Rowling is dropping all kinds of things in interviews today, from more information about what Ron and Harry and Hermione become in the nineteen years between the final battle and the epilogue (Ron and Harry revolutionize the auror department and Hermione has a career in magical law enforcement) to her original intentions for book 7. It must be such a relief for her to be able to talk about all these things at last!
And yes, she came out and said who died that she had not thought would die originally. We were right -- it was Lupin and Tonks.
Here's the quote, from an interview in USAToday:
There were deaths that were traumatic to write, she says.
"Fred (Weasley, brother of Harry's friend Ron), Lupin (a former teacher at Hogwarts, the school for wizards and witches that Harry attended) and Tonks (Lupin's wife) really caused me a lot of pain," Rowling says.
"Lupin and Tonks were two who were killed who I had intended to keep alive. … It's like an exchange of hostages, isn't it? And I kept Mr. Weasley (Ron's father) alive. He was slated to die in the very, very original draft of the story."
I confess I am a bit confused about the last part. Does this mean that Mr. Weasley was slated to die in book 5 (as we heard earlier) or in book 7? She just says "the story" which I am guessing is her term for the entire series. So I'd guess she's still referring to the book 5 reprieve.
Looks like Hagrid was safe from the beginning, despite the fact that many of us were worried he would die in the final book! I am so glad he didn't. It's so very moving when he carries Harry out of the forest, in an echo of the way he carried baby Harry out of the house sixteen years before.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Yeah, I was confused by that too; in the thing with Meredith Vierra, it said the fifth book, but USA Today makes it seem like the seventh. And why did she have to kill of someone in Arthur's place? Was it for the sake of the Resurrection Stone scene, and Arthur would have occupied the place Lupin did? (It makes more sense for it to be Lupin, really, with James and Sirius...)
Incidentally, that scene was the other one in the book that made me cry. I think it was when Lily first spoke to Harry... And nice to know Hagrid always was meant to survive. It really was a beautiful full circle, him cradling Harry at the beginning and end. And while he wasn't able to make a dent in Voldemort, he had a positive impact on the battle, I think, by rallying the centaurs. And it's so nice to think of him still being there 20 years later, inviting students to his hut for tea...
Ah, good ol' Hagrid, still inviting the kids over for tea and rock-hard biscuits!
I think you're right that it's powerful to see Lupin with James and Sirius there, though if she'd decided for it to be Arthur, that could have worked on a different level (all fathers/father figures). It's interesting who is not there: Dumbledore or Snape. Of course Dumbledore gets the key scene with Harry in King's Cross. I still feel a bit cheated that Harry and Snape never really get to exchange words after everything that happened between them...
I know, I really wanted to see Snape and Harry have a moment. And why couldn't they have at least had that in the headmaster's office at the end? Or wouldn't there have been a portait of Snape there because he wasn't in that position legitimately? (I was really surprised to see him as headmaster; I'd naively figured it would be McGonagall, and that Hogwarts would still be a haven of sorts... By the way, though he's sneering and condescending, I really do like Phineas.)
Are we to understand that Harry chooses who appears in the forest? Though if that were the case I'd think he would want Snape there, to apologize, and to thank him, though it might have made things all rather awkward, what with three of the Marauders and Lily there.
I'd also rather hoped to see Fred; after all, he was very much a big brother to Harry, and the depth of loss that he feels at his death is apparent by the beginning of the 32nd chapter. But maybe that would have detracted from the focus, since inevitably there would have been some discussion of the Weasleys and of George and maybe Percy in particular, and perhaps youthful Fred, who'd just died in the attack to buy Harry time, wouldn't yet have the insight to accept that Harry needed to die. What Harry needed then was comfort and the strength to accept his fate, not a call to resistance.
I don't know...I've re-read the scene again, when Harry is walking into the forest and uses the stone, and I can't tell if he chooses who is going to be there or not. I think we're only told that the ring has the power to call forth your dead loved ones... or did I imagine that phrase? Perhaps the reason these particular people arrive for Harry at just this moment is that they have always been his comforters and protectors...his parents, obviously, but also Sirius and Lupin (who taught him how to call forth a patronus in the first place). After that heated exchange between Harry and Lupin so much earlier, I'm really glad to see Lupin at the end, helping him.
On second or third thought, I think it would have been too much to have Snape present there at the end. True, he's protected Harry all alone, as much or more than some. But I am not sure there is great love between them still, even if perhaps (with time, on Harry's side) there will be deep respect. And I think it would have just been too emotionally heavy to have Snape there (so conflicting!) at that very moment. Our attention needs to be with Harry, walking that road to death, not on whether or not Snape and James have figured out how to reconcile in the after-life. :-)
But I completely agree that it would have been more than fitting to have Snape's portrait in the headmaster's office. And I don't think Rowling would have had to do too much with it to make a powerful and lasting moment. The main part of the scene could still have belonged to Harry and Dumbledore, but as Harry turned to go, he could have seen out of the corner of his eye the portrait of Snape, and perhaps they could have looked at one another again, and even just...well...nodded. Just recognized one another. I wouldn't even have minded if we'd seen Snape stand at attention out of respect for Harry.
The fact that we don't see his portrait doesn't have to mean it's not there, but it seems strange we wouldn't have our attention called to it. And it does sort of raise the question, doesn't it, about the legitimacy of his headmastership. As far as I'm concerned, it's a very legitimate headmastership because Dumbledore wants him there, protecting and watching over the students...
Post a Comment