Harry Potter - unanswered questions answered
August 12, 2007 | Harry Potter
The book has been out a couple of weeks now and, based upon the comments I’ve read there are still some questions people want answered. Therefore I have collected together my thoughts, along with those of others (thanks to the commenters on the previous posts).
I should point out that this post contains plenty of spoilers so if you haven’t read the book yet you should turn away now!
As an aside, for those who haven’t seen it, there is also a transcript of an interview available where JK goes over the post Deathly Hallows stuff. She talks about the lead characters and what they do with their lives, clearing up a lot of the issues people had with the epilogue. Personally I think it would have been nice if more of this was mentioned in the book itself.
Answered
- What significance did the colour of Lily Potters eyes have? Snape cared for Harry - at least in an indirect way. The reason? Snape was in love with Harry’s Mum, Lily. Shortly before Snape dies he asks Harry to look at him, presumably so that he can look into Harrys eyes - the eyes that famously look just like his Mums. Snape would do anything to protect Lily, and just as much to protect her last living relative.
- Why did Moody, and Fred (or was it George) have to die? These two characters needed to die. Moody had to go for a variety of reasons, firstly something was needed to increase bad feeling towards Voldermort and his cronies, and secondly, if he hadn’t died then he would most likely have gone with Harry, Ron, and Hermione to hunt for the Horcruxes. Fred died because JK decided to save Arthur Weasly who was originally planned to pass away. Why did Fred (or Arthur) have to die? Simply because Molly needed the motivation/ incentive to lay the smack down on a certain Bellatrix Lestrange.
- How did Gryffindors sword appear in the final battle? Ok - this ones a guess, but I reckon it’s a goodun. Dumbledore once said “Help will always be given at Hogwarts, to those who really need it”, and Neville clearly needed help, and he was with the sorting hat at the time, the same place Harry got the hat in the Chamber of Secrets. (update : I wrote this before reading the Rowling interview linked at the start of the post - I’m correct
) - Who are Victoire, Ted and the other children mentioned in the Epilogue? Victoire is Bill and Fleurs daughter, Ted is Lupin and Tonks son. FWIW unlike his dad Ted isn’t a werewolf but a Metamorphmagus like his Mum. Harry and Ginny have 3 children - James, Albus Severus and Lily, and Ron and Hermione have two, Rose and Hugo (not sure what significance those names have?).
- Why didn’t Harry use the killing curse “Avada Kedavra”? I’d have thought this one was obvious. Harry is not a bad person, that’s what differentiates him from Voldermort - even in their final duel Harry doesn’t, instead trying to disarm the dark lord. Good Triumphed over Evil.
- What was the baby thing in Harrys “dream”? The baby was the part of Voldermorts soul that was living in Harrys scar.
- What was the solver stuff coming out of Snapes head? I’d have thought this one was obvious but I’ve seen it asked so thought I’d mention it. This silver stuff is Snapes memories and the reason Harry can look into Snapes past in the Pensieve.
Unanswered
Unfortunately I still have some questions that need answering and I have no answer to - so maybe someone out there does?
- Why did Ron have to disappear for a couple of chapters? I understand why he got upset but there didn’t seem to be any big reason why he should have done what he did. All I can think is that Rowling wanted to have a use for the “putter outer” beyond putting stuff out.
- Why/ when did Lupin and Tonks die? Maybe I missed the bit where there deaths were mentioned but I could have sword they were fine one minute and dead the next. Nothing in between. I can understand Moody and Fred (as mentioned above) but Lupin and Tonks?
Any more for anymore?
Come on then… what have I missed?
ExGen
Rocket Boards
Free Games 4 Bloggers
Seths Puzzle Boxes
Comments »
August 12, 2007
I was thinking that Lupin and Tonks died so another orphan character could be created?
August 12, 2007
I think the purpose of Ron leaving was so he could provide exposition of what was going on in the world after he came back. Otherwise they were camping in the middle of nowhere and had no idea what was happening. He told them about the Taboo as well as wizard wireless and other stuff like that.
Also, I think it was just basic dramatic tension. All that camping was getting pretty boring.
And when Ron comes back he also gets a heroic moment and also resolves his feelings towards Hermione (jealously over her choosing Harry, etc.).
As for Lupin and Tonks, she mentions who kills them in that interview (Bellatrix kills Tonks, someone else kills Lupin…Dolohov maybe?), but their actual deaths weren’t shown in the book. I thought that was pretty disrespectful of those characters.
I’m with you, I don’t mind any other deaths in the book except for those. Even after she explained her reasoning (to mirror Harry’s parents dying in the last war), I still think killing them was rather pointless and cruel.
August 12, 2007
Clair - that’s what happened - yeah, but I’m not sure why that’s desirable?
Emily - thanks for the comments. I guess that makes sense about Ron disappearing but I’m still not convinced it was the best way to do it. They could have found out the information in another way. I did read the thing about Lupin and Tonks in JK’s interview, but I don’t really agree with her, and think it should have been explained better in the book - afterall not everyone will read the interview.
August 12, 2007
I think Ron disappeared, in order to finally show Ron’s strengths. Harry and Hermione have very obvious strengths (Courage and intelligence respectfully), but Ron’s isn’t so obvious. Only when he was gone did the other 2 see how crucial he was to holding the group together.
I actually see that triangle a lot like the Buffy-Willow-Xander one. Buffy=Harry, Hermione=Willow and Xander=Ron. The group shares a lot of the same dynamics, and I think the point JK was trying to make about Ron was the same one that Joss Whedon spent so long trying to make about Xander (Esp. in series 6). They’re both good people, and are needed to hold the group together.
As for Tonks and Lupin, I think it was sort of appropriate, showing that all wars have consequences. With an ending like that, the battle may have been a victory, but it wasn’t a success (Am I saying this right? xD ). It was also nice that they died together, showing that they really did love each other, despite the hard times.
August 13, 2007
I have a different view of why Ron left. There are the obvious plot benefits (the subsequent addition of an outside perspective, etc.), but the whole episode revealed an important flaw in Ron’s character, his insecurity. The entire time before this event he had acted as an anchor for the group (not in the positive sense), weighing them down and providing almost no magical or logical insight. The effect the horcrux had on him forced Ron to cope with his insecurities, specifically his fear over a possible Harry and Hermione relationship and his failing resolve in the mission, and made him a changed person the rest of the book. It makes since that Tom Riddle’s soul would have been able to feed on these insecurities, and only through his coping with these problems, symbolized by the stabbing of the locket, could Ron reach Harry and Hermione’s level of defiance to Riddle.
August 13, 2007
In my opinion the reason that Lupin had to die is because of the final walk Harry makes towards Voldemort in the forbidden forest, in the company of his dead parents, Sirius and and the recently deceased Lupin (who looked better and more relaxed than when he was still alive). The old friends of the past (with the exception of Pettigrew ofcourse) had to be complete for this to have the highest impact on the reader possible (yes, I cried).
The reason Tonks had to die is that Rowling is just plain evil.
August 13, 2007
Dude Robert, I cried too. Right when Harry said, “don’t leave me. ok”.
As far as the whole Ron thing, I am convinced that it was purely for the suspense. I mean she made it clear early on that there were going to be significant deaths she had to keep us guessing.
August 13, 2007
I think it was way better that the marauders were together at the end. But one of the reasons I think the three of them (Fred, who had a pretty empty death, and Lupin and Tonks, who probably fought epically off camera) died the way they did (without Harry crying at their sides, I suppose) is kind of in line with the thought above that if they hadn’t, the war wouldn’t have had any consequences. All in all I think they came out of that war remarkably well off — it would have been even more ridiculously unrealistic if no one had died in a sort of stupid way.
Also, though we didn’t see Lupin and Tonks die, I would imagine that it was epic. So it’s not that they didn’t go out in a blaze of glory, we just didn’t see it. And there’s no logical way we could have, either. They died in the battle at the castle while Harry was in the forest owning Voldemort, though.
I agree with other commenters who’ve said that Ron’s absense was to cement his worth to the trio and highlight his character. Sure, he could’ve stuck around and maybe taken off the locket and been fine, but if he had done that he never would’ve faced up to his main detractors — it would’ve been the easy way. This way, he did something he shouldn’t have, realized it, and came back to make it right.
August 13, 2007
Fantastic post. Submitted to StumbleUpon and Reddit
August 13, 2007
I always thought the disarming was nonsense, if Harry had killed the Death Eaters he’d come across, lives would have been saved. Isn’t the destruction of evil to save the innocents more good than letting evil off to kill some more?
August 13, 2007
lmao - Someone had to say it.
If there was an answer to that, morals in real life would be much, much simpler. Are you saying that the death penalty should be introduced in all countries, and used for many more crimes? (Define evil?). It all gets complicated. Murder for any reason is still murder. It would have been a lot to deal with, and Harry would be more of an anti-hero, than a hero then.
August 14, 2007
I agree with the Lupin/Tonks thing. I think he (Harry) was under his cloak taking one last look before heading out to the forest when he was just like, “Oh, look, Lupin and Tonks dead. Hmph. Well, better get going, I might miss tea time.”
The whole 19 years later thing was nice, but unnecessary , I think. I called it all before turning the page :\
A friend told me before I started the 7th book (having finished the 6th that same day, it had been years since the 5th) that McGonagal was a death eater, so that ate at the back of my mind the whole time
August 14, 2007
Some more interesting ideas. I like both the theories about Ron and why he disappeared for a chapter. I also think the idea of the Marauders being together in the final battle is interesting.
Joe - thanks
August 14, 2007
This is related to when Volde is hunting Gregorovitch and he kills that women and her family. The mother of the children died while trying to protect them, just like Lily with Harry. Wasn’t this love? If so, why was Voldemort able to kill the whole family witout getting the curse rebounded upon himself?
August 14, 2007
the children who were killed weren’t the “chosen ones” plus they were muggles, so they wouldn’t have any magical protection, or maybe they aren’t able to tap into it. either way it is fitting, now if voldemort had gone after Neville as a baby and his mother jumped infront of him he would have been saved because the prophecy related to him as well. I agree as well with the ron leaving to provide an outside report. and I think Fred had to die to ground George and force him to be a responsible adult, without this motivation neither one would have been able to move on. Also back in book 1 or 2(can’t remember now) fred makes the comment to Percy that him telling a joke wouldn’t kill him… ironic don’t you think
August 14, 2007
Correction. J.K. said that instead of Arthur dying somone else who was father died. So… your reason for Fred is wrong. Just thought you should know because it kind of made me doubt the rest of your answers.
August 14, 2007
nevermind… maybe I was wrong. “I– when I sketched out the books, Mr. Weasley was due to die in Book Five.” Instead, Rowling swapped his death with someone else in the final book. “I don’t want to say who for the people who haven’t- read,” she said. But I - I made a decision as I went into writing Phoenix that I was gonna reprieve Mr. Weasley and I was gonna kill someone else. And if you finish the book, I expect you probably know and someone else who is a father.”
August 15, 2007
His death was swapped with Sirius’, whose name is also a star, also known as the Dog Star, which explains why he turns into a dog when he transforms into an animal.
August 15, 2007
Rowling has said that she wrote in so many parents dying to show how truly evil Voldemort is - he stops at nothing to get what he wants. I think it illustrates her point reasonably well.
That said, I was upset that Tonks and Lupin’s death seemed to be glossed over. Just like you said, one minute they were fine and the next it was talking about their bodies. Odd, I thought, given that they seemed to be so important otherwise.
The thing irked me was that Rowling said someone would do magic at a very late age, and after finishing book 7 I couldn’t for the life of me figure out who it was. Then I read a transcript of her explanations and someone mentioned this, and she revealed that she did not write it into the story. What a let-down! I was looking forward to finding out who it was.
Re: Robert and Nick - that part got me as well. I just felt so bad for Harry - so many people he loved were dead, but yet there they were, supporting him at his death and guiding him along, one last time. *sob*
August 16, 2007
The reason Lupin and Tonks died is because it shadows Lily and James. It completed the circle. Ted was left without parents just like Harry was, but now Ted has Harry has a godfather. History repeats itself.
I always thought the reason why Ron left was explained in the book. They are teenagers who are left to deal with this huge task where they do not even know where to start, tempers are going to flare and especially with that locket hanging around their necks like some sort of noose. Ron leaves, because that’s something Harry always said they could do in every book, but neither do. Now was the time to test the friendship. Plus, I can’t remember how the quote goes exactly but, Harry states “No, he always knew you would want to come back.” In reference to the reason why Dumbledore left the put outter to Ron. It’s true. He may have left, but that fact that he comes back proves the strength of their friendship. Plus, that’s when everything started to go right. They find the sword, destroy the locket, etc.
August 16, 2007
She killed Tonks and Lupin to echo what happened to Harry in terms of losing his parents as a baby.
August 16, 2007
why did harry not die… I mean i did not understand the logic behind it.
August 17, 2007
Why Harry lived (to pari): because volde took part of harry’s blood in book 4, he also took party of the protection lily made (which protects only HARRY not volde). When Volde tried to kill Harry, the protection still existed inside of Volde, thus keeping Harry alive. Harry couldn’t die as long as Volde lived and the protection existed.
I think it would have been cooler if he had lived because he had mastered the deathly hallows. Dumbledore said he was the only one who could have possessed them because of his good intentions, and it was after all the name of the book. He had the cloak in his pocket, the elder wand was his because he disarmed Draco, and he had the resurrection stone in his hand, but dropped it to the ground right before he faced Volde. It just didn’t seem to fit. any thoughts?
August 17, 2007
What I really want to know is, does Harry become an Auror, or is there no need any longer?
August 17, 2007
I’m still troubled by Snape’s death. Yeah, I had him pegged as a martyr quite some time ago, but it seemed like he was (narratively speaking) wasted.
I’ve long thought of him as the most interesting character of the series, and while I understand not giving him more time on stage in book 7, he seems sorely underutilized–she spent all this time in the previous books setting up a redemptive pattern with Snape and Draco only to drop (or at least underplay) it in DH. Her disposal of him is quite cavalier, and was really not mandated by the plot (I think the whole wands/Hallows bit got rather messy and unclear, not to mention that in the context of the book, his wound seemed reasonably survivable with Hermione on hand). Yes, we know, Voldemort feels no loyalty and doesn’t respect life; the wanton destruction theme has become obvious by that point. Not to mention the message his death sends: life is pain, even if the mission is completed successfully.
True, it is very touching that Harry comes to recognize Snape’s bravery, but it is far easier to eulogize a martyr than to deal with an unpleasant hero. I suppose with Harry’s survival, someone had to fill the “noble sacrifice” spot, but I just keep thinking Snape was offed not to make a point, but to tidy up the story. Getting into the story of a character as complex as Snape could easily have filled a whole book. Nonetheless, I don’t feel the cut was very well handled.
I did enjoy the book, and I am probably just bitter my favorite character didn’t make it out. A while back I read someone’s comment to the effect that JKR has gone on record as being irritated with fans’ facination with the ‘bad boys,’ and killed Snape so ignominiously to kind of stick it to those fans. I mean, I doubt that is true, but the idea does keep coming back to me.
August 17, 2007
The “Ron Disappears for a few chapter” was explained in the book. He was under the influence of the ‘crux spirit and almost immediately calmed down. But because Hermione’s guard spells hid them from the outside Ron couldn’t find them either and kept trying to catch them before they moved to the next spot. Hence Hermione hearing someone moving around the campsite and Ron just happening to be around when Harry needed him the most.
As to why Lupin and Tonks needed to be offed, well… if not them who? It was WAR that they were fighting and in war people die. Same with Moody and the twin. Stuff happens to good people for no other reason than they were in the wrong place at the wrong time fighting for something they believed in.
August 21, 2007
okay, maybe this is irrevelant… but what happened to bill? did he become a werewolf, or what?
August 21, 2007
The death of Lupin and Tonks was very subtile but still very clear. I would have to reread to be clear but at one point we read that Lupin is dueling Dolohov. A little later we read that Dolohov is dueling someone else; implying that Lupin is dead. After this (or before?) Tonks informs of Lupin’s whereabouts outside the Room of Requirements and runs off after him also to her death.
Personally I think Rowling wanted to show that wars always result in pointless deaths and that killing off Lupin and Tonks helps to show that this is not a Disney fairy tale but a novel with a little more deapth
August 21, 2007
Daniel - I agree that that’s why it happened, I just don’t feel it was done in a good way. These two characters, Lupin in particular, were a big part of the book, so to kill them off this way just seems wrong to me. I think Lupins death would have had more power if we’d experienced it - as it was it just kind of washed over me.
August 22, 2007
I agree with all these posts about the reason for Ron leaving, but I also thought it was a good plot twist. That portion of the book was kind of drawn out (as it was supposed to be- we were just as frustrated with the lack of progress as Hermoine and Harry were) and it gave me a little more of the OMG what happens next. I kept waiting for the news that Ron was captured by death eaters and/or used to bait Harry out by LV.
August 22, 2007
I also think that Ron leaving showed Ron’s character. He isn’t always the just stay by Harry no matter what boy, like when Ron didn’t believe Harry did not put his name in the goblet of fire.
I totally agree with Mike #26 about Lupin and Tonks. Good people get killed in wars even characters we like!
August 23, 2007
How was Draco entitled to get the Elder Wand?
August 23, 2007
Samantha, Draco was entitled to the Elder Wand because he was the last wizard to truly get the best of Dumbledore. We though it was snape, but Dumbledore planned to let Snape kill him. So, Snape killing Dumbledore was just acting out Dumbledore’s wishes and not getting the better of Dumbledore in any way. So, Draco using the expelliarmis charm was the last to get the better of Dumbledore by disarming him of the Elder Wand.
August 24, 2007
I also want to know if Harry became an Auror. It was his only ambition as far as careers that I remember. I saw someone else asked and no one responded. It was the first thing I thought of when I finished the book. Does anyone have any thought on this.
August 24, 2007
Leah, if I’m not mistaken an Auror’s whole purpose is to defend against Voldemort. There’s no point for them anymore if he is no longer a threat. Also, he wouldn’t exactly need a job when he had all that money (from the first book?) in the first place.
August 24, 2007
#34 Leah, JK Rowling answered this question in her webchat, see link in Ben’s post. Harry and Ron are both Aurors and Harry works up to become the head of the Auror department. They revolutionize the Auror Department in the ministry of magic.
August 24, 2007
One question with no answer:
What character turned out to have powers that we didn’t know about. I never read anything about that?
August 25, 2007
Sam - again, the interview answers this
JK changed her mind about this and didn’t include it in the book.
August 26, 2007
One thing that I felt was never explained was when did Lily start to like James? She never seemed to even like him and then all of a suddened she’s married to him?
August 26, 2007
Voldemort thought that since Snape killed Dumbledore,Snape is the actual owner of the elder wand.He also knew that Dumbledore took that wand from Gregrovitch in a duel and became it’s owner without killing him.So, my question is why did Voldemort killed Snape to become its actual owner.Snape had been very faithful(as Voldemort knew him) to voldemort and he could have organized a duel between him and Snape in which he could have won easily and become the master of the elder wand.
August 26, 2007
Voldemort was cocky. He didn’t bother thinking things through (ex: room of requirement). to him, snape had the wand, and the only way to truly overpower someone (to voldy) is to kill them. thus, he killed snape. i really want jk to write a scene in which harry talks to snape’s portrait for the first time. i think it would probably be one of the most emotional of the entire series.
August 26, 2007
lol actually ben i think we should start an entire series of comments on scenes we wish jk would write. maybe we could convince her to
August 28, 2007
Amy,
My scene would be the person who used magic late in life while in dire circumstance who did not previously have magic- It would have been Petunia. The scene would have been hilarious. Can you imagine Petunia’s reaction. Torn between hating magic and secretly being happy that she finally could use magic just like her sister.
August 29, 2007
Petunia would probably have used magic to make her neighbors’ yards grow shaggy overnight, while keeping hers the consistency of a golf course… She’d deny that she was using magic, of course.
August 29, 2007
Good one Amy!
August 30, 2007
Why does Harry have to have that talk with Dumbledore when he’s dead?? I mean, sure, he’s got some unanswered questions, but not all of them were for Dumbledore. Were they??
August 31, 2007
One question, if the elder want is invincible, how did Dumbledore defeated that man (forgot the name) and get it?
Draco winning it makes sense coz Dumbledore dind’t even try to fight him, but Dumbledore is known for his amazing dual with that man. If Dumbledore could win the battle, what makes the wand so special??
September 8, 2007
Why is it that Harry could save Buckbeak’s life in the third book by turning back time, but couldn’t save anyone else’s life, like Sirius, or Lupin, or Tonks, in the later books?
September 9, 2007
why was dubmledore ignoring harry potter during the year in order of the pheonix? and why what the reason the scar was left behind when the prophecy scene was with malfows dad said he will tell harry potter the reason he didnt die?
September 9, 2007
48 - in book 5 they accidentally destroy all of the time turners during the battle in the department of mysteries. JKR said that in some interview that I read.
49 - Dumbledore knew of the connection between Harry and Volde and didn’t want Volde to use it to possess Harry and weasel info out of Dumbledore or to show Volde anything accidentally. I didn’t really understand your second question, sorry.
47 - the wand wasn’t special. that was what dumbledore learned and what volde could never figure out, he never realized that there were deeper magics than powerful wands.
46 - The “speech where Dumbledore explains everything” is a classic part of every book, and acutally a classic element of British literature. She couldn’t leave it out of the last one.
Just my opinions, of course.
September 10, 2007
#46 Zabou- Also go to the top of this page in Ben’s original post and click on thanks to previous posts. Read comments #104-112 about the elder wand.
September 27, 2007
I have a question RE: Goblet of Fire. If the Ministry can detect magic in “Muggle areas”, why didn’t they know that Voldemort murdered Frank in the Riddle home?
October 23, 2007
i was dreading lupin and tonks’ death the whole book, i knew that people were going to die and i thought that they were the most likely. Because they are characters we have grown close to, but aren’t really that important to the story anymore. Also, there’s teh whole ‘romeo and juliet tragic lovers’ thing. When they died i wasn’t shocked or anything, i was just sad!
but it was dobby’s death that shocked me- how could she? I hated Jk rowling after that!
November 8, 2007
I don’t know if this has been answered, but Ron had to leave Harry & Hermione because of the Put-Outer. Dumbledore gave him that little silver lighter thingie because he knew that Ron would leave Harry & Hermione. Ron gave up on Harry when he thought that Harry entered the Triwizard Tourney alone - remember? Hermione was the one that stuck by him. Ron came round in the end, returned to Harry & Hermione, I guess you can say. Anyway. What would the point of a) leaving one of harry’s good friends out of Dumbledore’s will? and b) giving Ron an object that leads you to your destination…I guess you can say…if there was no intention of him either leaving or coming back.
Does that make sense? It does in my head.
November 26, 2007
Hello, I’ve never done this before, so please excuse any errors or stumbles!! Just had one quick thought on the unspoken identity of the unmagical person suddenly able to do magicks~~~~~~could it possibly have meant to be Dudley, Harry’s cousin? He DID try at the very end to do right by wanting Harry to come to safety, too.
December 4, 2007
rowling said we would find out what dudley’s worse moment was when the dementor attacked him- but I’ve re-read DH and can’t find itanywhere
December 4, 2007
Septimus - I seem to remember Rowling answering this in an interview somewhere. She said something like when Dudley met the Dementor he saw himself exactly as others saw him (a spoilt bully) and decided that wasn’t a way to live, which is why he was nice(r than normal) to Harry before they parted ways.
June 17, 2008
I Think the idea of Ron backing out of the plan was that he brings news about the outside world and and if he wouldn’t have left they would not know what the “DELUMINATOR” actually did and also he came back with full energy and bought up enthusiasm amongst all the 3 of them!!
July 2, 2008
well like everyone else says i beleive that lupin and tonks had to die because if they didnt it would be “HOGWARTS had one the battle with only a hand full of deaths but the fact that people say that lupin and tonks were the only people they cared about shame what about Collin Creavey he was important and beleived in Harry all the way