The creature under the bench (again) (was: Of Sorting and Snape)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 175991

Carol earlier:
> > What I mean by looking at the canon is looking closely at what is
said *in DH itself* about souls, soul bits, and the creature under the
chair (not asides in interviews about Slytherin as the water House).
<snip> Please take a look at my arguments and the canon I've presented
in those earlier posts. I'd like to see them actually answered.
> 
lizzyben replied:
> 
> I have responded to your posts, and explained why I interpret this
the way I do. If you don't agree, that's totally fine, but I don't
understand the hostility here. <snip> Likewise, I don't interpret the
LV-creature as something totally separate from Harry, so that's not
the POV I'm going to be presenting. And, it is just my own
interpretation, which might be totally wrong, but I'm sticking with
it. <snip>

Carol responds:
I'm sorry that you perceived my intentions as hostile because I feel
nothing of the sort. It's not hostility; it's frustration. I'm trying
to get you to look specifically at the canon within "King's Cross"
itself, in addition to a few other quotations in DH that I've cited in
other posts rather than appearing to believe that a point can be
proven through repetition. I'm not trying to make trouble; I'm trying
to steer away from generalizations and preconceptions to examine
specifics.

Again, I'm not being hostile. I'm trying to understand how you can
persist in interpreting the creature under the chair as a soul bit or
a part of Harry with the evidence from these two quotations, in
particular, in front of you:

"'So the part of his soul that was in me . . . has it gone?'

"'Oh, yes,' said Dumbledore. 'Yes, he destroyed it" (708).

Ergo, the soul bit that was in Harry has been destroyed exactly as the
soul bits in the deliberately destroyed Horcruxes have been. The thing
under the chair is something else.

And

"'Try for some remorse, Riddle. . . . It's your one last chance. I've
seen what you'll become without it" (741).

That quotation shows what the thing under the chair represents: LV's
future, the state of his mangled soul if he doesn't show remorse.

That's all I'm asking you to answer, okay? Just look at those
quotations and show me how they can be interpreted in any other way
than I've done here.

I agree that the experience is taking place in Harry's mind, a kind of
out-of-body experience, but I don't see how that leads to the thing
under the chair being part of Harry. We've been told by DD that the
soul bit is destroyed and that Harry's soul is now whole and his own.
The soul bit that was in him was no more a part of himself that the
soul bit in the locket was part of Ron.

Please, instead of reiterating your arguments, can you show me *canon*
to refute my interpretation of these particular quotations? That's all
I'm asking. Give me a convincing, logical counterargument refuting my
position that the creature represents the future state of Voldemort's
flayed soul if he doesn't repent. I'm challenging you to prove me
wrong using internal evidence from DH itself, as I have done.

Carol, snipping the rest of the post because everything else depends
on what the creature under the bench is or represents