Harry as a Non-crux - a few thoughts.

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 157865

Geoff wrote:
> <snip> I have noticed that a few posters are getting confused about
what a Horcrux is:
> 
> '"Well," said Slughorn, "....A Horcrux is the word used for an
object in which a person has concealed part of their soul."'
> (HBP "Horcruxes" p.464 UK edition)
> 
> Using the analogy of a tin of biscuits, the biscuits are a person's 
> soul fragment, the tin is the Horcrux.
> 
> Returning to Robin's comment above, I do not believe personally 
> that an accidental Horcrux can occur.
> 
> We know that when a murder is committed, the murderer's soul 
> is ripped. But that does not automatically create a Horcrux. Looking 
> at the list of Voldemort's possible victims which was being
discussed a few weeks ago, he must have a few bits of torn soul still
kicking around inside him. Presumably, the act of encasing a soul
fragment involves a powerful spell which needs to be cast by the
wizard committing the act and, by extension, would be spoken by him at 
> some point after after the murder.
> 
> I think that, at Godric's Hollow, even if Voldemort had, as
Dumbledore believed, intended to make Harry into a Horcrux, he would
have had no opportunity after his killing curse rebounded to perform
the spell to create a Horcrux. It couldn't "just happen". 
> 
> So I still firmly believe that Harry ain't a Horcrux, not nohow!
>
Carol responds:
I agree with everything you've said except the part about intending to
make Harry into a Horcrux. DD actually said that he believed Voldemort
intended to *use Harry's mureder to create a Horcrux*--that is, to
enclose the soul bit created by Harry's murder in an object (possibly
the sword of Gryffindor, which he could acquire by killing the next
person on his hit list, Dumbledore). At any rate, Dumbledore's actual
words strengthen your argument.

We *know* that Voldemort wanted the Prophecy Boy dead and that the
spell which rebounded was a killing curse, not a Horcrux-creating spell:


JKR: The first question that I have never been asked—it has probably
been asked in a chatroom but no one has ever asked me—is, "Why didn't
Voldemort die?" Not, "Why did Harry live?" but, "Why didn't Voldemort
die?" The killing curse rebounded, so he should have died. Why didn't he?

http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2004/0804-ebf.htm

So we know that Harry isn't a deliberately created Horcrux, even if
Voldemort were foolish enough to want him to be one. As I said, he was
trying to kill Harry and, if DD is right, would have used that
important murder (as opposed to the death in battle of James and the
unintended murder of Lily) to make a Horcrux. (Which, BTW, may explain
why he wanted Lily to step aside. He wouldn't have considered James's
death a murder, but Lily's would have been. Maybe he didn't want to
use the "wrong" soul fragment for that last Horcrux?)

As for Harry's being an accidental Horcrux, I agree that since a spell
is required to encase the soul bit in an object and no such spell was
performed at GH, it's probably impossible for a Horcrux to be created
accidentally. Harry could have acquired some of Voldemort's *powers*,
as we know he did, through a drop of Voldemort's blood entering the
scar. (There's all sorts of canon evidence for magic being in the
blood, but I won't go into that now.)

Also, I see no way around the complications that would arise from
Harry being a Horcrux, since the only way to destroy that last Horcrux
would be to destroy the container (Harry himself) and that would make
it impossible for Harry to kill or otherwise permanently destroy
Voldemort. I concede, though, that the last objection (only the last)
would be overcome if the scar rather than Harry were the Horcrux.

Carol, imagining Snape bursting open Harry's scar and releasing the
soul bit