How J's Sacrifice led to H's Patronus?(was: Why were the sacrifices different?)

[cerebella316]

No: HPFGUIDX 95993

Bella (not to be confused with *Bella*trix-I'm a good girl!): 

Sorry I'm bringing back a thread that occurred a week ago...I was so 
busy last week with college exams and Easter that I am a little 
behind every else. But something in this thread has raised questions 
in me that I can't ignore...


Siriusly Snapey Susan wrote:

Thanks, Kneasy, Ffi & Max, for answering the questions I raised.
Your comments all help it to make more sense. STILL, I'm just a
wee little annoyed that James' death gets such short shrift! So Lily
*thought* [or was instructed, per Kneasy's comments] to apply the 
ancient magic that would save Harry. That's true sacrifice!
STILL, James chose to die saving Lily & Harry, as well. Just because 
he didn't apply the ancient magic which ended up saving Harry, he
still sacrificed himself for the hope of saving their lives. Seems 
he--and all those other wizards who did likewise for their families--
should get a little more "credit".

<Big snip--sorry!>

Neri responded:

My take on it is that Lily's and James's sacrifices were *not* that
different. They were different in the nuances, perhaps just because
Lily and James were different persons. James as a man couldn't help
but go down fighting, but he knew well that he is not as powerful as
Voldemort and he was only buying his family a small chance at the
price of his life. Lily as a woman pretended to be helpless while
preparing a hidden dagger for a low strike, and she consciously paid
for the chance to strike with her life. The results of these two
sacrifices were different in details, but very similar in principal:
Lily's sacrifice gave Harry his blood protection. James's sacrifice
gave Harry a very powerful patronus to defend him. It might be argued
that Lily's sacrifice was the more powerful, but this is rather
splitting hairs IMO. The interesting thing is how *similar* are these
two sacrifices in their nature and in their results. This what make
me think that they have the same kind of magic underlying them.


Bella asks:

Is there a passage in the books that says that Harry's patronus 
takes the form of the stag because of his father's sacrifice? (How 
did I miss something like that in my dozen or so readings of the 
books?)

I always thought that a patronus just takes the form of something 
that makes one feel safe (even if they are unaware of why it takes 
such a form)? What I mean is, had James not died in Godric's Hollow 
that fateful night...and had he been a great father but had died 
when Harry was 8 years old serving the Order, couldn't have Harry's 
patronus still taken the same form? Why does the sacrifice have to 
be the link? Maybe the form of the patronus signifies that Harry 
subconsciously *understands* that his father was willing to die to 
protect him, and that has made Harry feel, in a way, safe/protected 
his whole life? For a real-life example, there is no person that 
makes me feel more safe than my mother. I feel that nothing can 
happen to me when I'm with her...even though I know that this is not 
entirely true. But, in my mind, she is my sanctuary. And I believe 
that if I were a witch in JK's Potterverse and could conjure a 
patronus, it would be, in some way, a symbol of my mother.

Also, just wanted to note that, when I read the stories, I don't 
feel that either parents' sacrifice is downplayed. (And I agree with 
whomever posted that Lupin's remarks to Harry after Harry sneaked 
off to Hogsmeade emphasize to Harry and to the readers what a 
powerful thing it is that *both* of his parents sacrificed their 
lives so that Harry could survive.) I guess I just always 
interpreted the difference between to sacrifices to be that James 
had died fighting Voldemort--that the curse that killed James was 
*intended* for James, while Lily had jumped into the line of fire, 
an AK that Voldemort had issued to kill Harry, not Lily. 

But, to touch on Susan's feelings about sexism in this part of the 
story, what annoys me is that Voldemort told Lily to "stand aside." 
Did LV think that he could simply cast her aside, believing that she 
was merely a female and *surely* not powerful enough to thwart his 
mission? 

If anything, I feel like *she showed him*! The "girl" that Voldemort 
tried to cast aside seems to have been knowledgeable enough and 
quick-thinking enough to know that, if she sacrificed her life in 
just the right way--according to ancient magic, she could give her 
son a wonderful protection.

Pretty impressive work for a "girl." But, in no way, does this make 
her sacrifice more powerful on a level of love and appreciation than 
than James's. They both sacrificed their lives for their son.

~Bella

who wants to add that she finds it very interesting that Hermione's 
patronus is an otter, JK's favorite animal. Is this meant to once 
again give Hermione an attribute that, in a way, links her to JK 
herself? Or could it be that it is JK's way of saying that she 
herself will protect Hermione from too much harm as the series comes 
to an end? (Meaning that we can bet Hermione will be one of the 
survivors of the series??) 

Just a thought (that I might have mentioned before, now that I think 
about it!?!? Whoops!)