Lily's sacrifice may not be what we think it is... (very long)

[mad_maxime]

No: HPFGUIDX 95817

> Arianna wrote:
> As usual, everyone has excellent theories on what happened
> the night Harry's parents died and Voldemort's curse rebounded.  
> <snip>
> So far the consensus seems to be that Lily insisted on
> Voldemort murdering her so that her death would create some
> sort of protective charm on Harry.  Some posters suspect that
> Dumbledore had suggested this to her.
>
> Here's the problem: this theory requires Lily (and Dumbledore
> and perhaps James) actually risking Harry's life.   
>
> You see, for this theory to work, we must accept that Lily (and
> Dumbledore) was OK with the idea that helpless Baby Harry
> would actually be cursed with an AK (the magical equivalent of
> being shot with a gun, point blank in the face) by the most
> powerful dark wizard in a century, in the hope that
> their complicated (and unprecedented) experiment would work.  
> We have cannon evidence as far back as the first book that no
> one has been known to survive an AK.   Lily knew that
> Voldemort had come into the room with the intent to murder her
> child, and that there was no known way to deflect an AK.  There
> was no guarantee that her death would protect Harry.   Is it really
> possible that Lily would be so arrogant and reckless as to ever
> allow Harry to be put in this position?  The theory also doesn't
> address why the spell *rebounded*, instead of just failing.
> <snip>

Max responds:

While I agree that the active conjuring of ancient magic - that would
have allowed Lily's sacrifice to save Harry - [i]might[/i] have been
experimental, I disagree that Lily choosing to cast this spell on
Harry makes her "arrogant" and "reckless". For all we know, she could
have been experimenting with ways to conjure this sort of ancient
magic so that there would have been some possibility to protect Harry
if the worst case scenario came to pass and Voldemort found his way to
Godric's Hollow. As far as I can see, as soon as Voldemort walked into
the room, she had no choice but to try anything at her disposal. It
would have been irresponsible and reckless for her [i]not[/i] to cast
the charm on Harry. Of course there was a chance that it might fail,
but there's no reason to believe that Lily wasn't fairly hopeful that
the charm [i]would[/i] work.

As for the AK rebounding instead of just failing, we still have no
idea how this ancient magic works. Maybe it works by causing spells to
rebound. In fact, all evidence seems to indicate that this is true.    

> Arianna wrote:
> Here's my theory: Lily didn't cast a charm on Harry.  She cast a
> charm on HERSELF.
> <snip>
> Lily may have cast some new charm that she created from a
> theoretical perspective that causes spells and hexes to rebound.     
> She might have even taken part in experiments in the DoM involving
> simple hexes and even imperios (I still say Voldemort's "stand
> aside" was not a request but an imperio that she was able to
> resist).  Experimenting with a death curse would never have been
> tested as it would be unethical.

Max responds:

Using your reasoning that casting an experimental charm on Harry would
be arrogant and reckless, how is casting an experimental charm on
herself any less arrogant and reckless? Her "experiment" could still
have failed, whether it was a charm placed on Harry or a charm placed
on herself. In either scenario, the charm's failure means a dead Harry
and the charm's success means a live Harry. I see no difference in
terms of Harry's possible survival, unless you're saying there was a
greater probability of success with Lily casting a charm on herself as
opposed to Harry.

The only real difference between these two theories that I see is
that, with your theory, both Harry [i]and[/i] Lily would survive if
her charm was a success. Harry's death, however, has just as great a
likelihood of occurring with either theory.

And as for experimenting with the Death curse being unethical, she
[i]could[/i] have used small insects as subjects. The chance of saving
a human life far outweighs the killing of insects, imo.

So I'm not saying I don't like the idea of Lily casting a charm on
herself. I just don't see it as being any safer or more ethical as far
as Harry is concerned. I do like the idea of Lily working and running
experiments in "the locked room", and the idea that it's karma not
love that is hidden inside the room is intriguing.

Max