Creating Horcruxes (Re: Harry as Horcrux)

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 164046

Ken:

Mike, I agree with your position substantially if not in every detail
but only to the extent that I believe your positions are allowed by
canon. I have no strong feeling that Harry is or is not a horcrux but
I have a very strong opinion that nothing in canon prevents him from
being one. We do not know any details of the horcrux creation
processes and I simply cannot see how Slughorn's words can be read to
imply any sort of restriction on when the horcrux spell is cast. There
are many examples in canon of spells cast at one time and taking
effect at a later time. Cursed objects act in this way and and the
spells that enable a quidditch broom to fly act in this way, to name
just two. Slughorn's words do not *require* that the horcrux spell be
cast in advance, they do not *disallow* it from being cast in advance
either. 

This is very obviously a question whose answer has been reserved for
the final book. Those who have guessed right will be vindicated by DH
and will never be convinced that it was just a guess, but guess it is.
We don't know. Everything I've seen quoted so far to answer these
horcrux questions is too ambiguous to answer them and therefore I
conclude that those who are *certain* of one answer or the other are
injecting their personal convictions into their reading. In the end
one opinion or the other will be right but no one so far has been able
to demonstrate logically that their's and only their's is right. 

> 
> Mike:
>
> Was he intending to 
> make *Harry* into a Horcrux? I'll answer that with the question: Was 
> he intending to *kill* himself that night? Not just no, but Hell No.

Ken:

Maybe I've just seen too many visual allusions to Hamlet in which an
actor in some movie or TV show happens upon a skull, holds it at arms
length, and says "Alas poor Yorick, I knew him well." I know that is
guilding the lily but that is in fact what most of them say. That
image is so indelibly etched in my mind that I think is is possible,
quite possible, that Voldemort intended to make Harry a horcrux that
night. Not in the way that some feel he is currently a horcrux.
Voldemort intended to murder the chosen one all right, he didn't want
a *living* horcrux. I think he could have wanted to make the dead
Harry's skull a horcrux. The skull of the one chosen to kill me is now
the repository of a bit of my skull, the guarantee that I will never
die. How grotesque, how arrogant, how like Voledmort! However much it
appeals to my artistic sense, such as it is, it is only a possibility
and one of many. I don't feel certain that Harry is a horcurx, only
that he could be.

> Mike: 
> 
> Why didn't the soul piece transfer into Voldie's designated object? 
> **I Don't Know.** Maybe the object was destroyed, maybe the *mark* on 
> Harry was a more powerful pull than the marked object. 

Ken:

If Harry's skull *was* the designated object then all went as planned,
didn't it? Ok, that nasty bit about Voldemort's death, that wasn't in
the plan.


> 
> Mike:
>  
> Harry asked if Voldemort put a **bit** of himself into [me] and 
> Dumbledore says yes. What is your straight forward reading of what 
> this **bit** is, if it isn't a soul piece? Keeping in mind that Ginny 
> speaks Parseltongue because she has a **bit** of Tom's soul in her. 
> 

Ken:

I think this is a reasonably powerful argument from canon. It is not
the only reasonable reading of this passage. The most one can hope to
do I feel is enumerate the possible readings, combine them, and see
where they lead. In the end you don't prove anything but you might
list the entire menu of the author's possible choices by this means.

> Mike:
> Yes, and Dumbledore confirmed that Harry had a bit of Voldemort in 
> him. But as to whether he should be telling Harry, in HBP, that the 
> bit of Voldemort is a bit of soul, ... well, you answered that 
> yourself when you noted Dumbledore's reluctance to release critical 
> information. Not only is that perfectly in character for DD, but I 
> can honestly see a reluctance to tell Harry that he has a guest soul 
> piece especially if Dumbledore doesn't know how to get it out. Now 
> you ask, what makes me think this of Dumbledore?
> 
> "Is that where -?" whispered Professor McGonagall.
> 
> "Yes," said Dumbledore. "He'll have that scar forever."
> 
> "Couldn't you do something about it, Dumbledore?"
> 
> "Even if I could, I wouldn't. Scars can come in handy. ..."
> (PS/SS p.14, US)
> 
> Dumbledore knows that healing spell, he used it on himself in the 
> cave. He also knows that Dittany will prevent scarring. So why can't 
> Dumbledore do anything about that cut-soon-to-be-a-scar on Harry's 
> forehead? Note that he starts his answer with "Even if I could,". He 
> is admitting, in a very subtle way and later masking it with humor, 
> that he can't do anything about a simple cut? But, if it is a piece 
> of Voldie's soul that entered Harry there, and Dumbledore doesn't 
> know how to safely remove that soul piece, now this short confession 
> make sense. This last part may seem a stretch. Of course, I'd like to 
> hear an alternate reason for Dumbledore's "Even if I could".
> 

Ken:

I've never read that passage that way but combined with your other
examples I have to say it is plausible. Not certain, plausible.

You know there is one passage in GOF that has stuck in my mind much
like Yorick's skull and its impostors. In the graveyard speech
Voldemort says something like "one or more of my experiments
succeeded". The thing that strikes me about that passage is that a
horcurx isn't an experiment. Horrifying as they are they are known to
work. It is entirely possible that Voldemort does not want to reveal
that he has horcruxes and so he chose this ambiguous wording to hide
his methods. The Deatheaters would naturally assume that he had one,
they might not suspect that he has several. Still, I can't get the
possibility out of my mind that he has something else besides.
Something truly new. Something that will surprise everyone.

Ken