Harry's Soul with Harry as horcrux

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 155440

> Mike responds:
> 
> Alla, I think you're assuming that Voldy's soul piece is attaching
> to Harry's soul. Seeing as most Horcruxes are not assigned to other
> living things, there is no requirement for another soul to attach
> Voldy's soul piece to. In fact the accidental Horcrux theory
> postulates that Voldy had intended to assign that soul piece to an
> inanimate object.

Alla:

Hehe, no, I am not assuming anything, in fact as I said on whether 
Harry as a horcrux I am incredibly undecisive and don't have a 
strong opinion contrary to some other topics ;).

I totally get the possibility of soul piece not being attached to 
Harry's soul. But it is still there, though, no? Inside of Harry? At 
least metaphorically it is inside Harry's soul or am I missing 
something after all?

Mike:
 It was never intended to possess another's soul like
> the diary Horcrux. We don't know how Voldy managed this bit of 
magic
> with the diary Horcrux, but DD does say Riddle was probably the 
most
> brilliant student to attend Hogwarts. In any case, Voldy's soul was
> not intended to and probably isn't attached to Harry's soul. This 
may
> be due to Lily's protection or it may show that Harry is inately 
more
> powerful than Voldemort in the mystic realm of Love and Souls.
> 
> As far as Dumbledore is concerned, I rather think he knew but 
didn't
> know how to present this possibility to Harry. His whole hint about
> Nagini possibly being a Horcrux was to get Harry to realize that a
> Horcrux could be enterred into another living being, as well as
> becoming a Red Herring to the readers.

Alla:

Okay, yes, this **is** my question and I am still not quite clear. 
What does Dumbledore assume when he makes this remark?

Is it your argument that when Dumbledore says that Harry's soul 
is "untarnished and whole" , what he **really** means to say is 
that "Harry's soul is untarnished and whole, **except** that piece 
of Voldie that we don't count"?

Am I making sense to you? It seems to me that even if Voldie piece 
is not meshed with Harry's soul, it is still in Harry and it just 
seems strange to me to say it that way, **if** Dumbledore knows?

If he does not know, Okay, I can see him saying that.

Mike:
<SNIP>
See, I fall into the camp of
> people who believe that although DD is brilliant magically, very 
wise
> analytically, very learned scholastically-speaking (150+ years 
helps a
> lot in this area), but DD is not a brilliant tactician and has that
> frustratingly annoying habit of holding onto secrets way, waaay too
> long.

Alla:

Oh, I share your conviction about Dumbledore's annoying habits, 
believe me. ;)

Mike: 
> For instance, why doesn't he shout it from the rooftops that 
Voldemort
> is really Tom Riddle, a half-blood wizard?
<snip>

Alla:

Heeee, let me know when you have a satisfactory answer to that, 
except for plot related reasons.

Mike:
<SNIP>
Another case: he never told Harry how to destroy a
> Horcrux, despite the fact that he promised to expand on the Ring
> Horcrux story. Is this not an important piece of knowledge? 
<snip>

Alla:

Oh, totally, that is one of the most important reasons I never 
bought Dumbledore wanted to die on the Tower argument. 



Mike:
> So why wouldn't DD tell Harry if he knew or suspected Harry is a
> Horcrux? Is he afraid Harry would immediately assume that he must
> sacrifice himself, as you Alla have suggested, without considering
> other possibilities?
<SNIP>


Alla:

Just to be clear and I promise not to bug you  anymore :) - so it is 
your argument that Dumbledore knows that Harry is a horcrux, and 
still consider his soul untarnished and whole, and just does not 
count Voldie piece, because it is not really attached to Harry's 
soul, but just floats in him?


Mike:
 > Alla, does any of this help?
> 
> Mike, who even after all this is not 100% convinced that Harry is a
> Horcrux.
>

Alla:

See above, if you could just clarify Dumbledore's thoughts process 
when he makes this remark, it would help even more.