A Twist on Stoned!Harry

[annemehr <annemehr@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 51868

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Tom Wall <thomasmwall at y...>" 
<thomasmwall at y...> wrote:
> Annemehr wrote:
> How do we reconcile a pure and innocent 
> unicorn being part of Voldemort's role in 
> this? I propose that in his many magical 
> experiments and transformations that 
> Dumbledore refers to Tom Riddle undergoing 
> after leaving Hogwarts, that one or more of 
> them involved using unicorn blood to try 
> to achieve immortality.
> 
> I reply:
> Well, don't we know for sure that Voldemort
> has used unicorn blood twice as definite canon?
> 

Annemehr:

Yes, but those times are much later.  My theory requires Voldemort to 
have used unicorn blood *before* attempting to kill a fifteen-month-
old Harry, because:
> Annemehr wrote:
> I think that Harry was not *born* as the living philosopher's stone. 
> I think that he *became* one on the night that Voldemort tried to AK 
> him but failed, *transferring some of his powers* -- and *essence* 
-- 
> to Harry that night.

And part of that essence needs to include unicorn blood.  Fortunately 
for me, I think that's entirely plausible.
 
 <snip>

> Annemehr wrote:
> Also, it's so classical. It's like Oedipus Rex and many other 
> stories, where the steps people take to *prevent* a prophecy coming 
> true are *exactly* what bring it about. 
> 
> I reply:
> Also, very interesting, connecting Oedipus, there.  But, then again, 
> Oedipus was our tragic hero, right, so is drawing a parallel between 
> Voldemort and Oedipus kind of, well, bizarro? 
> 
> But, IMHO, I'm kind of almost hoping that she's going to outwit the 
> classical forms a little bit - as in, I'd be a more than a little 
> *disappointed* if it turned out to be Trelawney's first prediction 
> that foresaw the fall of Voldemort to Harry. I mean, well, I can't 
> really explain why... maybe it boils down to the notion that I find 
> Trelawney to be a little irritating.
> 
> I just would. ;-)

Annemehr:

Aww, heck, I didn't mean to carry the analogy *that* far, to equate 
Voldmort with Oedipus!  I just wanted to make the point about trying 
to prevent a prediction coming true is what actually brings it about. 
 Actually, I think it's a rule. ;)

Seriously, though, Trelawney's prediction needn't be involved here.  
We know that Voldemort wants to kill Harry.  We make the inference 
that he believes Harry is a danger or a hindrance to him.  But, (in 
this theory) Voldemort's first attempt on Harry's life has made Harry 
a living philosopher's stone with a connection to Voldemort, and 
perhaps his final attempt on Harry's life will bring about Voldemort's 
destruction. 

> 
> I'm-a-gonna revisit this later on, when it's not so late at night. 
> <yawn>
> 
> -Tom

Good, because there's something else I didn't address.  Apparantly, 
just as the philosopher's stone could turn base metal into gold and 
mortal life into immortal, it was also said (about Nicolas Flamel, I 
believe) that it would turn an imperfect soul to perfect.  So, if 
instead of trying to kill Harry and thus destroying his own stone, if 
Voldemort did something else with Harry (what, though?) would he then 
be redeemed?  Discuss.

Annemehr
staying up even later and off to OTChatter...