Neither Harry nor his Scar is a Horcrux (Was Re: Voldemort's Age)

[doug rogers]

No: HPFGUIDX 170359

> JW:
> I can't completely agree with Bart. JKR has said that horcruxes do
> NOT get used up. I compare a horcrux to an anchor, which maintains a
> ship's position, stops it from floating away, but can be used time
> and time again.

doug:
Another metaphor is Voldemort as the hot air balloon, and the  
horcruxes as ropes tethered, anchored, staked, to the ground. This is  
like the embodiment of a soul bit into an object.

All these metaphors require some kind of "silver thread' connecting  
the soul bit yet to the main one. This may be a problem with the  
power of metaphor, or a revelation into the kind of thinking  
necessary to realize the idea in the magical world we're dealing  
with. There must be some kind of ethereal connection between the  
anchored en-object bits yet with the main soul portion in Voldemort,  
else what is there to *HOLD* the un-embodied Vapourmort to the earth?

> Carol:
> I mentioned earlier that the phrase "a bit of himself" is not
> Dumbledore's but Harry's and that the context suggest suggests powers,
> not soul bits, which can only be read into the passage in hindsight;
> they aren't mentioned in CoS.

doug:
You insist that everything be revealed at once?

> Carol:
> This use of the word "bit" with reference to part of a person isn't
> proof, of course, that some physical "bit" of Voldemort, as opposed to
> the not-yet introduced soul bit,

doug:
Why can we not retroactively read earlier parts of the story with new  
information?

> Carol:
> is what Dumbledore concedes *may*
> have entered Harry to give him Voldemort's powers, but if Voldie's
> body exploded, a "bit" of his flesh and (magical) blood could have
> entered the cut on Harry's forehead as easily,

doug:
and just as improbbably

> Carol:
> and perhaps more
> easily, than a nontangible soul bit could have done. Or the powers
> could have entered Harry by some other as yet unknown mechanism,

doug:
Yes. Perhaps a soul projected as the power behind the Avada Kadavra.  
But in favour of Occam, fewer more elegant explanations are better.

>> doug:
>> I have been proposing a theory of magic, based admittedly on a  
>> small bit of canon, that of Lupin's explanation of the Patronus  
>> spell. A thought completely of Happiness is projected to become a  
>> kind of impenetrable Dementor shield. I think that that is  
>> basically how magic works in Potterverse, a thought is manifest as  
>> real, like an image on film is projected against a screen. So to  
>> enchant an object, the projected image is severed and now exists  
>> in the now enchanted object. Otherwise they return to the caster.
>>
>> And as to the soul ..... what better to force the removal of the  
>> life force of another than by projecting your own?

steve bbboymin:
> As to [your] idea that some physical bit of Voldemort
> entered Harry, say a drop of blood through his scar
> wound, that is an interesting and novel concept that
> I haven't heard before. That could certainly have so
> real merit.

doug:
What hasn't been explored, and thus doesn't disprove this idea, is  
why do consumers of Polyjuice potions not seemingly acquire the  
powers presumably inherent in the bit? Harry seemingly has Voldemorts  
powers based on whatever bit of Voldemort is in Harry. If powers can  
be transferred through body bits, why is there not a trade in blood  
and body bits?

This idea has indeed been done to death on various forums at Mugglenet.

What remains is for supporters of Physical Bits to explain how  
Voldemort recovered his own powers in the graveyard resurrection with  
no original body parts... he does not have his Fathers powers. He  
does not have Pettigrew's powers. He does not have Harry's powers.

What remains for supporters of soul as source of power is to explain  
why Voldemort's powers...

> boyminn:
> Not quite, in their conversation, by way of a warning,
> Dumbledore makes it clear that Voldemort's power and
> his soul are separate things. Dumbledore says something
> to the effect that despite Voldemort having shredded
> his soul, his magical power is still [intact]

doug:
… despite having his soul been parcelled out, remain intact.

1) *IF* there remains an ethereal connection enabling the horcruxes  
to actually anchor the main soul to the earthly realm, then the soul  
is not really in pieces is it? *IF* perhaps soul is source of power,  
then for this purpose, the soul remains intact enough enough to hold  
magical power no matter what its size, or where it is distributed.

or 2) Perhaps it is because magical powers are neither of the soul,  
nor the body…

but magic is of the Mind, and requires body - and parts of the body,  
most notably, opposable thumbs, to operate. Magic is Thought,  
Emotion, Will Desire, Imagination, Idea… projected onto the world so  
as to manifest as real.

And the argument against that is that 'Rowling has said Magic is a  
gene', and is somehow inherited in families and yet can mysteriously  
pop up in Muggle families. Sound science speaks against it being a  
single gene. Convenient Deus Ex Machina explanation is all it has  
working for it.

Yet if something is magically thrown so as to affect a magical action  
in the world, why cannot Harry bear an imprint of Voldemort -his  
soul,  as it were- and have the effect of a horcrux, have all the  
power and mind based connections… yet not be a horcux, yet have a  
'portion 'of his soul, and not have to die.

___<http://home.golden.net/~samu>
__<http://dougsamu.wordpress.com/>