Article here (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/6320733.stm).

'Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows' to be released on July 21st, the 10th anniversary of the release of the first book.

Let's hope the last one is an improvement on 'Half-blood Prince'...

Bets on the two characters who are scheduled to die? I'd suggest Voldemort and Harry himself, though I'm not too sure about the latter. I'm almost convinced that JK Rowling will want a truly happy ending (unless she goes for the happy ending of Harry joining his parents and it's all for the good of humanity, the ultimate sacrifice etc etc).

When she says two characters I think that applies to the 'good guys' only. Lucious Malfoy has to come a cropper as does Beatrix Lestrang (can't rememeber if that's spelt correctly).

I think it's going to be Hagrid and Ron who die :(. Harry imo has two souls in his body, the demise of Voldemort and one of Harry's souls will have something to do with the Deatheaters.

I think she means 'big' characters, not necessarily the good guys. Voldemort must be one of them. She's stated that the seventh book is absolutely the end of the series, and it would be unthinkable for the major antagonist not to meet his maker.

I rather lost interest part-way through the last book, so skipped a few pages and some of the references to the horcrux thingies were lost on me. As I understand it, Harry is (or might be) a horcrux - a bit of Voldemort's soul. So, if all the pieces of Voldie's soul must be destroyed for him to be completely vanquished, Harry must die too. Unless there's to be some sort of convoluted work-around.

I think she means 'big' characters, not necessarily the good guys. Voldemort must be one of them. She's stated that the seventh book is absolutely the end of the series, and it would be unthinkable for the major antagonist not to meet his maker.
I agree in principle with that, but I'd say Lucious is a big character. I've got a theory that it's going to be a reformed Draco that does the deed.

I rather lost interest part-way through the last book, so skipped a few pages and some of the references to the horcrux thingies were lost on me. As I understand it, Harry is (or might be) a horcrux - a bit of Voldemort's soul. So, if all the pieces of Voldie's soul must be destroyed for him to be completely vanquished, Harry must die too. Unless there's to be some sort of convoluted work-around.
I think JK has stated Harry isn't a horcrux, or one of the rules is they can't be alive?? But I agree Harry has to die for Voldemort to die too, because of the link, hence my two soul theory. Convoluted enough for you?

I'm sure it was something like one must die for the other too survive

Ah, well there goes my Harry-as-horcrux theory, then :lol: .

I agree that Lucius is a big-ish character, though not too sure about Bellatrix. I'm hoping for some major upheavals and shocks in the last book, so the deaths should be 'big' too. I've always thought of Lucius as a bit of an extra, but then again I thought that about Sirius. The deaths in the last book should be shocking enough to eclipse the death of Dumbledore, so it would have to be one of the main three (Harry, Ron or Hermione), as well as Voldemort.

I like the 'two soul' theory. Where does the extra one come from? If you're right, Harry will be able to survive the Dementors' kiss, I think, so that's a possible 'back from the dead'-type ending.

Im looking forward to the new book, does this make me sad?!

Im looking forward to the new book, does this make me sad?!
Why should it?

Why should it?

Not sure, people always make me feel silly when I say I read Harry Potter

Not sure, people always make me feel silly when I say I read Harry Potter
They're book snobs. Read whatever you enjoy and don't let anyone make you feel silly for doing so.

I like the 'two soul' theory. Where does the extra one come from? If you're right, Harry will be able to survive the Dementors' kiss, I think, so that's a possible 'back from the dead'-type ending.
Well in my eyes it is something to do with the link that they share. Voldemort did the death spell (Avada Kendrata??) on Harry, which bounced back and hit him. At this point for an instant I think they became 'one'. No one really knows the spell that Harry's mother used, it protected him from Voldemort, maybe it was capable of protecting him in other ways. Voldemort couldn't touch him until he was reborn via Harrys blood, something of him must be in Harry? It's only a theory, but I think the Death Eaters are going to be very important as a lot of emphasis has been put on them through the books.

Not sure, people always make me feel silly when I say I read Harry Potter
I purposely buy the child versions of the books. If people want to stare let them! There are some fantastic 'children’s' books which adults should read as a matter of urgency.

I purposely buy the child versions of the books. If people want to stare let them! There are some fantastic 'children’s' books which adults should read as a matter of urgency.

Indeed, I used to get flamed on forums for admitting to being in my 20s and playing the Harry Potter games/watching the films/reading the books... PMSL! Just cos Harry Potter isn't "cool" to a bunch of American 14 year old Sony zealots.

Indeed, I used to get flamed on forums for admitting to being in my 20s and playing the Harry Potter games/watching the films/reading the books... PMSL! Just cos Harry Potter isn't "cool" to a bunch of American 14 year old Sony zealots.

Only Rich could manage to involve Sony in a Harry Potter thread!

I purposely buy the child versions of the books. If people want to stare let them! There are some fantastic 'children’s' books which adults should read as a matter of urgency.
Absolutely! I buy the children's version of the Harry Potter books too. The covers are more interesting.

I read lots of children's books, both out of interest and because it's the genre in which I (occasionally) write. There are loads of excellent stories out there.

For starters, I recommend that everyone should read 'The Dark is Rising' sequence of books by Susan Cooper ('Over Sea, Under Stone', 'The Dark is Rising', 'Greenwitch', 'The Grey King' and 'Silver on the Tree'), anything by Diana Wynne Jones and 'Tom's Midnight Garden' by Philippa Pearce.

and The Dark Materials trilogy by Philip Pulman, and the Garth Nix books too, excellent stuff :)

And if you're mentioning Susan Cooper, then what about The Wierdstone of Brisinghamen by Alan Garner, and The Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula le Guin (sorry getting carried away, i love reading these kinds of books!) :)

And if you're mentioning Susan Cooper, then what about The Wierdstone of Brisinghamen by Alan Garner, and The Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula le Guin (sorry getting carried away, i love reading these kinds of books!) :)

Damn! You just beat me to it! I was going to say those :)

Also "The Book of Three" trilogy by Lloyd Alexander - absolutely spellbinding stuff.

StarSparkle

And if you're mentioning Susan Cooper, then what about The Wierdstone of Brisinghamen by Alan Garner, and The Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula le Guin (sorry getting carried away, i love reading these kinds of books!) :)

ooh, i read Brisingamen about 30-some years ago, I'd have been about 11. That takes me back!!! and I read a lot of Ursula le Guin, too

I can't wait for this book to come out, Then it'll be read in three days or less with the corners chewed by a certain bunny who likes 'reading' too.. :hihi:

Keeeerching !

Another £100million in her back pocket thankyou.

Only Rich could manage to involve Sony in a Harry Potter thread!

or indeed any thread.

my prediction is for either ron or hermione to die plus either draco malfoy or snape. snape will be saving harry from voldemort.

i also predict voldemort won't die

Snape sounds like a good bet - a chance for redemption by saving Harry. It could be the scene that settles the 'is Snape good or evil' debate. (He's good, by the way; I'm convinced).

Voldemort should die. The series needs resolution of the central conflict, and killing Voldemort is the way to settle it with satisfying finality. And it'd reduce the risk of any pesky sequels should JK's post-Potter career stall.

Just to let you know that Harry Potter has decreased on Amazon to £8.99 from £12.99.

It could be the scene that settles the 'is Snape good or evil' debate. (He's good, by the way; I'm convinced).
I'm convinced too. By killing Dumbledore I think he has allowed the future redemption of Draco.

Voldemort should die. The series needs resolution of the central conflict, and killing Voldemort is the way to settle it with satisfying finality. And it'd reduce the risk of any pesky sequels should JK's post-Potter career stall.
That's surely a lot less likely if Harry is the one to die though? I totally agree that Voldemort should die, I'm just not totally convinced he will. Evil will always exist in some form, I'm not sure the Harry Potter series has ever been set up for a happy ending.

Thanx for letting us know about the date Hecate! Woohoo can't wait!

I've recently re-read 'Half Blood Prince' and i must say i really enjoyed it more the second time around!

I'm sure that Snape is good and i think that Snape and Dumbledore possibly had an unbreakable vow over something to do with fighting Voldemort. I think this is why Dumbledore always trusted Snape - as if he couldn't trust him Snape would have died (by breaking his unbreakable vow).

I don't think she'll kill Harry off, but i'm sure she'll kill off Voldemort! She has to! I think Snape might be the other one to die...just a hunch. Possibly as someone else has said by saving Harry.

GazE - I don't think Harry's mother did a particular spell to protect Harry, i think it was just the act of dying to protect him, Voldemort told her to step aside but she wouldn't and so died protecting him and its that love that protected him in the future (before Voldemort took some of his blood). Might be wrong though but this is how i interpreted it/remember it :)

I don't think Harry's mother did a particular spell to protect Harry, i think it was just the act of dying to protect him, Voldemort told her to step aside but she wouldn't and so died protecting him and its that love that protected him in the future (before Voldemort took some of his blood). Might be wrong though but this is how i interpreted it/remember it :)
She didn't do a spell as such but by dying she invoked an ancient magic that protected Harry. She didn't know that it would happen, no-one did, as something like that had never happened before.

At the end of the Goblet of Fire when Harry tells Dumbledore that Voldemort is now able to touch him
..he thinks he sees, for a fleeting instant, "something like triumph in Dumbledore's eyes." Harry thinks he must've imagined it though, for Dumbledore merely says "Very well, Voldemort has overcome that particular barrier." When asked about the gleam of triumph, J. K. Rowling says, "That's still enormously significant. And let's face it, I haven't told you that much is enormously significant, so you can let your imaginations run free there."
Their link is important in some way and will prove to be Voldemorts downfall!?

I'm convinced too. By killing Dumbledore I think he has allowed the future redemption of Draco.
I do think that Draco will turn away from the dark side. I don't think JK Rowling will allow a child to be seen to be irredeemably bad, unless he is to be punished...
That's surely a lot less likely if Harry is the one to die though? I totally agree that Voldemort should die, I'm just not totally convinced he will. Evil will always exist in some form, I'm not sure the Harry Potter series has ever been set up for a happy ending.
I reckon the happy ending might be bitter-sweet (I hate that phrase, but it'll do for want of a better one). Harry might be sacrificed for the greater good, probably saving another character at the same time as killing Voldemort, and allowing Harry himself to be reunited with his parents. I'm not too keen on the latter point, but I think there is a little religion - or at least a hint of the afterlife - in the books: the stuff about our loved ones just being 'beyond the veil', and Dumbledore's speech in the first book about how to the well-ordered mind, death is the next great adventure.

Perhaps the idea of evil never really being truly vanquished will be portrayed through the escape of some of the Death eaters? That they are free to take up Voldemort's mantle?

As for a sequel; it wouldn't be the first time that an author killed off their protagonist only to bring him back. How about Sherlock Holmes, back from the Reichenbach Falls? Yes, I know, I'm reaching :lol: .

Oooo Some of your theorys are really good about what could happen. I just cant wait to read it and finally find out

Oooo Some of your theorys are really good about what could happen. I just cant wait to read it and finally find out
She maintains that some of the last book - the key bits about Harry's connection with Voldemort - were written at the time of 'Philosopher's Stone'. I hope that means the writing will retain a little of the purity of the first few books, and the waffly padding will be kept to a minimum.

I love the story, but her style sometimes leaves a lot to be desired (and get that woman's editor a new red pen!).

There is that many different ideas about what is going to happen I just want to know !!!

I can hardly wait:banana:

Just out of interest though, does anybody have any theories on the RAB connection (from half blood), the obvious one is Regulus Black but he is dead, isnt he? me and my friend have been through all the books but nobody else springs too mind.

I have got to admit I didnt enjoy the Half-blood prince as much as all the others, I found myself skipping all the bits about the pensive and the beginning bit with snape and bellatrix. Lets hope this final one is better.

Roll on July :thumbsup:

...Just out of interest though, does anybody have any theories on the RAB connection (from half blood), the obvious one is Regulus Black but he is dead, isnt he? me and my friend have been through all the books but nobody else springs too mind. ...
RAB is Regulus Black, I'm sure of it. I can't remember all the details from Half-Blood Prince, but wasn't RAB involved in hiding the horcruxes? I don't think it matters that he's dead. His role is what he's done and how that will affect the plot, not what he will do.

RAB is Regulus Black, I'm sure of it. I can't remember all the details from Half-Blood Prince, but wasn't RAB involved in hiding the horcruxes? I don't think it matters that he's dead. His role is what he's done and how that will affect the plot, not what he will do.

That is the obvious person, but when dumbledore died he had one of the horcruxes in his pocket but between him falling off the roof and harry finding him, someone had switched the horcrux with a fake one and left the note in his pocket, unless dumbledore had the note on him all the time, Oh god my head hurts just trying to figure it out, could it be regulus? and would Jk really be that obvious? hmmm we shall have to wait and see.

I clearly need to re-read HBP in preparation for the last one :lol: . It's the only one in the series that I haven't read again since the first reading.

RAB would need to be a character who's been 'set-up' for greater significance in the last one. I think it would have to be a member of the Black family, because no one else with the initials RAB has been given enough weight. Also, JKR has mentioned that no new characters are to be introduced in the last book, so it's not going to be someone we haven't heard of before.

I clearly need to re-read HBP in preparation for the last one :lol: . It's the only one in the series that I haven't read again since the first reading.

RAB would need to be a character who's been 'set-up' for greater significance in the last one. I think it would have to be a member of the Black family, because no one else with the initials RAB has been given enough weight. Also, JKR has mentioned that no new characters are to be introduced in the last book, so it's not going to be someone we haven't heard of before.

Ah ha, I didnt know she wasnt going to introduce new characters, so yes your probably right, I cant see it being anyone else I've got to admit, but I thought I'd just sound the idea off to see if anyone had suddenly come up with a grand theory!

If your lying in bed at night and suddenly something springs to mind let me know hey!! :hihi: I'll do the same.

Actaully, I think she said there would be no new major characters, so maybe she's trying to mislead us :lol: .

Who knows, only time will tell, she does like her red herrings though dosent she? :suspect:

That is the obvious person, but when dumbledore died he had one of the horcruxes in his pocket but between him falling off the roof and harry finding him, someone had switched the horcrux with a fake one and left the note in his pocket, unless dumbledore had the note on him all the time, Oh god my head hurts just trying to figure it out, could it be regulus? and would Jk really be that obvious? hmmm we shall have to wait and see.

I thought the horcrux had been switched before Harry and Dumbledore found the cave and locket??? I reckon RAB is Regulus, I can't think of anyone else with those initials, who appears (even if by name only!!!) in the previous books.....

I don't really think Snape is evil, Dumbledore trusted him so much and Snape would have to carry out the Unbreakable Vow whatever, for Voldemort to trust him, for Snape to destroy him from within. At the end of Goblet of Fire when Dumbledore told Snape he had to return to He Who Must Not Be Named, Snape "turned quite pale" and then when Harry called him a coward, he went ballistic.....

I'm a bit of a Fan.....!!!!! :help:

I agree that Snape is categorically not evil. To believe that Snape is evil is to suggest that Dumbledore is less than the wise old man archetype he's been portrayed as in the previous five books. Dumbledore trusted Snape, so we should trust Snape.

If Snape turns out to be a bad guy, I'll eat my (pointy witch's) hat!

i have a theory that snape killed dumbledore because he knew that if dumbledore were dead his portrait would be in the headmasters office and that meant dumbledores influence would be felt at hogwarts forever.

snape is a basically misunderstood character, he was obviously in love with LE and turned to the dark side at her rejection of him, his regret at her death led him to be a double agent against voldemort and he is still trying to atone for her death. the reason he hates harry is because he reminds him of james who he lost LE to.

snape is a basically misunderstood character, he was obviously in love with LE and turned to the dark side at her rejection of him, his regret at her death led him to be a double agent against voldemort and he is still trying to atone for her death. the reason he hates harry is because he reminds him of james who he lost LE to.


I've wondered about that myself....... !!!! It does fit..... All will be revealed on 21st July!!! The last book, I bought at 9:00 in Tescos on the Saturday, by the evening I'd read it, by the end of the week, I'd re-read it!!!!! And I'm re-reading it now.......... :bigsmile:

I've wondered about that myself....... !!!! It does fit..... All will be revealed on 21st July!!! The last book, I bought at 9:00 in Tescos on the Saturday, by the evening I'd read it, by the end of the week, I'd re-read it!!!!! And I'm re-reading it now.......... :bigsmile:i went at midnight, when you'd got your copy i'd finished mine!

I pre-ordered my copy on Amazon last night (using the SF link so Geoff gets some loot :D)

How many pages will the new book be??!

How many pages will the new book be??!
That hasn't been announced yet. The printers probably haven't started typesetting it (or whatever they call it these days). The page count is usually announced at around the same time as the cover art.

I reckon it'll be around the length of the last one, and not as long as book 5.

Yea I dont think it will be as long as book 5, but with it being the final one I wasnt sure.

I'm going to have to read the Half blood Prince again. When I read it originally, I wasn't convinced that Dumbledore was dead. Didn't the shape of a phoenix rise from the lake at his funeral? Dumbledore's own phoenix was resurrected when it became old and decrepit. Or maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part.

I'm going to have to read the Half blood Prince again. When I read it originally, I wasn't convinced that Dumbledore was dead. Didn't the shape of a phoenix rise from the lake at his funeral? Dumbledore's own phoenix was resurrected when it became old and decrepit. Or maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part.
Wasn't Dumbledore an Animagus? Maybe his animal alternative was a phoenix, and the 'phoenix from the ashes' imagery was symbolic of that? I can't remember the details, so I'm really just guessing.

Wasn't Dumbledore an Animagus? Maybe his animal alternative was a phoenix, and the 'phoenix from the ashes' imagery was symbolic of that? I can't remember the details, so I'm really just guessing.
He was the transfiguration teacher before he became Headmaster. Hermione said there a very few animagus though, 7 in the last 100 years??, if she knows that she'd know who they were, DD wouldn't be on the list or she would have mentioned it?

I'm also not entirely sure an animagus could be a mystical creature.

He was the transfiguration teacher before he became Headmaster. Hermione said there a very few animagus though, 7 in the last 100 years??, if she knows that she'd know who they were, DD wouldn't be on the list or she would have mentioned it?
Maybe he was unregistered?
I'm also not entirely sure an animagus could be a mystical creature.
Mmm, me neither. Isn't Dumbledore's Patronus a Phoenix?

Maybe he was unregistered?
Anything is possible with Dumbledore :)

Mmm, me neither. Isn't Dumbledore's Patronus a Phoenix?
I don't think that was ever stated in the books, more hinted at?

I don't think that was ever stated in the books, more hinted at?
I don't know. Maybe I've read it elsewhere, perhaps in one of JKR's interviews. I bet it is, though :) .

I don't know. Maybe I've read it elsewhere, perhaps in one of JKR's interviews. I bet it is, though :) .
I think she confirmed it in an interview. Isn't there something about Dumbledore using patronus's to send secret and untraceable messages to people? I'm on this (http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/articles/dumbledore-is-not-dead.html) website at the minute, got some fantastic crackpot theories!

I think she confirmed it in an interview. Isn't there something about Dumbledore using patronus's to send secret and untraceable messages to people? I'm on this (http://www.beyondhogwarts.com/harry-potter/articles/dumbledore-is-not-dead.html) website at the minute, got some fantastic crackpot theories!
Excellent site. Just bookmarked it.

This is from my favourite site, The Harry Potter Lexicon (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/wizards/dumbledore.html):
Patronus: Performed Patronus Charm during Quidditch match in 1993 [Y13], but shape was indistinct (PA9). Performed again in 1995 [Y15], when it was described as a "ghostly bird" [GF28]. JKR confirmed that Dumbledore's Patronus is a phoenix (EBF 2004).
You can't say they're not thorough :lol: .

Yes, I think Dumbledore would have a Phoenix Patronus.

I think he is really dead though.... Snape used the Avada Kedavra spell and Dumbledore didn't have his wand to block it (Malfoy had disarmed him earlier) and he was very weak from drinking the potion in the cave. He then fell from the top of the Astronomy Tower.... His portrait is now among those in the headmaster's office, so he'll still be able to give advice/suggestions/instructions!!!!

Nice theory though....!!!

My 100th post.... Woo Hoo!!!!!! :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana:

I think Dumbledore is dead, but that he may still be very important in the next book, maybe still helping Harry?
I hope Snape gets his comeuppance -sp!