Musings on Dobby,Horcruxes, and MPD!LV Was:Snape and use of "The Dark Lord"

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 167158

Anne Squires responds:
> 
> FWIW, Dobby also refers to LV as "the Dark Lord".
<snip>

Carol responds:

Very good point! Either we have ESE!Dobby, which seems extremely
unlikely, or the use of "the Dark Lord" is not, in itself, definitive
evidence of a person's loyalties. (Personally, I think that Dobby used
it because that's the way he was used to hearing Voldemort referred to
and DDM!Snape habitually used it to avoid giving away his true loyalty
around the Death Eaters and their children. He had to *appear* to be
one of them and to share their loyalties. Nor would the usually
dignified Snape say something as silly as "You Know Who" regardless of
his loyalties. He might on occasion say "He Who Must Not Be Named,"
but the term is cumbersome. "The Dark Lord," which also appears not
only in both Prophecies but on the label on the Prophecy globe in the
DoM. I hardly think that the keeper of the Hall of Prophecy is himself
a Dark Wizard. On a side note, I think that the name "Voldemort"
causes Snape's Dark Mark to burn, as if it senses where his loyalties
truly lie. The DEs glower and hiss at Harry in the MoM when he uses
the name, but they don't grab their arms as Snape does. I think he has
good reason for not wanting Harry to use the name (but I agree with
whoever said that he's directing Harry away from the dream about the
snake in case Voldemort is listening in--and that, too, would be a
reason to order Harry not to say the name).

Anne Squires wrote:
> Like I said earlier, when I first read this I thought it was a cheap
shot on the part of the author. <snip> At the time I was thinking that
Harry had guessed correctly and Dobby knew it all along.  Why play
this stupid game with both Harry and the reader? <snip>
> 
> Later, of course, I realized that He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named really
and truly had nothing whatsoever to do with the plot of CoS.  We have
been told that Lucius Malfoy was behind the whole thing. That LV's
anger, upon hearing about this blotched plot, was great to behold. 
One of his Horcruxes had been sacrificed for nothing.

Carol responds:
I had a similar reaction, though not so violent. :-) It took me awhile
to realize that Ginny's encounter with Diary!Tom would not in itself
convince Percy that Voldemort was back, that Diary!Tom was a kind of
manifestation of Voldemort, complete with his personality at an early
age, but was not Voldemort himself. (I still wonder what would happen
if Vapormort had met this younger version of himself. Would they have
been allies or rivals or would they have merged into a single entity
that looked like sixtee-year-old Tom Riddle?) I do, however, think
that the canonical information you've summarized above should be
accepted as accurate (Snape has to be the source of DD's information
on the anger) and not a set-up for something else or misdirection.

Anne Squires: 
> After reading HBP I completely changed my opinion about this
hint/clue---whatever that JKR is/was trying to give us via Dobby. 
This is the genius of JKR.  She is giving an incredibly clever clue
about LV's essence.  That he is, in fact, divided, split.  There are
different parts to Voldemort, that these different parts come from
different time periods and even have different names. <snip>

> What I am attempting to say <snip> is that the Horcruxes together
make up a whole being; but these bits of soul have been apart from
their "owner" for a very long time.  I wonder if they have developed--
or maybe retained--distinct personalities with distinct agendas.  I
think the fact that the Horcruxes exist means that LV has a sort of
MPD. <snip>

Carol:
I see what you're saying, although, of course, there are only two
different names, and the Tom Riddle in the diary was originally a
*memory.* I don't think that the other soul bits would have
personalities or bodies. You can put a memory in a diary to be "read"
by other people (the diary had to be interactive or it could not have
been used to open the Chamber of Secrets), but how can a memory be
concealed in a cup or ring, which would not be read or written in? I
think that the other Horcruxes serve a different purpose. They are
precious magical objects with a history that makes them more valuable
still to Voldemort, and they are mostly made of gold (ring, cup,
locket) which will last untarnished for a very long time. Unlike the
ring, which was intended one day to be used--and perhaps sacrificed,
according to DD--once Voldemort had all his Horcruxes and was in
power, the other Horcruxes are hidden, with curses and other powerful
protections to prevent them from being destroyed. Their sole purpose
is to encase a soul bit and "anchor" the main soul to the earth. I
doubt that they have any personality, and the only agenda in creating
a Horcrux is Voldemort's own--immortality. The diary was also proof
that he was the Heir of Slytherin, but that proof required a reader.
Any knowledgeable person looking at the Slytherin locket, the
Hufflepuff cup, or even the Peverell ring inherited by the Gaunts
would know what they were (in terms of their history, not the fact
that they're Horcruxes) with no interaction, no encounter with
embedded memories. They did not need to be "read" to be recognized as
valuable heirlooms.

Anne Squires:
> I also think that there is a Horcrux in Harry which has helped Harry
oppose LV.  This explains why Harry's instincts seem to always kick in
just in time to save him the times he has confronted LV (or in the
case of CoS--- one of LV's Horcruxes). <snip>

Carol responds:
First, from what we've read, a Horcrux has to be deliberately created.
LV may have intended to use the soul bit resulting from Harry's murder
to make his sixth Horcrux as DD speculated, but he performed no such
spell on Harry himself. He was trying to kill him. So even if there's
a soul bit in Harry (and all we know is that he has some of LV's
powers--we don't know that they result from a soul bit), he is not a
true Horcrux.

That aside, I don't think that soul bits have independent volition,
except in the case of the diary, in which the soul bit was combined
with a memory of young Tom, which could interact with a reader. And I
doubt that any bit of Voldie's soul would enable Harry to act against
the main soul it was broken off from, especially if your hypothesis
that the soul bits develop independently is correct--this one would
have broken off just as Voldie killed Lily, who was trying to prevent
him from killing the Prophecy Boy. I can see such a soul bit (if it
exists, which I don't believe) strengthening the link between Harry
and Voldie, stirring up hatred in Harry when he saw Dumbledore,
striving to get him to use Dark Curses, or whatever, but not helping
him to act against Voldemort.

I think that the instinct you cite is either inborn or a result of his
mother's accidental Love magic or the result of the curse that
backfired, creating the very enemy that Voldemort was trying to
destroy. But I don't think it comes from a seventh of Voldemort's
soul. Voldie isn't going to work against himself.

Anne Squires: 
> Horcrux!Harry explains why Harry's wand, the brother of LV's, chose
Harry. <snip>

Carol:
I think that the first wand, Tom's (yew wood and Phoenix feather),
sensed great power and a thirst for immortality. I think that the
second wand (holly wood and Phoenix feather) sensed that Harry was the
Chosen One, the one with the power to defeat its brother. Or it sensed
powers similar to Tom Riddle's that Harry acquired at GH. No soul bit
is required for it to sense these things.

Anne Squires:
> "Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't just throw
Riddle's diary away. The fact was that even though he knew the diary
was blank, he kept absentmindedly picking it up and turning the pages,
as though it were a story he wanted to finish.  And while Harry was
sure he had never heard the name T. M. Riddle before, it still seemed
to mean something to him, almost as though Riddle was a friend he'd
had when he was very small, and had half-forgotten. <snip>" (CoS US
paperback p.297)
> 
> What other explanation could there be for the above paragraph than
Horcrux!Harry?  Please, this is not a rhetorical question.  What do
you all think of Harry believing he used to be "friends" with T. M.
Riddle?  Why would he think that?  Why does the name mean something to
> him? <snip>

Carol responds:
I think it's part of the spell on the diary, which, as I've said, was
intended from the beginning (before it was a Horcrux, IMO) to be
interactive. Tom was using his charm to entice the reader to open it,
to write in it, to confide in him. Little Ginny, who also thought
"Dear Tom" was a friend, fell under the same spell.

Carol, who thinks that the diary is the only interactive Horcrux and
that it's a mistake to view the other Horcruxes as having similar
properties