IHHS, the I Hate Horcruxes Society (was Re: Harry Horcrux redux)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 155141

Lupinlore:
<SNIP>
> The ordinariness of it is what I think has lots of people 
annoyed.  We
> had strong hints and speculations of strange and original themes 
with
> strong spiritual overtones.  Instead, it seems most of defeating
> Voldemort will be purely mechanical - find the Maguffin and destroy
> it, basically a video game in written form.

Alla:

Oh, goodness. Yes, yes, you nailed it, I think. I don't **hate** 
Horcruxes per se, but it is most certainly "that's it?" moment for 
me.

The story was well crafted, I thought, but I certainly expected 
something more dramatic at the heart of the saga.

> Kemper now:
> Are you saying that JKR steals?  Because the idea of hiding the 
soul has
> been around well before the D&D geekdom.  There's a Russian fairy 
tale that
> depicts a magician (evil, obviously) who separated his soul from 
his body
> and hid it in an object; his nickname was The Deathless.  Maybe 
Alla can
> expound further.

Alla:

Hey, Kemper. Sounds like we do share similar tastes in fairy tales, 
if not in HP characters, hehe. :)

Yes, sure, this idea of hiding one's soul in the object had been 
around forever and this magician "Katchey( tried to spell as close 
as I could) Deathless or Immortal" is a **very popular** evil of 
Russian fairy tales. Usually he steals a maiden and hero comes to 
save her and first had to do a little quest to hunt the soul of the 
Evil one.

Usually his soul ( whole one) hidden in one object, but that object 
is hidden in several other ones ( russian matryoshka effect, I call 
it ;)).

Often for example Katchey's soul is hidden in the needle, needle in 
the egg, egg in the fish, fish in the bunny , etc( may have screwed 
up the order, remember well "needle in the egg")

But to go back to JKR, yes, I find it too trivial. I cannot exactly 
figure out why. Probably because I grew up with Katchey doing this 
trick in so many fairy tales I read and I guess I expected something 
more out of the ordinary, you know?

Something more spiritual, something not so little kids stuff? 
Although on the other hand, I guess it goes to support the argument 
that Potterverse is oriented to the younger audience first and 
foremost.

I don't know, as I said below, am sitting on the fence.

But I certainly don't think that JKR steals, everybody borrows from 
mythology and fairytales.

Kemper:
<SNIP> 
> Neil Gaiman, another of my favorite authors has used the soul-in-
an-object
> device. 
<SNIP>

Alla:

Which book? Love Gaiman, don't remember reading this one. Do want to 
read it. :)
Ceridwen:
< HUGE SNIP>

> We're stuck with these things if we want to follow the series to 
its 
> end.  As the loyal opposition, what is our position on Horcruxes?


Alla:

Zis true. :) We are stuck with those thingies. Hehe. I am **so** 
sitting on the fence especially after reading latest Horcrux redux. 
I am in love with Neri's arguments for the Harry as accidental 
horcrux, especially because I think that on metathinking level it 
makes whole lot of sense for JKR to go with Horcruxes as the reason 
for Harry to be prepared to sacrifice himself, if he is a Horcrux.

No, I don't think it means he is dead, dead, dead. There were 
several possibilities suggested for Harrycrux to get out of it alive 
and I think some of them are very possible.

Nevertheless, Rebecca made the strongest argument that made me jump 
back on the fence again and that is of course DD words that Harry's 
soul is "untarnished and whole".

Hmmm, sounds as pretty strong indication that no piece of Voldie 
soul tarnished Harry's, to me anyways.


JMO,

Alla