Sunday, July 08, 2007

The End of Harry Potter


The New York Times presents four essays and an artwork addressing how the Harry Potter series might end. In one, the co-creator of Lost opines that Harry Potter should die, but won't.
We come to learn later that Harry has survived an assassination attempt ... both his parents had sacrificed their lives to spare his. The most rewarding ending would be one in which he performs a similar act of self-sacrifice. I would just about giggle with glee were I to get to the last chapter (I never peek ahead) and find it titled “The Boy Who Died.”

So yes. Sorry, kiddies. I hope Harry buys the farm. Even though I know he won’t.
My speculation is that Harry Potter will die, but in a Buffy the Vampire Slayer / Baywatch sense of "dying" - he'll die long enough to not be a "horcrux", then be resurrected. I'm prepared to be wrong, but as this alternate ending suggests, you wouldn't want to jeopardize the big "M".

1 comment:

  1. It seems to me that many of the critics are confused by the fact that these are stories for children (young adults if you prefer) and/or blinded by their jealousy.

    The criticism sounds a lot like what people leveled at Starship Troopers (the book). Why aren't there more adult themes and elements . . . hmmmm . . . maybe because these are children's books from Schoolastic Press?

    CWD

    ReplyDelete