Harry as Horcrux/De-Horcruxing the Diary

[Annemehr]

No: HPFGUIDX 163994

> > Annemehr:
> > <snip>
> > 
> > I really like your Captain Kirk's door image, but the problem 
here 
> > is that Harry was stabbed with the Basilisk fang just before he 
> > stabbed the diary with it -- so if he *was* a Horcrux, and your 
> > theory is accurate, he ought to have ceased to be so right then.
> > 
> > That is partly why, in my "De-Horcruxing Harry" post earlier in 
> > this thread (#163784), I concluded that, if merely making a hole 
in 
> > a Hx is enough to release the soul piece, and if Harry is indeed 
a 
> > Hx, then the Hx would have to be restricted to his scar.  Other 
> > parts of him have bled numerous times, including the arm which 
was 
> > stabbed by  both the fang and the knife Wormtail used to 
resurrect 
> > LV.
> >
> > I do take note of your idea that is might need to be a magical 
> > object that creates the new portal, though.
> 
> Mike:
> Well you sure poked a hole in that theory <pun intended :-)>. I 
still 
> do like the portal part of my theory, can I keep that? <bg> 
> 
> I went back to reread your other post and the scar as portal would 
> still fit with your theory. But what wouldn't fit is how the diary 
> soul piece got out if Harry didn't stab the "location" of the 
diary's 
> Horcrux. IOW, if Harry wasn't de-Horcruxed when he got stabbed by 
the 
> Basilisk fang because it didn't stab his scar, how come the diary 
> *was* de-Horcruxed if it wasn't stabbed in it's Horcrux location? I 
> suppose you could say that Harry just got lucky, hit the right 
spot, 
> but it weakens any theory to claim luck was with you. Then again, 
the 
> diary was so small, maybe Harry couldn't help but hit the Horcrux's 
> location.

Annemehr:
By all means, keep the portal!

But, I'm not sure you understood me, quite.

I *do* think the soul-bit inhabits the whole of a Horcrux.  

Also, I do think that **maybe** if you open a Hx in some way -- in 
any location on the Hx -- you can release the soul-bit.  However, I 
realise this can *not* be true *if* Harry's whole self is a Horcrux, 
because we know he's been cut numerous times -- and often with 
magical items to boot.

In this thread, I was positing that one of the extant Hxes is Harry's 
*scar* (which was the cut, at the time it was created), rather than 
Harry *himself*.  I.E. what if the scar is not merely the portal, but 
the Hx itself?  This may be utter nonsense, but I don't think it's 
impossible.  However, it definitely would require a little something 
extra from a talented wizard to confine the soul-bit -- and thus the 
Hx -- to just that one little corner of Harry when otherwise his 
whole self would be the Hx.

This is where I brazenly commandeer Talisman's Dumbledore-turned-
Harry-into-a-Horcrux-of-LV theory (see end of message #163728).  I 
needed it to lend plausibilty to the idea that the soul-bit *could* 
have been confined to the scar, because I needed somebody to do the 
confining.

Let's be clear, though.  As far as I am aware (and I did just go and 
check), Talisman never specified Harry's scar as the Horcrux.  I have 
no clue what she would think of the idea.  I am not absolutely 
married to the idea myself.

I was only wondering (A)if the hole in the Diary, the crack in the 
ring, and the unopenability of the locket might tell us something 
about how to de-Hx a Hx.  I think these are suggestive, but I know 
they are by no means definitive.

And then I further speculated (B)on what that might mean if Harry (or 
his scar) was a Hx.

---------------------------------------------------------------

I suppose I may as well outline the reasons I do think Harry('s scar) 
is a Horcrux, and why I agree that DD did it:

(1)That Harry has a bit of LV's soul within him somewhere is the only 
explanation we can infer from existing canon for how Harry has LV's 
inherent powers and a link to his thoughts and emotions.  Of course, 
JKR *may* have a little surprise in store for us in DH, regarding 
some other reason for the link, but it would feel like authorial 
cheating to me.  I'll just content myself for now with what seems to 
be the best explanation -- it's a soul-bit.

(2)I'm sure LV did not intend to make Harry into a Hx at GH.  In CoS, 
DD told Harry that the transfer was "not something [LV] intended to 
do."  In GoF, LV told his DEs that he did try to kill Harry, and why 
he believes he failed.

(3)The idea of Harry being an accidental Hx is possible, but messy.  
It seems unlikely to me.  Much too unlikely to build the whole story 
around.

(4)As an unrepentant "Puppetmaster!DD" believer (and he does it only 
for the *best* reasons), when I first read Talisman's Hx!Harry 
theory, right away I thought that it brought everything into focus 
and made items (1) (2) and (3) fit in the most elegant way.




> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Mike:
> I had to take a couple of days to ponder the implications of your 
> reponse to my theory and your previous post. Sorry, it took me so 
> long to respond. 

Annemehr:
No problem at all.  Who wouldn't prefer a thought-out reply? :)

Mike:
> Here's what I came up with:
> 
> Harry didn't de-Horcrux the diary. The soul piece was already out 
of 
> the diary and was regenerating a physical body by feeding off of 
> Ginny or Ginny's soul, if you will. When Harry stabbed the diary he 
> broke that connection from Ginny through the diary to the almost 
> complete Tom. The connection broke, no more Tom cuz 9/10ths isn't 
> good enough, and the soul bit is no longer anchored, its *freeeee*. 

Annemehr:
Good point.  "Enough to let me leave its pages at last..." Tom says.  
Okay, that certainly weakens any evidence for thinking it is not 
harmful to stab a Horcrux.  Although, if there *is* still that 1/10 
of soul still seeping out... ;)

Mike:
<snip>
> So, Im going back with my ethereal Horcrux theory. It may still 
have 
> to be extracted through the portal. But I'm back to being convinced 
> that there is no specific location of the soul or a soul piece. 
<snip>
> 
> OK Anne, go ahead, poke another hole in this one, I can take it ;-)


Well, hopefully I was clear enough above in explaining that I have no 
argument with this -- so, no poking holes today!

Annemehr