Mindless painting leaves too much time for thinking - Warning "Harry Potter" Spoilers

I've been thinking about this (and re-read the part with Slughorn), and whether Harry could be himself a Horcrux.

I also considered the Priori Incantum spell we observed at the end of book 4.

Here's what we know:

1. That EVERY murder rips a piece of the soul from the murderer. (note to self... did Snape save Harry from ripping his own soul at the time of the attack on Draco and again the attacks on Snape?)

2. The effect of the Horcrux is to capture this bit of torn soul and preserve it, tie it to earth (as opposed, I suppose, to allowing it to descend into Hell or ascend into Heaven), for later reclamation.

3. The soul-bit is preserved in a tangible thing... we know it was preserved in the Ring and in the Diary, we suspect also the Locket and Nagini (didn't Voldemort meet up with Nagini AFTER the Prof. Quirrell disaster?). We know from the Diary that the soul-bits thus preserved contain sufficient personality to take independent action when given the opportunity. (question: which soul-bit did Voldemort reclaim in order to survive his miscarried attack on infant Harry? This would seem to indicate maybe Harry is looking for less than 7 total, since one has been 'used'.)

4. The spell-casting action associated with the Horcrux is something done prior to, and possibly separate from, the act of the murder. (No Horcrux spell apparent in the Priori Incantem)

Here's what I suspect:

5. SO... If Voldemort were planning to use the death of Harry (ooh, symbolism: slaying of the innocents... anyone notice a Herod connection?) as a particularly powerful slice of his soul, and all the preparations were made, and the item was at hand to make the transfer, and we know that the death of Lily Potter was not the intent (she put herself between V and Harry), could the misfire have simultaneously caught V's soul in Harry (instead of the intended item) and killed Voldemort.

7. This is probably why the first place Harry wants to go exploring is in Godric's Hollow, somewhere he hasn't been in some 16 years. He is likely to find the item that should-have-been the Horcrux container, and that will cause him to see that he himself is a Horcrux.

8. Dumbledore, like Lewis's Aslan and even the White Witch, believed in some sort of greater older magic that isn't taught or even commonly believed to exist. This magic has something to do with love, family, agency, redemption and forgiveness. Something about this older greater magic will make possible the final destruction of Voldemort even if a chunk of Voldy's soul is in Harry.

9. it is evident that a death must also take place in order for a soul-bit to escape its horcrux container. For example, the teen Tom Riddle (note to self: compare the Diary with the conversation with Slughorn... which came first? was the Diary the practice? was the death that of Moaning Myrtle?) of the Diary claimed that once Ginny died, he would be whole and powerful again. So who died to bring which horcrux bit back to life after Voldemort died trying to kill Harry?

Comments

cublawg said…
And just to add to the mix: if the HP series is intended as a Christian allegory, as Rowling has suggested, doesn't young Harry have to be sacrificed at the end of book seven, much like those who bit the dust in Lewis' Chronicles?
Coffinberry said…
Depends on exactly what she's allegorizing. True that the Sons of Adam and Daughters of Eve in Narnia bit the dust fighting the good-evil fight. But I'm not sure that is the direction that Rowling is going with HP (assuming she's allegorizing at all). I've a suspicion (mentioned in point 8 supra) that she's aiming at breathing life into whatever it is the 'old magic' is, and it is the 'old magic' itself (as professed by Dumbledore) that represents the allegory. I don't think she has the chutzpah to cast Dumbledore in a Redeemer role to come back from the dead (a la' Gandalf), because that would shoot the allegory (LOTR and Narnia were both set in 'other' worlds... Potter is clearly set in ours of today) soundly in the foot. So I'm expecting something more of a spirit guide like Obi Wan Kenobi/Yoda out of Dumbledore. I also expect book 7 to feature somebody knowledgeable in just what it was that Dumbledore believed/knew about 'old magic'.

But these are just my particular spin ramblings. You're free to imagine your own!
Coffinberry said…
To clarify: while there may be specific literary connotations applied to the concept of "Christian Allegory", it is my position that the allegory to Christian belief expressed in the story is the existence of an "old magic" that makes possible for hope, provides for the ability to choose which side one is on, and which emphasizes/values responsibility, love, joy, and forgiveness.

I do not expect a 'happy' ending, because life isn't like that, so such an ending wouldn't be true to what makes the books so great. I would expect a "hopeful" ending, however, that despite the near-impossible situations, our beloved characters find reason to keep loving and keep living.
cublawg said…
Unless they're dead. ;-)
Coffinberry said…
Lewis turned Dead into a happy ending.
Coffinberry said…
Nah, that's Tolkien, he wrote in the preface to the last edition of LOTR in his lifetime that he despises allegory.

Lewis, on the other hand, was master of Christian Allegory and was known as possibly the greatest Christian Apologist of the 20th Century. He stated many times that Narnia was specifically an allegory; it amused him that children were much quicker than adults to see the Aslan=Jesus connection. See also "Screwtape Letters," "Mere Christianity," and "The Great Divorce".
Coffinberry said…
The irony of the above is that it is Tolkien who converted the agnostic Lewis to Christianity.
Coffinberry said…
I will concede that I may be misusing the term "allegory.

However, in letters written by Lewis responding to children who had written to him about their enjoyment of the Narnia books, he does confirm the correlation between the Christian concept of creator/redeemer and Aslan. Further, one can find at least one specific Christian connection internal to the books... in "The Last Battle" Lucy makes the observation (as one who has been commanded by Aslan to "look for him" in her own world) that once upon a time a manger held something bigger than the whole world.

One thing that makes the Narnia parable (for lack of a better word) different from much of Christian storytelling is the allowance that a specific belief in Christ may be unnecessary (see Aslan's response to the young warrior who had served Tash), so long as the principles espoused by God were followed.

I am fully aware of the controversy (having read up on it a couple of years ago, which is why I read the book "C.S. Lewis' Letters to Children"). I believe that those who would wish to sell more Narnia books and movies to an increasingly secular world would like to persuade their audience that the story is not religious in nature. I laughed heartily at the thought once expressed by an editor at the publishing house, that the Christian references would be removed, so as to avoid offending some segments of the audience. I do not see how that could be even remotely possible, because very nearly every scene, nearly every phrase, has a religious reference and meaning. There'd be close to nothing left.
Coffinberry said…
It occurs to me (after a long day of wallpapering) that I do not mean to be argumentative.
cublawg said…
It's okay: we law students are used to it. ;-)

Popular posts from this blog

And did I mention...

Ok, why I have no pity for piggies