Blood magic v Love magic

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 142921

> a_svirn:
> I daresay. But should it be this different? This is the question 
> that really bothers me. All the other examples of the "higher"
> magic that metaphorically, symbolically etc represent essential
> human relationships are pretty straightforward in this respect.
> Fidelius charm can only work if you are loyal. If you are not it
> fails. We don't know how precisely the life debt thing works, but
> I have a hunch that the obligation exists only if you recognise
> it. The magic of the Unbreakable Vow can only be invoked if you 
> are making a commitment, etc. And yet with Love the most important
> of all things muggle and magical "just feeling love" suddenly
> becomes less important, than being a blood relation. 

Jen: I definitely get what you are saying here, why did Dumbledore 
choose to protect Harry with the bond of blood, the 'strongest 
shield I could give you' when the story seems to be saying the 
opposite--trust in love over blood, blood is meaningless for who a 
person will become. Logically that would mean someone who loves 
Harry could protect him better than Petunia. 

(As an aside before plunging forward, the UV and Fidelius aren't 
classified as ancient magic and so I'm not really addressing them 
here. I think they *are* straightforward and the mechanism for each 
is somewhat explained, unlike the magic classified as ancient magic.)

Regarding blood, there's an unanswered question in the story and I 
don't think it's some huge hole but the usual vacuum of plot 
secrecy. Because blood seems to be playing two different roles: 
First we have the introduction of bloodlines in COS, blood prejudice 
and the like. Then we have the curious details related to 
metaphorical blood, the power flowing through a person's veins, the 
life force. 

Voldemort represents the taker of blood, a person who will drain 
another's life force: 

1) First re: Lily, 'he shed her blood' according to Dumbledore in 
OOTP.
2) He commanded Wormtail to take Harry's blood 'forcibly'.
3) In the cave Harry discovers one of Voldemort's crude beliefs is 
that causing an enemy to spill blood 'weakens' him.

Lily & Harry are the shedders of blood, willing to give up their 
life force for another:

1) Lily's sacrifice for Harry.
2) Harry giving up his blood to Voldemort (this wasn't voluntary I 
know, but his blood was taken to give LV life so I think it's 
meaningful for where JKR is headed)
3) Harry offers his own blood so Dumbledore wouldn't have to cut 
himself.
4) Harry gives the blood tribute to the archway to save Dumbledore's 
strength, i.e. life.

Connecting this idea to the blood protection, I think there is a 
deeper meaning there, that Lily's life force flows in Petunia and in 
Harry. If Petunia were to deny Harry 'the place where his mother's 
blood dwells' she would essentially be separating him from his life 
force. And Voldemort taking Harry's blood *connects* LV to this life 
force, which won't confer any benefits on him I'm certain. Not the 
way he hopes, anyway.

Basically, I have faith that blood can matter and love can matter 
and somehow they are connected, that the blood protection won't 
prove to be this glaring 'what??' issue in the end. Given the fact 
we don't understand the gleam, or why Harry's blood is 'valuable' 
according to DD, or the importance of a life debt (saving another's 
blood from being shed?), JKR probably has a great plan that will be 
much more believable than my suggestions!

Optimistic!Jen