Yesterday, Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, the (probably, maybe) final chapter of the HP saga, was released. Like every long awaited continuation, sequel, prequel, or reboot, the book has left some fans frustrated, many delighted, and most a mixture of both. But one reveal in particular has readers annoyed, or at least perplexed (stop here if you don't want any spoilers).
In the play, Albus and Scorpious, Harry and Draco's very, very unfortunately named sons (honestly, if the entire play were an epic about them navigating the bureaucracy of the Magical Ministry of Name Changes, I would have been on board) decide to mess with the past — because there are no wise wizards or Back to the Future marathons to explain how dangerous that is. So, with the help of the Time-Turner, they go back to that fateful Goblet of Fire moment before Harry cries his ugly cry, and stop Cedric Diggory from dying.
But the shame of not becoming a Triwizard Tournament champion is too much for Cedric. So he pulls a Snape and channels his embarrassment-rage into a commitment to the Dark Arts. Yes, in this alternate timeline, Cedric Diggory becomes a Death Eater.
There's a lot you could read into this alternate evil Cedric. Is Rowling saying every character has the potential to go bad if they're put into the right circumstances? That sometimes a seemingly good person is only good because his or her life has been so free of challenges? Or was she simply combatting a bit of writer's block by picking characters and adjectives out of a hat? Were we inches from a flirty Dobby or altruistic Filch?
It's a lot to consider, especially as fans wonder what changes to the wizarding world might await in Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them.