Killing Harry for Fun and Profit

[Phyllis]

No: HPFGUIDX 127965


bboy:

<<Though few of us do, we should ask ourselves if Lily's love 
protection is Universal, or is it unique to Voldemort.>>

I don't think this is clear.  In Ch. 37 of OotP, Dumbledore tells 
Harry "While you can still call home the place where your mother's 
blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by *Voldemort*"  
(my emphasis).  This would suggest that the protection is unique to 
Voldemort, but in PoA, no one seemed concerned about Harry's safety 
after Sirius' escape from Azkaban until he ran away from Privet 
Drive.  So presumably there was some thought that Harry was safe from 
someone other than Voldemort (in this instance, Sirius) while at home 
(where he is protected by a charm that uses the spilling of Lily's 
blood to protect him). 

Either way, what confuses me is that, despite Dumbledore's 
acknowledgment in GoF Ch. 36 that Voldemort "has overcome that 
particular barrier" (i.e., Lily's love shield) by using Harry's blood 
in his regeneration potion, the charm that protects Harry at Privet 
Drive remained in place subsequently.  I would think that, once 
Voldemort overcame this obstacle, the charm would no longer retain 
its power.

bboy:

<<<Next we have the Prophecy, it implies that only Harry can defeat
assumed kill) Voldemort, but if we accept that, then shouldn't we
equally accept that only Voldemort can kill Harry? And, if that is
true, doesn't that give them each an additional level of protection?>>

I think the ambiguity in the prophecy's "neither can live while the 
other survives" wording is put to rest completely when Harry asks "so 
does that mean that...that one of us has got to kill the other 
one...in the end?" and Dumbledore responds "Yes" (Ch. 37, OotP).  
Which means, IMO, that only Harry can kill Voldemort (since he's the 
only one with the "power to vanquish the Dark Lord" who has 
been "marked as his equal").  However, I don't think it means that 
only Voldemort *can* kill Harry - but I do think it means that only 
Voldemort *will* kill Harry.  

I also don't think that it's the Prophecy itself that gives the 
additional level of protection - the Prophecy is only reporting on 
what is going to happen (it doesn't provide any sort of protection).

bboy:

<<Let me expand this by asking a question, if you were a general 
wizard or a Death Eater, give that Harry couldn't be killed by the 
strongest Dark Lord in a century, and given that the attempt by said 
wizard rebound and generally destroyed said wizard, would you want to 
be the next person to attempt to kill Harry?>>

Well, Barty Crouch Jr. was eager to try at the end of GoF, and many 
of the DEs during the chaos in the Department of Mysteries at the end 
of OotP sent curses Harry's way.  But the DEs aren't the sanest of 
folks :)

bboy:

<<This is what make the conclusion of the series so spectacular, JKR, 
in a sense, has written herself into a corner, but placing both key
characters in a position where they can't actually be killed.>>

But they can (and, IMO, will) be killed - just only by one another.  
I'm convinced that, had Dumbledore not sent the golden wizard statute 
to protect Harry, Voldemort's AK would have killed Harry at the end 
of OotP.

How Jo is going to play this out is beyond me - I think Harry's 
doomed, but I can't see Harry killing Voldemort - yet if she kills 
Harry and leaves Voldemort alive, it's going to be a most 
unsatisfatory ending to the series.

~Phyllis
who thinks a dead Harry will be most unprofitable for WB, and 
definitely not fun for fans