The Prophecy -- "Marking"

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 108366

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "gelite67" <gelite67 at y...> 
wrote:
> I'm hung up on the "and the Dark Lord will mark him as his 
> equal . . ." language.  Was Harry marked (scarred) because LV's AK 
> curse failed? Is the "marking" the literal scarring or just the 
> choosing of Harry?  Was the marking language an implicit 
prediction 
> that LV would be unsuccessful or are we to assume that Harry would 
> have received the same scar had he died? 



Valky:
I have finally decided to sit with the interpretation that 
the 'marking' of Harry by Lv in the attack was not the scar or any 
other literal sense of the word. for a start the scar says very 
little about an equality of the two wizards. It denotes a connection 
which is not the same thing.

I see Harry *is* marked by Voldemort as an equal in a completely 
different way, NOTORIETY.
Their respective names have an *equal* level of consequence when 
spoken in the wizard world. Voldemorts inspires great fear and 
Harrys inspires great hope.

The way this translates is that LV did not *mark Harry equal* as 
result of throwing the killing curse at him, but by the act of 
*trying to kill him*. Thereby they share equal notoriety, you can't 
kill Voldemort and you can't kill Harry.

Make sense to everyone? 




I haven't found any other 
> reference to scars on the other victims of the AK curse, 

Valky:
Excellent point! In fact othermentioned apparent victims of the 
killing curse are described as being completely unmarked!
hmmmmmm that *really* says something about the prophecy, but what?



but, of 
> course no one else lived. To me, if Harry had died, he wouldn't 
have been LV's equal, so the only way LV could have marked Harry (or 
> whomever) as his equal would be if LV's AK curse failed.
> 
> Angie

Valky:
As you have already seen, I agree completely with this statement.

Best to You all.