At some point, I counted how many people died throughout the books and found there are close to a hundred. (That will need to be checked, but with James, Lily, Sirius, Remus, Tonks, Lavender, Colin, Cedric, those killed during the battles, the minister, Fred, muggles, etc., the count got quite high.)

If you can find good reason to move a story forward through a death, it will be an important person. Whether a main character or not is irrelevant. Every death in these books was important.

I thought less people needed to die. Like, remember when Cedric died? Sure, he wasn't that big of a character, but he actually died in a book where most accidents were quite fixable. It was such a shock to see him die. It had impact.

Then, you get to the last book, and every second chapter ends in someone dying... It really didn't have much impact by the end of the book. I was honestly just upset with Rowling when I read the list of casualties. Why would she kill all these big, important characters we all loved and skim over it like that? Like none of them mattered at all... I just wished the deaths that did occur had been given more weight, instead of it being just "oh these guys died but HEY HARRY IS ALIVE!!!1!"

That said, I did expect Harry to die, and I was disappointed when he bounced right back. But oh well.

Ginny or Neville, though? Or Ron or Hermione? No way. Enough important people died for my taste, thank you very much. I would have preferred if there were only one or two major deaths that were given the proper weight and respect, not like how it actually went over in the book.

No, first Harry sort of died, and if you think about it, His parents died, then Sirius died, and Snape, Lupin, Tonks, Dumbledore, Fred, etc. I think enough important people died

I really wouldn't have minded if Hermione had died, but the body count is way too high already, so I guess not. If Rowling had killed off Ginny or Neville I would have been VERY upset.

So Ginny and Neville consider bigger role in the books than Snape? I don't see that

No. Dobby and Fred were enough for me.

JK Rowling killed off many main characters. Fred Wesley, Tonks and Lupin, Dumbledore, Poor little Dobby, Bellatrix, Snape, Voldemort, The list goes on. Harry nearly died in every book. In the Goblet of Fire, Harry nearly died 3 times before he even met Voldemort. He nearly died countless times in the Deathly Hallows.

Personally I think JK rowling could have continued with Harry Potter. For Instance, should could have portrade Harry in college, in his job, Ginny falling pregnant, etc. We could have followed Harry's Kids in school. She has the perfect set up, there are so many other things around Harry Potter, she could write about. But then that's just my opnion...

Ummmmm..... Fred died Lupin Tooks both died and they all have bigger roles in my opinon and befor Serious Dobby and Dumbledor died if someone else died I would want to throw away the books

The author as commented that she had a hard time 'killing' charactors in her books. Like for example Ron, in early drafts, was supposed to killed off early in the series. As for a more dramatic death I actually thought that Harry was going to die but thinking about it I doubt her publisher would have allowed her to. It would have brought a great deal of irony to have Neville the the chosen one. I cried when I read the Snape part when Harry watched his memories. It was very dramatic. But I think too many deaths of loved charaters would have changed the feeling of the story from hope for the future to one of sadness and loss.

I was also disappointed by the ending but not because the lack of death. What really killed the book for me was the whole Harry/Ginny thing. I was rather put off on how the relationship forms and it seemed very forced and materialistic. I never felt the love or tension between the two. To me it felt like it leading up to a tad bit of Harry/Luna for a little while.

A bigger role?! Fred Weasley died!! Lupin and Tonks died! Snape died!!! That's probably more than enough...

I thought Neville would. He didn't thou

I think enough major characters were killed that killing Ginny or Neville would have lessened the story. Killing either of them wouldn't have made sense.

I disagree.
If Neville, for example, had died, that would not have made him "more fantastic"; it would, in my opinion, make him look weak - he was beaten.

J.K. Rowling had already killed off a Weasley. I suppose she couldn't bear to kill another.

Luna already meant a great deal to Harry; he called his only daughter Lily Luna Potter.

There were enough deaths in the series, I think. J.K. didn't play it safe...she killed much-loved characters such as Sirius, Snape, Dumbledore, Fred, e.t.c. A death that saddened me a great deal was Dobby's.

But it was interesting to see your views.

??? No offense, but you are kind of making me depressed.

I think neville should have died because he didn't really have a big role at the end of the deathly hollows but ginny couldn't have died because then harry would have beena loner without a family. And also it would have been unfair to the wesley family who already lost a son in the battle.