Re: Why Harry *isn't* a Horcrux

Randy wrote:
> "Jane Grey" <jane.grey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1137180451.007489.53560@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Randy wrote:
> >> "Jane Grey" <jane.grey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> > <snip>
>
>
> > that is the whole point of the thoery; if you want to try and guess the
> > book7 plot you have to think "what if".
>
> Not necessarily. I believe thinking "what if" just clouds the issue. These
> books read like detective novels. Clues are mentioned vaguely but they are
> present. The idea of "soulbits" and "Harry is a Horcrux" are based on fan
> supposition that I believe isn't supported by anything written in the 6
> novels so far. Anything is possible though. But I still believe the
> argument is weak. Sorry.

this is where you are mistaken, there are many things (in CoS and HBP
especially) which support this thoery of how harry acquired LV's
soulbit and how harry could be a horcrux. read on details below...

> > "marked by the Dark Lord with special abilities" has no meaning in
> > itself. I believe the same rebounding AK which made harry's scar also
> > caused Voldemort to accidentally transfer his soulbit into harry.
>
> Sure it does. In COS, Harry and Dumbledore had a conversation about these
> abilities. Dumbledore told him that. (See dialog below from pg 245 of
> COS. )

how then, do you think, harry came to have LV's powers if it wasn't by
soulbit transferal?

<snip>
> choices and not our abilities that define what we are". Harry may have a
> piece of LV in him, but it doesn't mean its a Horcrux.

agreed, I only believe in the /possibilty/ that harry is a horcrux but
i am convinced that he must have LV's soulbit in him.

<snip>
> I read your reply. I didn't believe it made much sense but I did read it.
> You say LV did this unintentionally. I believe the only thing that was
> unintentional was that the curse rebounded on him making him less than a
> spirit but still alive.

You seem convinced that LV couldn't have unintentional made harry a
horcrux, i am wondering what your reasoning is? why are you convinced
that this can't have happened?

> > 1. V kills lily
> > 2. V sends AK on harry, the moment it hits harry, V sets about doing
> > the horcrux creating spell.
> > 3. V has magically taken his soulbit out of himself (not realising it
> > is the soulbit ripped as a result of Lily's murder) and is about to
> > bind it to the object he brought with him when the rebounded AK hits
> > him.
> > 4. V loses control of the spell and the soulbit is directed towards
> > harry instead.
> > 5. It enters harry and takes up residence alongside harry's own soul,
> > supplying harry with the traits that the Hat saw in him when it said
> > that he would do well in Slytherin.
>
> Again, supposition without support.

it is not completely without support. we know LV intended to create a
horcrux that night and we also know that spells don't always happen the
way the spell-caster intended it to. But at the end of the day, it is a
theory and therefore, by defination, it has to go into the realm of
'What if'.

> Wait. You say Voldemort was about to
> cast the spell to create a Horcrux after hitting Harry with the AK curse and
> now you say this was unintentional. Which is it? Maybe the result was

LV intended to create a horcrux but he didn't intend for that horcrux
to be harry.

> unintentional but the act certainly wasn't. Isn't it possible that he was
> there to kill and create a horcrux later?

Possible but not likely, IMO, because i think it would have been on V's
mind that what if Lily or James triggered an alarm and OftP members
were going to show up soon? Voldemort would have to kill other people
and therefore when he made his horcrux that newly ripped soulbit would
be used instead. we know that Voldemort wanted to use the soulbit
ripped when harry was murdered and therefore I think he would have
attempted to create the horcrux right away.

> Could he have not hidden it in
> another valuable object as he did with the others?

I belive that is what he intended to do but alas things don't always go
to plan.

> Why is it so hard to believe that LV went to Godric's Hollow with the
> singular purpose of murdering a little boy prophesied to be his downfall?

Because AD says in HBP that Voldemort also intended to create a horcrux
out of the rip caused my harry's murder. So Voldemort must have brought
an object with him, which he wanted to make a horcrux.

> Murder is the key word. Not store a Horcrux in him while he's killing him.
> That doesn't make sense. I believe this is one falacy of your argument.

Only because you don't understand my argument. Voldemort never intended
to make harry a horcrux. After sending AK on harry, Voldemort started
making the object he brought with him into a horcrux. But when the AK
rebounded onto him he lost control of the spell and LV's soulbit
accidentally got directed towards harry instead of the object. So
Voldemort didn't want to make harry a horcrux, it happened
accidentally. Voldemort didn't realise this had happened until book5.

In CoS when Ron intended to make Malfoy 'Eat Slugs', but instead, he
caused himself to. Ron's spell went wrong because he had a faulty
wand, I think that Voldemort's spell went wrong that night because of
the rebounding AK hitting him. it must be a little hard to do spells
properly when your soul is painfully being ripped from your body.

> Since we're in the realm of possibility here, try this. Voldemort went to
> kill Harry. Mom and Dad got in the way and were killed themselves.
> Voldemort next tries to put the AK on Harry. It rebounds and he is torn
> from his body. He became less than spirit. Unintentionally, certain
> attributes that he possesses are passed on to Harry. This was prophesied
> and was fulfilled in this act. This assumption may be wrong but its at
> least supported by the story line and has been mentioned several times in
> the novels.

With every book we find out more information about what happened that
night. with that in mind, do you really think we know everything there
is to know about that night? I don't and this is why: AK is a killing
curse, why would it cause power to transfer? You seem to think that
mysterious things happen when AK rebounds and somehow power transferal
occured. This IMO is a sloppy explanation and i think JRK's imagination
is greater than that. i think we will find out in book7 that the
rebounding AK caused LV's ripped soul piece (which ripped off during
Lily's murder) to go into harry (whether this made harry a horcrux, i'm
not sure) and this is how Harry acquired LV's traits and powers, and i
think this is the bases for the connection between them.

> Also, Voldemort mentioned in GOF that he had gone further than anyone along
> the path that leads to immortality and later explained that his goal is to
> is to conquer death. This is a veiled reference to creating several
> Horcruxes. Notice too that Dumbledore says he always keeps Nagini close
> and how risky it is to hide a horcrux in a living being that can move and
> think for itself. Mention of that fact alone should be enough of an
> argument to detract from the theory that Harry is a Horcrux.

No it isn't, because the theory never said that Voldemort intended to
make harry a horcrux, it happened accidentally and unknowingly.

> Also, in this scene, LV just got his body back. He hasn't created the
> horcrux out of Nagini yet.

this is what AD tells harry in HBP, horcruxes:

"After an interval of some years, however, he used Nagini to kill an
old Muggle man, and it might then have occurred to him to turn her into
his last Horcrux."

this suggests IMO that LV made Nagini a horcrux straight away.

> Most likely, he did not create a Horcrux the
> night he tried to kill Harry. Why? Harry was his key victim. He didn't

canon says otherwise; AD tells harry in HBP that

"[Voldemort] seems to have reserved the process of making Horcruxes for
particularly significant deaths. You would certainly have been that. He
believed that in killing you, he was destroying the danger the prophecy
had outlined. He believed he was making himself invin­cible. I am sure
that he was intending to make his final Horcrux with your death. As we
know, he failed."

this thoery is putting forward the notion that in failing to create
this horcrux as he intended, Voldemort caused harry to acquire his
soulbit. and it might have also caused harry to be a horcrux as well.

> kill him. Voldemort lost his body and his ability to do magic. Ergo, no
> Horcrux was created. Its a simple argument supported by what we know so
> far. Agreeably, that isn't very much. But its supportable.

Actually there is lots of indication that Voldmort still had his
magical powers before resurecting in GoF. He killed Frank Bryce,
Occulumenced Berkin Jokins and AD speculates that he created a horcrux,
all in GoF before the resurection.

In fact i think after his resurection in GoF Voldemort is unable to
create anymore horcruxes because Voldemort used Harry's blood to
resurect and therefore Lily's protection is within him too. Lily's
protection stops the bearer from being harmed by Voldemort. This means
that Voldemort cannot harm himself. Therefore when Voldemort murders,
Lily's protection stops his soul from being ripped. Without a ripped
bit of soul, Voldemort cannot make any more horcruxes. incidentally
this explains Dumbledore's 'gleam of something like truimph' in GoF.

> Although Voldemort isn't infallible, he isn't stupid either. It makes no
> sense to kill a person and then store your soul in him in order to preserve
> it and then try to keep killing that person. Certainly he must be aware

the theory does not say that LV ever intended to put a bit of himself
in harry. CoS supports this, because AD tells Harr that, "Unless I'm
much
mistaken, [Voldemoet] transferred some of his own powers to you the
night he
gave you that scar. Not something he intended to do, I'm sure ...."

the question is though, how did Voldemort unintentionally transfer some
of his own powers into Harry?

> that Harry has certain of his abilities. He now knows he's a parseltongue.
> (He'd know that from Draco through his father) That's why I believe your
> theory is weak. But, who knows? It could be right. I doubt it but its a
> possibility.

I don't understand what you mean here: how does LV's knowing about
harry's parseltongue make this theory weak?

> Unfortunately, it isn't well supported in what has been written so far.
> But, if you want to believe it, fine by me. You've stated your reasons and
> they're just as valid as those I've stated. We'll all find out in a year or
> so. Then you can rub my nose in it, agree with me, or we can both be wrong.
> I'm just laying out arguments within this thread of why I believe Harry
> *isn't* a Horcrux. I'm not the only one who believes that. Please, don't
> shoot the messenger.

I'm not shooting anyone, just laying out why i think the possibility
exists that harry is a horcrux. I'm just questioning your's and
everyone else's reasons for not believing in the possibility that harry
is a horcrux. I'm not asking anyone to believe he is because i'm not
sure of that myself (how could i be? i'm not writing the books). but i
do see that the possibility exists and i'm just trying to get other
people to see it too. So far all your (and others') reasons for
debunking the idea either contradict the canon or come about because
you did not fully understand the thoery.

> > We know Voldemort intended to make his 6th horcrux that night, but the
> > rebounding AK caused harry to be that horcrux thus forfilling the 'mark
> > him as his equal' part of the prophecy.
>
> Whoa there. Where do you get this from? That's a big assumption. The

it's not an assumption, it's a theory. the theory is based in canon.
the thoery doesn't contradict canon and therefore it is a valid thoery.
i'm not saying it's a true thoery, that can't be determined until book7
but if the canon so far does not contrdict it then it is a valid
theory.

> latest novel doesn't mention that LV was going to create a Horcrux that
> night. What we know is that Voldemort intended to kill Harry. In HBP,
> Dumbledore tells Harry that LV would probably have created a Horcrux after
> killing him. Since he didn't kill Harry, Dumbledore said he created a

Voldemort has used AK many times to kill people without it ever going
wrong, he had no reason to think it might go wrong when he tried to
kill harry as a baby. Also he was at the height of his power and he was
going to kill a mere baby, i'm sure he had no doubt in his mind that he
would be sucessful in killing harry once he got Peter to disclose their
whereabouts. So i think after he sent AK at a sitting target baby
harry, he wouldn't have concidered to wait until harry drops dead
before starting the horcrux-creating spell because he would have seen
harry's death as a forgone conclusion.

another possibility is that LV hadn't got around to starting the
horcrux-creating spell but when the AK rebounded upon LV, one of the
ripped of soul pieces got flung into harry, making harry his equal
according to the prophecy. If this is the case then harry definately
isn't a horcrux.

> Horcrux after killing the muggle caretaker of his father Riddle's home.
> Dumbledore believes this Horcrux to be Nagini. What we do know is that a
> horcrux can be created after a wizard kills someone, tears his soul in two,
> and hides a portion in an object. We don't know if this can happen while a
> wizard is doing the killing. We don't know if LV had any other intention
> that night outside of killing James and Harry. We know he didn't intend to
> kill Lilly until she refused to step aside.

But AD supposes that LV did intend to create a horcrux that in and
according to JKR, AD's guesses 'are never far wrong'

> Somehow or other, Voldemort has figured out how to create a Horcrux at least
> six times. Nowhere is it mentioned by Dumbledore or anyone else that this
> is done at the same time one is killing the victim.

I am not saying that the horcrux gets created automatically after the
killing, I am supposing that Voldemort has reasons to start the horcrux
spell right away.

> I believe that argument
> is based on reader speculation unsupported by anything else that is known.

It is not unsuported speculation, it is a logical conclusion from
things AD has said:-
AD says that Voldemort "..seems to have reserved the process of making
Horcruxes for particularly significant deaths." This suggests that LV
would want to make his horcrux right after the murder because if he
went on to kill others before making the horcrux the soulbit created
during that murder would be used. Voldemort would want to ensure that
he used the soulbit created when he killed harry by doing the horcrux
creating spell right away.

<snip>
> >> arguments have been mentioned before. Yet, anything is possible. This
> >> is
> >
> > like what?
>
> Like Harry is a Horcrux. Harry is an animagus. Lilly was a Death Eater.
> Sirius is still alive. Dumbledore isn't dead and will come back in Book 7
> etc. etc. Each time some new form of magic is introduced in the novels,
> speculation runs wild.

Sirius still being alive and Lily was a DE are completely baseless but
harry is a horcrux isn't a baseless theory that you seem to think it
is. the theory was created because there are clues for it, it explains
many things (like how harry became LV's equal) and it gives scope for
plot twists in book7.

> > I believe what my interpretation of JKR's writing style tells me I
> > ought to believe, not what i want to. e.g. i want to believe Snape is a
> > baddie and has always been but HBP, IMO, suggests otherwise.
> >
>
> Well, that's another topic for another thread. In that, I think you're
> closer to being correct than believing Harry is a Horcrux. But, believe
> what you want. I'm not saying I'm always right. I could very well be

just to set you straight: i don't believe harry is a horcrux, because i
am hoping JKR has something more surprising in store for us, but i do
believe the possilbilty exists. However I am convinced that the nature
of harry's connection to LV is that harry has V's soulbit in him (but
this does not necessarily make harry a horcrux).

> wrong. Then again, who cares? Its only a novel. The 7th book will be
> published and we'll all find out.

we sure well

<snip about Snape still being on AD's side>
> possibly arranged to do beforehand. This plot may be further developed in
> the 7th Book. I'm sure Harry will run into Snape again. That will be an
> interesting portion of the book to read.

agreed!

--
Jane Grey

.

Relevant Pages

  • DIVINATION TEST (REPOST)
    ... Answer whether the each of the following is a Horcrux. ... Harry, or his scar ... Fleur is a spy for Voldemort. ... Albus Dumbledore will return to life; ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Why Harry *isnt* a Horcrux
    ... well of course it's not in the books that harry is a horcrux if JKR ... in CoS AD tells harry that Voldemort ... >Not sure where you got the idea that LV's soul was ripped after he killed ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry not truly a Horcrux
    ... the implications of Harry not having anything to do with Horcruxes, ... between Horcrux and Harrycrux. ... One of her many theories was that Voldemort performed a Horcrux creating spell before his AK on Harry rebounded. ... Well - I decided to read DH again - and now that I have it appears that Dumbledore is on both sides of the issue in the books. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Hermiones book from DD
    ... that they should continue with the horcrux hunt, ... Harry is told by Dumlebldore that he is mostly not dead. ... I see this as a portrayal of a classic Near Death Experience. ... Harry and Voldemort had simultanous NDE, ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry probably is a Horcrux, yknow!
    ... >> Nice to know not everyone who doesn't think harry is a horcrux isn't as ... > I think it comes down to how the making of a Horcrux works. ... 'Killing rips the soul apart' - ... Whereas the soulbit in harry is ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)