The Scar. Was: Choices - or not

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 89923

- 
> Carol wrote:
> 
> > I originally thought as you do that the power was in Harry himself,
> > but JKR kept presenting new evidence that contradicted that
> > theory--first the Parseltongue that Harry acquired from LV when 
> > some of LV's powers were passed to him, 
> 
> Whizbang here:  I must be missing something.  How does Harry's being 
> a parselmouth or any skill aquired when Voldemort marked him an 
> equal, suggest that Lily did a protective charm?  The prophesy 
> states that the one had the power as he approached, not that he 
> aquired it later or as the result of someone else's action.  The 
> power to vanquish the DL is in Harry.  It always has been.
> 
> Whizbang

I wasn't talking about the charm here. I was talking about the
progressive revelations regarding the scar that convinced me that
Harry's survival had nothing to do with powers within himself. Those
powers were acquired from the AK (but the fact that the curse
rebounded could relate to the charm). Let me state again that we first
learn that Harry alone survived the curse. Then we learn that he
acquired powers from Voldemort. Then we learn that his survival had
something to do with his mother's love and/or her sacrifice ("old
magic," Voldemort calls it). JKR is not telling us everything at once.
She's adding layer by layer of new information. I think we can discard
any thought that an inborn power within Harry enabled him as a baby of
fifteen months to throw off a curse that had killed every other wizard
it was used on.

Also, where does the prophecy state that "the one had the power when
he approached"? If you mean "the one who would destroy Voldemort
already had that power when Voldemort marked him as his equal," I
think you're mistaken. It would help if you'd quote the specific
phrase you're referring to, but please remember that prophecies are by
nature ambiguous and this one is no exception, so we probably won't
agree on the interpretation in any case.

Whizbang:
>Somehow, the fact that Lily's wand was good for charms and the
identification of the rune represented in the scar seem very thin
canon to base this on. Knowing what we do about Harry, and 
> Dumbledore's statement that he put the protective charm on Harry 
> seem to contradict it.

Carol:
Again, I think you're confusing two different charms, the one that
Mandy and I think Lily may have used to protect Harry from the AK and
the one we all know Dumbledore used to provide him protection while he
stayed with the Dursleys. I know it's confusing, but the known
existence of one charm doesn't preclude the possible existence of the
other. And Lily's skill with charms as revealed by her wand *is* an
important hint that we shouldn't ignore. It hints at what's to come
just as James's wand hinted at his skill as an animagus. The rune also
will prove important. I'm only stating a possible connection, not a
proven fact--putting two and two together like Snape, if you like. I
may be right or I may be wrong, but at least it seems like an
intriguing possibility. Surely you can at least concede that the hints
are there, whatever they may mean.



> Carol wrote:
> 
> > Also, you might consider that we don't know what powers Harry had 
> > as a baby before LV "marked" him. 
> ******************************************
> 
> Whizbang here:
> 
> Harry had the power to vanquish the dark lord as he approached, 
> before he was born.  The prophesy should be taken into consideration 
> in this theory.

Carol:
Forgive me, but you're taking your own theory for granted here. We
*don't* know that Harry "had the power to vanquish the Dark Lord as he
approached." I think you're confusing what happened at Godric's Hollow
with what the Prophecy (ambiguously) states will happen in the final
confrontation. I'm not ignoiring the Prophecy, but clearly we're
interpreting it differently.


> Whizbang here:
<snip>
> According to Dumbledore, the powers transfered by Voldemort are what 
> have given Harry the "power, and a future" to escape the DL four 
> times.  None of the transfered powers will vanquish the DL. Even 
> Dumbledore can't do that.  This is a power or a quantity of power 
> somehow exclusive to Harry. He was born with it. 

Carol:
I'm sorry, but I'm not sure what you're saying here. In any case, a
power within Harry that will ultimately enable him to defeat LV is not
necessarily a power he was born with. And again, his ability to defeat
LV in the future is not the same as his "ability" to survive the AK in
the first place. As far as I can see, there is no evidence that his
survival was the result of anything the infant Harry said, did, or
willed. His survival is the result of something his mother did--her
love, her self-sacrifice, or a charm she put on him to protect him--we
don't know yet. And the powers he acquired from Voldemort may well
rebound on Voldemort just as the AK did. We don't know that, either.

You seem to be certain of your view, but it is really only an
interpretation just as mine is. We are looking at the same passages
and interpreting them differently. We are both presenting theories.
There are no absolutes here, and evidence is only evidence, not proof. 

> Carol wrote:
> 
> > I realize that this explanation doesn't in itself support the charm
> > theory; I'm only explaining here why I no longer think that the 
> > power to deflect the AK was in baby Harry to begin with.
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 
> Whizbang here:
> 
> There seems to be far more in canon to support the AK failing to 
> kill Harry, marking him with a lightning bolt scar, transfering 
> Voldemort's powers and then rebounding to tear Voldemort painfully 
> from his body, leaving him less than the meanest ghost. 

CaroL:
We both agree on this point. Where we disagree is that you think the
power to deflect the AK was within Harry himself, something he was
born with, whereas I think he was protected by Lily, at the very least
by her love and self-sacrifice, but possibly by a protective charm as
well (which is where the other evidence--her wand and the Eihwaz rune,
comes in).


Whizbang:
 Of course, 
> the house was also destroyed.  And ten years later, Aunt Petunia 
> wouldn't leave Harry home alone because she was afraid she would 
> come home and find the house leveled.  Harry protests that he won't 
> blow up the house, but she is unimpressed. (Just what does she know?)
> 
> How was the house in Godric's Hollow destroyed?  I think Harry 
> attacked Voldemort at the same time that the AK was cast and either 
> Harry's alone, or the combination of spells brought the house down 
> as well as all else that occured.  "Either must die at the hand of 
> the other."  But when they attacked each other simultaneously in the 
> graveyard, they both survived.  Has that happened before?

Carol:
A fifteen-month-old baby who couldn't even talk yet beyond "Mama" and
"bye bye" picked up a wand and cast a spell? I have no idea why the
house was destroyed, but I'm willing to bet fifty galleons in
leprechaun gold that it wasn't that. Again, you seem to be confusing
the Prophecy, which concerns the ultimate defeat of Voldemort by the
one he marked as his equal with the events at Godric's Hollow.

Carol, who would really appreciate support from the L.O.O.N.s on this
thread