My take on the Forest scene (also posted on Movie)

[Geoff]

No: HPFGUIDX 191171

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "kamion53" <kersberg at ...> wrote:

Kamion:
> this is the part I have most trouble with:
> The "love" protection from Lilly protected Harry for 17 years till the 
day he turned 17 and much intrige and drama happens in the first 
chapters of DH to get Harry under protection and from the Dursley 
house before the protection of love ends.
> OK so far so good.

Geoff:
I think the situation was that while Harry stayed with those of his own 
blood, i.e. Petunia's family, he could not be touched  while he was at 
the house each summer. But I think he was still vulnerable if he was 
away - as when the Dementors attacked at the beginning of OOTP.
During this time, it would seem that Lily's protection was still active. 
When Voldemort duelled with him in GOF, he was away from the house 
and under age but he was able to hold Voldemort off; whether he could 
have continued to do so is not clear because the fight was broken off by 
Harry while the 'shadows' of his parents distracted Voldemort.

Kamion:
> Then at the end it is suggested Voldemort fails to kill Harry because 
of that Lily protection. 
> And even more weird because the fact that with his own resurrection 
he took Harry's blood, so Lilly's protective spell is still residenting in 
Voldemorts veins?
> and still potent? 
> If that was the case, Dumbledore knew the fact... he was a sort of 
pleased, when he heard what happens when Voldemort was resurrected 
and used it.... 

Geoff:
I have begun to wonder whether Dumbledore's gleam when Harry told 
him about the encounter was that perhaps Voldemort now possessing 
some of Harry's blood allowed him to touch Harry and, according to 
his thinking gave him some control over its effect, However, what if 
it also gave easier access to the protection if he attacked Harry again.

Referring back to my last comment, it was immediately after this that 
Voldemort failed to defeat Harry as soon as he cast the spell and Harry 
was able to muster the power to hold him back - power which was 
attributed to the "twin wand" effect. Was this all or was the bottom 
line that Voldemort was now weakened in a *duelling* situation?

Kamion:
it's either this or JKR contradicted her own first law that dead is dead 
and nobody returns from death, not do dead spels return.

Geoff:
I'm not sure whether you are referring to Voldemort's return in GOF 
by these comments. If so, my view is that the word "resurrection" is 
perhaps misused here because Voldemort was not dead. When the 
Avada Kedavra rebounded on him at Godric's Hollow, he became 
disembodied but because of the Horcruxes which already existed, 
he did not die.

He makes this very clear in GOF:

'"My curse was deflected by the woman's foolish sacrifice and it 
rebounded on me. Aaah... pain beyond pain, my friends; nothing 
could have prepared me for it. I was ripped from the body, I was 
less than spirit, less than the meanest ghost... but, still, I was alive."'

(GOF "The Death eaters" p.566 UK edition)

'"We are not playing hide-and-seek, Harry," said Voldemort's soft, 
cold voice, drawing nearer as the Death Eaters laughed. "You cannot 
hide from me. Does this mean that you would prefer me to finish it 
now, Harry? Come out, Harry... come out and play, then... it will be 
quick... it might even be painless... I would not know... I have never 
died..."'

(ibid. p.574/75)

Kamion:
..then I have to concluded that the whole charade with the 
7 Potters was just a smokescreen with deadly consequenses.

Geoff:
I'm afraid that you have lost me here - what consequences are 
we talking about?

Finally, Steve, thank you for your supportive remarks on Movie. I just 
hope that my concise analysis continues to make some sort of sense; I 
think that trying to get sense out of this is giving me a headache. 
Where are the paracetamol tablets?