Harry as Horcrux/De-Horcruxing the Diary

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 164010


Annemehr wrote:

<snip>
> 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.

Carol responds:
This much I agree with. You De-Horcruxify a Horcrux by opening,
cracking, or poking a hole in the Horcrux, releasing soul bit (and in
some cases, releasing a protective curse which is not in tiself part
of the Horcrux. Since Dumbledore regards these released soul bits as
"destroyed," it seems most likely to me that they go where the soul
would have gone had Voldemort actually been killed by the AK, i.e.,
beyond the Veil. But based on Dumbledore's remarks and the durability
of the materials used in most Horcruxes (the diary is exceptional in
many ways), doing so (normally) requires great skill and power. We
know that Harry couldn't just open us the locket at 12 GP. Something
more will be required, and it may well be as dangerous as cracking
open the ring. One thing's for sure; Harry's not going to stab the
locket or the cup with a Basilisk fang. nor his own forehead, if I'm
wrong and the scar really is a Horcrux. (I agree with you that the
powers he acquired from Voldie reside in the scar and that his whole
body is not a Horcrux, but I don't think the scar is a Horcrux,
either, for all the reasons I've already given.)

Annemehr:
(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. <snip>

Carol:
Actually, we do have another explanation. Magic resides in the blood:
The Dursleys are described as not having a drop of magical blood in
their veins. Lily's blood (in the sense of a blood relationship)
protects Harry even when the relative isn't magical. Everyone from the
pureblood Malfoys to the "half-breed" (not just Half-Blood) Hagrid
talks about the importance of blood. The blood of a wizard enemy is
required to restore Voldemort's body; the gleam in Dumbledore's eye
indicates that there's some significance besides what LV himself
recognizes to his choosing Harry's. Unicorn blood (also magical) is
used in the first restorative potion, the one that created Fetal!mort.
And it seems to me that a released soul bit would go beyond the Veil
rather than into Harry's open cut. (Why in the world would it go
there? To possess him? No. The main soul might have done that if it
could, but clearly, neither it nor the soul bit possessed him. We've
already been told that he's not possessed. IMO, the soul bit, being
eternal and released from its body, not anchored to the earth like the
main soul by the Horcruxes, would go wherever the soul goes after
death. Or it would remain with the main soul, damaged but not detached
because no encasing spell had been performed.) But blood. How easy,
how feasible, for a bit of Voldie's magical blood to enter the scar
and pass on some of Voldie's powers to Harry. We do have an alternate
explanation, and it is both canonical and foreshadowed in canon, as a
bit of Voldie's soul in Harry is not. A blood link would also explain
the mind link and the ability to feel Voldie's emotions. (I think the
powers Harry acquired from LV are mostly mental--Parseltongue, the
mind link, and possibly possession). At any rate, it's at least as
likely that he could acquire these powers from Voldie's magical blood
as from a soul bit, which, IMO, would not seek out a person or other
container in which to encase itself but would either stay with the
main soul till detached by the encasement spell or go beyond the Veil,
as the de-Horcruxed soul bits appear to do. (the other Horcruxes don't
protect *them*, evidently.)

Annemehr:
> (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.

Carol:
Yes, indeed. Nor do I think that Dumbledore would turn Harry into a
Voldemort Horcrux. Why in the world wold he want to endanger Harry in
that way, or prolong Voldemort's life? That sounds to me like an act
of supreme evil. (Besides, I think you can only make a Horcrux with a
fragment of your own soul, having first committed murder. DD regards
Horcruxes as evil. He'd be a supreme hypocrite and liar if he made
Harry into a Horcrux himself and didn't tell him. That's not a DD who
remotely qualifies as "the epitome of goodness.") <snip>
>
> Mike:
<snip> 
> > 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*. 

Carol:
Mike, I actually like this idea. (Surprise.) But also, there's no
evidence of protections put on the diary beyond making it impervious
to water. Ink is absorbed into the pages (and perhaps becomes part of
the diary?), and, of course, the memories were magically placed inside
it and would not be washed out, any more than washing the Sorting Hat
would wash out the "brains" of the Founders. But I still wonder
whether fire might have destroyed it and saved both Harry and Ginny a
lot of grief. I don't think there was a protective curse on it since
it had to be opened in order for a witch or wizard to interact with
it, and, once ensnared, they were unlikely to harm their new "friend."

Carol, still a member of the Harry-is-not-a-Horcrux faction