Resolving (?) the Riddle

[naamagatus]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "Charme" <dontask2much at y...> 
wrote:
> 
> 
> Charme:
> 
> FINALLY, a topic which has some bite (pardon the pun) and not the 
same old 
> "Harry this, Snape that."  Thank you, thank you, thank you!!!! :) 
Forgive me 
> for having to snip so liberally what I felt to be one the best 
> thought-provoking posts on any of the groups I frequent in many 
>months.


I couldn't bring myself to snip this :-). Thank you.

> 
> 
<snip>
>Interestingly enough, this "original form" (if a true 
representation of the the way LV was prior to the incident at GH) 
brings to mind some Egyptian/Norse myths which claimed snakes could 
restore life to the dead or incarnate the soul of an ancestor.  What 
if Voldemort used snakes in some way to incarnate the soul 
> of his ancestor prior to GH? If we go back to your concept of DD 
asking the "divided in essence" question, Voldemort could be the one 
who has a dual nature: Tom Riddle's and the soul of his ancestor's.  
I don't think Harry's powers came from Tom Riddle (WRT to being a 
Parselmouth), I think they came from either Salazar Slytherin or 
*his ancestor* as JKR supposedly deliberately typo'd in CoS. How 
many times does JKR beat us in the head that Salazar Slytherin was a 
Parselmouth (and so is Tom Riddle) - from whom did they get that 
trait? These are questions which I feel might be answered in 
> Book 6, and could be that "storyline" which was eliminated from 
>CoS.


I did think a bit along these lines. It has merit... however, If 
Voldemort is some mix of Tom and Salazar, then he is two 
personalities - not two essences. Don't you think that this solution 
would lessen the theme of personal choice and the autonomy and even 
the very concept of personhood (which I see as very basic in JKR's 
work)? 

> 
> The scar? You want my take on it all?  Here goes: that scar binds 
Harry and 
> Voldemort as an incompleted AK curse.  I don't believe it has 
finished its 
> work.
> 
> Maybe the scar is a physical manifestation of the AK curse which 
couldn't be effectively rebounded on to Voldemort. JKR has said, in 
interviews, that the shape of the scar is not it's most important 
feature (although mythically and symbolically, snake shapes were 
also equated with lightening or thunderbolts.) We know that curses 
can "bounce" (the Stunners cast by the Ministry officials in GoF at 
the Trio, for example or Draco and Harry's curses in GoF which 
bounce *off each other* onto Hermoine and Goyle.)
> 
> Voldemort protected himself so a curse couldn't bounce back on him 
(think dragon's blood or snake venom which mythically is supposed to 
protect one from such things), but once he cast the AK in GH at 
Harry, Lily's sacrifice rendered Harry protected from it too. His 
curse bounced between the 2 of them until his protection slightly 
failed him and that resulting failure was enough to drive Voldemort 
>apart from his body. 

One problem with this scenario is that Harry remembers seeing one 
flash of green, not several. Another thing is that the AK is 
presented as the one curse for which there is no protection. So, I 
don't think Voldemort as being protected against it by some external 
magic - but that his being is such that, though the AK hit him, he 
didn't fully die. 

>However, it left the curse still strong enough to have finally 
rebounded from him to Harry in the form 
> of the scar (mark). This fits the line of the prophecy which 
states "and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will 
have a power the Dark Lord knows not" - other than love and a 
different disposition, Harry has the power and it's on his forehead 
just waiting to be freed in the form of an interrupted and not yet 
>completed AK curse.

But why would an AK curse (even if incomplete) be unknown to the 
Dark Lord? He is the master of that kind of power. I think that it 
would go against the deeper themes of the books if Harry wins 
through the use of dark magic, particularly an Unforgivable. 


Naama