alternative title

[Geoff Bannister]

No: HPFGUIDX 169363

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "leslie41" <leslie41 at ...> wrote:
>
> --- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "tassgurka" <snorkack@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > The swedish HP publisher, Tiden förlag, reveals their translation of
> > the title for HP7, "Harry Potter och dödsrelikerna" (Harry Potter 
> and
> > the Relics of Death). This alternative title was given to 
> translators
> > by JK herself, as DH is very difficult to translate. Thoughts on the
> > alternative title? Are relics "only" referring to the horcruxes
> > (locket, cup)?
> > 
> > Kati
> >
> 
> Leslie:
> 
> I think it's got to refer to the Horcruxes, and only the Horcruxes.  
> What else could it be?
> 
> We've talked about the meaning of the word "horcrux" before, as it's 
> an invented word, but obviously one Rowling thought about.      
> 
> The word "hore" in Old English means "whore".  "Horh" means dirt or 
> defilement, and "horig" (hory) means foul or filthy, and many of the 
> Old English words that have "hor" as their root have to do with dirt, 
> mud, and squalor.  Makes sense.  "Crux" means cross or center, root, 
> and many words associated with it have something to do with pain (in 
> Rowling's world and ours as well).  
> 
> A less religious interpretation would simply read horcrux as "root of 
> filth".  A more religious one (to which I am inclined) would have it 
> mean "cross of defilement" (or something like that), with Voldemort's 
> resurrection serving as an unholy, inverted version of Christ's.  But 
> your milage may vary on that.  I'm one of those people that sees 
> Harry's scar as symbolic of baptism and unction.  
> 
> We talked a lot about the meaning of "Deathly Hallows" as well when 
> the title was released, but the fact that Rowling allowed the title 
> to be translated as "relics of death" means that the deathly hallows 
> must be horcruxes, not saints or holy places or whatever.
> 
> Rowling I think is being deliberately vague by not calling it "Harry 
> Potter and the Horcruxes," but that title sounds rather stupid, and 
> every other title has had a bit of mystery too it and why not this 
> one, too?

Geoff:
In the world of Harry Potter, JKR's definition of "Horcrux" 
has been made very clear:

'"Well," said Slughorn, not looking at Riddle but fiddling 
with the ribbon on top of his box of crystallised pineapple, 
"well, it can't hurt to give you an overview, of course. Just 
so that you understand the term. A Horcrux is the word 
used for an object in which a person has concealed part 
of their soul."
(HBP "Horcruxes" p.464 UK edition)

In other words, a container for a piece of 'living' soul, a 
definition which seems to run counter to the title of the 
Swedish edition.

Lauren, in message 169360, gave definitions of "relic". In 
my dictionary, the definition which jumps out at me, in 
terms of this discussion, is:
"3 a part of a holy person's body or belongings kept and 
revered after their death".

Voldemort certainly isn't a holy person but neither, at the
time of writing, is he dead. So I suggest that "relics of death" 
can in no way refer to Horcruxes.

Until or unless JKR demolishes the idea in Book 7, I subscribe
to the theory that "Deathly Hallows" describes a place. Carol 
recently reminded us of the Hallows in Tolkien's ROTK and the 
word Hallow(s) occurs in UK place names. 

It is interesting that these two titles seem to take up diametrically 
opposed positions. I wonder whether the Deathly Hallows are the 
place where the Relics of Death are to be found?

Geoff
Ah well, only 54 and a bit days and all will be revealed.... or will it?