Re: Harry was NOT a Horcrux - Evidence in canon

On 2008-01-15 09:26:38 -0500, Toon <toon@xxxxxxxx> said:

On Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:54:01 -0000, dicconf@xxxxxxxxx (Richard Eney)
wrote:

Just about everything that was written in canon as "can't be done"
ended up being done in the books.

Star Trek TNG did that. Created rules that limited technology (so
plots can occur), then broke them in (usually) one time only
situations. Almost all of them were unrepeatable. Either by design,
or risk.

Deus ex machina


Even in the comic relief books,
FBAWTFT and Quidditch, there were statements that were disproven.
The Quidditch book said no wizard had ever achieved independent flight.
Yet we learned in DH that three had done so:

Before or after the "books" were written?

Lily as a child,

Did she fly, or float?

I read this and I thought, "she didn't fly, she floated."


Snape
as an adult (apparently the same method as Lily), and Voldemort
(method unknown). More specifically, Harry's entire existence involves
things that never happened before and broke the rules. His major
characteristic is that he is a rule-breaker. So when the rule is
that a full and complete horcrux requires a complex dark magic spell,
I find it very easy to believe that an incomplete horcrux can happen
accidentally. It may even have been how the method was discovered,
long long ago, possibly in battle. Someone killed someone, had a
soul fragment lodge in something else by accident, and then survived
a duel, and figured out why. Adding the curses that protect the
horcrux when the container is opened/used was probably a refinement
that was invented later, the way Snape improved on the potions.

Yes, but for some reason, people see it as a package deal. Create a
Horcrux, and instantly you have defenses. That's just a common sense,
instinctual thing to do, after creating a Horcrux. Maybe one day a
package deal ritual can be created.

Harry has been the acceptance before.

I assume you mean "exception".

Why can't he be the only
Horcrux (full and official, 100% so) created unintentionally? His Ak
surviving is precedent.

"A horcrux is the exact opposite of a human being."
HPDH (AKA "canon")

--
Lyle Delp
Yeah, Lyle Francis Delp! Ya wanna make somethin' outtavit?

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Harry was NOT a Horcrux - Evidence in canon
    ... things that never happened before and broke the rules. ... I find it very easy to believe that an incomplete horcrux can happen ... The reason why Harry cannot be a FULL horcrux unintentionally is that JKR has estalished that it cannot happen that way - period. ... Even if you argue about Harry was - based on a statement in the books - You cannot argue this point since you have no conflicting statement in the books. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry was NOT a Horcrux - Evidence in canon
    ... Before or after the "books" were written? ... things that never happened before and broke the rules. ... I find it very easy to believe that an incomplete horcrux can happen ... surviving is precedent. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry is a ...well, I was just thinking
    ... WHen I support my statements by points in the books - you dismiss the books. ... You're convicned he failed at making a horcrux. ... We do know he failed at murdering Harry. ... It was his memories and a Soul Bit. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry was NOT a Horcrux - Evidence in canon
    ... Harry to be a Horcrux, it makes no sense to say that he is. ... Yet this concept was too confusing to write in the books. ... create an accidental horcrux. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)
  • Re: Harry is a ...well, I was just thinking
    ... Harry needn't necessarily be a horcrux for this. ... another other than RIddle himslef ... the point is there is nothing in the books that say it doesn't. ...
    (alt.fan.harry-potter)