the Deathly Hallows
What the? That doesn't even make sense.
http://www.recordonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061221/ENTERTAIN/61221003/-1/LIFE
8bit said:What the? That doesn't even make sense.
bjork said:neither does the concept of kids flying around on brooms and shit
bjork said:neither does the concept of kids flying around on brooms and shit
FnordChan said:Fist off,
Cyan said:That's true. What are the odds of an important character that everyone likes getting killed off? I mean, these books are for kids.
Cyan said:That's true. What are the odds of an important character that everyone likes getting killed off? I mean, these books are for kids.
Cyan said:I was being sarcastic. If you've read any of the recent books, you know Rowling has no fear of killing off characters.
Hell, I'm an adult and I love the books.
Kabuki Waq said:Harry Potter and thethe books are targeted for kids you bastards...The story will be simple and predictible harry isnt going to die Snapes will turn out to be a good guy he might sacrifice himself EVERYONE will be happy THE END
what? when did she say this?bill0527 said:She's said that, but Harry's been through enough already.one of the 3 kids has to die
qftnintendorly said:The only even semi-predictable book so far in the HP series was book 6 (Dumbledore's death). That's it.
They aren't kid books. They're far, far, far deeper than that.
Kids can read and enjoy them on one level, but it takes an adult mind to truly understand and appreciate their depth. (Kinda like Narnia in that sense)
=W= said:what? when did she say this?
catfish said:Remember with the book where some dude dies, some guy fom OA showed up and posted a picture with that passage underlined? That's going to be oh so much worse when it happens again.
That's not referring tobill0527 said:Its been on several of the Harry Potter sites and this is from the Wikipedia. I thought itonly one of the characters, but I guess its actually 2 of them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_potter_book_7
Heavy spoilers there...
* There are indications that at least two of the main characters will die. In a June 2006 interview about the previously-written ending, Rowling stated that:
o "One character got a reprieve, but I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die...A price has to be paid. We are dealing with pure evil...They go for the main characters, or I do".[23]
* When further questioned in June 2006 about authors who kill off their main characters, Rowling said "I can completely understand, however, the mentality of an author who thinks, well, I'm going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author-written sequels'
PhoenixDark said:Link is invalid. I'll believe it when Rowling says it.
I absolutely cannot wait for this book. There's so much stuff that HAS to happen in it. I mean, I believe Harry will go back to school, which means the book will be split into many parts. What we no so far about book 7:possibly after talking to Dumbledore's portrait...
-Harry will go to Bill and Fleur's wedding pretty early in the book
-He'll turn of age
-He'll visit Godric's Hollow
That's the core stuff that's fact. But there's a lot of stuff left. For instance, is Harry going to return to Grimwauld, and possibly start his horcruxes hunt there? Reading back on OOTP reveals that the house has at least one horcrux in it (the locket Harry and Ron couldn't open while cleaning up the house).
But how will Harry go to school and search for the horcruxes, outside of the ones he finds before the school year starts? In HBP he was able to search for them with Dumbledore at night without compromising his studies (The Cave), so perhaps he'll do it that way.
Can't. ****ing. Wait.
And finally,SNAPE IS A GOODGUY
tehjaybo said:After reading the Sixth book, Brandonh83, Bloodwake, and I all sat down and had a little talk about what we thought might happen. My side of it went something like this:
I believe that Dumbledore faked his own death. Well, not FAKED, but he had a backup plan. He needed someone on the inside, so he had Snape kill him. I believe, however, that he has a horcrux. Dumbledore would go to any length to fight evil, he's said that repeatedly. And with all this talk of horcruxes, I believe it may have unearthed something that Dumbledore did in the past.
I personally believe that Fawkes is a horcrux for Dumbledore. It's said that in order to make a Horcrux, you must put part of yourself into whatever it is. Fawkes had an unmistakable link to Dumbledore, and I believe that's how.
I think that since Snape's original betrayal, and after he came back to the good side, Dumbledore had been looking for a way to get him back in with Voldemort. This would be the perfect crime, as Dumbledore would be considered dead, and Voldemort would start being more open about his whereabouts, as Dumbledore was "the only wizard he feared". This would allow the Order a huge secret weapon in the war.
Again, just my thoughts. All non-confirmed. Comments?
Steriletom said:Always blaming OA...
Kobun Heat said:HARRY POTTER DORK TIME:
Thereferred to in the title are most likelydeathly hallows. The HP site Leaky Cauldron has been going nuts over this, and I think they might have foundthe horcruxesin BOOK ONE of all places.another horcrux referenced
Explanation:
Hallows are the objects sought by Holy Grail questers, which usually involve a spear/stick/pole, a sword, a cup, and a stone/pentacle. These are also the four tarot card suits. Not a coincidence. And of course, book 6 was filled with explicit tarot references, use of the cards, lightning-struck tower.
Now, someone noticed this before, and speculated that the four horcruxes that belonged to the four Hogwarts founders correspond to these suits. We already know Gryffindor's is the sword, Slytherin's locket (pentacle), Hufflepuff's cup. So Ravenclaw would be a spear or a stick. Or a wand. And there's a part in book one where Harry sees a single wand laid out on a faded purple pillow in the window of Ollivander's shop. And the shop was raided in book 6.
This would be kind of a wild theory EXCEPT for the use of "hallows" in the title now, which is linked really strongly to tarot.
I didn't come up with any of this, I just spent the morning reading about it. Links to all the references are here.
GIVE ME THIS BOOK NOW
bill0527 said:Its been on several of the Harry Potter sites and this is from the Wikipedia. I thought itonly one of the characters, but I guess its actually 2 of them
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_potter_book_7
Heavy spoilers there...
* There are indications that at least two of the main characters will die. In a June 2006 interview about the previously-written ending, Rowling stated that:
o "One character got a reprieve, but I have to say two die that I didn't intend to die...A price has to be paid. We are dealing with pure evil...They go for the main characters, or I do".[23]
* When further questioned in June 2006 about authors who kill off their main characters, Rowling said "I can completely understand, however, the mentality of an author who thinks, well, I'm going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author-written sequels'
Kobun Heat said:And there's a part in book one where Harry sees a single wand laid out on a faded purple pillow in the window of Ollivander's shop. And the shop was raided in book 6.
Cyan said:Um, we're talking about witchcraft here. The power is from Satan.
tehjaybo said:After reading the Sixth book, Brandonh83, Bloodwake, and I all sat down and had a little talk about what we thought might happen. My side of it went something like this:
I believe that Dumbledore faked his own death. Well, not FAKED, but he had a backup plan. He needed someone on the inside, so he had Snape kill him. I believe, however, that he has a horcrux. Dumbledore would go to any length to fight evil, he's said that repeatedly. And with all this talk of horcruxes, I believe it may have unearthed something that Dumbledore did in the past.
I personally believe that Fawkes is a horcrux for Dumbledore. It's said that in order to make a Horcrux, you must put part of yourself into whatever it is. Fawkes had an unmistakable link to Dumbledore, and I believe that's how.
I think that since Snape's original betrayal, and after he came back to the good side, Dumbledore had been looking for a way to get him back in with Voldemort. This would be the perfect crime, as Dumbledore would be considered dead, and Voldemort would start being more open about his whereabouts, as Dumbledore was "the only wizard he feared". This would allow the Order a huge secret weapon in the war.
Again, just my thoughts. All non-confirmed. Comments?
PhoenixDark said:Although I simply don't believe the founders of Hogwarts outside of Slytherin would create a horcrux. Dumbledore has killed in the past, but I doubt he made a horcrux either.
nintendorly said:No no no, this is completely off. She did say two characters that she hadn't originally intended to die WILL die, one she HAD intended to will NOT. However, the fact that two characters are gonna die in book 7 is no shock to HP fans.
bill0527 said:She said two of the MAIN characters. To me, that indicates any combination ofRon, Hermoine, and Harry. Those are the only MAIN characters left. Other possibilities, who I don't consider main characters would be Draco Malfoy, Hagrid, and Snape. Those are really the only people left who would be considered important IMO and I'm sure Malfoy and Snape will be a big part of book 7.
And yes I belive that Dumbledore is dead for good. Rowling said in an interview I read last week that she wasn't going to pull a Gandalf with him and she made profound apologizes to the people that started the Dumbledoredoesnotdie.com website. Its possible that he may show up in a portrait.
I also think the title does not refer to horcruxes directly. Possilbly the location of a Horcrux, but I think its referring to Godric's Hollow where Harry's mom and dad were in hiding before they died. We also know that Harry will be returning to that place in Book 7.