Death is very much a pervasive theme throughout the HP series. From early on, we learn about Harry, the boy who lived; the boy who was orphaned and went to live with his aunt and uncle. I wanted to dedicate this thread to the theme of death; it's different aspects; how it affects and how it is perceived by the different characters in the books; and how this premise seems to enthrall readers of all ages.

How has this very real theme affected you as a reader? Has it broadened your scope; do you find yourself imagining how it will affect you?

Is the theme of death as a plot device warranted in a children's book? Will children understand it? Are there similarities between how death is portrayed in the HP series and between other books which have been published; comparisons with authors.

Did Rowling purposefully choose this topic as a center point since this was something she was dealing with in her own life at the time she began writing the HP series?

How has this theme enriched your understanding and enjoyment of the HP books; has it changed your life in any way? Do you find that you compare yourself to the characters and what they go through?

Parents; how has the theme of death affected you; has this opened communication with your own children; I am sure their curiosity will have brought up many questions.

Death affects each and every character in the book; either directly or indirectly; just as it affects those of us in the very real Muggle world.

These are just some proposed questions and food for thought if you will. Please feel free to contribute anything that I might have inadvertently omitted in my opening post. You are more than welcome to bring in your own opinions, queries, and of course complaints as well.

As I read the series, I grew attuned to the fact that death is real...and painful. As having never lost anyone close to me to death, I have thought about it a lot. I mean, when I read about Cedric dying in GoF, it was devastating to me...and it didn't even affect me directly! And yet, it has broadened my mind--it has given me insight that, even in death, people live on in memories and the such like.



I think the theme of death in any book like this is warranted--even for kids. Death is an inevitable reality. I think that if kids, at a young age, can learn through the Harry Potter series about death, it's affects, and how to deal with it, it will help them later in life if they ever have to deal with it--family member, friend, etc.



I think so. Having heard about JKR's life previous to writing these books, I think it was definitely a topic she dwelt on a lot. Sometimes, things we deal with, think about a lot, come out in our creativity--be it books (as in the case of JKR), music, art, etc.



It has given me respect for those having to deal with death (i.e. Harry). It has given me insight into how someone deals with death--and such deep character development is always enriching for me. The Harry Potter series has made me see life in a whole new light. Just like Cedric, who didn't know that he would never leave that maze alive, we never know when something might happen to us that may bring death. Live life to it's fullest. Be like the trio. Even in the worst of times, they were able to find hope, friendship, happiness, etc.

Life is short--don't waste it.

Before reading the Harry Potter books i was actually really scared of death (which i suppose is understandable saying i was so young) but these books have helped me believe that death is totally real and affects everybody but; in the end when it's your time to go it's your time to go. I suppose these books have helped me understand and 'not be scared' of death! I just hope it doesn't come too soon

What Rowling writes about death and grief almost exactly mirrors my own ideas, experiences and feelings. Throughout the series, I was moved by the way she described not only death itself, but also the reactions of the people who survived, and by the way she conveyed the message of sacrifice.

These books made me think a lot more than I had imagined, especially some scenes:
- Harry in Dumbledore's office after Sirius' death
- Dumbledore telling Harry "It is the unknown we fear when we look upon death and darkness, nothing more"
- Harry walking to his death

Nothing in the series really upset me - in the sense that it didn't change my views. But in these books I found somethings which could have been taken from my experience - the experience of anyone, I think. In these books I found something "true", something "human" in the true sense of the word.

The idea that Death can be defeated when one accepts it, even embraces it... well, it's a huge thing.



I don't know. It's a touchy subject. There's a part of me which says that children should be preserved from this. However, they are constantly exposed to this theme, more and more often in forms which aren't suited for their age. I think the HP series could be - maybe with the help of a parent - an useful educational instrument, because it's always positive in the end, and its message is a message of hope. Rowling wants to tell us that nothing is lost. However, I think very young children may not understand, and they would only be scared. I'd like to hear some parents about this .

As for the comparison between HP and other books, well... I don't want to go off-topic or to impose my views on anyone, but the books which immediately came to my mind as I finished reading the series were the Gospels. Probably this has to do with the fact that Rowling deals with fundamental themes and values: we have the idea of sacrifice, the idea of love as the means to annihilate death...



I think she did. Some passages might actually have been taken from her life. The reason why she can write so well about these topics is that she feels strongly about them.



It has definitely enriched my understanding and enjoyment of the HP books; the theme of death is the fil rouge which runs through the whole story and gives it cohesion and depth. I can't say it has changed my life, but as I said it was extremely stimulating for me.

---
Sorry, a part hadn't been posted

Cedric's death really affected me as well. Here is a wizard with so much talent; a hard worker; a guy that everyone seemed to like. A completely innocent person in the wrong place at the wrong time. One only has to read the news to see that this happens way too often, every day, to so many innocent people. Cedric's death really affected Harry; I can't imagine witnessing the death of someone, right in front of your eyes and not being able to do a single thing about it. Harry had to have felt a tremendous amount of guilt as well; it was his idea to touch the Triwizard Cup at the same time. The selfless offer by Harry was rewarded with Cedric's death.



I also think that Jo was literally writing from the heart. In interviews we hear how sick Rowling's own mother was; and how Rowling herself had to fight the demons of depression and suicide.



I completely agree


I really like the way she showed sacrifice through death in the series. And that the motivating factor was love. We see this in Lily and James, Harry, even Snape. A magical sacrificial protection was generated through Lily and Harry's sacrifices, however, James was also brave when he faced Voldemort. Lily and James died for their son.


I agree wholeheartedly. And this is the crux of the theme. Death can seem very frightening to a lot of people. The fact that Death can be conquered when it is embraced is remarkably brought forth in this series.



You're right; it is a touchy subject. As has been pointed out, children these days are exposed to so much. We needn't look further than what is shown on the television, and the internet. Children seem to be much more mature than what I remember myself to be. I like your idea that the HP books could be educational for children; the books send very positive messages. I would like to hear parents' opinions too

It is interesting to see your views, and this spring to mind.

Having lost a parent when I was young your world collapses, as you would expect.
Here (and this may seem selfish) Harry is too young to remember those days.
Take the quote ….
“It is better to have loved and lost than never to have loved before. “
…..is in my view the reverse is true for death.
“It is better to have lost than to have loved and lost .“
I know Harry sees his parents via the Priori Incantatem and the mirror, but he feel loss but of a different kind. Yet through all this he can still feel their love. Death is not the story , the HP story is of love and life. Lily and even Harry sacrifices themselves for their love of others, and whether or not the hallow wand is too weak to kill Harry (as he is its master at that point) is irrelevant. He did not protect himself!

For someone having felt and feared death at an early age, I could not do what Harry did.
I only hope that when I go its quick (and that is selfish).
It is good to see the world explained albeit, among the standard good versus bad scenario. This gives the child the power to ask questions – granted not that we can answer them all. Then those that choose have faith to help.

As death is an experience we all go through it is not necessarily one we want to?

My first experience of death was on the BBC Children’s TV programme “Blue Peter”
A magazine programme that is informing and entertaining and over 40years old. (sorry if your in the UK) On this programme that have pet dogs, cats and even tortoises - my first death was one of these pets – I was devastated that the dog had died when they announced it.

Would a parent of a child ever say to a child – one day you’ll die (preferably not in the language typed) … I can’t answer that.

the problem is you cannot protect a child – the real world is far too wicked, and although I’ve forgiven mt parent for going time doesn’t always stop it hurting.

I'm sorry for your loss ljsonline; the loss of a parent is truly saddening. The quote you give about loss is interesting. But I think there is a reason that "love and lost" are used at the same time. One can't really know what they have lost unless thay have loved that person. That is why death is so difficult to comprehend; there is a lot of blame; hurt; remorse. Death affects people differently. One can choose to accept death and move on; others become severely depressed; letting their deepest fears fester and run amuck.

Harry's case is interesting because throughout the series he gets to know his parents. Of course, not in the conventional way. Magic and those who were close to Harry give him pieces to the puzzle if you will. I don't believe Harry will ever have the full picture, but in order for him to continue on and live his life, he seems satisfied. And I believe this was realized in the forest when he used the Resurrection Stone. It was here Harry saw his family for the last time; he saw Sirius and Lupin who were his surrogate parents so to speak. (Interesting; he didn't summon back Dumbledore). Harry sees that they are in a happy place; and the will always love him. This is when he was able to say goodbye. And this is why he chose not to keep the Stone.

Unfortunately, we as Muggles aren't afforded a Resurrection Stone. However, the Stone is very symbolic. The Stone was depicted as a circle in the symbol of the Hallows. Very fitting; I see this as the circle of life. Life and death are in a circle; one coexists with the other. Because those that we have loved and lost through death will always be a part of us; part of the living world.

I am also sorry for your loss, ljsonline. But I agree with lirene's statement (which is very well said, IMO). No loss is as hard to bear as one involving someone you love and are very close to--be it friend, parent, sibling, etc. Death is such a difficult concept to understand because we don't have anyone who has returned from the dead and told us about what happens. Experience is a big part of human life--and that is how understanding is spread. But with death, no one knows and that scares people, whether they admit it or not.



With Harry, he was too young to remember his parents dying in front of him. But as he grew older, he knew they were not coming back and he would never see them in the flesh. Even Dumbledore (I think) said that there is no spell that can raise the dead. I like this statement by lirene. This is why love is so strong. It can connect us with those who have passed on.

Thanks tryston009 for your kind remarks ! Keeping in line with the thread about death and loss, I also wanted to ask what you thought of the following: does the fact that Harry lost his parents at such a young age contribute to making him the strong person Harry becomes? How does the death of his parents affect his actions throughout the series? How about Neville? Yes, his parents are alive; but they are in a perpetual state of temporary insanity; so in a way, they are lost to Neville. How did this very real loss affect Neville and how his character evolved in the series?

For myself as a reader, I belive the loss that Neville suffers incapacitates him more, at least in his early years as a student. He is very insecure; he is insecure as far as his magical abilities go; and many times people feel sorry for him. So, do you agree that the loss Neville felt was more than what Harry felt?

I agree with you lirene, that the 'loss' of his parents actually incapacitated Neville far more than Harry in many ways.

Harry grew up only knowing that his parents 'had been killed', and even though the Dursleys didn't tell him the truth about how they had been killed, he at least grew up without the physical presence of his parents. And that helped make him strong and self-reliant: he had to cope, and he did. I think that Harry, even holding the Resureection Stone, realised that he couldn't bring his parents back, because that would also require him to bring back other people - Sirius and Remus in particular. And then, when would it end - how many others would he want or need to bring back?

The situation was much worse for Neville, because his parents didn't 'die'. They were there, in that terrible half-minded state, and Neville grew up having to see them like that. In his own way, Neville coped with this, as we saw so beautifully with that gum-wrapper scene in OotP. But I think the worst aspect for Neville's experience was because Grandmother Augusta wasn't able to move on. Because Frank and Alice were still physically alive, she had never been able to fully deal with her grief and anger at their 'deaths', and then let go, allowing them truly to rest in peace. As a result of this, she was unable to see Neville as a person in his own right - Frank and Alice were always 'there', as presences in her life and Neville's. So in her own grief, she constantly held up Frank as an ideal which Neville was supposed to match. And Neville couldn't do this, at least when he was young - sadly, he grew up with a sense that he wasn't good enough, and that he would never be able to match his father. As we saw, he did grow up and far exceeded Frank, IMHO: it's just a tragedy that he had to spend 15 years of his life being compared to an impossible ideal.

What would we learn from looking at Neville and his experience of 'death'? I think that the lesson we see is not so much how to deal with Death, but how important it is for us to see people as individuals, and not set them up as "oh, he's just like his father / mother", etc. The lesson from Augusta and Neville is how important it is to allow people to be themselves: everyone has his/her own talents, and just because they have obtained half their genes from each parent, doesn't mean that they are exactly like that parent. Have expectations of your children by all means - but the expectations should be that they live up to their own potential, and not someone else's. They will often surprise you!

Alkari

It's impossible to discuss death in HP without any reference to my personal experience.

I was introduced to death when my mother passed away before my sixth birthdays. And I must say that it affected me more like it affected Neville than Harry. It didn't make me strong in the next years but even more vulnerable, shy, having low self-esteem. It also didn't make any other death that later occurred in my family any less painful.

I agree with ljsonline – Harry to me is exceptional with his strength because he came from a house where he didn't experience love. But he didn't remember his parents for 11 years and he didn't remember witnessing their death until he saw it through Voldemort's eyes. The first death that he experienced was Cedric's. Neville's situation was in this case much worse – to me he was witnessing his parents dying slowly all his life, because I wouldn't call their condition 'living'. Harry on the other hand was robbed of any chance of knowing his own parents. But would he change his place with Neville?

I don't have children but I think that they have to read about death in children's books – if we avoided this subject, wouldn't it be lying to them? But I don't see this as a way of preparing them for the pain of personal loss. They may however understand better that death is irreversible and final, something that children may not necessarily comprehend.

I don't like it that so many people died in these books, but that's the author's choice. But she made my heart bleed every time... She wrote books about a war and war is killing and dying.




I agree with you completely. That's why I felt more sorry for Neville than Harry before he lost Sirius.





I think that he realised that they weren't be really alive – just like it was said in the original story about the three brothers, they would be neither dead nor alive but as if behind a veil. The point is that you can't really bring them back and enjoy normal life again. Not even with the Resurrection Stone.

My daughter (14) has had to deal with death all her life, but she is more affected about how some grown-ups around us is NOT dealing with death! - and so I'm not talking about tv or internet but real life experiences!

From my corner of the world, I find it sad, that death HAS BECOME such at touchy subject to all - not just to children! It's not right. And it's not fair to those of us, who have had to deal with deaths. It makes things awkward, because it gets hard to have somebody to talk to about having lost loved ones.
It isn't more than about 75-100 years ago (maybe less in some parts of the world) that death was something happening right there in the living room! As a part of life actually, given that the family had to deal with their departed on their own, as money was a huge issue and far from all was able to pay a funeral director after a death. It made dealing with that particular subject more a fact of life, than it seems to be today in a modern society like the one I am part of.

So the way death is dealt with in HP is very illuminating to my daughter and in some sence, liberating, because it gives her the possibility to yet again adress the death/loss-subject with me as well as with friends her own age, who in some cases have had losses themselves, but not having been able to adress the issue before.

The way death is approached by Harry is so heroic - but only in a way that is true to his character - and actually I have heard my daughter and other children seeing some hope and seeing the love his sacrifice represents. So it was not frightening to them at all. I don't think that has to do with maturity, but all to do with the way the adults around children deal with the issues.

Books as well as TV/internet/news-papers can very well be used as tools to open up to the difficult subjects as death and loosing someone.
I make it into 2 subjects because children, I have met, is very much differentiating between dying themselves and somebody dying - and JKR is also dealing with death in more than one way. Yet another thumbs up from my small family of two!

And to Star of Isis: I totally agree with you, that it does NOT become less painful with each death !

and to other inputs as well: - But I also cannot see any way to compare Harrys and Nevilles situation - that is so unfair to both characters! Which type of tape measurer can be used here? And yet Harry is wondering himself, whether Neville is not in a worse spot because of the way, their surroundings are treating their losses. JKR - I think - makes us wonder about that unfairness - or?

I am sorry to hear of your loss, Star of Isis. Yet even though you were only five, you were still able to remember your mother, with all her love and what it meant to 'have' a mother.

In comparison, Harry never really knew that: Lily and James died when he was only 15 months old. Obviously, his parents held him and cuddled him and loved him, yet as we see in that scene at the end of GOF when Molly hugs Harry, he has no memory of that ever happening - as far as he is concerned, Molly's hug is the first 'motherly' hug he's known. And I think this makes a very big difference in terms of how Harry dealt with his parents deaths: they were 'abstract' to him, and as he admits, he really has no memories of them. It's really a case of: if you've never experiecned something, you can't really understand 'what' you've missed out on.

As far as his own memories go, Harry's first meeting with Death only occurred at the end of PS/SS when Quirrellmort was killed, and even there, the circumstances were very blurred. Although everyone was faced with the possibility of death in COS, no one actually died, and no one died in POA. So therefore, you could argue that the first time Harry experienced death as a reality was at the end of GOF, when he saw Cedric killed in cold blood. Of course, Harry had already dealt with the possibility of his own death in PS/SS and especially COS, but I think it was really only in GOF that "Death" was something Harry was forced to consider in terms of seeing someone else die.

And I absolutely agree with you, The-T-Dane, that these days Death tends to be sanitised, and is hushed up as a topic of conversation. As your daughter understands, people don't deal with it, because it has moved out of everyday experience. The Gulf War has changed this for many people, yet even with all the TV coverage, Death still occurs 'over there' and not at home, so that the acceptance of Death as a normal, ever-present part of daily life has passed out of everyday experience for many people. Of course, we can be very thankful for this too: in the days of very high child mortality, even young children quickly came to understand that their new baby brother or sister could die within hours or days of birth, and people regularly died of illnesses and injuries that today could be cured quite rapidly.

But it does mean that people can't cope, or find it hard to do so, not just because of their tremendous personal loss, but also because they have lost that perspective.

Alkari

I wonder how JKR felt when she was introducing a character, writing about his/her life, and knowing from the beginning that he or she would die... To us their death was a shock but it would have been even harder to know that the character is doomed... Did she say something about it in an interview?
I'm not sure if you know what I mean due to my English... It's just when I write a story, I have some thoughts on my character's fate but they are not final, things change while I'm developing the story. So when I start writing, I am never sure how it will end. But she knew from the beginning that Dobby or Remus are going to die, which to me seems very painful to deal with. Imagine writing a funny scene with Dobby and then realising how little time he is left... I'm not sure I could do that. Perhaps that's what makes her a good writer



Alkari, I too feel deeply sorry that Harry did not remember what it meant to have loving parents... It was heartbreaking when he sat in front of the Mirror of the Erised – a lonly child showing his deepest desire to be with his mom and dad... However, I think that it was awful when he saw his parents dying in the DH. Hermione didn't say how he reacted but we can imagine it, judging from her tearful, worried face... That's one memory of them that he could have been spared. But nothing was spared to Harry.



The-T-Dane, that's a very good point that these books teach us to talk about death. Look at the forums, how everyone speaks so openly about their grief after a character's death.

I also agree that we can't possibly measure who suffered more – Harry or Neville. So to me it's not about comparing Neville's and Harry's excess of loss but the ways they dealt with it and how it affected their later lives. These characters are made to compare. JKR made one of the boys 'weaker' and lacking self-esteem, and the other strong, to show us how suffering can affect us. We love them both. I think that JKR has made a great job with these two characters beause everyone can identify with either Harry or Neville.

So we have Neville unable to make a closure with his parents neither dead nor alive, and Harry witnessing deaths of people he loved or was attached to – Sirius, Dumbledore, Remus, Dobby and others. Additionally to their suffering, both live under a lot of pressure. Alakri described Neville's situation perfectly. And though Neville's grandmother is surely more intimidating than Petunia, Harry was the only one that could defeat a monster, so he lived under pressure too. I also noticed that both boys had difficulty talking about their pain to anyone, even the closest friends, which is typical but not good for them. I don't know if Neville had closer friends than Harry to confide to them but it's plain obvious that he couldn't talk to Augusta. Harry also felt more comfortable to express his emotions to more 'distanced' Dumbledore than to Ron and Hermione, but he also didn't spend ours crying in Dumbledore's arms, did he? These boys dealth with their pain alone, as if ashamed to show that they are suffering. And here comes the lesson from the books – learn to talk about death and pain.
I'm not sure if I have any point to make, it's just a stream of thoughts...

I read somewhere, that she told in an interview, that she came out into the kitchen crying at the time she had written about the death of Sirius? Do not remember where exactly I read it - sorry.


I'm sorry if I am misunderstanding you, I read it, as though you see that the "weaker"/stronger personalities is due to their sufferings?

Is it JKR showing us how childhood-suffering can affect us, so we end up weaker and lacking self-esteem, or is she showing how two different (one seemingly weaker and one seemingly strong) people, deals with difficulties and suffering in their upbringing - and how they both reach adulthood with success and both without becoming bad or even evil despite their different personalities and abilities!

I think that it is a mixture of both character and experience. Sure, we are born with certain predispositions but it's mainly our experiences that shape our character, especially in the first years of our lives. By making these two characters I meant that JKR put Neville and Harry through certain experiences to develop their characters and show us that we react differently to certain things (suffering). Was it because of their predispositions or maybe, although both suffered, Neville was safe with his grandmother, while Harry was on his own from the beginning? I'm not sure where to draw a line.
By the way, I hate calling Neville weak, it's not the right word because both of them proved strong, so I think insecure is better.

Anyway, there's a saying that what doesn't kill you, makes you stronger. I don't think it applies to everybody. In fact, it pisses me off, when someone says it.

Ha - knew, there was something I didn't quite get right! Language is a stone in a shoe!
Love you for being pissed on the bullsh** the quoted sentence is! Know for a fact, you are right on the mark!

I even think, that what makes me really fond of Harry Potter is, that I see some characters coping outside the boxes, we people often use for each other - and the boxes are often created originally by socalled experts! Love JKR for writing about being outside the boxes !!! Hope, I make a little sence!

I also can't see how people call Neville "weak' - he's insecure and lacking in confidence, but that's all. And that's also not atypical for his age!

One of the big differences affecting how Neville and Harry coped with their situations is that Neville still grew up in a family that loved him. Yes, Augusta was tough and demanding, and she certainly didn't help Neville by her attitude of always measuring him against his parents, but she still loved him. And Neville knew that, just as he knew that although Great Uncle Algie was eccentric, he still loved Neville too. On the other hand, Harry never had that experience: all he knew was abuse and bullying from the Dursleys. (Of course, that is where HP departs from Reality - I don't imagine any kid who'd suffered the treatment given to Harry would have emerged as psychologically undamaged as Harry is - but then, "Hero leaves home where he's unloved" is quite a typical theme for Hero's journey tales)

Harry really was "alone" from an early age, so from as far back as he could remember, he had to make his own way and work out ways of coping. Neville certainly wasn't alone: the trouble he faced was not lack of love, but coping with all the expectations from his family, and learning to find his own way in life. "Death" therefore shaped Harry's life from the age of fifteen months: near- or living-death shaped Neville's life in a subtly different manner.

Alkari

Agreed. Consider the saying: "no pain, no gain."

Who ever said that should take a good look at Neville's parents. More than often, what doesn't kill us can still leave us in a state where we are powerless, in unimaginable pain, or worse. Think of the images of starving adults and children, so weak they can only stare ahead, or people so terrorized in their existance that not even the death of the person standing next to him can startled them ebough to struggle or fight.

There are many things, as Dumbledore told Tom, worst than death, but that doesn't mean I want to die.

Hi Alkari,
Sorry if I appear unnecessarily arguing or even educational, but if you do not think some real children in real life are treated as bad - and worse - as the Harry-character, and still coming out as whole and sometimes even heroic people, I'm happy for you, because that must be because you never witnessed such bad behavior from any humans (especially towards children), and that is very good!
Please do believe, that he really IS believeable. And I do not see him emerge undamaged, but managing his damages gracefully!
It's like if she can write about him in the way she does, then maybe she actually saw/met some "survivors" herself?
When I read HP, it's reality! even if it is fiction, and I can never require a wand ^_^ (Did not want take out the drama, but I felt JKR and the children suffering out here should be defended)

I am well aware that many children in RL are abused far worse than Harry - sexual abuse, or extreme physical abuse, for example. And I am not saying that ALL children in RL who have been abused will end up as terribly psychologically damaged, but alas, that is all too often the case. The damage may not show in obvious ways, but the scarring will be there, even if it is very well-hidden. Harry has had a certain amount of physical abuse (clearly, he's been hit quite often by both Vernon and Petunia, has suffered physical confinement in a near-cell, as well as being borderline malnourished) but more importantly, he's also suffered considerable psychological and emotional abuse, and of course, the marks of that are often much harder to see.

Mine was merely a passing remark: I simply found it a touch unrealistic that Harry should emerge from his life at the Dursleys with so few signs of damage. But as I said, that is where Fantasy and Storytelling has to take over from Reality, because without that essential disconnect, we wouldn't have a story at all. And for the sort of journey which JKR is writing about, it is just essential that we understand that the Hero comes from an unhappy and abusive home: he has to start from a low point, and work his way up the mountain, as it were.

Alkari.

I agree but there were signs. He does not expect kindness from his family, but he has known scattered moments of small kindness from strangers. He is able to screw up his courage and asks for help.

He is not able though to seek comfort when he needs it for himself. He does not tell his aunt and Uncle that Sirius has died, 1) because he knows they do not care and would possibly ridicue him. 2) The fear of his muderous Godfather was a deterent to their more outward show of abuse.

Petunia is his mother's only living relative, but he does not share his pictures with her. He doesn't asks his aunts any questions fearing her answers would be as hateful about his mother as Snape's are about James. And what, if as with his father, there is some small subtance to Petunia's opinion of Lily.



The scenario of the abusive home is more fairy tale than Hero's journey and not all fairy tales. The image is optional.

Usually these fairy tales involve the hero--more often female than male--is deprived of her inheritance, as is Cinderella from persons who usurp the parents role: The wicked Stepmother, the evil and greedy Uncle who envies his brother's position and spouse, the wicked aunts, uncle, or guardian pocketing the child's inheritance.

In other adventures the Hero/herione comes from a humble, but not abusive backround. He or she leaves propelled by his parents to seek fortune for himself and sometimes for his community, like Frodo and Sam, or because, as in the Eragon series, someone discovers their potential and murders their parents and destroys their home.

Jack goes up the beanstalk because his home is humble to the point of poverty. Hercules human mother and stepfather are virtuous, but not abusive. Hercules goes out into the world to discover his true father and his true place in world. Arthur is in servitude to his brother, but he isn't maltreated as much as undervalued, his identity and destiny hidden until the proper time.

Jason's mother is kind, by her beauty leads to persecution, she and her son must hide from his divine's father vengenful wife. Jason like Hercules, his descendant, goes into the world seeking out his father.

Oedipus was sent away by his father, but saved by humble but supportive and virtuous people. Luke is raised by his humble, work ethic kind step aunt and uncle. He is pushed into the world by their deaths and the destruction of his home by his own father.

An abusive home is not essential to the hero's journey, but it is to Jo's hero's journey.

It doesn't really matter whether it is Hero's Journey or Fairy Tale - there is a big overlap between them anyway, and JKR is using major elements of both. For herparticular story, a key element is the hero's Journey between his starting point of emotional starvation and abuse, to that of having a wide circle of friends, and his own loving wife and family. That is both fairytale (the classic rags to riches of Jack and the beanstalk) and hero's journey (self discovery, including 'true' identity).

However, Maime does point out that Death is one factor used by JKR to highlight Harry's isolation from his blood-family. Right from PS/SS we find that the Dursleys have lied to Harry about the deaths of his parents, such a key event in the whole storyline; Harry in turn doesn't mention his own battles with death, as with Quirrelmort and the basilisk; he doesn't mention Cedric or the horrors of that graveyard scene; he certainly doesn't talk about Sirius's death; and of course, he doesn't mention Dumbledore. The physical 'home' that Harry must return to each summer is not an emotional home where he can recover from his experiences, assisted by his family. And because of his experiences with the Dursleys, he doesn't - possibly can't - talk about his feelings after the deaths of Sirius and Dumbledore.


Alkari

Another angle (besides my earlier input around suffering) I became occupied with by reading HP is this:

So often in every-day-language are people (and I) saying: I could kill ... - But could we?

As seen described, Malfoy is hesitating in the Astronomy tower (HBP), because there is a big difference between thinking/talking about taking another life and then doing it.

JKR made me reflect, because I have actually thought about having to take a life and how I would react.
Mostly it's when I have been in the situation of considering hard facts, while having to cope with my past and how it is affecting my present life. Sometimes the hate towards another human can evoke the feeling of need to act, but could I? - should I? Is hate enough?

How come that for some people (cultures), the idea of superiority is actually enough to make them convinced they have a right to commit murder? The thought of killing muggles for fun is not far fetched, as history as shown us. How were they able to be THAT superior?

At least it was thought-provoking for me.

I realize it's difficult in some ways to compare what Harry and Neville went through. However, I agree with you Alkari that it might very well have been easier on Harry for the exact reasons you state above. I would like to add, that I am in no way undermining what Harry went through in any way. Harry never knew his parents; he grew up thinking, believing they had died in a car accident. He didn't live through the horror of the experience had it happened say when Harry was older; it would have been something he would have remembered.

However, having said this; I realize that my own theory is off a bit. Harry has flashbacks to green light; a high pitched voice. During his third year in school when he is attacked by Dementors he hears his mother screaming. I can't imagine what Harry must have gone through. He knows his parents are dead; yet he can hear his mother screaming moments before her death. This isn't something Neville had to deal with; or did he? Was Neville there when his parents were being tortured by Bellatrix? Because if he was, this could not have been easy for him either.

Harry also has the very unique connection with Voldemort. Harry; through Voldemort's thoughts actually witnessess the murder of his own parents!

But we see that when these two boys enter Hogwarts, Harry seems the stronger of the two, at least emotionally. Harry has had to fend for himself; while Neville has had to live with his grandmother; but she was overbearing; she had enormous expectations that Neville thought he had to fulfill. It seems she had those expectations in Neville not to put him down, but to keep the memory of Neville's parents alive.


I appreciate your sharing that, T-Dane. I agree; death is seen as some type of hushed up secret sometimes that people aren't willing to discuss this with anyone else let alone their own children. I like how you describe how death is approached by Harry and how strong he was at such a young age.

However, when I compare Harry and Neville; this comparison is warranted because the fate of their parents affects their lives profoundly. This isn't unfair in any way. However, there is no tape measure; it's how the characters face death in Harry's case, and in Neville's case he is able to shake off his grandmother's overbearing ways; he shakes off being constantly compared to his very successful parents. And he comes into his own; we can see Neville's transition in OOTP during their DA meetings. And let's face it, Neville was amazing in DH when he stood up to Voldemort !!


Bold mine; I see the point you are bringing up, Alkari. I am going to bring in an argument that has been used in the UT thread. I too was surprised at how well our hero fared after all of those abusive years with the Dursleys. He adapts very well to his life at Hogwarts and flourishes. It seems that this abusive environment has made him much stronger as a character and able to tackle the very difficult task of eventually defeating Voldemort. Just as we were discussing that Hermione grows and matures after Hogwarts; even though we really don't have any canon evidence to support this, I believe Harry does carry around those emotional scars, but again, we aren't privy to them. Who is to say that an adult Harry doesn't carry around his emotional baggage if you will, into his marriage with Ginny?



You and Maime bring up very interesting points. Death does isolate Harry from his blood family; it's important to the plot that Harry involve and immerse himself into the wizarding world without much thought for the Dursleys. Their abuse allows them to become more background characters. The death of Harry's parents, however, their deaths at first seemingly just a mere fleeting mention becomes a focal point in the story; such a focal point that it follows our hero to the very end of his journey. By having his family including Remus and Sirius, with Harry in the forest via Resurrection Stone, the circle is completed so to speak. Harry is finally able to say goodbye and to hopefully move on. However, those early scars and the neglect Harry suffered at the hands of the Durleys, at least in my opinion persist Re: Harry getting together during holidays with Dudley' however their relationship is still and will probably always remain strained. And notice, Rowling doesn't mention Vernon and Petunia. So, I think the hurt will always be there for Harry.



You're very right T-Dane; and I have asked myself this question too. The idea of superiority was certainly the case with Voldemort. And of course being evil helped too. It seems that he was purging the wizarding society of those witches and wizards who weren't pure bloods; which is absolutely hypocritical given the fact that Voledmore was a half blood. Rowling has said in several interviews that Voldemort's actions mirror those of Hitler during his heinous rein of power.

I was reading the transcripts from Rowling's very recent trial and she says the following:


I really like what Rowling says above; that death is probably the major theme of the HP books (bold mine). Do you agree with Rowling in this regard?

Very illuminating for me to read and participate in this thread.
As for your question, lirene, I "totally" agree with JKR !

Your participation in this thread is well received, T-Dane . And I would also like to say to those of you who have already posted here to congratulate you on your wonderful and insightful posts Keep them coming!

I too believe that the theme of "death" is most probably the most pervasive theme throughout the series; and it's just as important as love. And notice, death as a consequence of love is also a combined theme, if you will which Rowling has brought forth in the series. Lily died to protect Harry because she loved him; James died for the love of his family and to protect them too. All of the people fighting at the battle of Hogwarts were fighting for Harry; and ultimately Harry sacrificed hiself in the forest not only to destroy Voldemort's soul bit, but by doing so, he unwittingly provided protection for those fighting in the battle; those he loved.

It's interesting too why Rowling chose not to kill off Arthur in OOTP after the attack by Nagini. Notice, she doesn't think Ron will be able to handle it emotionally; he isn't emotionally mature to have endured his father's death. By keeping Arthur in the story (sure Rowling loved Arthur's character too, which is another reason she kept him in the story), she keeps Ron focused on Harry; Harry needs Ron to get through his mission in DH. Rowling didn't want to create another "orphan".

Notice too, that Neville's parents are still alive. True, they are mentally incapacitated; and they can't be parents to Neville. Howver, the fact that they are indeed still part of the living world is significant to me as a reader. Because I have always believed that Neville knowing that his parents are still alive anchor him if you will. They aren't permanently gone from his life. Are they any use to him in the capacity of parents? Unfortunately, no, but they are still there nonetheless. I don't believe Neville's character would have developed in such a positive manner had his parents been deceased. Plus, Neville doesn't have the strong bond of friendship that Harry has with Ron and Hermione. I have always been a proponent of the strong bonds of friendship; such a strong bond goes a long way in being emotionally therapeutic. Neville isn't as close to the trio as he would like to be and for a long time I was annoyed that Harry kept Neville at bay and out of his inner circle. I was happy when Neville finally came into his own and became very close to the trio, as we see in the epilogue in DH when Hermione sends her love to Neville .

I'd like to point out that both Harry and Neville had one year of loving care from their mothers. That year, the first of infancy, is critical to the development of the "self"...through the mother's nurturing use of touch, cooing, and most importantly: mirroring in the eyes. The infant is reassured, connects, and feels comfortable and safe as his/her 'self' is formed in the brave new world. The fact that the two boys grew up to be "whole" and eminently good people, able to function with ethics and fortitude inside a larger society, attests to this, despite the trauma within their childhood homes and experiences.

Compare with Tom Riddle, who was abandoned immediately by his mother's choice of death, and who received what I surmise was at best a paucity of nurturing in that first year and thereafter. It is where sociopathic and psychopathic potentialities are seeded, if they are not curtailed by supportive and nurturing intervention in later childhood...but even then are not always successful in staving off disorders of the personality, the personality never having formed cohesively in infancy because of the helpless infant's confusion and fear at the beginning of life.

You bring up very good points about infancy and the strong maternal bonds that develop. Tom, having none of this growing up in an orphanage was surely deprived of this. We never really come to know the circumstances of his upbringing as far as his caretakers are concerned. We do know that in later years Tom shows "strange", "weird" behavior". Had Tom had his mother in his life, she could have explained to Tom those strange occurrences as being part of his magical heritage. A Muggle certainly couldn't do this; and I am willing to say, even though some might disagree, that Tom very well might have suffered neglect during his years in the orphanage. Later in his life there really isn't anyone who could provide the nurturing environment that he needed. When Tom was offered assistance by Dumbledore, it is evident Tom didn't want a nurturing environment either; he preferred to work on his own. And now he had the means to make his mark in the world.

So, to me as a reader, as much as his father abandoning him affected him; I've always believed that Merope's death was particularly bitter for Voldemort. She chose death over him; she chose to die rather than be with him; rather than love him. Love wasn't enough of a motivating factor to keep Merope from dying. So how could Tom ever revere love, or understand it. If love wasn't enough for his mother, then love surely cannot exist. Tom viewed Merope's death as cowardly and despicable. Hence, all the more reason to become immortal; he would never succumb to the weakness of death that his mother chose for her own fate; she didn't even use her powers as a witch to over come this. We see that Voldemort clearly surpassed Merope with regard to magical powers. Which is why Voldemort's using the complex and powerful magic that he employed when creating his Horcruxes; the vessels of his immortality; is so understandable.

I had the impression that Harry would have killed Bellatrix if Dumbledore hadn't stopped him... And he might have killed Kreacher if DD hadn't spoken to him to calm his anger... I had the impression that Albus saved him from these mistakes. He was ready to kill Snape at the end of HBP but luckily he wasn't skilled enough to succeed. It seems that it is easy to make this mistake – to let your anger, even righteous, take control over you... I guess that it was a good thing that Harry had someone older and more experienced to protect him from himself at these moments.




I suppose that if everyone around you agree with the idea of superiority, after you hushed all the criticism, you start to believe that you are entitled to do anything. Because you have 'the right' to do that. Especially when the others are a threat to your ideals and they 'need' to go away, disappear... With all the pure-blood supremacy idea, JKR described yet another common flaw of human nature.




In JKR's books there are many aspects of death – the loss of the love ones, the fear of death, afterlife, taking one's life... It seems that to her death is a part of life, yet another journey, not the end. Just like Dumbledore said it: 'After all, to the well-organized mind, death is but the next great adventure.' I'm not sure if I believe that there's something after death and I'm still far from accepting death with such wisdom... But though I'm not sure that those who passed away are 'just behind the veil', I like reading about it.

To me however, these books are mainly about the despair of those who stay alive and grieve. They show that one person's death affects so many people. When Lily and James died, Harry lost his parents, while Remus and Sirius lost their best friends and family. I felt sorry that Sirius died just because I liked this character. But I also felt sorry that Harry lost his godfather, who was closer to him than his real family. And I felt sorry that Remus lost the last of his closest friends. One life taken, and so many broken hearts. Can it be some consolation to know that you're not the only one who suffers after someone's death? I was disappointed that Harry didn't talk more with Remus after Sirius's death...

Well, there I go again, writing down my thoughts and not getting to any point Anyway, I find it harder to accept all the deaths than Harry, and to be honest I would be happier if the last book ended with everybody somehow really brought back to life, I even wrote about it the alternate endings' thread (I know it's pathetic).



P.S. About Tom Riddle - what did you think of Dumbledore asking Harry if he started feeling sorry for Voldemort (after Merope's story)? It seemed awkward because I kind of felt sorry for him too at that moment. So I was wondering if Alus's question was suppose to mean that LV was evil from the day he was born (being descendant of the long line of evil, inbred Gaunts) and Merope's death had no influence on his character. I just keep thinking about this Harry/Dumbledore scene.

Your'e quite good at rambling, so don't worry! About Remus: Wasn't he on a mission for the Order? If I am not confusing my own memory, he was with the werewolfs, trying to find out, how they stood on LV being back and all that?


What I experienced from DD's question was him asking Harry, if there could be any forgiving explenation to LV's choise to be evil. That maybe he was like he was for a reason. - Obviously DD did not have access to Leaky, or he would have considered the proposed Psychopathy-theory in one of the threads (can't remember where).

edited for a missing s!

Albus asking if Harry felt sorry for Voldemort is a very interesting moment. Here we have the hero of the story and the villain; both half bloods and both orphans. Harry is on the good side; Voldemort on the bad side. It's interesting how these two very different people had such a seemingly similar upbringing. Both brought up in Muggle environments; and both emotionally and physically abused (this is just a theory of mine as far as Voldemort is concerned; we really don't find out in canon; however; growing up in an orphangage isn't easy and abuse can be found there as well).

Dumbledore wanted Harry to look beyond Voldemort's evil and find an explanation for it; and even possibly sympathize with Tom's early childhood. When I heard about Tom's childhood I felt sorry for him too. The fact that Tom didn't have a nurturing childhood; the fact that his mother chose death over her own son is very telling; how much did this affect a young Tom? How much accountability does she have as far as Tom's turning out the way he did? How about his Muggle father abandoning him and Merope? It's always easy to judge; sometimes we have to put ourselves in others' shoes for understanding to dawn on us. So, I believe Dumbledore wanted Harry to take a moment and think about this as well as far as Voldemort was concerned.


There is no such thing as "rambling"; just well thought out posts . I too was disappointed that Harry didn't talk more with Remus about Sirius' death; as a matter of fact, I was surprised that Harry didn't really talk about his parents with Sirius as much as he should have. The fact that Harry really doesn't delve into those feelings mirrors what happens a lot in the Muggle world when we lose a loved one. People deal with death in different ways; and many times people keep a lot of things bottled up and find it difficult to discuss. Maybe this was one of those situations.