Death, where is thy...?

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 167252

Barry wrote:
>
<snip> Another thing that's been bothering me is death. When a W or W
dies, they (all?) move into picture frames and seem to maintain their
existence. Does it mean that they all have a picture frame horcrux? Or
is it that JKR can't really bring herself to kill her characters? 

Carol responds:

I agree that death and what happens after it is one of the mysteries
of the Potterverse. All we know, really, is that death is not the end
of everything that Voldemort envisions it as being. DD in his wisdom
regards it as "the next great adventure"; Luna and Harry hear voices
beyond the Veil; NHN says that not all wizards choose to become ghosts
and that Sirius Black "will have gone on"; Dementors can suck out a
person's soul, resulting in a fate worse than death. The portraits,
presumably painted during a person's lifetime (see the Wizard of the
Month for April on JKR's site) apparently paint the portrait during
its subject's lifetime

http://www.jkrowling.com

and in the case of the headmaster, that portrait somehow magically
appears on the office wall when the headmaster dies. But they are not
the character himself returned to life. There's no portrait of James
or Lily Potter that we know of, but it's possible that one of Sirius
Black magically appeared in Grimmauld Place. (Could Regulus's portrait
also be there? We know that Mrs. Black's isn't the only one, just the
noisiest. I assume that Mr. Black also has a portrait though I'm not
sure what we can learn from it. Maybe it will just yell catchphrases
like Mrs. Black's.) At any rate, neither the ghosts nor the portraits
are reincarnations of the dead person. Ghosts, Snape tells us, are an
*imprint* of the person's departed soul. I believe that JKR used the
term "imprint" in relation to portraits, too.

I agree with some of the points that have been made in previous
responses to your post. First and most important, portraits are not
Horcruxes, which can only be created through murder, which splits the
soul, and an incantation enclosing the soul bit split off by the act
of murder in an object. The point of the Horcrux is to keep the (Dark)
wizard's soul "anchored" to the earth so that even if his body is
destroyed, he can't die. We know of only one wizard who has made
multiple Horcruxes, Voldemort, and one other who has made a single
Horcrux, probably Grindelwald (IMO). So whatever the portraits are,
they're not Horcruxes, the Darkest form of Dark magic. They are not
keeping their subjects alive. They are to some degree sentient beings
or objects, but so is the Sorting Hat, which supposedly contains some
of the "brains" of the Four Founders."

I also agree that the portraits, especially that of Phineas Nigellus
appear to do more than repeat catch phrases and seem to be capable of
independent action (like running off to 12 GP when he hears that
Sirius is dead). Phineas also seems to disapprove of Harry's comments
about Snape ("Impertinent!" etc.). 

Someone else brought up the idea that they don't remember their own
past lives as living people (I'm not sure about that, but it's true
that we haven't seen them referring to those lives), but they
certainly have witnessed some interesting conversations in
Dumbledore's office and would remember those. I'd like to hear
Phineas, who fortunately for the plot has a second portrait in Harry's
room at 12 GP, tell Harry about Dumbledore's conversations with
Snape--not the one in the forest, unfortunately, but he must have
overheard Snape's reports to DD about the Occlumency lessons and much
else. He could be a very useful and valuable source of information if
Harry will just listen to him.

Which takes us back to the question, what are the portraits, exactly?
They're not Horcruxes. They don't contain bits of the subject's soul,
which can only be split through an act of murder, and is permanently
maimed when that soul bit is placed in a Horcrux. (We see the
dehumanizing effects of that action in Voldemort's altered
appearance.) Unlike ghosts, they have limited mobility, but they, too,
seem capable of holding a conversation (as does the Sorting Hat). Even
the "recorded voices" of the Marauders can respond in a characteristic
fashion to a perceived kindred spirit (Harry, the Twins) or a
perceived enemy (Severus Snape). In a more limited way, even
photographs can act characteristically (most notably, Percy's leaving
the family photo taken in Egypt).

I'm going to take a stab in the dark and say that something like
sympathetic magic is involved here. Just as people in certain cultures
fear(ed) being photographed because they thought the photograph would
capture their spirit, both a wizarding photograph (to a small extent)
and a wizarding portrait (to a larger extent) seem to to me capture
something of the subject's personality or character or spirit--*not*
the same as his soul, which is the immaterial and immortal essence
that will leave the body and pass beyond the Veil when the witch or
wizard (or Muggle??) dies. Just as the Founders could place some of
their "brains" in the Sorting Hat to determine the proper placement of
a student based on his personality and aptitudes and the Marauders
could place their voices or personalities in the Marauder's Map to
interact in a limited way with those who attempted to discover their
secrets, the portraits also seem to capture the voice and personality
and facial expressions of the subject.

JKR's response to a question about portraits, like most of her
interview responses, is both helpful and unhelpful:

"[Question]: All the paintings we have seen at Hogwarts are of dead
people. They seem to be living through their portraits. How is this
so? If there was a painting of Harry's parents, would he be able to
obtain advice from them?

"[JKR]: That is a very good question. They are all of dead people;
they are not as fully realised as ghosts, as you have probably
noticed. The place where you see them really talk is in Dumbledore's
office, primarily; the idea is that the previous headmasters and
headmistresses leave behind *a faint imprint of themselves. They leave
their aura, almost,* in the office and they can give some counsel to
the present occupant, but it is not like being a ghost. *They repeat
catchphrases, almost.* The portrait of Sirius' mother is not a very 3D
personality; she is not very fully realised. She repeats catchphrases
that she had when she was alive. If Harry had a portrait of his
parents it would not help him a great deal. If he could meet them as
ghosts, that would be a much more meaningful interaction, but as Nick
explained at the end of Phoenix—I am straying into dangerous
territory, but I think you probably know what he explained—there are
some people who would not come back as ghosts because they are
unafraid, or less afraid, of death."

Sunday 15 August 2004
J K Rowling at the Edinburgh Book Festival
ttp://www.jkrowling.com/textonly/en/news_view.cfm?id=80

So we need to figure out what JKR means by "imprint" or "aura." I
think the "almost" is important in "they repeat catchphrases, almost."
IOW, I think the portraits of the headmasters and headmistresses are
more fully realized, more independent, than the portrait of Mrs.
Black. Phineas Nigellus seems as fully realized to me as NHN, JKR to
the contrary. And her description of the headmasters' portraits as
faint "imprints" of themselves (intentionally left behind to counsel
new headmasters?) is too close to Snape's description of ghosts as
"the imprint of a departed soul left upon the earth" (not the departed
soul itself, which is presumably beyond the Veil) to be coincidental.
They're not ghosts, not as fully realized as ghosts (who definitely
*do* remember their time on earth, as NHN illustrates), but the
concept appears to me to be similar.

At any rate, please forgive the length of this response. I have
trouble thinking in generalities or finding simple answers. But I
think we can confidently say that the portraits are not the characters
themselves made two-dimensional and transferred to picture frames.
We'll probably encounter at least two portraits again, Dumbledore's
and Phineas Nigellus's, and I hope they'll give us some answers, but
it won't be the same as having the living Dumbledore restored but
trapped in a portrait. I think the real DD would consider that a fate
worse than death, but his portrait can sleep peacefully, reconciled to
being just a portrait of a dead headmaster who has "gone on," as NHN
so delicately puts it.

Carol, who likes Phineas Nigellus and hopes that he'll be useful in
opening Harry's eyes to the possibility of DDM!Snape