Divination Sixteen: The End & the Beginning
Harry’s parents had died in Voldemort’s attack, but Harry had escaped with his lightning scar, and somehow – nobody understood why – Voldemort’s powers had been destroyed the instant he had failed to kill Harry. (COS1)
Divination Sixteen: The End & the Beginning
Into the Pensieve: The boys travel back in time together: Ron using the watch and Harry the Time-Turner. They Apparate to an upstairs bedroom at Godric’s Hollow, as Lord Voldemort is duelling with James Potter below. Harry attempts to rush to his father’s aid but is stopped by his mother. Lily, who recognises her son, has some idea what is happening and begs them both to hide under the cloak. Voldemort appears, holding the sword of Gryffindor, taken from the dead hand of James Potter, which he intends to make into a Horcrux. Restrained by Ron, Harry witnesses his mother’s harrowing death (Voldemort offers her the chance to stand aside but she resists his Imperius curse with her eyes) and then sees Lord Voldemort about to kill the baby. From beneath the invisibility cloak, Harry somehow deflects the curse back on to Voldemort with a non-verbal spell, saving himself. [See further comment below - thanks to lila & others for making me think! For a slightly different scenario, take this Portkey.] Lord Voldemort is vanquished and baby Harry becomes an accidental Horcrux. As Voldemort is ripped from his body, the house explodes. At this moment, the current Voldemort arrives to challenge Harry. He knows that he cannot touch the baby since he required Harry’s blood to regenerate (hence Dumbledore’s gleam of triumph). The older Harry and Ron must now face Voldemort in a final duel. Throughout this last battle, Harry interposes his body between Ron and Voldemort, determined to protect his friend. At the end, Voldemort taunts Harry, telling him that he cannot win. He claims that Harry’s death will make Voldemort immortal but that Harry cannot hope to fulfil the Prophecy by killing Voldemort since Voldemort will never be destroyed as long as Harry is alive. As Voldemort raises his wand to perform the Avada Kedavra, which he believes will make him invincible, Harry shoots Snape’s Sectumsempra curse at Voldemort. The Dark Lord staggers backward in astonishment then horror, as his own curse hits Harry who dies triumphantly, knowing that the final Horcrux is destroyed with him. At last Voldemort must taste the bitterness of death, his second body melting in agony. Ron kneels wordlessly besides the corpse of his best friend. Nearby, he hears a phoenix singing and a baby crying. Fawkes has arrived to heal the wound in the infant Harry’s scar. Ron realises that their actions have enabled baby Harry to grow up and fulfil his destiny, like a phoenix from the ashes. He promises Harry that the world will not forget him and waits with the baby until he hears an approaching motorcycle. Ron returns to the present with Harry’s body as Sirius and Hagrid arrive to find Lily & James dead and Harry apparently alone in the ruins. (Fawkes has returned to Dumbledore.) The novel ends with Sirius and Hagrid, full of pain and wonder, gazing down at the baby with the lightning shaped scar.
Omens & Portents: Canonical Clues & Questions
1. Concerning Harry’s fate…
- ‘My dear boy – my poor dear boy – no – it is kinder not to say – no – don’t ask me … My dear,’ Professor Trelawney’s huge eyes opened dramatically, ‘you have the Grim.’ (POA6) Over the course of Books 4-6 I have become increasingly convinced that it is Hermione and Ron and not Harry who will inherit the post-Voldemort world. The first clue comes at the end of GOF, when we realise that the terrible events Harry has witnessed (i.e. Cedric’s murder and Voldemort’s return) have separated him from his best friends in a way that is unlike any of their previous adventures in PS, COS and POA. (In OOtP, this is physically signified when Harry sees the Thestrals.) For the first time, Harry is unable to confide in Ron and Hermione, grateful only for their silence: ‘He liked it best when he was with Ron and Hermione, and they were talking about other things, or else letting him sit in silence while they played chess.’ (GOF37) They, in turn, draw closer together in OOP, impelled in part by Harry’s increasing moodiness and remoteness. We see them defend each other from his anger, worry about him behind his back and work together to help him. Moreover, Harry has becomes fatalistic and his mood recalls that of other tragic heroes who sense that ‘the readiness is all’. ‘As Hagrid had said, what would come, would come … and he would have to meet it when it did.’ (GOF37) At the end of GOF, there is an alarming sign when Harry gives his Triwizard winnings to Fred & George. On one level, this is simply a generous gesture, which helps the twins (and Ron) and pays tribute to Cedric. Yet the reason that Hermione is so disturbed by this revelation in OOtP, might be that she senses Harry’s subconscious decision not to invest in his own future. Does this foreshadow some final bequest of his belongings?
- Then there is the ominous moment in OOtP, when Ron and Hermione are made Prefects and Harry is not chosen, causing the sensitive reader to feel heartache on his behalf. Beyond the simple smart of injustice, however, is the sense that something irreversible has happened. Dumbledore’s tears as he confesses to Harry ‘that I rather thought … you had enough responsibility’ (OOtP37) are hardly reassuring. Hermione and Ron are now advanced on the ladder of worldly prosperity. In Books 5 and 6, their prefect duties, in which they support (or undermine!) each other, further divide them from Harry. At the end of HBP, we learn that Harry has decided not to return to Hogwarts (as a student). I think it is very likely that Harry will keep his resolution, judging by his new firmness in addressing McGonagall and Scrimgeour; however, I am less sure that Ron and Hermione will not succumb to pressure from their parents, the school and Harry himself to complete their education. If Ron and Hermione begin NEWT study without him, then this will be the clearest indication yet that they have a future in the wizarding world and he does not. For without NEWTS, Harry will never qualify to become an Auror. Nor is he likely to return to Hogwarts beyond the time frame of the books.
- The romance patterns of Books 4-6 also bode ill for Harry’s survival. While tension is developing between Ron and Hermione, Harry is distracted by his feelings for Cho. This romance, tainted before it began by Cedric’s death, is over by the end of OOtP. In HBP, the ground is being prepared for a Ron/Hermione relationship that looks set to flourish in Book 7. After a stormy year, the two are finally united when they comfort each other at Dumbledore’s funeral. In contrast, it is at Dumbledore’s funeral that Harry breaks off his relationship with Ginny, who has loved him from the start. The multiple losses that he has suffered and his sense of himself as a marked man make it impossible for him to stay with her. Interestingly, Ginny who loves him as selflessly as he loves her, does not fight his decision but accepts it as inevitable. Harry now contemplates one more day of happiness with the Weasley family, before setting out on his quest. So what of Ginny, the girl left behind? I think it is significant that Ginny is Ron’s younger sister and that Hermione has taken her under her wing. Harry knows that whatever happens, this pair will look after her.
- It is the revelation of the Prophecy that Harry and Voldemort are fated to be the other’s destruction, which is seen as the most compelling evidence that Harry will not survive. The prophecy is deliberately ambiguous. ‘And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives’: in other words, either (Harry or Voldemort) must die at the hands of (Harry or Voldemort) for neither (Harry nor Voldemort) can live while (Harry or Voldemort) survives. In OOtP, Harry is initially horrified to learn that ‘his life must include, or end in, murder’, but in HBP, Dumbledore helps him to accept that the desire to defeat Voldemort really comes from within. Harry’s mysterious connection to Voldemort has long been a source of worry to him, becoming particularly pronounced in OOP when he feels ‘dirty, contaminated, as though he were carrying some deadly germ’ (OOtP23) and it has never been satisfactorily explained. Following HBP, the intelligent speculation that Harry’s scar contains one of Voldemort’s Horcruxes has not improved Harry’s chances. The idea that Harry is harbouring a fragment of the Dark Lord’s soul (is this what it means to have been ‘marked’ as an ‘equal’?) might suggest that Harry’s death is physically necessary in order for Voldemort to be destroyed, but I am more interested in the emotional ramifications. We know that the battle between Harry and Voldemort is personal; what Harry most dreads is that more innocent people will die in his defence. I could see Harry dying heroically to protect one of his friends, but knowing how racked with guilt he was after Sirius’s death then Ron or Hermione dying for him would be unbearable.
- Harry has never been comfortable as a survivor. It is tragic that his first defeat of Voldemort came at the price of his parents’ lives. His experiences with the Mirror of Erised in PS and the Dementors in POA reveal how deeply he has been scarred. When Harry learns that his dead parents have left him a vault of gold coins, we know that he would gladly exchange it all to spend five minutes in their company. Harry has often dreamed of splitting his fortune with the impoverished Weasley family and we cannot help but think that they will be the ultimate beneficiaries. The death of Cedric brings another unwanted boon in the form of the Triwizard gold, which Harry offers to Cedric’s parents and then gives to the twins. Sirius’s death is the most searing wound that Harry experiences in the series and it too enriches him materially in the cruellest way: Harry inherits Kreacher, who betrayed his godfather and the house that Sirius hated. While the elf is disposed of relatively easily (sent to work at Hogwarts), there is still the matter of 12 Grimmauld Place. Harry will never live there and if Regulus is truly dead, the best hope is that Tonks (a cousin of the Blacks) and Lupin will make it their home. It seems that others can be helped through Harry’s unwelcome inheritances. Yet Harry has endured too much loss to be truly happy in the aftermath. If, as I suspect, Hagrid, his oldest magical friend, is a casualty of Book 7, then Harry may feel that his heart is no longer with the living. While the Weasley family will survive through laughter and tears to help the reader overcome the pain of bereavement, I believe that Harry’s spirit will not find peace until he is reunited with his beloved dead. Let the pain stop, thought Harry … let him kill us … end it, Dumbledore … death is nothing compared to this… And I’ll see Sirius again… (OOtP36)
2. Concerning Harry’s first survival…
- ‘It’s just astounding … of all the things to stop him … but how in the name of heaven did Harry survive?’ ‘We can only guess,’ said Dumbledore. ‘We may never know.’ (PS/SS1) Contrary to much fan belief, Harry’s initial survival has not been explained. Harry’s mother’s sacrifice gave him a lingering protection that saved him from Quirrell but did not explain why the killing curse rebounded on Voldemort. This JKR makes clear, remains a mystery: ‘Harry’s parents had died in Voldemort’s attack, but Harry had escaped with his lightning scar, and somehow – nobody understood why – Voldemort’s powers had been destroyed the instant he had failed to kill Harry.’ (COS1)
3. Concerning the gleam of triumph…
- ‘If I had murdered Harry Potter, the Dark Lord could not have used his blood to regenerate, making him invincible –‘ ‘You claim you foresaw his use of the boy!’ she [Bellatrix] jeered.’ (HBP2) Of course, Snape was making no such claim but the point here is that if Harry had died before the end of Book 4 than Voldemort’s rebirth could not have happened. Thus, though Voldemort might go back in time to prevent the older Harry from causing his downfall, he cannot use time travel to harm the baby without preventing his own return to power. Perhaps this is the reason for Dumbledore’s celebrated gleam of triumph?
4. Concerning the sword of Gryffindor…
- ‘Voldemort was still at least one Horcrux short of his goal of six when he entered your parents’ house with the intention of killing you.’ (HBP23) It would be interesting if the object that Voldemort was intending to use was the Gryffindor sword – the only one of the four relics to escape being a Horcrux – which might have been at Godric’s Hollow anyway. ‘I cannot answer for whether he ever managed to find anything of Ravenclaw’s. I am confident, however, that the only known relic of Gryffindor remains safe.’
5. Concerning the house…
- ‘It was me what rescued Harry from Lily an’ James’ house after they was killed! Jus’ got him outta the ruins, poor little thing, with a great slash across his forehead, an’ his parents dead …’ (POA10) Whatever happened to the house at Godric’s Hollow? Whatever Hagrid thinks, it is most unlikely to have been the Avada Kedavra (just as that curse cannot have been responsible for Harry’s scar!) My guess is that the house was either destroyed in an explosion when the first Voldemort was ripped from his body or it was demolished during the subsequent duel between the current Voldemort and Harry. Dumbledore and Voldemort smashed up the Fountain of Magical Brethren in the lobby of the Ministry of Magic! [Location corrected - thanks to M!]
6. Concerning Voldemort’s death…
- ‘Without his Horcruxes, Voldemort will be a mortal man with a maimed and diminished soul.’ (HBP23) Indeed, Voldemort can hardly be described as a man in good health; resurrected from flesh, blood and bone with the aid of ‘a potion concocted from unicorn blood, and the snake venom Nagini provided’. (GOF33) I foresee a suitably visceral death for him, involving the cutting spell Sectumsempra, introduced (otherwise) somewhat unnecessarily in Book 6. ‘Blood spurted from Malfoy’s face and chest as though he had been slashed with an invisible sword. He staggered backwards and collapsed on to the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling from his limp right hand.’ (HBP24) This is not the instant oblivion offered by Avada Kedavra; instead, it provides the requisite time for Voldemort to confront his long-deserved death with a scream of terror and defeat. ‘Perhaps, at the point of death, he might be aware of his loss…’ (HBP23)
7. Concerning Harry Potter day…
- ‘He’ll be famous – a legend – I wouldn’t be surprised if today was known as Harry Potter day in future – there will be books written about Harry – every child in our world will know his name!’ (PS1) If both Harry’s defeats of Voldemort occur on the same day then the wizarding world will indeed be able to designate Halloween as Harry Potter day!
8. Concerning Harry-as-Phoenix…
- ‘Dumbledore and Professor McGonagall bent forward over the bundle of blankets. Inside, just visible, was a baby boy, fast asleep. Under a tuft of jet-black hair over his forehead they could see a curiously shaped cut, like a bolt of lightning.’ (PS1) Might readers cope better with the death of Harry Potter if he died to enable baby Harry to live (so allowing the story to happen)? This would be an original take on the notion of literary immortality. Also, if my theory is correct then Harry’s death has in a sense already happened.
9. Concerning Wormtail and Dumbledore’s role in the ending…
- In an earlier version of this theory, I imagined (the current) Wormtail travelling back in time with (the current) Voldemort, to duel with Harry and Ron. Then, at the last moment, as Voldemort raised his wand to fire the ‘Avada Kedavra’ at Harry, Wormtail was to hit Voldemort in the back with the ‘Sectumsempra’ curse – a reprise of Wormtongue’s big moment in LOTR! I rather liked the idea of Voldemort being killed ignominiously by his Muggle-born servant, but on the other hand, I was reluctant to give the honour of Voldemort’s (second) defeat to Wormtail, (who would presumably survive to return to the present). And the idea of more than one Wormtail on the scene was just plain confusing! In any case, Harry is meant to be the one to vanquish Voldemort. I had also wondered if Dumbledore might be the one to reveal to Harry what he must do but decided that this would impede Harry’s free will and detract from his individual heroism.
Legilimency… what is JKR thinking?
‘Let’s go again … on the count of three … one – two – three – Legilimens!’ (OOtP24)
- If all the 15 discarded opening chapters of Book 1 were put together they would almost give the whole story away. “I reckon I must’ve got through fifteen different alternative chapters of book one. The reason for which I discarded each of them was they all gave too much away. And in fact if you put all those discarded first chapters together, almost the whole plot is explained.” [JKR, "Harry Potter and Me," 2001 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Will Harry time travel again? JKR: “Not telling!” [JKR, AOL chat, 2000 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Harry did not see his parents die because he was in his cot [crib]. [JKR, Edinburgh Book Festival, 2004 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- The “crucial and central question” of the series is why both Harry and Voldemort survived the killing curse. [JKR, World Book Day, 2004 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- JK won’t tell us if anyone else was present in Godric’s Hollow the night Harry’s parents were killed. [JKR, Mugglenet/TLC interview, 2005 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- JKR: “Why did Dumbledore have James’ invisibility cloak at the time of James’ death, given that Dumbledore could make himself invisible without a cloak?” is an important question that no one has asked her (“NAQ”). [JKR's website]
- Dumbledore’s “gleam of triumph” (GOF) will be enormously significant to Book 7. [JKR, Mugglenet/TLC interview, 2005 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Book 7 will see Harry come of age – face his destiny. [Quoted in the Guardian Newspaper, 1999 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Does the prophecy mean that both Harry and Voldemort need to die? JKR: “Both Madam Trelawney and I worded the prophecy extremely carefully” [JKR, website – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- She can’t tell us if she imagines Harry growing up because it will ruin the plot of book 7 for us. [JKR, National Press Club, 1999 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Harry is really progressing as a wizard, so his powers are becoming greater. [JKR, World Book Day, 2004 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Voldemort’s Boggart would be “death, ignominious death…. He would see himself dead.” He sees death as a “shameful human weakness.” [JKR, Mugglenet/TLC, 2005]
- Ron Weasley is “always there when you need him.” [JKR, "Harry Potter and Me," 2001 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- JKR said she couldn’t answer questions about religious content until the end of the seventh book. [JKR, Chicago Sun Times, 1999 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- “I constantly rewrite,” she says. “At the moment, the last word is ‘scar.’” [JKR, People Magazine, 1999 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
- Some fans have come very close to guessing the ending of Book 7, but the one she has planned isn’t “very obvious.” [JKR, BBC Radio 4, 2005 – Madam Scoop’s Index]
you’ve thought it out alot, but i have a small problem with it. in book four moody states that there is no blocking the killing curse, so that would mean that harry couldnt be able to protect his baby self, because if it were that easy to block the curse, then alot of people wouldnt have died from it. i think that it really was just love that protected baby harry from being killed.
reading the quote about harry’s scar, i realized something. Could it be that Voldemort destroyed his own horcrux by trying to kill harry which is why he got stripped of all powers?
Hello!
Thanks for your comments.
Very important point, lila – as several others have hastened to add! (Discounting the imaginative possibility that Moody-Crouch was lying) I’ve given this some thought and would suggest the following:
1. “Not nice,” he said calmly. “Not pleasant. And there’s no counter curse. There’s no blocking it. Only one known person has ever survived it, and he’s sitting right in front of me.” (GOF14) We have little reason to doubt that this is the effect of the curse in conventional circumstances.
2. However, Harry’s circumstances are far from conventional. We know that a) he survived what should have been a fatal curse, b) he was scarred despite the fact the curse usually leaves no mark and c) he has a mysterious connection with Voldemort as a result. (Not to mention the fact that Hagrid believes the curse destroyed the house as well!) None of these are usual properties of the Avada Kedavra. There’s clearly more to the events of Godric’s Hollow then we’ve been told. Moreover, there were a lot of ‘firsts’ that night!
3. “It’s just astounding … of all the things to stop him … but how in the name of heaven did Harry survive?” “We can only guess,” said Dumbledore. “We may never know.” (PS/SS1) Contrary to some popular belief, we still don’t *know*! Lily’s sacrifice conferred a blood protection that saved Harry from Quirrell’s touch in PS/SS (“love as powerful as your mother’s for you leaves its own mark”) , but we’ve never been told explicitly that this is why the *curse* rebounded. If this was so, then surely DD would have said as much? On the contrary, JKR has worked hard to sustain an air of mystery throughout all six books.
4. Crucially, we know that Harry and Voldemort are connected through their wands, which share a core of feather from the same phoenix (Fawkes). This proved important in GOF and will be so again, I think. (JKR has promised us more about wands in DH!) In fact, in the graveyard scene in Book 4 [corrected - thanks to anonymous!], Voldemort attempted to use the Killing Curse on Harry and was effectively blocked by the Priori Incantatem effect. ‘As Harry shouted, “Expelliarmus!” Voldemort cried, “Avada Kedavra!” A jet of green light issued from Voldemort’s wand just as a jet of red light blasted from Harry’s – they met in midair – and suddenly Harry’s wand was vibrating as though an electric charge were surging through it; his hand seized up around it; he couldn’t have released it if he’d wanted to – and a narrow beam of light connected the two wands, neither red nor green, but bright, deep gold.’ (GOF34) Interestingly, Harry then forces a bead of light right back into Voldemort’s wand…
5. I don’t think that Priori Incantatem will necessarily occur again but IMHO this passage does challenge the idea that there is no blocking the Avada Kedavra curse. Similarly, it is *physically* blocked by the statue (and swallowed by Fawkes) during the duel between Voldemort and Dumbledore in the DOM, as M usefully commented.
6. I suspect that it is Book 1 which offers the most clues to Book 7 – JKR will come full circle in fulfilling the prophecy. So this makes it very significant (to me) that Ollivander is so emphatic about the importance of the wand connection in PS5, surely a recipe for exceptional circumstances? “I remember every wand I’ve ever sold, Mr Potter. Every single wand. It so happens that the phoenix whose tail feather is in your wand, gave another feather — just one other. It is very curious indeed that you should be destined for this wand when its brother — why, its brother gave you that scar.” In short, I don’t think we know enough to rule out some ‘funny business’ between Harry’s and Voldemort’s wands at the end! It doesn’t help that we still don’t know how the Horcrux creation spell works.) As Snape says: “The usual rules do not seem to apply to you, Potter.” (OOtP24)
7. Another possibility (belatedly) occurs to me: namely that Harry might have acted preemptively to save his young self *before* Voldemort’s Unforgivable Curse. (After all, we still don’t know about the spell that Dumbledore tried to use on Voldemort in the Ministry duel, which JKR has hinted that we might see again!) And several people have commented that the Priori Incantatem (Reverse Spell) effect produced no record of the Avada Kedavra that Voldemort attempted to cast on Harry. Not necessarily significant, but still…
Hmm. Must return to the books!
Well. I hope you are way off on everything, cuz otherwise you just killed everything for me
anyhow, even if you are spot on, it’s going to be a great read. can’t wait til July 21st
les
It seems to me that Voldemort would not be foolish enough to try to kill Harry at the end. On the one hand, he can logically conclude that only he can fulfill the prophecy, since Harry cannot kill Voldemort without killing himself. But on the other hand, if Voldemort indeed kills Harry, then Voldemort will be willingly destroying his only remaining Horcrux, rendering himself completely vulnerable. So what we really have here is a stalemate — Voldemort’s best option is to do absolutely nothing. Then Harry’s only way to destroy him would involve a self-sacrifice, which would require someone else entirely to finish off Voldemort.
Anyway, I am just a little uncomfortable with the notion that Voldemort would voluntarily set himself up for such an obvious trap. It would be a disappointing ending.
“But on the other hand, if Voldemort indeed kills Harry, then Voldemort will be willingly destroying his only remaining Horcrux, rendering himself completely vulnerable.”
Interesting … but as I see it, this wouldn’t be a worry, since in destroying Harry, the only “one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord”, Voldemort would be making himself immortal, whether or not Harry is an accidental Horcrux.
As Dumbledore says to Harry in HBP23: “He believed that in killing you, he was destroying the danger the prophecy had outlined. He believed he was making himself invincible.”
in point 4, i think you meant book 4, GOF, not book 5 (with the graveyard scene)
What makes you think that priori incantatem won’t occur again?
If voldemort can go back to godrics hollow, why doesn’t he just go back to the night in the graveyard in book 4, and kill harry while he is still tied to the tombstone and can’t defend himself?
why doesnt voldemort go back to the night in the graveyard in GOF and kill harry while he is still tied to the tombstone and is defenceless (if he knew harry would escape he wouldnt have untied him)
“in point 4, i think you meant book 4″
Thanks, anon. Duly amended.
“What makes you think that priori incantatem won’t occur again?”
Well, I might have changed my mind about that! See: http://book7.co.uk/second-sight/
“If voldemort can go back to godrics hollow, why doesn’t he just go back to the night in the graveyard in book 4, and kill harry while he is still tied to the tombstone and can’t defend himself?”
From *our* perspective it might be a bit repetitive (as well as creating an alarming paradox – in that Harry’s post-GOF adventures won’t have happened in the new timeline!). :–) But from *Voldemort’s* perspective (and I agree it needs an answer) he could attempt to ambush Harry on another occasion (& perhaps he does!) but I imagine that he somehow finds out that TimeTurned!Harry was present on the night of his first defeat & so goes back to prevent Harry from intervening & saving his younger self … only he arrives just too late & has to battle with the older Harry instead. (That’s my version, anyway!)
It’s worth pointing out that according to the laws of the Potterverse, time-travel only works if you don’t change anything that has already happened (i.e. Buckbeak never died in POA, it only appeared as if he did) … so by that rule (& I agree it’s slightly bizarre), Voldemort can’t go back to kill Harry in the graveyard (because he didn’t!) & Harry can’t go back to save his parents. But we still don’t really know *what* happened at Godric’s Hollow…
Well, about the whole love protecting harry thing, if it saved him, then why did it leave a scar of lightning and not something more believable?
are we not ignoring a crucial fact here, which is that making a horcrux irequires a very complicated type of magic. Would it realistically be possible that voldy transferred a piece of his soul into Harry by mistake?
I used to be utterly convinced by the Harry is a horcrux theory but I’m becoming less so. Perhaps I just dont want Harry to die in the end.
Other than that though this is definitely a sound theory and very interesting. It wouldn’t surprise me if you’re right about the time travel, it’s the sort of idea that JK would persue and would neatly tie off all the loose ends and seemingly anomolous pieces of information she has included in her books so far. That doesn’t mean to say I’ll like it if she does. It would just make the story too circular for me, I’d feel like book 7, the most keenly anticipated of the series, was really only covering old ground. Still it wouldnt be the firs time JK has written something I haven’t liked, after all it’s not like she’s writing the books for me…
Harry traveling back does something to save himself? I doubt it. It cuts against the prevailing theme of the books. That its Lily’s love sacrifice which causes the curse to rebound.
I’m still waffling on Harry’s death. Would JKR do that to children? I cannot say no. But at the same time sending a message that a person can weather death of many people the person loved is an important message. But of course so is the idea you shouldn’t fear death.
At this point I’m leaning towards Harry’s survival, but your idea of the book ending where it began with Hagrid and Sirius looking at baby Harry’s scar is compelling. And of course killing Harry would ensure non-author sequels would be highly unlikely.
NH: for my full thoughts on the subject, see comments at the end of http://book7.co.uk/sight/
(The short answer is that we know Lily’s loving sacrifice *did* confer a special protection on Harry, which saved him from Quirrell in PS/SS and keeps him safe while he is with his maternal relations at Privet Drive. However, I would argue that canon is (deliberately?) ambiguous about whether it was Lily’s love which caused the curse to rebound. Interestingly, Dumbledore never says so; he claims not to know why Voldemort was defeated in PS/SS1, despite the fact that we later find out he was aware of Lily’s altruistic death. I just think (post-Prophecy) that there must be something else involved … evidently there was “something special about Harry”, after all, and JKR has said that the connection between him & Voldemort is the key to everything.)
1.) “An’ then – an’ this is the real myst’ry of the thing – he tried to kill you, too … No one ever lived after he decided ter kill ‘em, no one except you, an’ he’d killed some o’ the best witches and wizards of the age – the McKinnons, the Bones, the Prewetts – an’ you was only a baby, an’ you lived.” (Hagrid to Harry, PS/SS4) Firstly, JKR is careful to emphasize that Harry’s survival is mysterious. It’s interesting that she didn’t *need* to take this route – if it was all down to Lily, then why not have the wizarding world honour her from the start? But no, from the very beginning of PS/SS, we’re encouraged to think that it was *Harry* who (somehow) stopped Voldemort that night. “No one knows why, or how, but they’re saying that when he couldn’t kill Harry Potter, Voldemort’s power somehow broke – and that’s why he’s gone.” (PS/SS1) When McGonagall asks, even Dumbledore has no answer: “It’s just astounding … of all the things to stop him … but how in the name of heaven did Harry survive?” “We can only guess,” said Dumbledore. “We may never know.” (PS/SS1) This is crucial, IMHO, since Dumbledore is Harry’s most important source for the events at Godric’s Hollow.
2.) But what of Lily’s sacrifice & the importance of love? I would *never* want to undervalue such an important theme … but IMHO, the protection conveyed by Lily’s altruistic death is first seen at the *end* of PS/SS when it saves Harry from Quirrell. “But why couldn’t Quirrell touch me?” “If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn’t realise that love as powerful as your mother’s for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign . . . to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in your very skin.” (PS17) Later, it is confirmed that Dumbledore knew of this “ancient magic” from the beginning: “I am speaking, of course, of the fact that your mother died to save you. She gave you a lingering protection he never expected, a protection that flows in your veins to this day. I put my trust, therefore, in your mother’s blood. I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative.” (OOtP37) What’s interesting is that Dumbledore was already aware of the fact (& the importance) of Lily’s sacrifice in (the backstory of) PS/SS, but evidently *didn’t* believe it was responsible for Harry’s first survival. “We may never know.” (PS/SS1)
3.) Neither Quirrell!Mort nor Riddle!Mort seems to know exactly what happened at Godric’s Hollow; though Quirrell!Mort tells Harry that “your mother needn’t have died … she was trying to protect you”. (One might think that Lily Evans-Potter can’t be the only witch/wizard to have died for another, yet JKR has confirmed that Harry’s survival is unique.) Riddle!Mort wants to know, “how is it that a baby with no extraordinary magical talent managed to defeat the greatest wizard of all time?” (COS 17) He also refers to Harry’s subsequent defeat of Quirrell!Mort. “Twice – in *your* past, in *my* future – we have met. And twice I have failed to kill you. *How did you survive?*” Harry’s answer is nicely ambiguous. “No one knows why you lost your powers when you attacked me,” said Harry abruptly. “I don’t know myself. But I know why you couldn’t *kill* me. Because my mother died to save me.” I believe that the first part of this answer refers to Harry’s first defeat of Voldemort (at Godric’s Hollow), while the last part refers to the second defeat (of Quirrell!Mort). Dumbledore has certainly given Harry no reason to think that his mother’s death explains why the curse rebounded. But Voldemort gets this wrong – like most evil overlords (in fantasy) he fatally underestimates his enemies. “So. Your mother died to save you. Yes, that’s a powerful counter-charm. I can see now – there’s nothing special about you, after all.” (But we know *that’s* not true, right? In theology & literature, the devil is a liar. There’s no reason to take Voldemort’s word about anything.)
If that happened why wouldnt harry hav saved his mom and dad?
Good question!
However, I think that the easy answer, i.e. this would invalidate everything which has already happened in Books 1-6, is probably correct in terms of the Potterverse. You can’t change the future, because this would create an impossible paradox whereby you couldn’t have travelled back in time in the first place (if that makes sense!); so JKR gets around the problem by saying (in effect) that Buckbeak never died in POA21 (they only thought he did). Harry can’t go back to save his parents because we know that they both died (& are buried at Godric’s Hollow); however, he can go back to explain his own survival (because no-one knows how Harry survived!) And he has already saved himself once in this fashion (from the Dementors in POA20&21).
There are some useful insights on the problems of time-travel to be found on Mugglenet: http://www.mugglenet.com/levelnine/timetravel/ and (in particular) http://www.mugglenet.com/levelnine/timetravel/howitworks.shtml
So to answer your question, Harry would know that he can’t save his parents without breaking a fundamental law of the Universe and (as Hermione says in POA21), “Awful things happen to wizards who meddle with time.” But wouldn’t Harry’s very human desire to defend them override even such considerations as defeating Voldemort? That’s why, IMHO, Ron will be present to restrain him and it’s even possible that Lily (whom I suspect knows about time-travel) screams out a warning to her son in her last moments.
NB: If Harry does witness his mother’s harrowing death then this will be what gives him the final motivation to fight Voldemort – and win.
i dont think harry should die if the dark lord dies and harry lives there is no1 to kill harry and harry should grow old with ginny and die of old age then no one can do any more books but if harry dies then some one can do another book with the dark lord
IMHO the only problem with this conclusion is that the current Harry travelling back into the past enables him to save his past-self to fulfill his destiny….well see if he grows up he will have to travel back into to do it again because saving himself and killing Voldemort was his destiny. Then after saving himself again he will have to do it again.
With the current Harry dead and current Ron alive then Ron will live on while the baby Harry will grow up 17 years younger than the current Ron. But if Harry was one year old at the time of the current Harrys death then so was Ron which will mean when Harry grows up so will Ron so every time they travel into the past they are kind of living two lives. he will go to school with Ron like normal because that is whats supposed to happen but because Ron is already 17 years old there will be the future Ron 17 years older than the past Ron and also the rest of the world that lived on from that point.
Time is irrelevant(sp?). if you travel to the past to change the future how do you know what you are changing if you at the precise time in the past don’t know why you were there in the first place. For example: if i were to be 10 years old and learn to play the piano then travel back in time to when i was 5, i would not know how to play the piano because i dont have that knowledge.
I think it was kind of stupid( still very cool and dont get me wrong i love the harry potter series w/ a passion, so dont use this against me) to branch into time travel with this series. I know that magic can do a lot but time is something that shouldn’t be messed with. it leads to too many questions that no one has anwers to.
This is probly very confusing and i know it is because i confused myself writing but please try to understand what im trying to say.
Nice speculation, Cassandra, but I’m having some trouble with your scenario in trying to figure out what happened to the current Voldemort’s body once Harry inflicted the Sectumsempra curse on him… surely the presence of Lord Voldemort’s remains would have been noticed by whoever appeared on the crime scene all those years ago…
The ending will not be so contrived as a time-travel solution. Altho’ Book 7 will certainly mimic Book 3 (imo), any use of time travel to make the series end on a “OMG baby!Harry survived because his older self came in and saved him” smacks in the face of cheese, but also throws away the constant “your mother’s sacrifice is what protects you”.
HOWEVER, older!Harry going back in time and dying while trying to save baby!Harry may create a temporal feedback wherby the HP series is ‘re-lived’ on an infinite loop. Hence, why one would never be able to live while the other survived.
HOWEVER, Rowling would have needed to introduce elements of a temporal ‘feedback’ loop in Book 3; she didn’t. So, to suddenly throw it in would be… well… silly and poor writing.
The idea of Harry losing ‘his mom again’, however, is something that i agree with as being an amazing catalyst for Harry. Ever since OotP, when it’s pounded into us that Ms. Weasley may not be his mother, but she’s “as good as” AND her constant fretting over everyone’s health (more so than anyone else), gave me the sinking feeling that Molly will be one of the Weasleys to go, and possibly in front of Harry.
OR, it sets Ron off, who goes into vigilante mode, by which Harry has to do the ‘rescue bit’.
So let’s take some of your #’d list items individually.
#1: he idea that Harry is harbouring a fragment of the Dark Lord’s soul (is this what it means to have been ‘marked’ as an ‘equal’?) might suggest that Harry’s death is physically necessary in order for Voldemort to be destroyed, but I am more interested in the emotional ramifications.
Why? The diary was still around… you could still write in it. The ring was still wearable… there’s absolutely nothing in canon to suggest this — and it’s alittle too late to be introducing a ‘hey-all-the-other-horcrux-items-are-fine-maybe
-cracked(SCARRED)-abit-but-far-from-destroyed’…
remember, Rowling is writing a traditional story… she’s not re-inventing the genre. she understands — and uses — literary devices mostly properly. therefor, should would not introduce a new exception to the Horcrux items (because Harry dying to rid himself of the soul WOULD be an exception).
HOWEVER, why introduce Dementors? It would have been JUST as easy to say “no one’s ever escaped Azkaban because the prison is bewitched and, since you don’t have your wand and maybe there’s a stasis field around the prison that makes prisoners too loopy to cast spells”… then they wouldn’t NEED Dementor guards at all… for anything (plot-wise). If Rowling needed a ‘shock value’ traitor of races, then there could have been another Goblin Revolt… or dragons… or, since we’ve already been told that the Giants helped Voldy last time, it could be then.
Dementors are ONLY needed to help introduce the prominence of ‘the soul’ in the Potterverse.
And, what do they do?
They suck out souls.
And, what are horcruxes?
Vessels housing a portion of the caster’s soul.
And, what do Dementor’s do again??
Harry needs to learn how to restrain Dementors. He knows how to repel them… but restrain them? So, i the tradition of Harry learning something new that DIRECTLY helps move the plot along, it could be “how can I use the Dementor’s soul-sucking power to get rid of this soul in me WITHOUT it taken my REAL soul?”
So, since I think HP:DH with mirror HP:PoA, that’s where Remus (or some other person) comes in. Hermione doesn’t find the answer… Ron doesn’t make a sacrifice an get hurt in battle (that happened — kinda — in HP:OotP); rather, someone teaches Harry something that specifically, directly, and explicitly helps with the Horcrux issue.
Again, the Dementors simply were not necessary in the story arc EXCEPT to provide a way out in dealing with the ‘soul’.
#3: Concerning Time TravelThus, though Voldemort might go back in time to prevent the older Harry from causing his downfall, he cannot use time travel to harm the baby without preventing his own return to power.
This is why I don’t think Rowling would use Time Travel for some form of conclusion to a series — one of the books, certainly; but not the whole SERIES.
Introducing time travel brings in a slippery slope of plot holes and a smattering of “Well, why didn’t he just…” and “…couldn’t he do…” It makes any ending convoluted.
I mean, look at the ridiculousness of Time Travel in PoA. “No one can see us, Harry…”
Really? Because I’m pretty sure people were seeing you the entire term you were using the Time Turner.
#5. Concerning the house My guess is that the house was either destroyed in an explosion when the first Voldemort was ripped from his body or it was demolished during the subsequent duel between the current Voldemort and Harry.
But, again, there’s a more simpler solution… two of them, in fact.
Solution-1: The house was destroyed in a battle between James and Voldy. It’s safe to assume (for a number of reasons), that Voldy didn’t just knock on the door and AK James when he opened the door. I mean, he’d have fought for his life and the life of his wife and only son, knowing that “the jig is up — we’ve been betrayed. Either he has to go or we go.”
Solution-2: James and Lily weren’t put under the Fidelius Charm, their LOCATION was. Killing the Secret Keeper doesn’t break the charm. But, I bet destroying the object would. I mean, they would Fidelius a living person, but in a time of war Peter could have been killed and then they would never ever ever ever be found. Never. According to Rowling: “Even if one of the Potters had been captured, force-fed Veritaserum or placed under the Imperius Curse, they would not have been able to give away the whereabouts of the other two. The only people who ever knew their precise location were those whom Wormtail had told directly, but none of them would have been able to pass on the information .”
Not even Voldemort, once told by Peter, could tell anyone. So, he goes into the house, something goes wrong, and Voldy would not be able to call for back-up.
Likewise, if James needed to call for help and alert The Order as to where they were, he’d have to destroy the house. Lily’s good at Charms. We’re not told that James is or isn’t. But if he was, certianly Remus and/or Sirius and/or ANYONE would have said that already.
James is fighitng Voldy… he’s losing… last-ditch effort: blow up the house. Fidelius Charm broken. Now The Order can find them.
See? It’s so much easier and simpler a solution than Time-Traveling Harry, which ADDS to the muck instead of clarifying it, which ultimately, Rowling has to do. She HAS to clean up the majority of the loose-ends from Godric’s Hollow. And Time Travel will not do that. Worse yet, your theory would mean at some point, there’s TWO Voldy’s and possibly TWO Peter’s on site… at the same time…
No no no no. Altho’ I think the idea that you present would be good for another story, and, if you’re writer, please write it! It’s a good idea! But for HArry Potter, given the 6 books that we’ve already been given and the rules of time-traveling as provided (albeit haphazardly) by PoA, any solution that revolves around or evolves from the notion of time travel is simply a no-go.
HOWEVER, you’re more than willing to say ‘I told you so’ if you’re right.
Hello all!
Not having studied in the Time Room of the Department of Mysteries (!), I can only attempt to answer your points to the best of my ability:
a) To respond to someone – not quite sure what you’re saying, so please let me know if this isn’t the right response :–): my scenario involves the deaths of both Harry and Voldemort (according to the Prophecy). JKR’s point about non-author sequels isn’t (as I understand it) that she’s worried about Voldemort outliving Harry (no – she wouldn’t be so cruel!) but that if Harry has a long and happy life with Ginny (as in your scenario), which JKR can only mention briefly in the epilogue, then other authors might be tempted to fill in his ‘missing years’ of adulthood *before* he dies of old age.
JKR: “I’ve never been tempted to kill him off *before* the end of book 7. I have always planned seven books and that is where I want to go, where I want to finish on seven books. But I can completely understand the mentality of an author who thinks “Well I am going to kill them off because that means there can be no non-author written sequels as they call them, so it will end with me and after I am dead and gone” – they would be able to bring back the character and write a load of …”
b) To respond to Brandy Murray: I can see where you’re coming from but I’m convinced that my theory eliminates the need for a continuous loop. I’m basing it on time-travel as it appears in POA21 – when Hermione & Harry go back in time *once* only and return to the future. So, in my scenario, Harry is born *once* and dies *once* at the age of seventeen, heroically defeating Voldemort at Godric’s Hollow. The only funny business is that we find out why Harry survived a Killing Curse at the age of one (saved by his time-travelling future self shortly before that future self perished). So although Harry revisits his own past in my scenario, he does not change it in any way. He makes possible the events we’ve just witnessed and if the future Ron were to remain in that world (invisible) for seventeen years then he would watch the events of Books 1-7 unfold again in exactly the same way, with baby Harry growing up … ending with a trip back in time to Godric’s Hollow … from which Harry is brought back dead. So in that sense, I suppose, a loop exists … but only in the somewhat narrow sense that all of our younger selves continue to exist in the past (if we could only time-travel!) and that readers can re-read books 1-7. Ron doesn’t do that in my theory, however; Ron returns to the future/present with Harry’s dead body. For in the current reality at the end of DH, Harry is dead and will never be alive again.
He is buried next to his parents at Godric’s Hollow and will rest in peace – free from all continuous time loops!
c) To respond to Avidreader: see my comment at the end of ‘Second Sight’ for more, but I describe current Voldemort’s body as ‘melting in agony’ when he is hit with the Sectumsempra spell. His new body is made from such a hideous concoction of elements (unicorn blood, Nagini’s snake venom, bone from his father, flesh from Wormtail, and blood from Harry) that I imagine something like this might happen if Voldemort is hit by Sectumsempra, the spell that ‘cuts forever’ and returns to his constituent parts. Interestingly, JKR is on record as saying: “The one that I wondered whether I was going to be able to get past the editors was the physical condition of Voldemort before he went into the cauldron, do you remember? He was kind of fetal. I felt an almost visceral distaste for what I had conjured up, but there’s a reason it was in there and you will see that.” It seems a fair assumption that her “reason” relates to Voldemort’s eventual demise … (this theory to be known as Puddle!Mort in future, please! LOL).
d) To respond to Brandon: thanks for such a detailed analysis; I shall take your points one by one.
1. On the issue of Lily’s sacrifice, please see my response to NH, above. I would argue that while her sacrifice did indeed confer a special protection on Harry, JKR is deliberately ambiguous about whether it was this which caused the curse to rebound. IMHO, the protection conveyed by Lily’s altruistic death is first seen at the *end* of PS/SS when it saves Harry from Quirrell. “But why couldn’t Quirrell touch me?” “If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn’t realize that love as powerful as your mother’s for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign . . . to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection for ever. It is in your very skin.” (PS17) Later, it is confirmed that Dumbledore knew of this “ancient magic” from the beginning: “I am speaking, of course, of the fact that your mother died to save you. She gave you a lingering protection he never expected, a protection that flows in your veins to this day. I put my trust, therefore, in your mother’s blood. I delivered you to her sister, her only remaining relative.” (OOtP37) What’s interesting is that Dumbledore was already aware of the fact (& the importance) of Lily’s sacrifice in (the backstory of) PS/SS, but evidently *didn’t* believe it was responsible for Harry’s first survival. “It’s just astounding … of all the things to stop him … but how in the name of heaven did Harry survive?” “We can only guess,” said Dumbledore. “We may never know.” (PS/SS1) This is crucial, IMHO, since Dumbledore is Harry’s (and our) most important source for the events at Godric’s Hollow.
2. On the ‘infinite loop’ question – see above response to Brandy Murray. On the Prophecy angle, I think it’s probably relevant that Voldemort and Harry are both living ‘on borrowed time’ so to speak. “And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives.” Though both *appear* to be living at the same time, it’s a sort of mockery: Voldemort’s Horcruxes have bought him sixteen years of posthumous life but sixteen years later he will return to the past and be killed again on the night of his first downfall; Harry’s seventeen year old self ensured his survival as a one year old but his seventeen year old life was to end on the same night. Only one cycle is necessary to bring the wheel full circle, IMHO. And crucially – the interim (Harry’s childhood, Voldemort’s return etc.) still happens – indeed MUST still happen in exactly the same way to bring about the climax in which both Harry & Voldemort time-travel to Godric’s Hollow. Thus, nothing in books 1-6 needs to be altered as a result of this ending.
3. Assuming that Harry’s scar is a Horcrux then is Harry’s death necessary for Voldemort to be destroyed? I don’t pretend to know the answer. The difference with the items you’ve mentioned (the ring, the diary etc.) is that these are inanimate objects. But if Nagini was a Horcrux (and Dumbledore thinks she might be) then would Harry have to kill the snake? We know that the diary has a ‘sizzling hole’ burned through it by Basilisk venom and that the black stone in the ring is cracked down the middle but we simply don’t know how it works with *living Horcruxes*. Nice idea about Harry’s scar and the Dementor, which has been mentioned on here before, but I’m not sure I’d agree with Dementors having no other purpose in the Potterverse. Along with Sirius Black, the Dementors are the main antagonists for much of Book 3 and they seem about as necessary as Animagi, Polyjuice Potion, the Marauders Map, the Fidelius Charm, Inferi, even Horcruxes etc. She could have done it differently but she didn’t. The Dementors have various roles a) as a warning about the Ministry fighting terror with terror, b) as a counter to Voldemort’s idea that there is nothing worse than death, c) as a device to enable Harry to recall his parents’ deaths and to show how emotionally scarred he has been by the horrors in the past, e) as an appalling fate for a villain (Barty Crouch Jr.) whom Harry would not wish to meet in the afterlife (!) and an infinitely more appalling *potential* fate from which Harry must save his beloved godfather (Sirius Black) and most brilliantly d) as a metaphor to illustrate that what Harry “fears most of all – is fear” (so Lupin tells him). FDR would be proud! (Plus, they’re a literary nod to Tolkien’s terrifying Ringwraiths.)
The idea that Harry might have to overcome this fear in order for Voldemort’s soul to be removed from his forehead is nonetheless compelling; I’m just not sure that such creatures will be given any positive role in DH, when we really need to see them destroyed, IMHO. Also it seems a little too *easy* (like the idea of Harry sticking his forehead through the Veil to remove the Horcrux) as opposed to the dramatic motif of the hero’s self-sacrifice. (Why not send him to St. Mungo’s to have his scar surgically removed instead?) But of course, I could well be wrong …
4. As for the ‘ridiculousness’ of time-travel in POA21, I’d have to disagree – this was one of my favourite scenes.
OK, we must forgive the ‘causal loop’ in the casting of the Patronus Charm, but JKR flags this up herself via Hermione! The trio have to avoid being seen *the second time*. No-one else (apart from Dumbledore) ever finds out that they have meddled with time. I enjoyed this climax – in particular, I like the fact that Buckbeak never died and that time-travel in the Potterverse is permissible if you don’t change anything that has (in a sense) already happened; which is why I think it might be used to explain Harry’s mysterious first survival. And the fact that Voldemort needs Harry’s blood to regenerate as a more powerful Dark Lord would give JKR the perfect alibi to explain why Voldemort can’t use time-travel to kill the baby *again* (a possible explanation for DD’s gleam of triumph?) though he might well return to Godric’s Hollow in an attempt to kill the older Harry if Voldemort works out that he was there.
5. Again, good speculation on why the house explodes, though it must be stressed that we really don’t know. My biggest problem with your theory would be that JKR apparently wrote the script for the flashback scene in the PS/SS film, which showed the house still *intact* after Voldemort’s duel with James, when he went upstairs to confront Lily in the bedroom. And I’m not sure that James would have wanted to destroy the house with his wife and baby son inside. Though the idea of the house being destroyed in a duel is interesting; perhaps it was my ‘final duel’ between the second Harry and Voldemort? (Interesting thoughts about the Fidelius Charm; I’m assuming it had some kind of built in safeguard to allow Harry to be found in the event of his parents’ deaths).
6. ‘Worse yet, your theory would mean at some point, there’s TWO Voldys and possibly TWO Peters on site… at the same time…’. Not necessarily a problem, though, if well-handled (as various sci-fi films have shown)! Anyway, I rejected the idea of two Peters in favour of just one (in Animagus form). And the second Voldemort only arrives *after* the downfall of the first, IMHO. As for the idea of two Harrys at the same time… it’s the fact of the Invisibility Cloak, combined with the introduction of non-verbal spells, which makes this seem like a viable option to me – especially after HBP27.
Phew – congrats (and apologies) to anyone who has made it thus far! I’m definitely suffering from temporal fatigue, now …
glad you enjoyed my writing, Brandon, even though the theory didn’t work for you. Goodness knows what JKR has planned to confound us all in DH. We shall just have to await the outcome with due humility …
Your theory is the most inventive Ive ever read.
Love the resurrection from ashes (why else “Order of the Phoenix”) and Harry saving himself … also, I agree with your evidenced-divination that Harry is indeed a Horcrux; except I think it was NOT accidental … and it offers an explanation for the prophecy.
* since we are all shamless potterholics, I hope to have your feedback … *
Voldemort’s Best Laid Plans:
The Logic of the Horcrux Scar
I believe our collective intuition knows the ultimate resolution of the series: Harry Potter, title hero, exemplar of Good, will triumph over the Dark Lord, anti-hero, epitome of Evil. That much seems indisputable, notwithstanding Christ and King Arthur allegories that suggest savior sacrifice and legend glory. For the simple reason that in a story whose core is based on the essential issue of morality (and here, inextricably tied to the notion of MORTALITY, also), Evil, by virtue of its negative connotation, cannot but be negated –i.e., conquered.
But … the thorny prophecy: how will Harry dispose of Voldemort without blood on his wand, so to speak; without enacting on his nemesis the selfsame ‘supreme act of evil’ of murder? Even as a pre-destined, ‘Chosen’ hand, he would be taking life.
The dilemma is further complicated by that other controversial question: Is Harry a Horcrux? And if so, how can he destroy without dying himself?
I propose here an off-color theory that, while it may not give a clear-cut resolution to the above two questions, may be warped enough for J.K. Rowling’s love of twists … for as Jeeves says, we must examine ‘the psychology of the individual.’ The individual here being, Tom Marvolo Riddle vis-à-vis his six choices for Horcruxes:
1- The Diary: (i.e. ‘Book’); represents Riddle’s respect for Knowledge as a means to Power.
2- The Ring: (i.e. ‘Heirloom’); symbolizes Riddle’s reverence for his Ancestry on the pureblood maternal side.
Because Riddle considered Hogwarts his ‘home’, it follows he would wish to identify himself with all four Houses as a whole, by selecting relics belonging to each of the original founders:
3- The Locket: House of Slytherin
4- The Cup: House of Hufflepuff
5- The [?]: House of Ravenclaw
6- The [?]: House of Gryffindor
As for Dumbledore’s hypothesis that Voldemort, having failed to create his sixth Horcrux prior to his downfall, would later resort to entrusting a part of his soul in a live creature (Nagini), I doubt that Voldemort (and Rowling!) would be so tacky as to disturb the perfect symmetry & symbolism of the ‘Houses of Hogwarts’ coat-of-arms. Three simply is not four; it ruins the balance, makes it lacking, asymmetrical, devoid of full meaning. A big black snake (even if it does call to mind Voldemort’s serpent/skull Dark Mark) is a poor substitute for Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, Riddle’s home. All four relics must be present to create this symbol. How can one become a Dark Lord if one is not obsessive about his image? : )
So what can Ravenclaw & Gryffindor’s relics be, according to canon hints? My idea for the former is purely guesswork: Rowena’s wand; which we encountered in our first trip to Diagon Alley, sitting in its prominent and untouchable position in Ollivander’s shop window like a set of antique jewels. Maybe Ollivander’s mysterious disappearing act in HBP is due to Voldemort’s wish to provide a safer hiding place for his Horcrux-wand, following the failed Ministry mission and his exposure? The object itself has intrinsically symbolic value, as the most crucial instrument of magic.
Gryffindor’s relic, as Dumbledore tells us, cannot be the sword, having been under safe lock in the headmaster’s office during Riddle’s schooldays and subsequent years before/after his fall. But the sword is said to be the only ‘known’ relic of Godric Gryffindor … might not have Voldemort managed to find an ‘unknown’ one? Especially, as GG holds the most important correlation to SS: best friends, worst enemies, both male, opposite colors (Green/Red – Silver/Gold), opposite values, the Lion & the Serpent, etc. etc.
For purposes of symmetry in the series, it seems crystal-clear to me that Harry Potter is to Lord Voldemort as Godric Gryffindor is to Salazar Slytherin. Knowing Voldemort is Slytherin’s last living descendant, from his pureblood mother’s side; Harry would have to be Gryffindor’s from his pureblood father’s side. Two half-blood orphans, two extraordinarily talented wizards: logically, who else could possibly be ‘born’ to vanquish the Heir of Slytherin but … the Heir of Gryffindor? (further canon support for this symmetry is that Riddle visited his hometown where Merope Gaunt lived and Harry plans to visit his birthplace where James Potter lived. Thus Godric’s Hollow can be read to indicate the Potters’ ancestral namesake).
If the above premises are correct, Voldemort would absolutely be compelled to find a Gryffindor relic as a Horcrux. Perhaps he would esteem it the most important one, to be chosen with care, taking time to procure, and so wish to leave the best for last (i.e. the sixth trophy).
Let’s now examine a very probable scenario: having already created five Horcruxes, Voldemort hears the prophecy and identifies the candidates: Neville Longbottom & Harry Potter. Voldemort, putting so much store by the prophetic possibility of doom, would not make his choice between the two infants arbitrarily. He would do his homework on parentage. And perhaps learn of James Potter ancestral line leading to Godric Gryffindor, making young Harry Potter not only the obvious ‘prophesized enemy’ but also … a prime relic for the last Horcrux. What could ensure immortality more emphatically than to entomb the final fragment of his soul in the corpse of his vanquished nemesis, the Heir of Gryffindor?
My theory is that Voldemort made Harry into a Horcrux with pre-meditated purpose. Not ‘accidentally’ (as some have suggested to be the case after backfiring of the Killing Curse on the baby –and others have pointed out that casting the complex spell needed to create a Horcrux is impossible to perform after losing his body, sapped of strength and sans wand). Voldemort sought out his relic/enemy that fateful July night, killed James & Lily, used their murders to create a Horcrux in Harry’s body (thus carving the scar), and in triumph over the prophecy, shot the lethal Avada Kedavra at the baby boy, knowing a mortal can die but retain the Horcrux in its corpse (morbid enough?!). We know what happens next. Power Voldemort knows not, and could not expect, ancient magic evoked by Love, gives Harry Potter protection to survive the curse as an unprecedented exception in the history of wizardkind.
The crux is that Voldemort, now back in power, well remembers what he has done. His rage to kill Harry arises not only from his desire to win the prophecy, but to safely repossess a cherished Horcrux: the lightning-bolt scar wherein one-seventh of his soul resides. How else could the scar be such a powerful conduit between Harry and Voldemort’s moods, emotions, innermost chambers of mind? How else could Voldemort’s talents (e.g. Parceltongue) have been transfused into Harry’s essence? Why does Harry’s scar burn, if not with the lava wrath of the Dark Lord’s soul?
As a last thought, we have heard much but not yet seen that worst of punishments, the infamous Dementor’s Kiss. Maybe when the other three Horcruxes are destroyed (locket, cup, wand), as well as the last bit in Voldemort’s physical body (Ideally, Snape will fire the AK like he did at Dumbledore, as per his ironclad trusted vow), and only Harry himself remains a Horcrux … he can have a Dementor kiss his scar. The empty shell of Voldemort’s soul will live in it until the end of Harry’s life, yes; but perhaps that is why ‘scar’ is rumored to be the last word of book seven’s epilogue: the prophecy will be fulfilled by Harry living and Voldemort failing to survive –in the sense of immortality. There is good reason why the prophecy wording is not ‘neither can live while the other lives.’ Voldemort may live, but not have the eternal survival he had planned … Dumbledore did warn him there are worse ways of destroying a man than death. Being soulless is the best example of such destruction. Also, as per law, a Dementor’s Kiss is not illegal like an Unforgivable. This way, Harry will not technically be a murder, either, because he does not ‘kill’ Voldemort, but lets his scar act rather like a cell in Azkaban.
was that ….. too long?
sorry!!!
but this is the first blog ive posted this on, so go ahead and open fire …
: )
tara
I think there is a definate possibility that Harry may travel through time in the 7th book, but the idea of him dying at the scnene of his parents’ death doesn’t exactly ake sense, because as you said on previous pages, once you die, you’re dead for good. The same way that Buckbeak was never killed, if Harry died while returning in the past, then in theory he died at that time, and would not have experienced his years at Hogwarts because he would have changed the past by dying 17 years before!
Also, if your theory somehow was possible, wouldn’t Harry have been able to see the Thestrals since his first year at Hogwarts, bacause he had really been there to see his parents die?
Hi Sabrina – thanks for commenting!
To answer your points, my time travel scenario depends on two Harry Potters: one-year-old Harry who does not see his parents die (JKR said he was in his cot) and mysteriously survives Voldemort’s curse and seventeen-year-old Harry who witnesses his mother’s death, saves his young self from beneath the invisibility cloak and later dies at the scene.
This time-loop (note: it’s a loop, not a cycle!) enables the older Harry to travel back to witness his past and to intervene without altering the experience of the young child who will one day grow up to be seventeen years old. So all this has in a sense already happened – it’s just that Harry doesn’t know it yet!
Just as Harry and Hermione saved Buckbeak without affecting their own experience of his supposed death, so Harry will grow up with the same nightmare of Voldemort, will be unable to see Thestrals until Cedric dies and will have his mother’s last moments replayed in his mind when Dementors get too close.
Indeed, the reason this theory is attractive to me is that it doesn’t change Harry’s past – it just explains it. If that makes sense! ;–)
Wow. This is the best theory I’ve read yet! And remarkably doesn’t violate causality!
I’ve been wondering for a while just why it is that people think Harry survived the AK, when there were supposedly no witnesses left alive after the attack until Hagrid showed up to find the baby Harry there alone.
if harry kills voldermort at godrics hollow, how do expalin the US cover illustraion showing harry fighting voldermort in a colloseum type place with many others watching? apart from that, a good theory, but i suspect that it is just that; a theory. a good alternative ending, but i feel that that JKR’s ending will be different. we are forgetting that this is a childrens book – would the main character really die in a book of this genre?
note on horcruxes – judging by the cover illustraion of UK childrens edition, harry and co. seem to be in a vault full of gold. (harry’s inheritence from james?) is it not possible that one of the horcruxes is hidden here, and that the potters were already aware of harry’s fate, and had already found a horcrux which, along with thier gold, found it’s way to the gringotts vault. i also find the whole lucius malfoy minister of magic scenerio to far fetched. all of the HP books so far have given us simple, yet exciting story lines, and they have never been to uinbelievable (except for the fact that it’s set in a magical way). i think that some of your theories (time travel) may be too far fetched when taking into acount the style in which she wrote books 1-6. i think that the past is the past, and although your ‘harry is the horcrux’ theory may have merit, i think that the final battle will take place in the present.
“deathly hallows” may be refering to all hallows eve (Holloween) making halloween deathly/significant in this last book – halloween = harry potter day?
I’ve been reading for a couple days and I love your theories! They are all fantastically supported by evidence (and some very minor invention, but I digress…).
I have a comment about this theory, however. I hope I’m correct in assuming that you think the spell that past-Voldemort cast to kill baby Harry was the Horcrux-creation spell since virtually all of my conjecture here hinges on this. I’m just thinking out loud but it would do a great job explaining just HOW past-Voldemort was “ripped from his body” and able to still survive if the spell does, in fact, separate the soul and body. It doesn’t, however, explain what happened to past-Voldemort’s body. IIRC, it’s never stated that past-Voldemort’s body is found (by Sirius or Hagrid) in the house at Godric’s Hollow. This is a significant point because if you accept the Horcrux-creation spell as baby Harry’s potential demise and if, as you theorize, Amelia Bones was killed by Voldemort to create another Horcrux (his wand), then her body shouldn’t have been found either. This is all purely conjecture at this point, as it’s not been stated just HOW Horcruxes are created; whether they’re made AS the person is killed, or AFTER the person is dead. Though, perhaps Voldemort was so magically powerful and much less human (ripping your soul into pieces will do that to you) that his demise in the past was much different than normal wizard and witches’ deaths. I suppose I’m just talking in circles now, sorry.
You’ve addressed all the challenges to your theories quite admirably, so I’m eagerly anticipating how you’ll respond to this challenge which, as near as I can tell, has not yet been posed.
Your scenario regarding Harry firing off Sectum Sempra right as Voldemort fires off AK works fine, and would certainly result in Voldemort’s demise… in the present, at the point where all the Horcruxes have been destroyed. But 17 years ago, in Godric’s Hollow, we know that most /all of Voldemort’s horcruxes were still intact at that point. At the very least, enough were in existence for him to survive the rebounding curse the first time. So if present-day Voldemort time travels back to a time when his soul fragments are still largely intact, won’t their protection be just as valid then as they were for Past!Mort? Surely Past!Mort would be willing to share.
Or are you hypothesizing that since the Horcruxes that correspond to his time frame are gone, the ones in the past are null and void for Present!Mort, and thus are worthless to him?
Tim, I won’t answer for Ms. Vablatsky but I’ll give you my take on it and await her thoughts.
I’m thinking that your latter theory is indeed the case. I believe that the Horcruxes do correspond to his own time frame and so wouldn’t be valid for Present!Mort, even if he travels to the past.
I’m pretty sure I disagree with that one then. Time frame or no, I don’t see why Present!Mort wouldn’t have the same protection as Past!Mort if he was back before any Horcruxes had been destroyed. Turn that theory around, say that somehow once Harry destroys them all, V just goes back in time and brings them all to the present, good as new. It’s still his soul, present and accounted for.
A comparison with POA, if you will – Present Harry & Hermione rescue Past Buckbeak. To me, this line of reasoning is along the same lines as saying Buckbeak couldn’t protect them from Lupin because they weren’t all from exactly the same timeframe.
I didn’t read all the way through all the responses because I have ADHD, but it seems to me that the whole love being the most powerful magic thing will be significant. Perhaps Voldemort will underestimate Harry’s love for, and thus willingness to die for, his friends, which will lead to the situation in which Harry can sacrifice himself and kill Voldemort at the same time.
If Harry is indeed a horcrux, couldn’t he just make his own horcrux and put that piece of Voldemort’s soul inside of it, then destroy it? Its better than ….
I do not see how time travel would resolve all the mystery surrounding this book.
First in POA we were not told if one can go back in time do stuff and return back to the present again. In POA we have harry and hermione having to spend the entire 3 hours saving, buckbear, sirius and himself from the dementors, but they had to go through the entire 3 hours and be back to the same exact spot where they started their time travel at exactly 5 mins to midnight.
Now if this theory is right, what happens to Ron after the death of Harry and voldermot? He would have to live another 17 years to get to the present time, by which time he would be 34years of age. I wonder how hermione would feel seeing off a 17 year old Ron Weasley only for a 34 year old Ron to return with no Harry potter. This would put an incredible dent to the entire potter plot.
However if you are assuming as some science fiction tell us you can backtrack, or move forward in time randomly. Then Brandon’s earlier theory of Harry saving his little self from voldermot becoming an endless continous cycle would have to stand, and that does not make any sense.
My Opinion: I believe that Lily’s sacrifice saved harry potter, the scar is not a horcrux but a magical endowment from voldermot as a result of the spell that was meant for him but killed his mum, which now works on the same principle as the vanishing cabinet that could connect 2 distinct places and allow the DEs to enter Hogwarts from daigon alley but in this case instead of connecting 2 places it connects 2 persons, which is harry and voldermot and can allow each access each others thoughts and feelings.
As for finishing voldermot, I do not doubt harry dying in the process, but I think like the other books, it would be through new information or enlightenment from previous experience and off course with the help of his more talented friends.
I’ve really enjoyed reading your take, but i see one problem with the time travel theory. I haven’t read all the comments so forgive me if I am repeating what someone else has already pointed out.
We have seen Hermione and later Hermione/Harry travel back only a few hours in time, which means that they will be back to their original time within a couple of hours. The problem with travelling back 16 years is that we are never told in the series that you can traved forward using the time turner! (Although, this doesn’t mean that you can’t, but I’m not sure JKR will introduce this concept so late in the series.)
Dispite all this Harry and Ron will still be able to go back in time to stop LV, so that part of your theory is sound. However, the problem will be of Ron getting back. Judging by our previous experiences with the time turners, Ron will have to spend the next 16 years without attracting attention to himself until the time in which he and Harry go back in time. So, he cannot (going by my theory that you cannon travel forward in time using a time turner) travel forward in time to tell everyone about the events. Ron will have aged 16 tears (if he had successfully remained in hiding) by the time he gets back to his original time!!
It will be interesting if what you say is how JKR decides to end book 7 and we find out that perhaps Trevor the toad was Ron in animagus form.
(Unlikely though, but I’m just speculating!!) Altough JKR has ruled out the possibility, it would be poetic Justice if Crookshanks was Ron!! 
Your version is quite imaginative and I hope you write an epilogue and JKR has promised that she will!!
must say this is THE MOST imaginative and interesting theory i’ve ever read!!! just one observation – the scene in HBP where ron, hermione and harry are explaining to hagrid why they dropped his class in their 6th year, hermione mentions that the entire stock of ministry time-turners was destroyed during the battle in OOtP. plus in PoA it was mentioned that the ministry regulates the use of time-turners very carefully. so unless there is another way to travel through time (not yet mentioned in the books), i’m not sure how they’ll be able to go back 16 years.
I am leaning towards the time-travel theory, however; I have questions about other coincidences, etc.
1. Is DD really dead. I understand Ms. Rowling has repeadly said that he is dead, however; The position of his body does not correspond with the way others have died with Avada Kardava (eyes wide open, spread eagle). I believe when DD’s body was found his eyes were closed and not spread eagle.
2. If part of Voldy’s soul was transferred into Harry, how is it that Voldy is great at everything; but, Harry can only preform defense techniques and speak parseltongue?
3. Is it possible that Lily is a descendant of Slytherin and James a descendant of Gryffindor which is why Voldy did not kill Lily instantly.
4. Will Hermione (since she is the brains) convince Harry to have the dememtors suck out Voldy’s soul from Harrry before the final duel.
5. Can Lily’s eyes be a Horcurx instead of Harry’s scar?
6. Ms. Rowling has said a major characters will die in the end. Could one of them be Uncle Vernon.
7. I truly believe Snape is a good guy and will be the hero. I believe Snape pretended to kill DD to prevent other Death Eaters from compeleting the task. Remember Hagrid overheard a heated conversation between Snape and DD in the forrest. Is it possible that once Harry informed DD of Malfoy’s behavior it was then their plan was put into place. Remember Snape is good at Occlumency/Legil… and so was DD. Also, at the funeral what was the flash of light and the phoenix Harry believes he saw. Whenever Harry believes he saw “something” he was right on the money.
8. As this is a children’s book I find it hard for Ms. Rowling to make the ending so sad. Killing off a child whose life has been nothing but tragedy seems drastic. Since the death of his parents and left in the care of angry muggles Harry has managed to find magic, love, friendship, life, quiddich and most importantly family. Was his life so depressing and unbearable that the only choice would be to kill him as a hero as oppose to saving the world and living happily ever after? Remember this is a world of magic and conversating with the dead is not unheard of in their world.
Very imaginative, and certainly feasible. If it turns out to be way off, you could always turn it into a fanfic ‘alternate ending’. I’d read it
PS: Despite all evidence to the contrary, I still think Sirius is alive :p
Good point on Number 8
Concerning Harry’s first survival
There is a significance in the order that Harry’s parents died. In the books it is assumed that James dies first after duelling with Voldemort who then goes on to kill Lilly who is protecting Harry. However, in GOF 579 when Voldemort and Harry’s wands lock and the victims appear in reverse order of being killed, James appears second to last and it is Lilly who appears last. Therefore, since Lilly dies first, it appears that James is still alive after his wife is killed and this should be included in your theory. “and Harry, his arms shaking madly now, looked back into the ghostly face of his father. ‘Your mother’s coming …’ he said quietly.” (GOF 579). Harry’s father might still have a greater part to play in saving baby Harry.
I’m leaning towards Dudley being to person suddenly being able to do magic. It would be just desserts for his parents’ hatred towards Harry, Lily and James.
Also, I wonder who in Hermione’s family tree was a wizard/witch. Would be hilarious if she was related to the Malfoy’s. Talk about family reunion.
As for Trellaney, all her “predictions” have been accurate, yet no one has paid much attention to them. HMMM!
Concerning Time Travel …
Okay, you’ve raised some really good points … which I’ll do my best to address below:
However, I reasoned my way out of it (I think), with the argument that the Horcrux protection can only work once for the same individual on the same night. The first Voldemort is hit by a rebounding Killing Curse and would have died, JKR tells us, were it not for his Horcruxes. As it is, he is ripped from his body and becomes “less than the meanest ghost”, i.e. Vapour!Mort. If the same were to happen to the second Voldemort (who owes his survival originally to the first), would he also become a spirit? Thus allowing for an infinite series of Voldemort’s using time travel (something for Voldy to consider perhaps?!). My feeling is that this would have to be illegitimate in JKR’s magical scheme of things. When it comes to Horcruxes, we don’t know all the laws of the Potterverse …
1. Not commenting on the covers, asdfasddfsadfasd, as without context it is almost impossible – never claimed this to be anything other than a theory, btw. As for deaths in children’s books – Tolkien and Lewis didn’t shy away from the dark stuff! The death would have to be meaningful though. (Interesting idea about the Potters having found a Horcrux.) Not sure what counts as “far fetched” either – I found the Moody/Crouch twist in Book 4 to be pretty unexpected!
2. WayneCO2, I’m assuming that past Voldemort’s body *was* found at Godric’s Hollow. This would explain why so many believed him to be dead originally. If his body hadn’t been found, it would be more unusual and thus a matter for comment: i.e. “They say he’s dead, but we never found a body”? As it is, only Dumbledore and Hagrid seem to suspect that Voldemort wasn’t mortal enough to die the first time.
3. Tim, that’s an ingenious point, which I must confess did niggle at me before posting this theory originally.
4. Rob, I’m sure Harry would never make a Horcrux. It’s just not what the good guys do, surely?
5. Jayen (and Potterreader), you raise a good point about Time Turners, though I suspect that (to be really useful) they can do more than was shown in Book 3. (Hermione only needed a basic version for classes.) You’re right that forward travel isn’t guaranteed; I know that in some (but not all) fandoms it is impossible but I’m hoping not in this case (don’t know what Dumbledore’s watch can do). I really don’t believe that this would require an endless continuous cycle, though … in my scenario everything happens just once for Harry and Ron, even if they do see baby Harry at the end.
6. Countdown, we only have the Daily Prophet’s word for it that all the Time Turners have been destroyed … and that isn’t the most reliable source in the world! I suspect that one or two may have survived (and that it was actually rather convenient to dispose of the rest so that only a few people can time travel). Time will tell …
7. Richard, JKR has said that the so-called “wand order problem” was a mistake and it has been corrected in later editions of GOF. James definitely died first. See here for more: http://www.hp-lexicon.org/about/exp-wandorder.html
God help us if that is the way Rowling closes the most amazing children’s saga written. I think resorting to time travel to suddenly end everything is similar to the Greeks running out of ideas and using deus ex machina to fix an ending.
I support Eve’s comments- this is a children’s book. Back when she wrote chapter one of book one in the mid 90s, this series was for children. Granted – we all read the books now but at the heart of the story “love conquers all.”
I have just finished all 16 blogs and I must comment on how brillant you are. I enjoyed reading them all. I cannot wait to find out all the dirty little secrets Aunt Petunia has been hiding. And I cannot wait for Neville to have his glorious moment avenging his parents.
First of all, Harry is not gonna die. The base reasons are canon based and undeiable, but the easiest to understand is economics-he’s not gonna die because if he did the final two movies would be destroyed as would OotP 8 10 days after its 7/11 open.
If Harry were to die, it would end the Potter bloodline (and that by it self equates to evil winning), and that’s not gonna happen. And finally, Harry is not gonna die and leave the survivors with guilt complexes that will result in unsolicited followup books by every wantabee writer.
Harry is not the “boy who lived” so that at the end of the series he’s the “young wizard who dies”. Not gonna happen.
Could Aunt Petunia’s secret involve her son and past lover???
hi, first when you are on a pensieve anyone can see you! in the fourth book when Harry go to the pensieve of Dumbledore anyone can really see him! o.o XD
Considering Voldemorts obsession about immortality I think that once The Dark Lord is killed he will choose to become a ghost. Nearly headless nick tells harry after Sirius dies that although few wizards would choose it, you can choose to leave an imprint of yourself upon the earth ie. a ghost. I think Voldemort would choose this path. You cant kill a ghost and therefore Voldemort could emotionally torment his victims for eternity even without a body.
I have to make a correction on my DD being dead theory. He was indeed found spread-eagle, yet his eyes were closed as if he were sleeping. But, according to DD the killing curse leaves no traces. However, upon finding DD body, Harry reached out, straightened the half-moon spectacles upon the crooked nose, and wiped a trickle of blood from the mouth with his own sleeve. Also, DD did convince Malfoy that he could make it appear that he “Malfoy” is dead. Again DD states “He “Voldy” cannot kill you if you are already dead. Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more completely than you can possibly imagine… And, how is it possible that DD knows more about what Harry’s whereabouts and doings–I believe he was the Transfiguration teacher back in the day. There is more to DD than what’s written in the first 6 books. Lastly, I have uneasy feelings about Luna. No one could be that spaced out. And, as for Wormtail, I believe his hand to be the last horcrux. There was nothing significant about the old gardener’s death in book 4, however, Voldy’s rejuvenation was significant and Cedric was killed with his wand. The soul is encased into a horcrux after being ripped from killing. Wormtails’s hand was not replaced with a regular hand, but encased with silver. I believe whatever the incantation used was unbeknown to Wormtail as it was done silently and voila the silver hand appeared. Sorry, but I am too excited about the new book.
Huntington, you may well be right about Harry’s survival! But if his creator has decided to spare him then it won’t be based on economics *shudders* – I trust that JKR will have remained true to her original vision with the artistic integrity of a writer. And if he dies, the end of a bloodline is not necessarily the triumph of evil, methinks? What matters more is the triumph of certain values – love, friendship, bravery etc. (In any case, Harry will have gained his immortality.)
They’ll be unauthorised prequels and sequels written, whatever happens – but I think that Harry’s later career would be more of a problem (in this respect) than his early death – the books have described seven crucial years in the life of Harry Potter but if he lives (after realising his destiny at seventeen) then I’m sure he’ll have an extraordinary life … the temptation for JKR to continue it would be almost irresistible, IMHO …
I agree, Illuminet, that there would appear to be at least the potential for Voldemort to return as a ghost. However, since that would be rather a problem for eveyone(!) I earnestly hope that his “maimed and damaged soul” will make it impossible … no hauntings, please!
Intriguing theory about Wormtail’s hand, Eve, but as for Dumbledore, I have to believe that he is (in the words of his maker JKR) “definitely dead”. The Oracle has spoken. (Hey, I did my best to bring him back – briefly – through time-travel!)