Will there be an ESE!character in Book 7?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 147499

kchuplis wrote:
> I can't see it [Voldemort's redemption] either. And I don't think
we've seen any indication that such a fate will be written. Even DD
says in OoTP to Voldemort "Merely taking your life would not satisfy
me, I admit".  That's a pretty strong statement. So however it is
going to be done, total destruction seems the likely outcome.
>
Carol responds:
I agree. Unlike Snape, Voldemort has never shown any sign of remorse.
He has been a murderer since sixteen and routinely uses the other
Unforgiveable curses, even Crucioing his own Death Eaters with a
sadistic pleasure akin to Bellatrix's. He cares for no one but
himself, cares for nothing except his own power and his own
immortality. He has even sacrificed 6/7 of his own soul (pretending
that the soul is divisible into exact sevenths regardless of the
number of murders committed). I won't go into a litany of his sins: we
all know what they are, and they exceed even Wormtail's (some of which
were performed in his service). He (LV) has long since ceased to be
human, as his snakelike appearance so clearly reflects. Redemption is
for the human characters, those who still have some good in them. I
would nominate Draco, Snape, and Percy as the most likely candidates,
and Snape, at least, will probably earn his redemption through his
death. (Not what I *want* to happen, just what I *think* will happen.)

But I'm also interested in the Dumbledore quote you cited. On one
level, it's an example of the type of half-truth DD tells when the
whole truth can't or should not be revealed. (Other instances include
the reasons he gives for Snape's saving Harry's life in SS/PS or for
"returning to our side" after becoming a DE.) In this instance, DD can
hardly say, "Oh, I know I can't kill you, Tom. Only Harry can do that,
and he has to destroy the Horcruxes first." Also, (IMO) DD doesn't
want to kill anyone, or to cast a soul-corrupting Unforgiveable Curse,
and we know that he believes there are things worse than death.
There's also, of course, the rather significant detail that LV is
possessing Harry at the time, and even if DD had no scruples about
killing Voldemort and there weren't any Horcruxes preventing LV's
death, DD wouldn't want to kill Harry.

Still, I think we can take the statement ("Merely taking your life
would not satisfy me, I admit") as true even though it's not the real
reason (or the primary reason among many) why he doesn't attempt to
kill Voldemort then or at any other time. That being the case, what
can he mean by it? What *would* satisfy Dumbledore (if he were alive
to see it)? Would merely having *Harry* take LV's life be somehow more
satisfactory? Surely he's not expecting LV to beg for mercy or
repentance? Or maybe it's not a half-truth at all but an out-and-out
lie to cover up his knowledge of the Horcruxes? I can't imagine DD
*wanting* to take someone's life, not even Riddle/Voldemort's. What,
then, does he mean?

Ideas, anyone?

Carol, noting that the half-truth tactic seems very Snapelike (not an
insult to DD, whom I regard as Snape's mentor)