Was It Fair : Voldemort & Harry Potter ?
You-know-who destroyed his HORCRUX in Harry Potter, But didn?t kill him?
Who would have imagined that J. K. Rowling would seek a way like this. Death of Harry was sure, but she did what was unimaginable and unbelievable. But I have a little trouble about it. She didn?t even kill Ron or Hermione.
The main thing that rests is the low credit to Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows because Harry survived. Cause again this novel got the same old scenario of several GOOD N EVIL NOVELS.
Lord of the Rings (trilogy)
Matrix (trilogy ? Neo did survive)
And many more.
In all of them, the good was very powerful to protect the so called Hero. There must have been some sort of difference in Harry Potter?s saga. From the very decades, it is depicted and seen that the Hero doesn?t survive always. Because if this is true then why we need a new hero, now and then.
You must have seen that in every horror novel or serial or film. There remains a slight bit of clue that the evil will emerge once more, that means the good is not so powerful to give his hero the power to finish the evil completely.
The prophecy was that, that the other must die for the other to survive. But that didn?t mean that both of them can?t die.
In my opinion, at last J. K. Rowling, followed the same old path of writing magical novels.
Or to say, Voldemort was not so powerful to fight with a 17 year old wizard!!
- Harry Potter
- Harry Potter And The Half-blood Prince
- Harry Potter And The Deathly Hallows (no Spoiler)
- Era Giusto: Voldemort & Harry Potter?
- Harry Potter And The Philosopher's Stone