The Darkness Within

[M.Clifford]

No: HPFGUIDX 119021


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" 
<justcarol67 at y...> wrote:
> 
> azriona wrote:
> > <snip>  By taking Harry's blood at that point,
> and bringing Voldy back to power, he managed something quite
> incredible - he rendered Voldy mortal. <snip>
> 
> 
> Carol responds:

> We've already discussed why DD didn't try to kill LV at the MoM, 
but if LV is mortal, *couldn't* DD have killed him, Prophecy or no 
Prophecy?
>

Valky:
I think DD said he *could* kill him but that it would not be 
satisfactory. 
The prophecy says that the "one with the power to vanquish the Dark 
Lord approaches"
The word vanquish is too *carefully chosen* to simply mean *kill* I 
should like to think, and some of the synonyms for vanquish are :
overpower, overturn, humble, master, overcome, quell, reduce, 
repress, rout ... among many others. These are the things that *only 
Harry* can do. Although while LV is mortal someone else might *kill* 
him.

Carol:
> Either A) the Prophecy is wrong (or being wrongly interpreted by 
DD, Harry, and most readers) 

Valky:
I don't think DD is interpreting it wrongly.
DD says: " It means that the only one with a chance of conquering 
Lord Voldemort for good...."
and later Harry asks does "..neither can live while the other 
survives.... mean that one of us has to kill the other"
To *that* DD replies "Yes" Whch I take as saying that DD interprets 
*that* line as meaning that one has to kill the other, omitting the 
part about the mysterious power, because he is not *asked* to 
include it.


Carol:
or B) LV is wrong about his own mortality: he's immortal with the 
exception of an Achilles heel named Harry Potter.
>

Valky:
I think that you are right about this. Strangely enough.
>

Carol:  
> Can anyone think of a third possibility?

Valky:
I think that the third possibilty is the inherent meaning of the 
carefully chosen words, Vanquish and Conquer.