[HPforGrownups] Speculation on Tom Riddle's origins

[Lissa B]

No: HPFGUIDX 57324

> --- Lissa wrote:
> > a long post that Harry Potter and Ginny
> Weasley may be
> > Tom Riddle's biological
> > parents.>

Lynn responded:
> Big problem:  Tom Riddle, Sr. was a Muggle, Harry
> is not.

Me:
Thanks for the response Lynn.  I should have been more clear in my post,
but I was trying to keep it brief.  I don't believe Tom Riddle Sr is
Harry Potter and I don't believe Riddle is Voldemort's father.  I also
don't necessarily believe Harry went back in time.  I just believe that
Ginny did.  In my opinion, Voldemort grew up believing mistakenly that
Tom Sr was his father. Ginny might even have believed Riddle Sr was the
baby's father herself, depending on whether memory charms had been used
on her.  Alternately, she may have duped Riddle Sr into marrying her. 
(I don't have any evidence to conclude anything about Ginny's state of
mind--assuming my theory isn't utter hogwash--and don't want to
speculate.)

I realize this makes Voldemort's resurrection spell in GoF problematic. 
Without the proper ingredients, the ritual should not have worked.  I
suspect part of the reason Dumbledore seems secretly pleased when he
hears the details of the ritual is that Voldemort *did* get it a bit
wrong.  He used the bone of an enemy and the blood of his father rather
than vice-versa.  (And yes, I do think Dumbledore knows that HP is
Voldemort's father.  His statements in CoS when Harry is asking about
his similarities to Riddle are, in my mind, too carefully worded to be
candid.  When Harry prompts Dumbledore for confirmation that Voldemort
passed characteristics to him when he tried to kill him, Dumbledore
diplomatically responds, "It certainly seems so".  This recalls his
response to Prof. McGonagall in Chapter 1 of Phil. Stone. when she
questioningly states about Voldemort, "I suppose he really *has* gone,
Dumbledore?"  I suspect Dumbledore knows much of what is to come, which
explains not only his general sense of playful optimism and calm, but
his status as the one wizard Voldemort fears.  Dumbledore has an
advantage Tom Marvolo Riddle does not.)

Lynn wrote:
> As far
> as the Potter name, JKR has already said she
> picked that name because neighbors had the last
> name of Potter and she liked it, the same way she
> picked Harry's first name is because Harry is her
> favorite boy's name.

Me:
I think that's clever misdirection on Rowling's part.  I also don't
think she had much choice but to pass the name off as insignificant. 
Admitting it had meaning would potentially spoil her plot twists--again,
if my theory is correct.  And I admit it may be complete nonsense.

Lynn wrote:
> We also know from PoA that time travel doesn't
> prevent people from killing their former or later
> selves so it stands to reason it wouldn't stop
> them from killing anyone else so that wouldn't
> have stopped Voldemort or Tom Riddle, Jr. from
> killing Harry before he has a child.

Me:
I think if it had been anyone other than a Voldemort-type figure--who'd
saturated his being with spells and potions to make himself immortal--he
would have succeeded either in killing his biological father or, at the
very least, rendering himself nonexistent.  Only the lingering effects
of extensive dark magic kept him alive. It's a paradox complicated by
Voldemort's dark magic immortality.


Lynn wrote:
> As to Ginny
> Weasley, I really don't see Molly Weasley
> allowing her granddaughter to be raised in a
> Muggle orphanage, do you?


Me:
Absolutely not!  Molly Weasley would never allow a grandchild to be
raised in an orphanage if she could help it, but there's no reason Molly
would know anything beyond the fact that her daughter disappears if/when
she does.


Lynn wrote:
> Besides, that would
> mean that the Weasleys were descendents of
> Salazar Slytherin and I also don't see his
> descendents being sorted into Gryffindor House.
> It would also stand to reason that at least one
> of them, if not all, were Parselmouths.

Me:
Hmmm, I don't see why the Weasleys couldn't be descendents of
Slytherin.  I think one of Rowling's points in the series is that
genetic makeup is not the same as personal character and that
upbringing--family--has a far more powerful effect on a child's ultimate
personality than DNA.  Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if the
Weasleys were related to Slytherin and Ginny turns out to be a
Parselmouth.  Nonetheless, I do believe Harry is an heir of Slytherin
and that he passed the Parselmouth trait on to his son.  Dumbledore was
able to hide this truth from Harry by claiming Voldemort was the "last"
Slytherin heir in CoS. Since Harry doesn't realize that, generationally,
he's actually older than Tom Riddle, this information appeases him and
allows him to believe, wrongfully, that he's not related to Slytherin.

Also, Dumbledore notes that being a Parselmouth is terribly rare. 
I--perhaps wrongfully--took this to mean that even in descendents of SS,
there was no guarantee of the ability to speak with snakes.


Lynn wrote:
> Unless JKR comes out and says, oh, by the way,
> you can't take anything in the books as truth,
> it's all lies, for me at least, this theory
> doensn't fly.

Me:
Lynn, I honestly see why you say this.  I think my theory is utterly
far-fetched.  Honestly, I hope it isn't true.  It isn't where I would
have taken the series, but it is my best interpretation of the facts and
symbols as I see them.  The only real "lie" I can see, is the one that
states Tom Riddle Sr is the father of Voldemort.  Given that the man so
easily parted with the boy, however, I'm not sure even *he* really
trusted that he was Tom Jr's father.

Still, I could be completely wrong.  You've given me some things to
think about.  Thanks.

~Lissa