July 21st is fast approaching, and the media is totally bewitched by the phenomenon that is Harry Potter. And the question on every fan's mind is - Will Harry die in the seventh book? There have been a lot of teasers from the author herself - all these talks of at least two of the main characters dying in the book and her revelation that she cried her heart out after writing the final few chapters. For a lot of reasons I personally think these are just that - teasers, that is, to create a buzz around the book. True, from the fourth book onwards, the series is getting darker, with at least one death in every book. If it was Harry's Godfather Sirius in the fifth, it was his mentor Dumbledore in the sixth. She seems to be (slightly sadistically, according to me!) killing people who matter to Harry, just so that Harry will have to face Voldermort all on his own in the final book.

The main reason why Potter fans think Harry will have to die is because of this theory that he himself is a horcrux of Voldermort, and to completely destroy the evil dark Lord, he will have to die. I have tried to compile reasons why JKR would not do that (or probably I am hoping that she should not do that!)

1.                          If you read all the books from 1 to 6, all the events are narrated from Harry’s point of view. Like, if there is a quidditch match where he doesn’t play (like in the sixth book) JRK does not bother telling us what happened in the match if Harry is not playing. Her own style of writing is narrating the story through Harry. So, if she kills him in the final book, unless she kills him in the last sentence, I don’t see how she’ll suddenly deviate from her style.

2.                          Harry cannot be a Horcrux, because Dumbledore says that making animals as horcruxes is a dangerous business, when suggesting that Nagini the snake could be one. If an animal like a snake is a bad choice for a horcrux (mainly because it can think and act itself) how can a human become a horcrux?

3.                          Though the series has an excellent plot and story line, the basic crux of the story is not that original – it is plainly good versus evil. For those you who have read JRR Tolkien’s Lord of the rings series, you would agree with me that JKR has borrowed some ideas from Tolkien, and in those books against all odds, at the end, good does triumph over evil, so there is no way she’ll kill Harry because that will be like the good doesn’t win!

4.                          Remember Star wars series, which was a Global phenomenon too, and against all odds, the evil Darth Vader does die at the end, and all the good characters survive. Initially JKR may not have written keeping the movie angle in mind, but surely the recent books of hers are written keeping the multi-million Hollywood productions in mind too. And the movies, by themselves, have their own audience, people who don’t read books watch the movies too. I cannot think of any typical Good versus Evil blockbuster where the good triumphed at the end, but died in the process! Surely Warner Brothers would want to keep the dough rolling!

5.                          I know the target audience for the series has aged considerably (initially it was pre-teens, but as Harry got older I guess his fan base got older too), I personally know a lot of people who are in their late twenties hooked to the series too! Still it doesn’t mean that it is a strictly adult book, and even now a lot of pre-teens do read the series, so it is unwise to kill the main protagonist, as Harry has kind of become an icon for them. And if he is killed, there will be a lot of back lash for that, so I personally think she would not risk it.

With all these hype, I hope the book lives up to its expectations, which I am sure it will, and all the questions and loose ends are tied up. Still, JKR is famous for her ‘googlies’ leading her fans to believe in something and giving an unexpected twist at the end. Till then we can always volley our own theories and argue and have fun!