Alright, so now that it's finished, what would you say is the meaning of the story? What would you say is the main message or lesson that the story has to tell us? It can be religious if you like or just spiritual or just moral, whatever. If someone asked you, what is the message of Harry Potter, what would you say? Oh, and feel free to explain why you think so. I'm curious to see what different people have gotten from it. Because I know a lot of people are making religious connections, both good and bad, that I just never noticed. So I'd love to hear all the different interpretations of the overall theme of the books.

The story, at its "heart," so to speak, is the oldest tale of all time. And no, I'm not referring to the Bible. At its heart, the Harry Potter story is a story about love. The power of love. Love conquers all. Love, the indomitable force. The life force, the essence of everything and everybody.

It is simply, firstly, and lastly, a story about the power of love.

After DH the message seems to be that the worst thing one can do is refuse to die or let one's dead remain so. Death is here to stay.

Edited: Unless you are the chosen savior of your world, of course. then you get to use the resurrection stone safely and come back from certain death.

And you think that this is the overall theme? Isn't love at the crux of not being afraid of death and allowing your dead loved ones to remain so?

I'm not sure how love relates to not being afraid of death, but by the end of DH I was starting to feel that death, and how it affects us, was more the main theme than love was. That wasn't true for the other 6 books, but to me, DH seemed to be obsessed with death and dying.

Oxymoronic, in my experience love had nothing to do with either of them, merely rational thinking. It might be different to other people.

I think it has really taught me about friendship and staying loyal to those who care about you, no matter how different or abnormal they seem, because anyone can be your friend. The six of them (Harry, Hermione, Ron, Ginny, Neville, Luna) are all different and 'outcasts' but they bonded as friends. Harry was famous for something he couldn't remember, Hermione was super smart, Ron was overshadowed by his 5 older brothers, Ginny was overshadowed by her brothers and was the only girl in a large, poor family, Neville was different because he was a 'geeky' little kid whose parents were mentally messed up (unfortunatly ) and Luna was outcast because she dressed and believed differently from what was considered 'normal'. It has really taught me to not judge a book by its cover. That is the main thing...just stick by the people who are loyal to you and who you care about.

I also have to agree with Oxymoronic's statement "It is simply, firstly, and lastly, a story about the power of love."

Hmm overarching themes:
Love and family/friends relationships are good. The selfish pursuit of power for powers' sake, the willingness to use violence to achieve it and general self-interest are bad AND WILL BITE YOU IN THE BEHIND. VOLDIE GOT KARMA.

Tolerate don't demonise those who are different ('mudbloods' are emblematic of any ethnic minority, but particularly jews in Nazi Germany).

Exploitation and racism against other peoples is bad (house elves and other 'half breeds' also emblematic of repression/exploitation of ethnic minorities) AND WILL TURN ROUND AND BITE YOU IN THE BEHIND. Sirius, the death eaters after the forest taunts, ALL GOT KARMA.

You always have the choice of good or evil, what is right or easy.

Death must be accepted as part of life, and the well-organised (or is it Christian/Religious mind?) will accept it as the next great adventure.

I personally have rediscivered as an adult that I like (well written) books with wizards in them a lot.

It relates, in this specific story, because Harry came to an understanding of sorts with the fact that he had to die. And he felt he had to die, because he would be saving the people he loves by doing so. Like his mom saved him. Because she loved him, and love triumphs whatever fear one may have of death - if the love is strong enough, of course.



Yes, sadly, it is quite, quite different. My hope is that you'll get to see it from my point of view, some day soon.

Yes, these are all running themes throughout the story, but we're discussing what we feel is the overall, general theme of the story. Death is most definitely a big theme, but sorry, love trumps death.

What's so sad about acknowledging facts for what they are and dealing with them? Love is what it is, death is what it is, they usually have got nothing to do with one another directly. (When they do things are usually tragic.)

(Bold added).

Harry may have chosen to sacrifice himself it in the hope of saving people that he loved, but I seem to remember that he was not exactly unafraid when he went to do it.

There was an awful lot of death in DH, and that still leaves me feeling that death was the main theme. I realize that this isn't the case for everyone, though.


I'd have to agree.

Very well said and I agree completely.
Another thing I learned is that friendship is very important indeed and you must value your friends and be grateful that you have any.

Yes, they usally have got nothing to do with one another directly, however, we're discussing a particular topic - the Harry Potter story - and in this case, love has everything to do with death.

Right...he was afraid, but not afraid enough to say, "forget about this, I'm not doing it." He was afraid, but his love for the people in his life, both there and gone, propelled him beyond the realm of fear where it prevents you from acting.

I'm sorry, I am just forced to be cynical about what Rowling did with DH. The one person who supposedly represents her message of acceptance of death doesn't actually die. And Harry is lucky that Dumbleodre already dealt with the curse on the ring for him. Though Dumbleodre at 18 wanted the resurrection stone for inappropriate reasons - he wanted his mother back so she could care for Ariana and leave him free of responsibility, at 115 he wanted the stone for exactly the same reason Harry did almost 2 years later - for a sense of closure with the dead. Yet somehow Harry was more deserving than him. And of course we Muggles cannot rely on magical means for that - all we have is what's in our heads. And it works well enough.

Jo has touched upon many beautiful things in the series :

1. Acceptance - One must learn to accept people and circumstances as they are and for what they are - be it a person or death. We must have an open mind towards new ideas and new people.

2. Choice - I've always believed in this and I'm very happy that Jo thinks the same. We ourselves are responsible for what we do and become and no one else. It is our choices that determine who we are and nothing else.

3. Courage - Bravery isn't lack of fear, but going ahead all the same. Paraphrasing Sir Winston - The only thing to fear is fear itself. And the only thing that can conquer fear is wisdom.

4. Second Chances - One must give a second chance to people who really regret their past. People can and do change over time and it would be grave injustice to label someone for something they did once upon a time.

5. Friendship and Love - Our friends are part of ourselves and not any different from us. Real friends stick together no matter what happens. Love isn't limited to romantic love as some people think. Love is a thing that cannot be graded. If you can say how much you love a person, you don't love them at all. You merely like them. Love is the most powerful thing in life without which life would be very hollow and useless.

Forced to be cynical? No one is forcing you to feel any particular way about something - you choose to feel the way you do, and if you don't, then, my apologies.

Whether or not the one character chosen to represent Rowling's message of acceptance of death, as you put it, dies or not is not the point I am making.

The point I am making, is that Harry, despite his fear, and in spite of not knowing the complete story at that point - decides that he needs to die in order to save the people he loves.

Death is just the means to an end, and that end, is love.

What does it matter whether or not Harry was lucky that Dumbledore took "care" of the ring for him? Yeah...he was lucky, wasn't he?

Like you so rightly state:

I'm so glad we agree.

I agree wholehearted(&minded)ly with Oryx. Harry indeed should represent acceptance of Death, but then becomes Hallows'master in order to circumvent it.



Do you mean that you must die in order to achieve love? Well, of course i'm prepared to die for the woman i love. But until then, i'm going to live my love with her. Love is about life, not death.

No, I don't mean you must die in order to achieve love....I'm talking about a very specific act - Harry's act at the end of the book, of being willing to die for those he loves.

How can I possibly state it more plainly?

Well, I'm disappointed in DH, too, and it's not because I choose to feel that way. I wish I didn't, but try as I might, I just can't manage to feel otherwise.

I like rowena r's 5 points, though. They're much more insightful than just "love and death," IMO.

It taught me the meaning of true friendship that real friends will always be there to help you in times of need. That they will never give up on you no matter how crazy you are. It also taught me how to believe in your capabilities as a person that nothing is impossible if you trust yourself.

Love was not his goal, love was his means. Love is 'the power the Dark Lord knows not' which makes it a means, not an end. When Harry came out of the Pensieve he was feeling despair. Love helped him overcome his despair and go and 'die', in order to destroy yet another Horcrux.

The problem I see with the 'message' of the series is that there are (or can be) at least two stories here: One is the story of how Harry grew up in a horrible existence and learned of this magical world he really belonged to. Except it turns out the magical world has just as many problems as the mundane one and Harry can't even live in the magical world unless the most recent expression of these problems is taken care of. But while he is handling the current problem he is exposed to some of the underlying reasons that cause the repeated conflicts in the magical world - unfamiliarity with Muggles and their world, lack of respect for Muggles and by extension Muggle-borns, hereditary Sorting causing generations-long rivalry between segments of society, lack of understanding of the thinking of other intelligent beings. And it shouldn't take much to realize that for the victory over Voldemort to have lasting effects these and others like them need to be handled in the long term. This story requires that Harry live and undergo the moral development that enables him to become part of the solution.

The other story is the story of acceptance of one's own death. Much of DH is about leading Harry to make his decision to go into the forest and 'die'. All the focus on his doubts about Dumbledore is there so that he would have to question himself when he finally gets the message through Snape whether to follow through or not. And as a result any other aspects of growth for the trio was put aside. So in the end Harry 'dies' but because this is magic Voldemort was able to give him a way out of death via the blood connection between them. And Harry gets to live, except we don't see why it would really matter that he in particular lived, rather than say, Fred or Colin.

IOW I can see at least two different ways for the story to have worked: One would be to make it focused on accepting death, but then Harry should have died, no blood connection, no resurrection stone. No special treatment for 'The Chosen One'. The alternative would be to focus on taking some steps towards making the wizarding world a better place, one that is less internally conflicted and more resiliant to Dark forces - where the victory over Voldemort is only the first step towards a better society. But then the whole development of the characters (at least of the trio) in DH should have been different so that the reader would be convinced they did learn some of the lessons they needed in order to be on this healing path. So that when Rowling says in her interviews that the members of the trio are revolutionizing their respective Ministry departments it would be believable as a significant positive change. It seems Rowling tried to do a bit of both stories and I find the outcome unbalanced and unsatisfying.

TO BE PATIENT...

3 years waiting for OoTP to come out..
2 years for HBP
2 years for DH..
10 years to find the absolute truth about Harry, Snape and Voldermort
7 years waiting for the Ron/Hermione kiss to happen...

Because all the good things in this life take time...

Ioli; that's the way your life changed by waiting to know about Harry, Ron & Hermione aftermaths. You learned to be patient.

I think the focus of this thread is in the story told at the books. Maybe Harry learned to be patient, at least by trying to think a bit more than half second befor act. But i'm not sure if that's an overall theme of the story.



If feel the same, Oryx. But i just have a second thought about J.K. working harder might have came out with a more balanced & satisfying. Though it was immediately cancelled by the fact that the epilogue was already written in 1997.

Clearly, this is where you and I disagree. It seems that I'm looking at what I think is the overall theme of the story - spread out over seven books - and it seems to me you're focused specifically on Deathly Hallows.

Love - its power - is the overwhelming message I get from this series. In the face of all the despair, in the face of all the issues brought up as important themes from some of the posters - love is the be all and end all. Harry realizes at the end of the saga that he has to "die." Well, he doesn't really have to do anything of the sort, does he? But he knows that this is the only option available to him at that moment in time to save the people he loves.

Everything that Harry has ever had to do throughout the books - all of it - was because Voldemort was evil, and destroyed lives, and destroyed the lives of people Harry loved. It's about the power the Dark Lord knows not - it's about love.

We can analyze and scrutinize our way through every single running theme in the books - death being a very important one, no doubt - but it all comes back around to love. It is the end. Everything else is a means to it - if you think of it in terms of an umbrella of sorts covering the whole epic tale.

I understand that Deathly Hallows was quite a disappointment to many fans, but I look at it as just another piece in the overall story - which to me, is one where (cue cheesy music) love conquers all.

I loved this cartoon when I saw it. Sums up my take on the fuss about DH.

davidenglish, I heartily agree with your 'take' on the matter!

What fanfictions have to do with Harry becoming Hallows'master in order to circumvent death?

Straight from the, uh, "horse's mouth", so to speak:


From Rowling's documentary interview.

Oxymoronic: hole in one.

Some layers of meaning were documented in the "Is HP Great Literature" forum.

The process for resolving traumatic grief provides the basic plot structure. The series is useful for children who have experienced trauma, especially in war. It also gives some sense of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and its effects and helps to alleviate the shame of suffering from traumatic interactions. Harry's nightmares and flashbacks in the movies help children to understand and possibly to begin to recover from PTSD.

The HP series provides basic ideas about how tyrants accomplish their domination of others. Dolores Umbridge is a classically evil person, as described in the novels, but not shown in the movies. I still am shocked that the movie, Order of the Phoenix (OoP), does not state the fact that Umbridge ordered the Dementors to murder HP. Although OoP does show Umbridge's obsession with perfection, straightening her pens on her desk, and her need for control.

Terrence, again - this is one of many themes that run throughout the books, but as this thread asks us what we feel is the one general, overall theme of the entire series, I don't feel the ideas you referred to fit.

The most important thing Harry Potter has taught me is that its not a bad thing to be different and that there is a lot of underlining prejudice in our lives. I learned that trying to be like everyone else is such an idiotic thing to try and do. When people say that something is unnatural, what really is unnatural is trying to fit in when you really don't. Or at least not in the way some demand you to.

I mean who wants to be like everyone else? What a bore!

I am not sure that the book series deals with anything that has never been dealt with before, that's why I can't talk about "teaching", at least for adults. I've read plenty of books of various genres where love being the most powerful feeling of all and the force of life is prominent in many of them, acknowledged as world masterpieces.

I have to disagree that love conquers death; that is not what I perceived when I read the books, any of them. Being a mother myself, what Lily did when she came face to face with Voldemort is what I think any mother would have done in a similar situation, it's instinctive, you don't have to think that you must protect your child with your life. If I'm not mistaken, Rowling has said the same thing in one of her interviews. What I found ingenius in Rowling's fictional situation is that she came up with a symbolic way to show that a mother's love for her child is the most powerful feeling in nature, that's why Lily's sacrifice can protect her son even after her death. Unfortunately, this cannot apply in real life.

Throughout his experiences in the magical world Harry makes bonds with people. This is what sets him apart from Voldemort, that he has friends and people who love him and he loves them back. He is human and he accepts it. As a consequence of being human, one day we must all die. There's no way we can avoid that. Harry knows this and accepts it. Voldemort tries very conscioulsy to undo his human nature, he forms no emotional bonds with other people, he tries to avoid the inevitable finality of death by moving "beyond the usual evil." Of course he fails. It would be against all laws of nature if he had succeeded (not to mention the riot that the angry Harry Potter fans would make). Everything ends in a neat and tidy way as it should.

Because the series is mainly addressed to young people and children, all this is presented in an optimistic way, where magic gives solutions that are impossible in real life. I believe this is good because the children need not be afraid of their human nature, they just have to accept it. Positive thinking is what children develop when they read these books, as I can see from the reactions of my 10-year-old son. As a mother, I couldn't be more satisfied.

It someway love did conquer death. Even though many of Harry's guardians and parental figures died, the effect they had on Harry remained. They even help Harry from beyond the veil, for example Lily and Dumbledore. Perhaps the reason Lily (mothers in general) protect there children so instinctively is because they love them so much.

*edited to add- And I disagree (see above text in bold). The ones that love us never leave us. There will always be a something that's still with us, so for me this means that they will alwasys protect us. Even if its only through the way they loved us.

"Me!Books!And cleverness!There are more important things-friendship and bravery and-oh Harry-be carefull!"
Hermione Granger
I think that is all what I can say.Just need to add Love.Mother love,brother love,romantic love,unfortune love.The main power of the world,what never dies.Love.

Brilliant quote Alyonka its one of my favourite HP moments! Thanks!

A beautiful thought but this is not actually always true. As a teen, my daughter had to rush into a city square in Jerusalem to carry to safety a baby who was abandoned in its' carriage because a sniper was trying to shoot anyone in the square. Bullets kept smacking around her but I think God protected her and the child as she rushed in and then ran out with the baby. The mother had panicked, run and was still hiding behind a pillar, sobbing. However, I always hope that the mother did not feel guilty. Unless they have practiced and prepared themselves, few people can think clearly while terrified.

I do agree that it is an emotional moment when Dumbledore explains to Harry that what saved him was his mother's love and that her love is continuing to protect him. This is a statement about internalizing into your own mind your early experiences of love and the on-going power of that early experience.

Well, this is clearly a matter of perception then, as you stated.

Sadly, as Terrence pointed out, not even mother-love is foolproof. I'd like to think that it would be true of all mothers, straight across the board, but I just don't think this is the case. Clearly, ladies such as yourself and Ms. Rowling, being mothers, would not think twice about sacrificing yourselves for the sake of your children. I am not a mother. But when I do embrace the beauty that is motherhood one day, I will most certainly share your thoughts on the matter.

Not just Lily's sacrifice, remember - Harry did what amounts to the same thing his mother did - to protect all those that he loves. Talk about setting an example for your son....and all of it revolves around a very, very (suprisingly underrated) powerful element called love. You've just said so, using one of the greatest examples in the story. And I'm sorry, I do believe very much that the power of love can be applied to real life - of course it can! Where do you think Rowling comes up with the material for her work? She clearly knows the powerful affects of love on humanity for the very simple fact that it exists - it is real, there is no arguing with it. If someone were to come along and attempt to begin a discussion with you about whether or not you truly loved your children - would there ever be a discussion? Of course not. You KNOW for a fact that you love...no one has to explain that to you scientifically, no one has to try to convince you of it, if it's true, then it's an irrefutable fact, isn't it.


Yes. Of course.


As it should to you perhaps, but as we know, this isn't always the case. Sadly, there are too many Voldemorts in the world who are succeeding at the moment, but I hope there will always be Harrys around to triumph over them. And I'd like to believe there will be, and that we'll keep enjoying those "neat and tidy" endings.


That's fantastic that children, including your own son, are developing positive thinking as a result of reading this story. I should hope so, and I'm sure the author shares my hope. In fact, I'm clearly positive that she does, aren't I?
As to the magic in the books giving solutions that are "impossible" in real life, I believe the magic is just a tool to be used - like anything else we have in life - say, the power of our words as one example that just jumped out at me - in order to express who we are as a person, witch or wizard.

There are good and bad people, and good and bad "magical" people. It is the choices that they make in life, and if those choices, even in a small way, are choices made based on love - whether it's love for one-another, love for humanity in general, love for the environment, love for peace, love for integrity, love for truth - then we'd all be better off.

Rowling has stated over and over again that death is a powerful theme to the books. I think, however, it's important to look at Harry's survival within the context of the philosophy of the books as a whole before we declare that Rowling contradicted or undermined her own thematic premise.

First, I think it's important to point that there are two experiences of death - that of the person dying, and that of the people left behind. Rowling continually describes the second, starting the entire series there in fact with the reactions of McG, Dumbledore and Hagrid to the deaths of Lily and James (and, of course with the immediate consequences to Harry). However, in that same book we are also led into the second point, that the person who dies also experiences death and that, in Dumbledore's words, it is the next great adventure - at least to the well organized mind.

So in Deathly Hallows we are introduced to the Hallows themselves, the artifacts that can make the wizard who has the wisdom and the moral strength the "master of death." On the surface it should mean that Harry takes these artifacts and with them he accepts his own death and makes the full sacrifice. However, and I think this is essential to the over-arching themes of the books, it is shown in the narrative that this would be the weak choice.

Harry faces his own death with fear as he walks towards the forest, but that forest walk is also Harry's walk through the process of becoming Master of Death. He begins it with fear, he gather around him the shades of his loved ones (and I think it's intentionally ambiguous whether these shades are the actual souls of Lily and the others or Harry's own imagination) who allow him to achieve acceptance of death. Notice in particular the piteous and childlike question "does it hurt?" And at once he is reassured. He experiences fear of physical death (not just the question about pain but his intense awareness of his own physicality as he begins his walk to death) and fear of loss - loss of his worldly life, of his love, of his potential. All of these are, I think, beautifully expressed in that chapter.

If Rowling had left it there I think it would be reasonable to say that Harry should have died, but she goes on, we have the King's Cross chapter, and this is where the true meaning of Master of Death is made clear.

When Harry is in that limbo state where he has the opportunity to "go on" - to board the train and truly die - he, and we with him, learn much more about death in the Harry Potter world. He feels no physical pain, he has no more fear or doubt. He know he will see many of his loved ones again: Lily, James, Sirius, Lupin and Dumbledore. He has already paid his price in fear and pain and he can now achieve peace. In other words, dying at this point has no further sacrifice - death would be his reward for what he has willingly borne.

By choosing to return he is choosing further pain, more loss, more fear - and he is choosing the possibility of failure. The point JKR has made, and it is consistent with the philosophies of the entire series, is that choosing to live, to really live in spite of all of the terrible things that life holds, is the real sacrifice and takes real strength.

Harry does truly master death - he masters it, and he accepts it, and he heroically refuses the reward it offers.

Why, are you declaring that Rowling contradicted or undermined what is, according to you, clearly, her own thematic premise? The woman has also been quoted describing the power of love as the most important thing her hero learned in his quest. Like other posters before you, I think you're concentrating your focus on just the last installment of the series.

I stated before and I'll state it again. Death, is mose definitely one of the biggest and most important running themes in the book. But I also stated that I think, time and again, Rowling shows us that the power of love - which I equate with the power of true life and living - trumps the power of death.


Yes. And we are also told by Dumbledore in that book that Lily died to save Harry, and if it is the ONE THING that Voldemort does not understand, it is love. He has clearly given the child the most poignant bit of information about his greates enemy - he does not love. That's huge, in my book, and a continuous message - obviously the central message to me - of the entire story.


Yes, and as I pointed out earlier, it was Harry's pure love for the people in his life that made him accept the fact that he had to die. Death is all around him - throughout every book it's right on his heels, nipping at them, so to speak. But again and again, the author chooses to have her hero rise above the trifling formality that we all must succumb to at some point and focus instead on living - which is loving. Of course one can live a life without love - unfortunately it happens all too often. Voldemort is one of these sad sorts - but he too had to die in the end, except what does he have to show for it?

He made a "name" for himself - which in the end amounted to very little, as was made wonderfully clear by the author during that final battle - and he'll be remembered as a terrible soul in the history of the wizarding world, who focused too much on death and dying instead of love and living. Meanwhile, while everyone was so preoccupied with Death and the hallows, I focused on the pain of those in the Order who had family and friends that they cared about and that were in harm's way, the pain of Harry losing more people that he cares for, the love that made him look at a map of Hogwarts just so he could see Ginny's dot moving about, the drawings in Luna's room - how lovely was that message of friendship? - a friendship so valuable to perhaps one of the most honest characters in the series (and one of Rowling's favorites) that it cannot be anything but raw and truthful. Love.


I agree with you. I also happen to feel that the reason they're so beautifully expressed is because love is the most powerful force among all those other forces vying for Harry's attention at that moment in time - even fear of death.


And by choosing to return, Harry is ultimately choosing love. Willingly accepting the fact that to go back he would be furthering his chances of more pain, loss and fear - he does it anyway. He refuses the reward Death would offer him because he loves others more than he loves himself.

As you say, he's already mastered Death, hasn't he? He mastered it by accepting it and choosing to live. The selfish choice would have been to stay. He loves Ginny. He loves Hermione and Ron and his surrogate family, the Weasleys. He loves Neville and Luna. He loves his parents, and he loves his parent's friends. He gets how powerful a force friendship truly is. He loves Dumbledore. He loves life, so he chooses to live.

That's all I'm saying.

I love this idea, and how Jo put it in the book. Voldemort is indeed a tyrant, in every way a person can be. She taught me so much about war and love and loss. And especially how and why a person becomes a tyrant. Some of y'all have much deeper ideas you have put out there in this thread, but I just felt that I had to point this out.

The books have, as I said, taught me a lot about love and loss and friendship, as well

Oxymoronic I think you might have misunderstood me. I did not say that death is THE theme in the books and I was not countering (or contradicting) your assertion that love is the major theme. I was actually replying to Oryx who was speaking about death as a theme and saying (forgive me if I'm misinterpreting, Oryx) that Deathly Hallows did not support or extend that theme, that Harry's survival actually seriously weakened it.

My point, and I think I didn't make it well, was that Harry becomes the Master of Death because not only does he not flee death, he also does not seek it. Either one of those is, in the Harry Potter philosophy, a mistaken response. What Harry does instead is to comprehend death and to accept it. His return to life, far from being a mistake on Rowling's part is the essential final step on his journey to truly mastering death. He could have sought it - he had every reason to. It would bring him peace and the reunion with his lost loved ones. However, he returns to a life of uncertainty, of pain and of loss. He returns knowing that he will mourn for those who have died, and knowing that he must once again face death but because he has mastered it he makes that very difficult, very noble choice. That decision, the decision to return, is vital to the whole theme of mastering death.


I'm not sure why saying that death is a thematic premise means love isn't one as well? Books, well written books, have multiple themes, and usually the most important are intertwined. In my opinion love and death are both essential to the books. Simply because I chose to write about one in an effort to keep my comments focused does not mean I don't accept the other as vital - I do!

I totally agree that love is what drove Harry, what kept him essentially heroic, and what allowed him to master death. Voldemort's utter lack of love is what made him the quintessential villain.

Since the topic of the thread was "The Meaning of Harry Potter" I think it's reasonable to allow for more than one theme - don't you?

A few quotes from Rowling as to the importance of death and its position in her novels:

E: It seems like almost through your books you miss your mom and you're dealing with that conversation like Harry, just seeing the shadow but it can never come back.

JK: Dealing with bereavement is a strong part of the books. Dealing with loss. Yes. I can't elaborate as much as I'd like to on that because I have three more books to go and this is not a sales pitch, you can get them out of the library and you don't have to buy them, I'm just saying that I will ruin future blocks if I elaborate on that too much. But it's a strong central theme - dealing with death, yeah, and facing up to death. CBCNewsWorld: Hot Type, July 13, 2000

Death is an extremely important theme throughout all seven books. I would say possibly the most important theme. If you are writing about Evil, which I am, and if you are writing about someone who is essentially a psychopath, you have a duty to show the real evil of taking human life. "Harry Potter and Me" (BBC Christmas Special, British version), BBC, 28 December 2001 My emphasis obviously.

Death is the key to understanding JK Rowling. Her greatest fear - and she is completely unhesitant about this - is of someone she loves dying. "My books are largely about death. They open with the death of Harry's parents. There is Voldemort's obsession with conquering death and his quest for immortality at any price, the goal of anyone with magic. I so understand why Voldemort wants to conquer death. We're all frightened of it." In the seventh and final Harry Potter book there will be deaths of both goodies and baddies. She was talking to her husband, Neil, the other day, after she had just written the death of one particular character. "He shuddered. 'Oh, don't do that,' he said to me, but of course I did." And with one swirl of her pen, millions of children will weep or rejoice. Countless Harry Potter websites try to predict what will happen in the final book. "Neil is the only person I can talk to about what happens because he instantly forgets," she says, laughing.
'There would be so much to tell her...'
Interviewer: Geordie Greig. Publication: Tatler Magazine. Date: January 10, 2006.

MV: How did that shape you as a young woman, and how did her departure, her death, affect this book?

Jo: Definitely, Mum dying had a profound influence on the books, because I had been writing about Harry for 6 months when she died. And on the first draft, his parents were disposed off really quiet and at an almost cavalier fashion. 6 months, and my mother dies, and I really think from that moment on, Death became a central, if not the central theme of the seven books. And, ummm, in many ways, all of my characters are defined by their attitude to death and the possibility of death. 27 July NBC Today Show Interview

Again, I'm not discounting the importance of love, but it's important to recognize that death is vital thematically as well.

Yes I do say that and I still feel that way after your reply. I think Rowling can't accept Harry's death. She is playing the childish game of 'if I really wish it very hard it will be so'. And I wasn't one of those who wanted to see Harry die before DH. But then, I wanted a completely different theme for the book and the series. But if acceptance of death is so important then even after Harry chose to come back he should have died for good on camera, within the main body of the story.

Having let these books (and participation in this forum) rest for a couple of months now, I find that the main theme that stands out to me is that the HP books are about growing up and getting to know yourself and the world, learning about your own strengths and weaknesses as well as the forces of love and evil at work in the world around you. At the beginning of the story Harry is a child, his world is very limited and he has no idea that he is a wizard, i.e. he does not know who he really is, or his inner powers. At the end of the story he is "of age" and fully responsible for his choices and actions, he can see both that the consequences for himself (the soul) go "beyond this life", and that the choices he makes for himself affect the lives of other people as well as his own.

That's fine and I can understand your opinion however I do feel that within the philosophy presented by the books Harry's survival was essential.

What I see her doing is going beyond the timor mortis concept (represented by Voldemort of course) and actually taking a more interesting and complete view of death. Accepting death does not mean embracing it necessarily, it means understanding its inevitability in life - accepting it when the time is right.

When Harry made his decision to sacrifice himself it was a complete and honest decision. He was choosing death, not out of a desire to die (clearly) but out of a desire to do what was necessary out of his love for others. His sacrifice is poignant because of his own awareness of the value of life at that moment. When he makes his full journey through to the mastery of death - through his talk with Lily, James, Sirius and Lupin (giving him the consolation of death), his experience of death itself and then his discusssion with Dumbledore death ceases to have any fears for him. His sacrifice is already made - it is complete. There is no need, having faced the fear and the pain, for Harry to "go on" because, as is made clear, at that point going on would actually be a reward for Harry. He has no fear of moving on.

Instead he is now faced with the choice to make a second sacrifice - the sacrifice of returning to life. He talks about how well he feels when he is in King's Cross. He is enjoying a particular clarity of mind; he is aware of the opportunity to leave behind him responsibility, care, and pain. Choosing to go back and face Voldemort is choosing to give up everything he has achieved with his mastery of death and that is the whole point.

Had Rowling not written that chapter at King's Cross then I would also feel Harry's revival was a literary mistake, but the King's Cross chapter demonstrates Rowling's point about just what acceptance of death means - it means neither trying to avoid it nor trying to achieve it. It means acknowledging that death is inevitable and then living anyway. That is the message in the third brother - at the end of a well-lived life he meets death as a friend.

ETA: Here's what JKR has to say about this. I had made my own conclusion as above before I read this, so I find this particularly interesting:

"“I felt that it would be a betrayal of the character if I showed Harry doing anything other than living, what all along, he has discovered to be true, which is that love is the strongest power there is.“I thought a lot of people that had been through terrible things like wars, and having to come home and rebuild normality after seeing horrors has always seemed to me like such a courageous thing to do. Climbing back to normality after trauma is much harder, it’s much harder to rebuild than to destroy.

“In some ways it would have been a neat ending to kill him [Harry], a neater ending to kill him. But I felt that would have been a betrayal, because I wanted my hero, and he’s my hero, to do what I think is the most noble thing. So he came back from war and he tried to build a better world I suppose – corny as that sounds – both on a small scale for a family and on a larger scale.” "

From Leaky Lounge's news article on the DH documentary to be aired December 30th, 2007

Emphasis is mine. I have to say, from personal experience, I entirely agree.

I understand that you didn't say it was THE theme - I think my misunderstanding stemmed from the line that read:

I took this to mean that you had decided that Death was exclusively Rowling's thematic premise throughout the books. My misunderstanding.


I agree that this vital decision - perhaps one of the most crucial choices Harry had to make throughout the entire series - was at the heart of the entire "mastering Death" theme in Deathly Hallows, no doubt.


Again, I seemed to be operating under the assumption that you were saying you think Death is THE theme of the entire series, which you've made clear isn't how you feel - although if it were, of course it wouldn't be a problem, I would just disagree with you is all. So, as I felt differently, I made my point accordingly, but of course it's reasonable to "allow" for more than one theme - that's the point, no? But I also enjoy debating and propping up my opinions with as much fact, knowledge and understanding as I can muster. And despite that Rowling stated that Death is "possibly the most important theme" in the books, I still feel that, for me, Love stands out. And I think she gave Love the very extreme backdrop of Death in order to make it stand out more forcefully. Yes, they're probably the top two running themes, and you make a good point that they are intertwined in many ways throughout the story (how can they not be)? But just as I accept the theme of Death as very vital - I was only attempting to keep my comments focused on the theme of Love. I never intended to come off as disparaging of Death's obvious importance to the plot, only to express an answer to the question of what I thought was the main, overall message of the series.

We don't actually see him do the 'larger scale'. Not in the book. And the way she left some aspects of his development undealt with, I don't see why it is important that Harry does the 'larger scale' thing more than say, Colin Creevey. Or why I should expect him to do a better job than those who botched it up the previous time, despite their claimed good intentions.

This books Taught me so many things firstly CHOICES thats most important thng in this book,:its our choices that define us","a time will come when you will hae to choose between ,what is right and what is easy."
Choices is what can make dreadful effects think if James didnt choose to swap the secret keeper at last moment .he would be living and so would be probably loads others.so many possiblites but umtimate hig was choice.

the Death has ben a vital theme ,Rocked us didnt it?so many deaths,James,Liliy,Lupin,Cedric,Tonks,Albus,Mad Eye,Fred ,Sirius and who not but the thing is its this peopel who have died accepting death and trying to fight for greater good or protecting others but certainly not themselves.

so here i bring in the sacrificial part or more better selfnessness has been an important lesson,more you can give ,give do not expect anything in return thats what i belive and his Cahracter of Harry tells same thing,he has singlehandedly protected with much help the whole wizarding world alas when he conquers death the protection he gives is not to Weasleys or his friends but to every person he ca and nobility is another great attribute

Love has been most powerful object in all books ,Love has probably saved many lives and in the end destroyed evil itself but Love makes staggering difference,the choices and contrast of Voldemort and Harry during Hogwarts time proves the choices are important,Love is so important in the end Voldy is left with handful of death eaters to fight with while Harry has whole Hogwarts no need for second guesss what it is.