That ugly baby thing.

[angellima at xtra.co.nz]

No: HPFGUIDX 173587

Sandra wrote:

> Having put down the book after reading the King's Cross chapter 
> again, I still don't get the whole ugly baby thing. 
<SNIP>
> ... but the baby made it unpleasant reading and I still don't 
> get it.

Cariad Replied:

yes that scene disturbed me too Sandra. I don't get what the ugly 
baby was all about either. Like you and Geoff I subscribe to the 
near-death experience theory, a moment in earth-bound time and 
space but one in which Harry 'sees the light'. My take on the 
'creature' was that it was symbolic of evil, DD said that 
it was beyond help.
<SNIP>

Angel Now:

Yes that was disturbing.  But I remember representations of St 
Michael as a child where he is crushing a baby...I used to wonder 
how it was possible that a good angelic being, an angel could do 
that.  It touched me because I was a child seeing those images 
and though I still view children as chaste, I understand why those 
particular babies were kept out of heaven by St Michael in the 
icons.

They were the devil.  Uncleansed.  Tainted still by original sin.

The baby in DH represents such a being tainted by original sin not 
yet baptised.  The other horcruxes showed themselves in all forms 
- diary at the age Riddle was when he wrote it.

The locket, would be likewise I assume especially as it was lucid 
enough to read and taunt Ron.

The baby however may have taken on Harry's form as it entered 
Harry when Harry was a baby and his growth was stilted. He 
forever remained the twisted parasite, uncleansed where as 
Harry grew and sprouted.

At least that is my interpretation.  Very Christian but then I am 
very Christian <g>