The Pensieve

I needed some time to think about the title before posting my speculations about it here, but I think I’m ready now. I have purposely been avoiding reading speculation about the title so I could form an opinion before I read those of others.

First of all, I’m not crazy about the title. I wasn’t crazy about HBP, either. Frankly, I think the title of HBP is misleading. Yes, Harry gets the Half-Blood Prince’s old Potions text, and yes, it’s helpful, and yes, it is interesting that it was Snape. Maybe the fact that Snape is a half-blood will be significant in the next book, but based on information we have now, I’m not sure it’s an important bit of information. At any rate, that book mainly seemed to be about Harry’s discovery of the horcruxes and Voldemort’s past. But it might have been giving too much away to title it Harry Potter and the History of Voldemort (not to mention it sounds duller than it is) or Harry Potter and the Seven Horcruxes.

It is tempting to confuse “hallows” with “hollows,” probably because we already know of a place in the Potterverse called Godric’s Hollow. “Hallows” are something different altogether. The verb “to hallow” means “to venerate,” “to respect,” “to make holy,” “to set apart for holy use” (Merriam-Webster). “Hallows” as it is used in the title sounds more like a noun — like a group of people or a place. However, it also takes an adverb, “deathly,” which means we can’t discount the notion that it is being used as a verb. Both verbs used as nouns and verbs could take an adverb, so it could be either one.

Looking strictly at the language, it sounds as though the title could refer to venerations that are somehow like death. Substituting language, it could mean “deathlike venerations.” “Hallows” can also refer to those who are hallowed or venerated, such as saints. Read this way, the title could mean “deathlike venerated ones.” Objects, people, or a place that is respected or venerated, or perhaps even holy, but are also deathlike.

We don’t think of “deathly” as an adjective very much, as it ends in “-ly,” but it is actually used more often as an adjective; according to Merriam-Webster, when used as an adjective, “deathly” means “fatal.” Another way to look at the title, then, might be “fatal venerated ones/place/things” or “fatal respected ones/place/things” or even “fatal venerations,” as in the very respect given to venerated object is fatal. This is the definition I prefer.

Voldemort’s followers are called “Death Eaters.” I don’t know that I have ever sat down and really thought about why. Literally, that means, “eaters of death.” Does that mean they enjoy death or they defy death? Or both? I think both. They clearly enjoy killing, as evidenced by Voldemort’s promise to Macnair to provide him with Muggle victims soon (GoF Ch. 33). However, Voldemort’s quest — ever since was a student at Hogwarts — has been to conquer death. This is his reason for creating the horcruxes. He fears death above all things. JKR has stated in interviews that Voldemort’s boggart would cause him to see himself lying dead: “death, ignominious death …. He would see himself dead.” JKR added that Voldemort sees death as a “shameful human weakness” (Accio Quote).

It could be argued that Voldemort’s Death Eaters venerate and respect him; therefore, the title indicates that those venerations will be deadly to them. I suppose it could also mean that Voldemort is deathlike and hallowed, also, but I don’t care for that interpretation.

My pet theory at the moment is that the title refers to the fact that what Voldemort venerates and respects most — holding onto life at any cost, even that of his soul — will be his undoing. I think he will be destroyed through the very means that he used to work to overcome death — namely, that his horcruxes will be destroyed and he will be killed. I refuse to believe that the series will end without the death of Voldemort.

On the other hand, there are those who would argue that something respected or venerated by Harry will prove to be fatal. I don’t see it. JKR seems to value the same things — love, courage, bravery. Why would she seek to make it seem as though valuing or venerating these virtues is somehow fatal and deadly? That’s flat depressing. I will add that some of the HP fans who are really campaigning for Harry to die in the end frequently remind me that JKR “doesn’t write the books for fans; she writes them for herself” are full of horse-hockey. I am sure that she writes what she wants to write, but like any writer, she is aware of her audience. If she wasn’t, she wouldn’t be such a good and successful writer. I think she would like us to debate whether or not Harry will die, but ultimately, I don’t think she will kill Harry. I have said before and will say again that a large part of JKR’s audience is children. I do not think she will lightly kill off the hero of a children’s book. If she does so, it will be for reasons that are absolutely clear to the readers — it is something that will have to happen. I know she hasn’t shied away from killing beloved characters, but that is very different from killing the hero. In most epics that I have read, the hero does not die at the moment he achieves his quest, but after a long life. Some examples:

• Beowulf dies slaying a dragon long after he has rid Heorot of Grendel and Grendel’s mother and become king of the Geats.
• Odysseus dies long after returning to Ithaca and routing the suitors, re-establishing his kingdom and relationship with Penelope.
• Frodo Baggins sails to the Grey Havens (which may be viewed as a sort of death, as he moves on to a sort of heaven) years after the One Ring has been destroyed.
• King Arthur is slain by Mordred long after his knight Galahad obtained the Holy Grail and long after the peaceful kingdom of Camelot was established. He had successfully subdued the Saxons for a time.

It could, however, be argued that like Arthur, Harry will die in battle while at the same time killing his enemy. I would definitely prefer that this didn’t happen, but precedent has been set, and JKR would be able end the series with Harry’s death if she set the book up in the manner of Arthurian legend and prepared the reader. Still, to those readers who pooh-pooh me when I remind them that the books were originally intended for children and therefore that Harry’s potential death should be handled carefully, I say that one simply cannot discount this fact. Had the series been fantasy books with older characters and clearly aimed adults, those naysayers might have a point, but as things stand, I don’t think that they do have one.

I have probably already posted predictions for this book somewhere else on this blog, but I can’t remember, and now that I’m caught up in writing this, I don’t want to check. These are my predictions for DH:

• Voldemort will die.
• Snape will die and will also be revealed as an agent for good.
• One of the Weasleys will die.
• I think JKR likes Ron/Hermione too much not to ensure that they are able to marry and start a family in the future, so I don’t think they will die.
• We will learn why Dumbledore had a gleam of triumph when he heard about the rebirthing ceremony — that will be important.
• We will discover that R.A.B. is Regulus.
• We will learn that locket found in OotP while cleaning house is a horcrux — Merope Gaunt’s locket/Slytherin’s locket, but just to make things difficult, we will also learn that Mundungus stole it and sold it and Harry will have to track it down.
• Harry is not a horcrux, or if he is, the goodness in his body made it impossible for the part of Voldemort’s soul embodied within him to survive.
• Harry’s scar will disappear when he defeats Voldemort, as will some of the abilities it afforded (this reminds me of the fading of the elves in LotR after the One Ring is destroyed — even the beauty that was forged with the elven rings cannot last if the One Ring is destroyed).
• I admit I have trouble seeing what Harry will do next after waging this battle. Anything he does after almost seems mundane, which is a good argument for killing him off. If he does survive, he will attain his ambition of becoming an Auror, as will Ron.
• Dumbledore is really dead and will not be sent back to complete his mission in a greater, more formidable form (as Gandalf was). However, his portrait will advise the characters. He will not become a ghost — he was not afraid of death.
• Prof. McGonagall will become Headmistress, which will necessitate the hiring of a new Transfiguration professor in addition to a new DADA professor. So far, with the exception of HBP, the new DADA teacher has been someone we didn’t know. Perhaps McGonagall will see fit to bring Prof. Lupin back? I’d like that. Do we know any wizards good enough at Transfiguration to replace her? I can’t think of any notables off the top of my head.
• Hogwarts will reopen for Year 7 — it would disrupt the pattern too much not to have a Year 7 on the book’s spine — but it will have to be a strange year, and Harry will have to be given leave to seek the horcruxes.
• I am kind of afraid Hagrid will die; however, JKR really likes him a lot, so it’s possible she will not have the stomach to kill him. I like him, too, but I know in some corners of the fandom, he isn’t very popular.
• Lupin will avenge himself against Fenrir Greyback.
• Petunia Dursley is supposed to play some last important role — there is more about her than we guess, according to JKR. JKR has said that she is not a squib, but that guessing she was a squib was dangerously close to the truth. I think she is a witch who willfully denied her power, but that she will use it in DH. JKR said she is a Muggle (Accio Quote). I think that she willed herself to be one.
• In the epilogue, we will learn that Ron became Minister for Magic, Neville became a Herbology professor at Hogwarts (Professor Sprout will either die or retire) and married Luna (I just like them together), Ron married Hermione (I am so stuck on what I think she will do for a career), Hagrid married Madame Maxime and they did something to repair the relations between wizards and giants, and Lupin’s lycanthropy was cured and he married Tonks — it would be so cool if Hermione became a healer and developed a cure for lycanthropy, wouldn’t it? Maybe she will. We will also learn that Ron and Hermione had a son they named Harry. Like Ron’s family of origin, they will be prolific, and they will also have children named for Molly, Arthur, Hermione’s parents, Neville, Luna, Ginny, and Bill or Charlie. Of course, that one’s a wild, out-there guess.

Technorati Tags: Harry Potter, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, J.K. Rowling, predictions, Harry Potter series, title, theories, speculation

This entry was posted on Monday, January 1st, 2007 at 5:44 pm and is filed under Speculations. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.