Last H.P. post, I promise. Kind of.

This is NOT a spoiler. (Would I do that to you?)

I have been checking out a few of the Harry Potter fan websites these last few days, just observing the general reactions from readers around the world. I want to address a question that keeps coming up in various forms: "WHY did JK Rowling have to kill off so-and-so??"

The correct answer is that she didn't kill anyone: they died. Allow me to explain.

In his delightful book, On Writing, Stephen King explained that most of his characters begin as very hazy, indistinct people in his mind. The more he works on the story, the clearer he sees them. And eventually comes that magical moment when they are fully materialized in his imagination, and all he does is sit back, watch what they do, and write it down. He has admitted that his characters often do things that surprise him, and no matter how much he may have believed he knew the end of the story, sometimes the characters have other plans.

Detailing how the Outlander series of books began, author Diana Gabaldon tells us that the story was initially a straight period romance set in the 1740's. But, referring to her lead character, she admits, "....but Claire just wouldn't behave. I kept writing scenes and Claire kept reacting in wildly inappropriate ways. It was only after I knew her better that I realized she was actually from the future, and then things fell in to place."

People who have read Harry Potter feel like they know the characters, that they are almost real. Do you think JK Rowling feels less? She has known, loved and despised these people for almost twenty years. To suggest that she arbitrarily decided, "Hey, I'll kill THAT guy" strikes me as somehow disrespectful. If you were sad that a particular character died, don't you think she was, too? Don't you think she would have saved them if she could?

But, of course, she couldn't. She didn't control these people. She just visited with them for a time, then reported back to us what she saw.