very basic confusion

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 163759

k12listmomma (Shelley) wrote:
<snip>
> Frankly, I think if Neville has been killed first, nothing out of
the ordinary would have occurred that would have deterred Voldermort.
Having yet another murder under his belt, he would have proceeded to
Harry, and found the real subject of the prophesy. I don't think it
would have mattered in the end just how much the Longbottoms loved
their son, for I think they loved him every much as Harry's parents
did, but what other factors were present. I often wonder if Lilly's
sacrifice was merely of "pure motherly love", or if it was of
something more than that- a preplanned spell or protection set in
place. This spell could have been activated the moment the Potters
knew of the Prophesy, and thought that Voldemort would come to kill
their son. Like Hermione's charm on the "snitch" in the DA's group,
the outcome it would be triggered based on the condition of something
happening, regardless of when that something did happen. Alice would
have had that same love, and maybe even heroic sacrifice for her son,
but in the end, I think it was the difference of an additional spell
that caused the AK to rebound back to Voldemort. <snip>

Carol responds:
I used to think much the same thing for several reasons, including
Ollivander's reference to Lily's first wand as "a nice wand for charm
work." (I still think that her forte was Charms, not Potions, despite
Slughorn's fond memories of her "cheek," and I think that she placed
the Fidelius Charm on Peter Pettigrew.) I've also always found it
strange that a mother's self-sacrificial love for her child had never
before prevented a child from being AK'd. Why would the sacrifice work
to protect Harry and no one else? A protective charm that worked like
a Protego but was strong enough to protect against an AK seemed like
the answer. (There's no countercurse for an AK, of course, but a
countercurse works after the fact, not as prevention or protection.) I
thought that the protection was activated by Lily's death and that the
 shape of the cut on Harry's forehead (surely caused by the AK
bursting outward rather than by the AK striking Harry resembled an
Eihwaz rune (protection or defense). (Other people think it looks more
like Sowilu, but the theory is the same.)

Unfortunately for my theory, JKR said on her site that Lily wasn't
planning to die. I suppose that a protective charm could still be
activated by an attack on Harry, but that would lessen the
significance of Lily's self-sacrifice, and both Voldemort and
Dumbledore consider the sacrifice itself to be the source or cause of
the ancient magic that protecte Harry, and which DD could extend to
Number Four Privet Drive through Lily's "blood" (Petunia).

Why, then, didn't James's death protect Harry? Because, IMO, he died
as a hero rather than a martyr--that is, he died armed and fighting
whereas Lily died begging for her son's life and offering her own in
exchange. Either she was unarmed or she simply didn't pull out her
wand and offer to fight Voldemort. Had she done so, she would
certainly have been killed as James was--no "Stand aside, silly girl!"
She'd have been AK'd on the spot. (Was she "silly" not to fight, in
his view, or "silly" to think that he'd listen to a mother's pleas?) 

Here's the quoted interview, with only the part about Voldemort
snipped because I want to keep the focus on Lily:

JKR: . . . . Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect
Lily and Harry? There's your answer, you've just answered your own
question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was
going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean? I'm not saying
James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was
going to be murdered anyway. He had no - he wasn't given a choice, so
he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are
distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of
Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could
have saved herself. Now any mother, any normal mother would have done
what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal
quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an
intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush
them. But if in cold blood you were told, "Get out of the way," you
know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand
aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very
consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice -

ES: And James didn't.

JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a
clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more
to it than that but that's most of the answer.

MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in
front of Harry?

JKR: No - because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never
happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore,
knew that could happen.

Carol again:

And then there's the FAQ on JKR's website, which indicates that if
Frank or Alice Longbottom had thrown themselves in front of Voldemort
as Lily did, Neville would have become the Prophecy Boy with a scar
and a mind link to Voldemort (no hint that the scar is a Horcrux!):

"So what would have happened if Voldemort had decided that the
pure-blood, not the half-blood, was the bigger threat? What would have
happened if he had attacked Neville instead? Harry wonders this during
the course of 'Half-Blood Prince' and concludes, rightly, that the
answer hinges on whether or not one of Neville's parents would have
been able, or prepared, to die for their son in the way that Lily died
for Harry. If they hadn't, Neville would have been killed outright.
Had Frank or Alice thrown themselves in front of Neville, however, the
killing curse would have rebounded just as it did in Harry's case, and
Neville would have been the one who survived with the lightning scar.
What would this have meant? Would a Neville bearing the lightning scar
have been as successful at evading Voldemort as Harry has been? Would
Neville have had the qualities that have enabled Harry to remain
strong and sane throughout all of his many ordeals? Although
Dumbledore does not say as much, he does not believe so: he believes
Voldemort did indeed choose the boy most likely to be able to topple
him, for Harry's survival has not depended wholly or even mainly upon
his scar." 

The interview distinguishes Lily's death from James's and seems to
indicate that Lily had no idea that she was protecting Harry. But JKR
also says, "There's slightly more to it than that but [the fact that
Lily had a choice and James didn't is] most of the answer." Many
posters think that "something more" relates to Voldemort's reasons for
"offering" to spare Lily, but I don't think that "Stand aside, silly
girl" constitutes an offer so much as an indication that she's in his
way. JKR is just picking up the wording of the question and
emphasizing that this "offer" (Get out of my way!) gives Lily a chance
to live if she were so heartless as to accept it.

The FAQ states that Alice Longbottom, who clearly loved her son just
as much as Lily loved Harry (shown by the bubblegum wrappers in OoP),
might have died in the same way as Lily, in which case Neville would
have had the scar and the mind link to Voldemort (but maybe not the
character traits required to defeat Voldemort). But since she was an
Auror (at least according to OoP), it's just as likely that she might
have tried to fight Voldemort as James did (and Frank probably would
have done), in which case Neville would have been killed along with
his parents since there would be no self-sacrificial love to activate
the ancient magic. (Most likely no other mother in WW history has ever
offered her life for her child's since her instinct would be to fight
instead. Think of a mother bear defending her cubs, and witches
normally carry wands. Lily, thinking that she was safe because of the
Fidelius Charm, may have been unarmed. Alice the Auror would not have
been, IMO.) 

But even if I'm wrong and Alice, instead of fighting to protect her
child, would have stepped in front of him and offered her life for his
as Lily did for Harry (screaming and terrified and possibly wandless
yet still incredibly brave), she didn't have the opportunity to do so.
Voldemort had already been vaporized by the consequences of Lily's
self-sacrifice. (He *ought* to have exchanged her life for Harry's,
but he cheated, trying to kill them both, and her love rebounded to
protect Harry by deflecting the AK onto its caster.) With Harry
already "mark[ed] as [Voldemort's] equal and Voldie in no shape to
kill anyone, what Alice might or might not have done becomes superfluous.

At any rate, I no longer think that Lily placed a protective charm on
Harry, much as I like the theory, with its connections to Lily's first
wand and Hermione's reference to the Eihwaz rune. In short, I think
that Voldemort ordered an unarmed Lily out of his way; Lily pleaded
for her son's life and offered to trade her life for his ("Kill me
instead"); Voldemort killed her, activating the ancient magic of her
sacrifice; Voldemort then attempted to kill Harry, violating the
bargain he had made to kill her instead, and the ancient Love magic
caused his own curse to rebound on him, Protego-style. Had it not been
for his Horcruxes, he would have died, and Harry's scar would merely
have been the mark of his mother's protection. As it is, the scar
formed a mind link to Voldemort (and perhaps contains a few of his
powers, though the interview downplays its importance--the scar might
not have been enough to make Neville Voldemort's equal, Prophecy or no
Prophecy). 

Carol, now more confused than ever with regard to Lily's sacrifice