Ginny as an accidental Horcrux

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 156940

> Neri wrote:
> 
> 
> > However, note that JKR doesn't say it's impossible in principle. I
> > quite agree that what happened between Ginny and Diary!Horcrux was
> > meant as a hint that soul parts can do unexpected things. They can
> > tempt people, they can possess them, they can make them forget things,
> > and they can pass magical powers to them. 

> Carol:
> 
> However, if a soul bit possessed the person who destroys the Horcrux,
> Harry would be possessed, forced to do Voldemort's will and having
> gaps in his memory.

Neri:
I didn't say and didn't mean to say that a soul bit would possess the
person who destroys the Horcrux. The soul part in the Diary was
destroyed immediately when the Diary was destroyed (as JKR confirmed)
so it didn't have time to possess Harry. 

> Carol:
> I don't see this interview segment as evidence that Horcruxes can be
> created accidentally.

Neri:
I didn't say and didn't mean to say that this interview is evidence
that Horcruxes can be created accidentally. What I did say was that
the Ginny case in CoS (and not the interview) shows that Horcruxes can
have all kind of interesting and unexpected capabilities. They aren't
necessarily inert things that just seat in one place doing nothing.

> Carol:
> Tom deliberated the diary Horcrux, which already
> had his memory in it, the original purpose being the one he states in
> CoS, to carry on Salazar Slytherin's "noble work."

Neri:
"The original purpose" is an apt term here. The diary Horcrux diverted
from its original purpose in circumstances that its maker couldn't
have foreseen. The Horcrux heard from Ginny about Voldemort's defeat
and Harry's involvement in it, and changed its first objective
accordingly, from killing mudbloods to destroying Harry Potter, which
was not even born yet when Tom had "deliberated" the diary Horcrux. 

And in fact it was exactly the independence of the diary that
convinced Dumbledore it was a Horcrux, even in the absence of any
other evidence:

***********************************************************
HBP, Ch. 23:

"A mere memory starting to act and think for itself? A mere memory,
sapping the life out of the girl into whose hands it had fallen? No,
something much more sinister had lived inside that book. ... a
fragment of soul, I was almost sure of it. The diary had been a Horcrux."
************************************************************

If this behavior were highly atypical for a Horcrux, then Dumbledore
wouldn't have reached this conclusion.

> Carol:
> He doesn't turn
> Ginny into a Horcrux--her purpose is to set the Basilisk on the
> "Mudbloods." She's never intended to keep him alive by storing a soul
> bit in herself. In fact, the opposite is true. Once Diary!Tom decides
> to go after Harry, her purpose changes, and instead of being
> temporarily possessed to do his will, he is (figuratively) sucking the
> soul out of her to bring himself to life.

Neri:
Exactly. Instead of remaining a mere Horcrux, the soul part attempts
(and nearly succeeds) in resurrecting the living Voldemort. I don't
think these were its original instructions. The soul part does it
because it heard that Voldemort had lost his body and powers.
Conclusion: Horcruxes can do unexpected things when faced with
unexpected circumstances.

> Carol:
> The soul here is her life
> force--nothing to do with her powers. And she has the power to speak
> Parseltongue (when she's possessed) not because she's acquired Tom's
> powers but because he's controlling her and speaking through her (as
> Voldemort speaks through Harry in the MoM, using Harry's voice).

Neri:
And yet AFAIK this is the only other case in the series where the
powers of one wizard are used through another wizard. There isn't
another mechanism for that in the series, so unless JKR invents some
completely new magic in the last book this is our best and only
candidate. And it is done by a Horcrux and it does involve parseltongue.  

> Carol:
> And
> possession, as we know from Harry's experience with it, is a very
> painful state, which lasted a short time because Voldemort couldn't
> bear to be in his body.

Neri:
We in fact see three cases of possessing a human in the series (Harry,
Ginny and Quirrell) and each of these cases is different. Possession
doesn't have to be a painful state, it doesn't have to be for a short
time and it doesn't have to involve gaps in memory. All these appear
to be incidental rather than obligatory. 

> Carol:
> If a soul bit had any ability to feel, it
> couldn't bear to be in Harry, either.
>

Neri:
Maybe, maybe not. It may depend on the soul bit, on Harry's situation
at the moment, and on the requirements of JKR's plot. But all the
other explanations of Harry ending up with Voldemort's powers and a
connection to his mind are even less supported. 
 

Neri