A logistical Potter question

[nancylebov]

Without going into any spoilerish details, I'll note that Rowling has set up a lot of story that'll have to be covered in the last book. Which would you rather have--a really long wait till book 7, or an announcement that it's just 2 or 3 three years till 7, but there's gonna be a book 8?

Comments

[malkingrey.livejournal.com]

I'd sooner have a book 7 and a book 8 than have to wait longer than two or three years for the last book, but I suspect that what we're going to get is a really long book 8 that takes however long it takes to write.

[redaxe.livejournal.com]

I'd settle for her breaking her initial determination to hold to seven books. If she settled half the questions of book 6, and left room for book 8, sure, why not?

[batwrangler.livejournal.com]

I want it all: a really good next book and a short wait. If that means adding another volume to the series, I hope she'll do so.

[zsero.livejournal.com]

No reason Book 7 can't come in two or more parts...

[(Anonymous)]

She's already said 2 or 3 years for the next/last book...

[cheshyre]

I don't know why that came up anonymous. That was me.

[orangemike.livejournal.com]

I'm good either way. This book went by so quickly for me (5 hours reading time) that the thought of waiting another 4 years or more is maddening. I want to resolve as many questions as possible, as soon as possible; but above all, I want it to be as good as Rowling can make it.

I started to say "there's nothing sacred about seven" but then remembered that 7 is a good medicine number for my mother's tribe, and one I use a lot myself. But if the only reason for seven volumes is the Hogwarts school cycle, then to hell with the seven.

Many people would assume, of course, that the only reason to take it beyond seven volumes is to milk the readers for more money by stretching things out as long as possible (a/k/a [Robt.] Jordan's Disease). In fact, I have never felt that Rowling is padding things, or deliberately introducing complications so that she can spend extra pages resolving them.

[nosebeepbear.livejournal.com]

In fact, I have never felt that Rowling is padding things, or deliberately introducing complications so that she can spend extra pages resolving them.

Wow. Really? It's the one problem I have with her. It bothered me most in book 4, which seems to do almost nothing *other than* introduce complications that make no sense and do nothing but make the book longer and the reader say "huh?" I'd be happy to tell you why I think so, but I don't want to assume that everyone has read book 4 so I'll keep this thread spoiler-free. Outside that book, I don't find that she introduces needless complications so much as goes on and on about the ones she's created and spends way too much time getting to where she's going.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

I'm annoyed about the seven horcruxes--that's too many for story purposes, and they seem like plot coupons. Perhaps she will find a way to collapse two or three of them into one incident.

Also, it's quite possible that Voldemort will have made another horcrux after Dumbledore told Harry about seven of them.

There's a theory going around that V. accidentally made Harry into a horcrux.

I do think horcruxes are a brilliant idea, both horrible and an elegant fit for V.'s character, and I bet they're what Dumbledore was thinking about when he said in book 5 that there are worse things than death. At the time, I thought V. was going to get turned into a Muggle, and I still think it would have been an interesting story line.

[nosebeepbear.livejournal.com]

Er...horcrux? Am I totally blanking on something I should know from previous books or is that a book 6 detail?

[pariyal.livejournal.com]

It's a book 6 detail; and frankly I think it's just a McGuffin.

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

My apologies--I should have remembered that I said no spoilers (though i don't think I gave much away) in the initial post.

[cheshyre]

I'm annoyed about the seven horcruxes--that's too many for story purposes

Well (a) 7 seems to be a theme throughout the series: 7 years of schooling, 7 obstacles to the stone in Book 1... (b) some of them have been neutralized already, so it's really more like 4 to find.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

"I'm annoyed about the seven horcruxes..."

I have several thoughts on this, and unfortunately they are chock-full of spoilerish details (though anyone who's read this far in the comments has hit most of my spoilers already). So here goes.

First, there are only 6 Horcruxes--Dumbledore says in Book 6 that the residuum of V's soul, so to speak, remains in his physical body. V's divided his soul 7 ways, all right, but for that only 6 Horcruxes are required.

Second, two of the Horcruxes are already gone. The first one was Tom Riddle's diary, and Dumbledore says in Book 6 that he's destroyed the second (the ring with the black stone) offstage, so to speak.

Third, the mysterious R.A.B. claims to have found, and to be in the process of destroying, the Horcrux Harry and Dumbledore spend so much of Book 6 trying to get.

So that may well leave only three Horcruxes for Harry to find and destroy (and he already has hints of what they are from his talks with Dumbledore), plus the final confrontation (and elucidating who R.A.B. is and why R.A.B. took a Horcrux and left a dummy in its place). I think that's doable in a final long book--particularly if much of it doesn't take place at Hogwarts (which Eric is convinced is the case).

[nancylebov.livejournal.com]

Thanks--three Horcruxes seems managable, though I wouldn't be surprised if Voldemort makes one more before the final confrontation.

I also wouldn't be surprised if a lot of book 7 doesn't take place at Hogwarts, but I don't know whether that would tend to make the book longer or shorter--it could take a while to introduce one or more new environments, especially considering that Rowling seems to prefer inhabited places with complex histories.

How much of Hogwarts as an institution do you think is likely to survive?

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

I doubt V. would dare to make another Horcrux now. He's split his soul pretty thin already, and as I understand the magical situation, the parts of his soul that he put in the destroyed Horcruxes are already gone for good.

How much of Hogwarts as an institution do you think is likely to survive?

I think most of it will. It seems to me that one of Rowling's points is that Hogwarts and the other wizarding schools (the ones in other countries, remember, from Book 4?) are a keystone of wizarding society. Heck, even Voldemort holds Hogwarts dear, in his twisted way, as Dumbledore points out to Harry in his discussion of where/what the remaining Horcruxes are likely to be.

I wanted to add...

[nosebeepbear.livejournal.com]

I don't actually believe she does this for more money; if, however, she went to an 8th book, I would rethink that assumption. For the moment I believe it's merely something in her writing style I don't like. She likes to use lots of words which is sometimes interesting and sometimes just...a lot of words.

[nosebeepbear.livejournal.com]

I seem to be alone in this (at least among your commenters so far), but going beyond 7 books would really honk my cheese. IMO, an 8th book would have the feel of "I'll just keep writing forever because I'm making money," especially after the repeated assertions that the story would span 7 books. In theory she has a plan for finishing things up, and frankly, she could do a whole lot of plot in 700 pages if she'd curb her tendency to endlessly draw things out for no apparent reason.

[penngwyn.livejournal.com]

I think she has the option of appeasing some of the pent-up demand for stories in the Hogwarts universe, but that THIS story has to wind up in the seven volumes promised.

[cathyr19355.livejournal.com]

I think she can tie up the loose ends in one book, though it may be another really long one.

I definitely don't want her stringing out Harry's quest to kill V. (for what else can book 7 be?) into multiple volumes. I just want to see book 7 as soon as reasonably possible.