Prophecy (was: HBP chapters 24-26 Post DH look

[tommy_m_riddle]

No: HPFGUIDX 184470

Catlady:
> Please share your interpretation of what 'neither can live while the
> other survives' could mean. Because I can't make anything of it.

Sarah:
I don't know either.  Many people explain it with a non-literal
definition of "live," but that doesn't really sit right with me
either.  Maybe what Voldemort is doing is not "living," but his mode
of existence would not change all that much if he killed Harry dead
for good.  I can't accept that Harry has not been truly living his
life up to the point of killing Voldemort.  His mission occupies much
of his consciousness, to be sure.  But he also goes about usual
business like finding out he is a wizard, going to school, playing
sports, making lifelong friends, falling in love, etc.  I can't think
that he hasn't been "living" all this time.

The "third man" interpretation of the prophecy would have settled all
this neatly, but alas, it was not to be.

Catlady:
> But why would DD refuse to tell Harry that? After a few minutes or a
> few weeks (I don't remember how long), I figured that this prophecy
> must not only specify Harry, but specify that he can only kill LV by
> dying himself, and DD didn't want to tell a young child that he must
> die young.

Sarah:
I think the reason is just suspense.  When Harry found out the
prophecy and everyone was interpreting it that Harry must kill
Voldemort or be killed by Voldemort, I was like, "Seriously, these
characters are surprised by this?  What are they, new?"

Catlady:
> A statement that 'neither can DIE while the other survives' would
> convey that meaning, and would be true during their final
> confrontation. 

Sarah:
Yes, it would be accurate, and make sense.  But, it would also cut
down on the suspense.  The prophecy reveal is around a full two books
before Harry figures out he has to die.  I suppose 'figures out' is
the wrong phrase there, but at least he didn't throw away Snape's
memories or trip and break the bottles on the way to the Pensieve or
something, so I'll give him partial credit there.

Catlady:
> "Yes, alive," said Fudge. "That is-- I don't know-- is a man alive if
> he can't be killed? I don't really understand it, and Dumbledore won't
> explain properly-- but anyway, he's certainly got a body and is
> walking and talking and killing, so I suppose, for the purposes of our
> discussion, yes, he's alive." 

Sarah:
This is the closest I can come to wrapping my mind around the whole
"live" thing too.  Harry is immortal, therefore he does not live?  But
(as you elaborated later and I snipped) he's not immortal in all
circumstances.  Which raises some interesting questions regarding what
would happen if Harry had been killed in another way.  If Harry is
destroyed by walking in front of a bus, I have to think the soul piece
wouldn't have died for him and sent him back to earth.  Would his
corpse then act as a Horcrux?  On the other hand, if Harry was bitten
by the basilisk in COS and Fawkes didn't show up, I have to think the
poison would have taken care of both Harry and the soul slice.