Could be doesn't necessarily mean it should be or will be. I'm just giving you quotes from the texts themselves without adding anything to them; and without adding any suppositions, it seems to point to Harry not being a Horcrux.

You believe he wouldn't, and I believe, based on how he's learned from his mistakes in not telling Harry in the past things that were quite important, resulting in the death of an Order member and great emotional distraught on Harry, that Dumbledore would have at least mentioned it as a possibility. I look to Order of the Phoenix for this:


I realize this is speaking directly to the fact that Harry was tricked into going into the Department of Mysteries, but I do believe it shows that Dumbledore has learned that it is best to be honest and open with Harry about these types of things.

And then, a few pages later - the text shows that Dumbledore now realizes that Harry needs to know everything . . .


Although this is not yet in relation of the Horcruxes, we see that Dumbledore realizes Harry needs to know things about his past that deeply effect his present and future. I see no reason to believe, based on Dumbledore including Harry in the Horcrux hunt and discussion in the next book, that this decision to tell Harry everything would stop short of telling him he might be a Horcrux, no matter the emotional blow.

Whether it's the first or the tenth time you give me this theory, which, yes, I have read before, it doesn't convince me of anything because it is based on the supposition that Harry is a Horcrux. It is based on the supposition that the Horcrux soul is dormant. I don't believe either of those suppositions at this time, so to me it is just another theory. I believe we can still use the diary to counter the Horcrux theory, and it is not based on the diary alone.

We know that the diary was enchanted with the memory of Tom Riddle which interacted with those who wrote in it; but it was the soul piece, not the diary, that possessed Ginny Weasley and caused her to act against her own volition. It was the soul piece (separate from Voldemort, who at that time had no idea it was happening - so it was not the ethereal voldemort that possessed her) that she knew was inside her, which she had later described to her parents and to Harry when he believed he was being possessed. That soul piece was not dormant- and I know you give a counter to this, but it can't be backed up as of yet without the seventh installment. The other example we have is Nagini, whom Dumbledore suspects as a Horcrux. If Dumbleodre says that Voldemort has an unusual amount of control over that snake, even for a Parselmouth, then it leads me to believe that the soul piece hypothesized to live inside that snake is not a dormant piece of Voldemort, but one that can be used.

In the instances where we have the suspect of a soul piece dwelling inside of something living; we see that living creature acting in an unusual manner.

As the inanimate objects cannot move around and act on their own, I do believe that the soul piece cannot affect it at all, but in the case of something alive - it seems that it does have a "voice."

I don't think this proves much, as it implies the connection was there prior to the Horcrux. In this case, I have no problem leaving the connection as the connection without the addition of an Horcrux, which based on Slughorn's dialogue in HBP needs a spell after the splitting of the soul. I don't believe that the magic you hypothesize as floating around the room would follow that connection and just happen to make a Horcrux inside of Harry. This just seems to be stretching it to make it fit into the Harry is a Horcrux theory.

Yes, I am suggesting that it would not be the ultimate deadly weapon. You see, even if Harry were to sacrifice himself to get rid of the Horcrux, Voldemort would still exist. He would have the opportunity to create another Horcrux. He wouldn't be destroyed. The Horcrux in Harry would be just another anchor, and I don't think it would matter much to Voldemort to lose it - as he doesn't know it exists, and he was blase with the diary which held another portion of his soul.

I don't agree with this because it takes that quote out of context. Words in dialogue and text modify and refer to each other, and in examination of this portion of text; reference is as follows:


Harry latches onto "his own powers" resulting in:

Which is the 12 year old's understanding, so Dumbledore responds to Harry's understanding as:

Without such prompting, you'll find in the texts that Dumbledore never refers to any of the shared powers between Voldemort and Harry as being a piece of Voldemort.

The other reason I believe it is faulty to use this passage of dialogue to point to Harry being a Horcrux occurs in OotP:



Here we have Dumbledore saying in retrospect that he thought Harry was too young to hear any of the implications of Voldemort's attack on him during his second year at Hogwarts - which is where that first dialogue takes place.

And I think we're just going to be going round and round here, Tom. You are convicted that Harry is a Horcrux based on your readings and your suppositions and theories of what happened, and I believe that he's not a Horcrux based on the text. I have no trouble accepting the fact that it's a possibility; because, hey, everything's a possibility in these books! It's just that I think you need to be prepared to accept the possibility that he's not one as much as I can accept the possibility that he is one.

As an aside to the conversation. Semantics, or the use of language in different ways is extremely important. I once heard a lecture about debate. The lecturer said that the key to his success was, "I make them define their terms, then I make them stick to their definition." "Killing" "splits"or "tears" the soul. What kind of killing? Would self defense qualify as a soul split/tear event? What about defense of others? What about a "just" war? What is the effect of a torn asunder soul, if the pieces still lay within the same person? Wouldn't LV's soul be in more pieces than seven? With six of them only having been encased in a Horcrux?

Oh, I never thought about that! I guess it is possible that his soul is in more than seven pieces, because as we all know, he did kill more than seven people. I guess his soul is in more than 7 pieces, but he only put 6 in horcruxs. Dumbledore said that Voldemort only made horcruxs out of important murders right? So, I would think that the Potters murder would be an important murder to him because he was going to destroy the boy that could destroy him. So I think that, yes he did make Harry a horcrux, and that is what caused the connection between Harry and Voldemort. I think that when Voldemort realized that he couldn't kill Harry and the spell bounced off him, I think that destroyed the house, I think the spell flung off any many directions, so Voldemort only got hit by a little bit of it, so thats why didn't die completely, I think before he left the house he preformed the spell to turn Harry into a Horcrux, then Voldemort knew that Harry would have to kill himself in order for Voldemort to be killed.
Also back to the thing about Voldemorts soul being in more than seven pieces but all but 6 being inside of him. I think that when you kill someone your soul is ripped, it isn't in two different pieces, it just rips and then the spell to create the horcrux is what really tears it into two parts. This brings me to something else on my mind.
When Voldemorts sould was torn the first time for the first Horcrux both pieces were eqaul. And then he ripped it again, and again... but that means that not all the pieces would be equal, so does that make it where he isn't as strong, and is that what made him snake like? I'll try to explain this using numbers, it might make more since.
Okay Voldemorts soul = 80, when he creates the horcrux it is split in half, so now it is 40 and 40, now he only has 40 in side him. Than he creates another horcrux spilting the 40 into 20 and 20. So now he has a 40 horcrux and a 20 horcrux. After he made twenty he would have horcruxs with a value of 40, 20, 10, 5, 2.5, 1.25, and his soul inside him would be .625. Does that make since?? So I was wondering if have the .625 as a soul is what made him more snake like.

passerby,

I'd like to address something that I keep seeing over and over again.



You claim that you are simply quoting the book and not applying any suppositions or adding anything to them. Lets take a look.



Now, there is nowhere in the book that explicitly states that a piece of soul cannot pass through Lily's protection. You are applying your opinion to expand on what we know as a fact. We know for a fact that Voldemort couldn't physically touch Harry. That can be stated without doubt from the books. Is a soul the same as a physical body? Beyond that, as has been stated, something non physical passed into Harry to create the scar and the powers, so right there the book tends to discredit your supposition.



You may think that, but again nowhere in the books does this specifically get addressed for certain. We cannot say for sure that Dumbledore even figured this connection out correctly. Yes he did reveal to Harry that he had made a mistake in hiding things from him, but do we know for a fact that he revealed all? We do not. This may seem like semantics, but as you stated, the devil is in the details, is it not?

What I'm getting at is this. To claim that your arguments are solely based on hard facts is not exactly the truth. I'm not saying you are a liar. What I'm saying is that you are looking at the story from the perspective that JKR is leading us in a certain direction and that direction will hold true to the end. She is setting up a predicted ending that will occur just as it appears to be. Even if you looked at the book and took only the facts that we could absolutely verify as given truths, you would be missing any plot points that she is specifically trying to conceal for our enjoyment in the big reveal at the end. Do I think that there will be suprises in the end? Absolutely. Can I say for sure what they will be. No way. No side in this argument holds any further weight than the other. It's a matter of opinion both ways.

So, let me put my two cents in on my theory. We know that Harry survival of the killing curse was a unique situation that had never happened before. This tells us that we are getting results from the combination of Lily's protection and Voldemort's killing curse (which by the way was meant to be a part of the procedure to create his final horcrux) that nobody has ever seen before. I believe that therein lies the opportunity for Harry to be a horcrux. We know that every murder creates a torn soul, but not every murder creates a horcrux. If the spell to create a horcrux isn't cast, what happens to the soul piece, does it return to the main soul, but remains damaged? Does it float off into oblivion? If, as passerby states, the soul is completely ripped from the main soul, then what happens if the main soul is torn away from the fragment before the spell can be cast to encase it? Even further arguments from semantics reveal that Slughorn's description of the encasement spell doesn't explicitly tell us that one must happen after the other. If you reread it, you will notice that it would be possible to cast an encasement spell first (sort of like preparing a box to catch the soul when it splits) and it would still work with Slughorns statement. He simply says that you perform an encasement spell. Others have since added the "then" perform the encasement spell because the two statements happen in that sequence, from two separate thoughts and questions. What I'm trying to get at, is that the fact that nothing like this has ever happened before, allows for the possibility that a horcrux could have been created in a way that had never happened before. If that were true, then it might not be fruitful to look at how a horcrux is typically created (or how Slughorn believes a horcrux is created).

Please allow me to clarify. I in no way intended to imply that my opinions on the text were not colored in my opinion. I'm sorry if it came across that way. I should have reread and made sure my meaning was conveyed properly.

When I look at a passage of text to determine its meaning, I'm looking at the text as it stands; without adding any what ifs into that reading. Based on what the text says, without taking into account all the little what ifs that could and might happen, I give you an analysis on that passage of text with my opinion. When I read these portions of text in regards to the creation of a Horcrux and Harry being a Horcrux, I examine the text as it is: without figuring into the equation that there might be another spell, that there must be a significant amount of magic in the air, that there is a line upon which a spell travels that links the direction of a spell to the outcome of another, without Voldemort having prepared an object beforehand, etc. I'm looking solely at what's printed. After this, then I can take my reading and make educated (and sometimes uneducated) guesses as to the meaning behind them. Not always accurate, I'm the first to admit.

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that it was my way or the highway or that my opinions were not biased by my belief that he's not a Horcrux. I'm just trying to convey how I arrive at my opinion. Any time I say "I think, it seems to me" etc, I am wholly aware that I am operating under my interpretation of the text.

I wholly and utterly agree. Not one of us can adequately and accurately predict the end of this series with 100% certainty with any detail. Other than, yeah - it is certain Harry and Voldemort will face off. That's a reason you'll (hopefully) never hear me say that I am 100% and totally correct in my interpretation of the text. My ideas have as much merit as the next person's and as much possibility, but I can't disregard that other people might have it right instead of me. I'm totally willing to admit to being wrong once the book comes out if JKR indeed makes Harry a Horcrux. I have no problem being wrong, but I'd like to be right as much as the next guy!

Which I never said and never meant to imply. My arguments are based on the type of reading of the text I described above and then, yes, I have my opinions on what they mean which make them my arguments. I really am sorry if it didn't come out as intended in my previous post.



I just don't think we can argue this based on what Slughorn says being all we can really go on about the creation of the Horcrux. The murder takes place. Then there is a spell which is the procedure for making the Horcrux. He never gives a time line that the murder must be fresh, that the spell must be started prior to the murder, or anything else. He starts by saying murder rips the soul apart. We know from Dumbledore that Voldemort intended to use the murder of Harry to create his final Horcrux, but again, this doesn't really speak of a process.

From what we've got, and yes I can only assume, the real dark magic of this Horcrux creation isn't the supreme act of evil - the murder (and the tearing of the soul) isn't what makes a person less human - it is taking part of one's soul outside of the body and forcing it to reside somewhere other than where it is meant to be. Voldemort's soul could be in as many as 100 pieces, but Harry doesn't need to be concerned with the number of soul pieces Voldemort has. He needs to be concerned with the number of items pieces of the soul were placed inside: 7 things to destroy because there are seven houses to Voldemort's multiple-fractured soul.
I do not agree that this would work with Slughorn's statement. As we don't know what the spell entails, we can't assume it's a preparation for an object. It might be, but it might also be as simple as merely placing the piece into an unprepared object. It might work with the process once we actually know it, but this portion of text leads me to believe that it isn't a case of previously preparing an object.

HBP ch. 23 "By an act of evil -- the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage. He would encase the torn portion --"

"Encase? But how --?"

"There is a spell, do not ask me, I don't know!" said Slughorn.

---

I look at it in regard to verb usage: "By committing . . . would use . . . would encase." Gerund, functioning as a noun, modal future, modal future. Modal Future describes an intended action. The gerund phrase names the thing that needs to take place for the intention of the modal future verbs to be carried out. By the verb tenses and the order in which he explained it, I conclude that the murder has to take place before the creation of the Horcrux.


I agree, it might be fruitless to be looking at what the text gives on the creation of a Horcrux . . . but it might not, as well. I choose to include it because it's from this text I base my opinion that Harry is not a Horcrux. If I'm to defend my position, these are the passages that I need to examine.

This is a bit of a ridiculous argument on my part. It is really nit picking, but I was into the whole semantics bit at the time. I personally don't think that it would go this way, but see if this makes sense to you.

The encasement must happen after the murder, but that doesn't mean that the spell to create the thing that encases the soul must happen after the murder. I've tried to explain this before. Let me see if I can remember my analogy.

Let's try to imagine that Slughorn was explaining how to get a glass of water for someone.

"How does one make a glass of water?"

"By an act of faucetry -- the supreme act of faucetry. By turning on the faucet. Turning on the faucet makes the water come out. The wizard intent upon creating a glass of water would use that running water to his advantage. He would catch the water for drinking.

"Catch the water? But how --?"

"There is a glass. Don't ask me how you get the glass. I don't know."

Does that make sense. The glass exists at the beginning of the process. It is simply put into action when the water comes out. My sentences are structured the same way as JKR's. I have simply changed the objects. As I have said, I doubt that JKR would hide meaning in this way, or if most people would even catch it, but without a "then" in the statement, there is no telling what the timetable must be for the encasement spell. The most logical way to look at it is exactly as it is written, and exactly as you have suggested. I also just wanted to use the term "supreme act of faucetry. Perhaps I will use that term for getting a glass of water from now on.

<-- The supreme act of Faucetry. LOL!

I like your analogy. I may start using it, too. "Hey, hon. Can you please commit the supreme act of Faucetry for me please?" On to the analogy, The premise isn't quite equal, because one would not describe acquiring a glass of water as "make a glass of water," but they would more likely say "how does one get a glass of water?" I would probably argue that making and getting are not synonymous and so the analogy doesn't quite work.

I will argue my stupid idea one point further. The analogy is a way of taking a conversation in the magical world and transferring it to terms that make sense in our world. I could have said that the person "made" the glass, instead of "got" the glass, but it wouldn't make as much sense to how our everyday lives work. Of course you usually would just grab a glass out of the cupboard, but the fact of whether the glass is made at that moment or made by someone in a factory several years before doesn't change the point of the analogy. If you think about the magical world, the act of conjuring something makes the words "get" and "make" pretty much interchangeable. The point is that, based on the conversation between Slughorn and Riddle, the spell to trap a piece of soul could be performed before the murder to act as a container to catch the soul that comes out. It's simply a matter of how you interpret the sentence. Is JKR being coy and wording it this way in order to set us up for a suprise? I doubt it. Now I'm going to go bang my head against the wall for being so stubborn that I actually spent several posts arguing this.

This is the other thing that doesn't sit well with me. The thing that holds the soul already exists. It doesn't need a spell for creation. The diary was already a diary. The ring was already a ring. What he needed was a place to store his soul piece, and like your glass for the water, he chose something that was already in existence. It didn't require a spell to make the thing. The soul is the part that needs the preparation, from what we've been shown in the text thus far at any rate. We know from Dumbledore that Tom used certain murders to make his Horcruxes . . . he murdered first, then encased his soul into the already existing object. This is also heavy on the speculation that there is a spell that is needed to prepare an object. I'm not so sure one is needed. What makes the object a Horcrux is the encasement of the soul within.

I believe what he is getting at is that just because something is the shape of a cup, and it looks like a cup, does not mean it will function as a cup. A book or a locket are not meant to hold human souls. A piece of paper folded into a box is not meant to hold water. Yet, you could make that piece of paper hold water by preparing it with wax to make it watertight.

The preparation is in modifying a mundane object so it is capable of containing something as powerful as the energy of a human soul.

Yes, I did understand what vulturemort was saying in regards to the object not functioning as the object was intended to function. The problem I have is this: We don't know if there is another spell that's meant to prepare an object or if the object can be used just as it is. As we don't have any information on whether the object needs a separate preparation spell, I hold the view, at the moment, that the object can be used as is. I'm not saying that we won't be told in the last book that there was a spell that was needed to prepare the object, but as it is right now; I don't think there needs to be one.

I'm confused. Clearly, in the conversation between Slughorn and Riddle, there is an encasement spell. Whether you call that the horcrux spell or the encasement spell, it is the thing that takes advantage of the murder. That is the spell that I'm talking about. What I've been trying to say, is that the spell doesn't have to happen prior to the murder. It could be a vessel to catch the soul and to transport it into the object that you are intending to hold the soul in. I am assuming that it isn't a natural thing to have a soul trapped in an object, or multiple souls trapped in a living being. The soul would need some sort of magic to hold it in there. Are you arguing that the magic is purely to get the soul into the object and then it stays there? What is the extent of the magic going on in a horcrux in your opinion? This is an interesting avenue of thought that I have never gone down.

Ok, I've tried to read most of the 8 pages on this thread - boy do I have a headache now-

I am leaning towards Harry not being a Horcrux but I'm not convinced. I have had some thoughts and insights that have gone all the way back:

It would seem that making a horcrux is no light matter. You would have intent and planning.

"I'm going to kill that little brat that threatens by immortality, I'm going to kill him and use that as my final assurance of being immortal. Let's see, what do I need? Oh, yeah, I need an object. Check, I need my soul, Check. Ok, let's go."

Originally I thought the object would be at the house, possibly the cloak or the sword, but why would he leave that up to chance? He would have his object and take it.

Once there, with the object, he would prepare to kill and remove the part of his soul.
Things got a little crazy. He didn’t intend to kill anyone but Harry or his soul would have been in multiple pieces. THAT IS WHY HE GAVE LILY CHANCES TO STEP ASSIDE. HE DIDN’T WANT TO KILL HER. He only wanted to kill Harry to end the prophecy and make his horcrux (boy I hate typing that word from now on it's HX).

Lily refused to step asside.

When he killed Lily his soul ripped (I maintain that James was not killed at the same time as Lily- wont go there now) there were two pieces.
He was holding the object, sent the curse to kill Harry and it rebounded. The origional LV was destroyed/killed and his object was destroyed - or Peter got it. The part that was ripped when he killed Lily was sent off to be Vapormort.


People were talking about the AK and possibly another killing curse:
The AK seems to destroy or remove the soul from the body. As was pointed out before, the body is unmarked and uninjured. When the Riddle bodies were examined there was no evidence for the cause of death for 3 healthy people. Their beings were simply removed from their bodies. There were no marks on Cedric either. What happens to the soul? Where does it go? Through the Veil? If so then Sirius went through the veil bodya and soul??? I know, I know, that's another topic!!


Albus Dumbuldore Jan 27 2007, 04:24 PM

According to HP-Lexicon Riddle makes the Diary in 1943 and kills his father and grandparents in the summer of 1944 (http://www.hp-lexicon.org/timelines/timeline_voldemort.html).

Acording to that he would have known how to make an HX before he killed his family. Unless he put his memory in first and then the soul?

I’m pretty sure killing his family was the making of the ring HX. When Harry was looking in the pensieve he noticed that Tom Stopped wearing it after that summer.

I thought I read someplace, from DD maybe? That the soul would heal itself but be scared? Anybody else know what I'm talking about? Was that on the "What is a Soul" Thread?

Harry does have a connection with LV. It is some kind of magical transferance. It can be shut down, as LV has shown. LV can use it to influence Harry. Perhaps Harry will learn how to use it against LV in time. Wouldn't it be cool if LV suddenly had the desire to kiss Bella or something?

Boy, thinking about Harry's connection with LV and the Nagini/LV connection I have swayed to the Harry could be an HX!!!



Cris

Well, according to the HP-Lexicon Master Timeline he killed his parents in July of 1943. All the dates match up with the books there and my entire theory revolves around those dates. I believe my dates are accurate.



This depends on the accuracy of your dates, which I am questioning.



What? Harry saw Tom wear the Ring circa September of 1943, right after his killing of his parents in July 1943. I agree with the Lexicon in that the meeting with Slughorn took place sometime around September, before he made the ring or anything a Horcrux.



The soul does not heal itself. It is an act against nature to sever ones soul through murder and it does not heal. However, the soul does have a natural tendency to stay whole, making the severed pieces want to stay close to each other.. but never healed.

We must also remember that Horcruxes do not need to be made at the time of the Murders.

~Albus

OK the origional timeline I looked up was about a year off. So He killed his family before he knew how to make a horcrux. That means they don't have to happen at the same time. Point granted.



Yes, he wore the ring for a while after he aquired it. He also stopped wearing it after it became a horcrux.

I would love to go into whether or not the grandparents were significant enough to make HXs out of but that would be way off tipic here.

So you are saying that LV didn't have to make a horcrux right after he killed Harry. He would wait until the right item came along? He wasn't carrying anything or expecting anything to be at GH that night (cloak, swords etc?)? He just had to split his soul and then go back to his lair to ponder the appropriate vesel?


Cris

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. You do not need the object at the time of the murder. All you need to make a Horcrux is the torn soul from Murder. Seeing as the soul never heals itself, one could wait any amount of time before turning a torn soul into a Horcrux.

~Albus

I have a hard time believing that LV knew about a portion of the prophecy, and waited so long to act. There was a reason he didn't go after Harry when he was firts born.

I believed, before, that the object was at GH. something like the cloak or sword - I know I sound like a broken record there but...- NOw I believe that LV was searching for the perfect item he found it and got the info from Peter as to where they were. He took the item with him.

What is that object and what happened to it? Since LV killed 2 people that night there would have been 3 pieces of soul. We know where 2 went.

I guess that is the point here. Harry could be the 3rd piece, or Harry's scar. I don't want to believe it because that would mean Harry would have to die. But logic keeps leading me back there.

Talking to El Barto on the Absorption Theory I have come to believe that a sort of magical psychic link formed between Harry and LV but I doubt seriously there is a piece of LVs soul in Harry.

LV cannot control Harry like he does Nagini. I think he tried when Harry felt the hatred for DD and the urge to bite him. But it didn't work.

But where is that 3rd piece? Would this be something that JKR would just spring on us?

From Lexicon's Timeline plus my own verifications, Peter Pettigrew started passing information a year before the Potter's death, Peter started working for LV in 1979. The prophecy is most likely given in the first few months of 1980, seeing as it was "a cold, wet night" and this would match Dumbledore's timeframe of "sixteen years ago" when he speaks to Harry in Book 5. This means that Voldemort knew about the Prophecy for 4-6 months before the two July births.. Voldemort then had to determine if it was Harry or Neville, and gather information on what he should do and where he would find the Potter's. From Harry's Birth to Harry's Parents Death it exactly 3 months. Meaning that Voldemort didnt wait as long as you think. Thus cutting the extra time you seem to think he had to determine a special object.

Say that the prophecy was given in early 1980 because the night was descibed as 'a cold, wet night' is not very logical. We are talking Hogsmead here. In Jan and Feb and even March there seems to be lots of snow all the time. So it would have to be in the early to mid Spring OR backing it up to a time when it would be cold and wet, late Fall.

Since JKR has made many significant things happen, especially to Harry, on October 31, why wouldn't that be the perfect date for the prophecy to have been given? Exactly 9 months before Harry's birth. Practically the night of his conception. That would fit in with so much.

Snape, DD and AD heard it. Snape went back to LV with the partial prophecy. LV had 9 months to discover the child and the object. And then took 3 more months after Harry's birth? Why? Was he was still looking for that object?

Peter was a spy for at least a year, as Sirius said. The FC was not cast until the week before their deaths, October 31st. A year after the Prophecy. Why?

Harry was given power to vanquish the Dark Lord not power to make the Dark Lord immortal. The prophecy was only fulfilled because LV acted on it. It wouldn't have been changed etc.


LV went there that night to kill Harry and make a horcrux, not make Harry a horcrux. Harry was protected. The protection deflected the killing portion of the curse as a bullet proof vest absorbes most of the speed of the bullet. The wearer of the vest will get a bruise and might even be knocked out or winded but not catch any shrapnell. That is what happened to Harry. Lily created an AK proof 'vest' and it absorbed the power of the curse but Harry was bruised. The bruise created some kind of connection but not a horcrux

Cris

That's indeed the case in several common day objects, but does using a vessel to house a piece of soul require the same preparation? Assuming it does, then it's very likely that Tom had something that he carried that night, something he had already moulded to hold a piece of his soul. It was required that he say a spell after the murder so that the piece of his soul was transferred to that vessel. If we talk about absorption, then it is evident that the "pro-horcrux" (what I call a vessel all set to accept a soul piece) is more capable of absorbing a piece of soul than any other, then it is reasonable to assume that the specific piece that Tom brought with him would compete with Harry's body for accepting Tom's soul, and may have absorbed more of it than Tom himself thought possible. That leaves only a tiny bit inside Harry, if Harry absorbed that soul. Does that make him a horcrux?

Venturing off of current discussion for a moment. Another thing that really leads me to believe Harry will not end up being a Horcrux: Timing.

JKR has repeatedly stated that this is the seventh and final HP book. We've got several things that must take place during this book: 1) the search for the Horcruxes 2) the destruction of the Horcruxes 3) the backstory on James/Lily/Dumbledore/etc. that she's said will be included in the book 4) Harry leaving Privet Drive for the final time 4) a wedding 5) a trip to Godric's Hollow 6) Confrontation between Harry and Voldemort.

That's a lot to pack into a book, and that's not even half of what's going to happen. I think (and yes, I'm speculating) that the only way they'll figure out that Harry is another Horcrux, since he's supposed to be an unintential/accidental one, is that he destroys all known Horcruxes, kills Voldemort and Voldemort doesn't die. That would make them search harder, perhaps clueing them into Harry being a Horcrux. Then they'd have to find Voldemort all over again, figure out that they need to kill Harry and then Harry killing Voldemort. Not making sense is the least of problems I see with this. That would be one HUGE book, and we know the length of this book. So perhaps the initial things aren't going to take very long and Harry and Voldemort will confront eachother in the middle of the book, and the book will drag on as they go through the rest of the Horcrux Harry discovery.

I just don't think it's likely.

I agree with that. It just doesn't seem feasable.

LV also doesn't seem to have the control over Harry that he has over Nagini. He can take her over and have her do his bidding. With Harry he can connect with him but not make him do his bidding.

What about Peter? IfPeter hid LVs wand he had to be at GH that night. He could have been the one Harry heard yell at Lily to run. He was there when LV tried to kill Harry and the 3rd piece of soul went to him. He hid the wands, went back to his place and set up his disappearance, knowing that someone would come after him.

He hid in plain sight. Why not just disappear forever? He waited. He gathered info. He spied and when he couldn't anymore he found LV. Something no one else could do. How did he do that? What kind of control did/does LV have over him?

He did things that were very uncharacteristic for Rat Boy. He killed many people, set up his friends, cut off his own hand....why?

He is hidden away with Snape in Spinner's End. Why? Is he no longer trusted? Is he no longer the most loyal? Someplace else someone thought Peter was put there to spy on Snape. That is perfect. He is always listening at the door, sneaking around. LV has a direct link with him and can use him.

It would make as much sense as Harry being one....

Cris

passerby,

I personally don't see why Harry being a horcrux would make the book too long. Yes, you can set out scenarios that would complicate matters, but that doesn't make them so. The way I look at it, searching for horcruxes and destroying horcruxes would probably include clues to the fact that Harry is a horcrux, so that would cut down on the time devoted to figuring it out. Also, I disagree that Harry would have to destroy Voldemort, then realize he was a horcrux, then have to find Voldemort all over again. It could be that Voldemort willingly reveals to Harry that he has a piece of soul inside him. I could see Voldemort being proud of the fact, believing that it was his ultimate insurance policy, because he would never consider the fact that Harry would kill himself. In this way, there is no extra time added. It is simply a big reveal as part of the final battle. I don't know if that is going to happen, but it ties into the two polar extremes that Harry and Voldemort represent. They both start from similar backgrounds but choose two different paths (with Voldemort being the ultimate selfish being and Harry being the ultimate selfless being). Regardless of how it works, I don't think it's a valid argument against the theory. Try making a list of all the things that had to happen in any one of the books and you would see that they are as complex or even more so than the one that you just created.

thatsProfessortoyou,

I keep hearing that Voldemort had way more control over Nagini than Harry. How do we know that Voldemort is forcing Nagini to do anything. At no point have we been shown that Nagini did anything outside of Nagini's free will. It is purely an assumption based on Dumbledore's comment about Voldemort "seeming" to have an unusual amount of control over her. I still believe that Nagini is a red herring. It doesn't make sense for Voldemort to be defeated by Harry in his quest to create his final horcrux and then decide to just use the random death of a random muggle to finish it. We know that he used significant deaths for all of the other horcruxes. Doesn't it seem like Voldemort admitting that he cannot defeat Harry if he chooses to not finish what he started. He wanted to kill the only person that could possibly kill him and at the same time, he wanted to make his 7th horcrux. That would have guaranteed his immortality and been symbolically perfect. Instead, he gives up on using Harry as the final signicant murder and decides on the fly to use an old man who is unlucky enough to stumble on to him. On top of that, he purposely puts his final soul piece into an animal, which happens to be a dangerous way to keep your soul. I just cannot see him doing that.

Vulturemort
I agree with you to some extent. It seems like a desperation move on LV to use Frank Bryce's death and Nagini for the final HX. It seems like a 'copout' answer. I felt let down when I read that. A live animal is also a dangerous HX because it can die. LV killed many animals in possessing them before he got his new body.

But, when Harry was seeing what LV was doing, through Nagini, in the ministry...Nagini was doing unsnake like things. When Nagini saw Arthur she wanted to bite him but had other things to do. When Arthur woke and pulled his wand, Nagini 'had no choice' but to bite him.

I also have to ask, -Why, when LV was connecting to Harry during OoTP, was it always (mostly?) through Nagini?- LV was possessing Nagini because she could sneak into the MoM where he couldn't. Why didn't this damage her like the other animals?

LV is Slytherins Heir and what better object to make a horcrux than a snake?

Also, in an interview on one of the DVDs JKR said that you can pretty much take everything DD says as trugh. He is her means of giving given facts.

Do you think LV would wait till he kills Harry to make his final horcrux? I think he was shaken by Harry 'defeating' him and wanted to make sure his plan was finished before he went for Harry again.

If Nagini is a red herring, what is that horcrux?

I still strong disagree with Harry being an HX but I could see the USC cover depicting Harry facing his death - and thus the end of the final horcrux- with no fear, welcomingly and proudly. LV is cowering away from his death, warding it off. They die together in one action. The HX first then the remnant soul.

Cris

I know this isn't in the main stream of discussion at the moment, but it is only back a few posts to which I am referring.

First, I'm confused where the info came that it was only 3 months from the time Harry was born till LV destroyed his parents. Not only have I always heard that Harry was 1 years old when his parents died, but the dates show him to be one. Harry was born July 31, 1980 according to wikipedia. This makes sense because Ron was born in 1980 and Hermione was born in 1979. If Harry had been born in 1981, he would have been a year behind the other two. LV went to GH on October 31, 1981 according to wikipedia. So, with those dates, that would put Harry at 1 year and 3 months. If there is misinformation somewhere, please let me know. I try to be a stickler for facts!



This I'm a little confused about. Know offense thatsProfessortoyou. Just because LV kills someone, doesn't mean he HAS to make a horcrux or that the damaged soul has to go anywhere. I'm sure his soul has numerous tears to which he hasn't removed and placed in an object.

And I also agree with Albus Dumbledore. He doesn't have to make the horcrux at the time of the murder. The act of murder tears the soul which will never heal. That tear will sit there until a person decides to take advantage of that damage and create a horcrux (if one decides to do that anyways). So, he wouldn't have needed to take something that night to GH, but you never know, he may have just for the "fun" of it.

Okay, now I would like to give my views as to how I think Harry could have become a horcrux without actually saying the spell thus it happening unintentionally and without the knowledge of the parties involved. For those who have already read my theory on this, I apologize.

First, I'm going to have to explain another theory I have. When LV said the AK curse, he formed a magical connection with the "green light" of the curse's spell. During this connection, I think several things happened quite rapidly. First, the AK curse was absorbed by Lily's love protection. Second, the love protection traveled back up the connection and made contact with LV. Third, the love protection is what helped destroy LV (just like when Harry placed his hands on Quirrell but more intensly because it was directly from the love protection itself). Fourth, as LV's already ripped soul was torn from his body, a piece of the soul broke free and traveled back down the magical connection into Harry's scar before the connection broke. LV's abilities that Harry inherited also traveled down the connection into Harry. An easy way to explain the love connection traveling up is comparing it to sticking a butter knife into a light socket. The electricity travels up the knife into the holder.

So I don't think he ever said a spell to actually create a horcrux. His soul was already ripped at that point. Usually LV would have to say the horcrux spell to get the piece out of his body and into an object. But, his soul being ripped from his body was doing the job of the spell. That piece of soul that came loose just found itself a magical connection that it traveled down which led to Harry's scar.

Anyways, that's how I would explain it. But I could very well be wrong. And if I am, I'll be the first to admit it. Comments anyone? Please be kind.

Boy, I wish I could really dive back into this discussion full-on, but alas! Time does not permit. However, I've begun my big reread of the series before the Deathly Hallows, and as I was reading through Chambers of Secrets I found something that I was pretty sure I hadn't discussed before (although it seemed familiar enough that someone else may have brought it up at some point), and I thought it would be fun to throw it out there into the shark pool...

From the American copy of Chamber of Secrets, starting at the tail end of page 233 and continuing on 234...



It strikes me as interesting that Harry, having no reason to have ever heard the name before, even sure that he had not heard the name before, not only thought it sounded familiar, but thought it seemed like some friend that he had had when he was very small. Like an imaginary friend. The possible indications... it's very exciting... to me, anyway...

Love to go on, but I'm afraid I must go perform the supreme act of faucetry now (LOVE that, by the way). Later.

It's really interesting that you bring up the imaginary friend. I was only discussing this earlier today with my to girls who both had imaginary friends, who got the blame for quite a few mishaps in our house. Luckily these, friends conveniently disappeared when we moved house.

One article staes the following.



I have never bought into the 'Harry is a Horcrux' theory, but if you consider that Harry may have been visited by the young Tom Riddle in his early childhood, it could stand to reason that this is because of some kind of physical bond between the 2 of them. Let's just hope that Harry's 'friend doesn't turn out to be similar to Donnie Darko's Frank, that outcome was not a favourable one.

I really have always just attributed that to a description of an occurance of imagined familiarity. Example. The name John W. Smith might sound very familiar to me. It might make me think that there was once a boy I had a crush on, or a good friend that I had once upon a thousand years ago . . . but it's not. It's a familiar sounding name that strikes a chord with me because it reminds me of something familiar. Perhaps my friend was John V. Smythe. At any rate. . . to me, the phrase is just description of occurance. I'm not ruling out any possiblity, of course, because anything could happen. I seriously doubt, though, with the watch that Dumbledore had been keeping on Harry, that Harry had ever been visited by young or old Tom Riddle.

Or, the name was supposed to be one of those "Harry Potter" names that could represent the elusive "ANY BODY." Makes Voldemort that much more creepy when he could have been your next door neighbor, and perhaps that's what she was going for. The normal sounding name that makes Harry feel comfortable with Tom Riddle not realizing until a moment later that it is actually "I am Lord Voldemort."

Well, of course, like all the little "clues" or "imagery" or "foreshadowing" that Harry could be a Horcrux, it only really means anything if he indeed turns out to be a Horcrux. It's vague enough that it could go either way. Just like everything else. Which is why I gave up trying to convince anyone in the first place. *Sigh*... We'll know in another month anyway........ At which time I will reply with "Who said what about Harry and Horcruxes? Not I, sir! Not I!" whenever anyone tries to get me to admit my erroneous belief... I will however be all "In yo' face!" if I turn out to be right.

No offense taken. I was trying to think too hard, possibly. My point was, if the soul is ripped when murder is commited, that night LVs soul had at least 3 pieces. (since then others have pointed out that he may have had more pieces since he only used significant murders to take horcruxes...but do we really know that? It seems to me that he sends his minions to do his dirty work. His soul has been divided too much)

anyway...there were 3 pieces that night. When his body was destroyed, where did they go? 1 to Albania, 1 destroyed with the body, where did the other go? Did it go with the body?

I don't believe, or don't want to believe, that Harry is a horcrux. But my thoughts on LVs soul that day are lending to the idea .

LittleRed your theory of the connection working like the wand connection in HBP is plausible. Many have said that JKR doesn't use the same thing twice but then she also gives clues...I like traz-ak s possition on the whole thing, if I'm wrong I deny every saying it, if I'm right In yo' face!

Cris

I know I keep coming in here with things that are not necessarily the EXACT parts of the debate that are currently being discussed, but I keep getting ideas as I go through my fresh reread of the series, and lately, something in particular has been striking me...

One of the arguments that I've often heard put up against Harry being a Horcrux is that Dumbledore would have known and told Harry. I've already made points as to why he may not have gotten to that revelation yet if he DID know, but I have another point in the plausibility of DD perhaps NOT knowing (not to say that I don't think he knew; I think he probably at least suspected it, but one of the cool things about being on the pro side of this argument is that I get to use all possibilities as to how things could have gone down as potential "arguments")...

Of course there's the whole bit of DD himself saying that he doesn't often make mistakes but when he does... you know how it goes... Anyway, we get this whole impression of Dumbledore (despite things that he's said to assure us that he's only human and does make mistakes or does not know everything) that DD is always perfectly aware of everything and knows everything, largely because his role in the series has been to fill in the gaps in the story at the end of every book (or all throughout HBP) so we can perfectly understand how everything went down. As a result, we tend to overlook a lot of the things that DD DIDN'T know at any particular point.

Some of the more notable points to my mind being the fact that he DIDN'T originally know that Sirius and Peter had switched as the Potters' secret-keeper or that Sirius was innocent. DD was blissfully ignorant of this fact right up until Harry, Ron, Hermione, and the rest of us found out about it too. Just a year later, DD also managed not to realize for an entire schoolyear that Moody was, in fact, not Moody at all. And I wont' bother using Snape as a reference since the jury's still out on him, but I imagine there are other points of reference as well...

My point simply being that we can hardly say that Dumbledore always has all the information, even though it may seem like that, so even though I personally think that DD surely at least suspected that Harry had been accidentally made into a Horcrux, it's certainly plausible as well that the reason he didn't tell Harry may have been because he hadn't figured it out yet at all. We can't assume that he had just because he was Dumbledore. It would hardly be the first time he had yet to put all the clues together, if that was the case.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

EDIT: ................................ Aw, I was hoping someone would reply so I could just make a new post... Oh well... Guess I'll just add...

So tonight I was at work with nothing better to do than read ('cuz that's my job: reading, walking around, reading some more, walking around... but I digress...), and I was finishing up GoF and suddenly, something just hit me in the head like a baseball bat! Figuratively, I mean, of course... I haven't been hit in the head with an ACTUAL baseball bat for years... And I digress again... sorry... Here I go for real now...

As I was getting through the part where Voldemort has just returned and he shows off how he can now touch Harry all he wants, and Harry's scar exploded in pain, it suddenly occured to me why that happens... if he is a Horcrux, of course. If he's not then this is just another one of those things, but frankly I think there are too many of those things when you really start adding them up to not mean anything. But whatever: not the point. The point is: if he IS a Horcrux - or rather if his scar is a Horcrux; same difference - as I so very believe that he is, then the pain in his scar makes perfect sense!

We all know of course based on what Dumbledore has been telling us for years, and further evidenced by Harry's experiences throughout the book that his scar reacts in pain whenever Voldemort is a) nearby, or feeling a particularly strong emotion, especially hate. So why does it do this? Is this just a biproduct of having a curse scar? Well, I can understand doubt at the following quote being submitted as evidence against that idea as it comes from Fudge of all people on page 706 of GoF, but...



Now, of course, I know what the naysayers will say to that. Even if Fudge's statement is accurate that curse scars don't typically behave that way, Harry's scar is a very unique curse scar in that who else has ever survived Avada Kedavra, but regardless... It wouldn't be the first time Rowling skillfully hid a big hint in the words of someone we'd be inclined to ignore.

But I still haven't answered my own question as to what struck me in the first place about why Harry's scar behaves as it does, reacting in pain to Voldemort's proximity or emotions... And granted, I realize this is probably obvious enough that someone has probably mentioned it before; I may even have read it before and forgotten, so please forgive me if I'm just repeating something that someone else has already threorized, but... it would make sense for Harry's scar to pain him in these circumstances if it either is the Horcrux, or is a result of Harry's being made into a Horcrux.

It's a piece of Voldemort's soul. We can only speculate on how a piece of soul would behave as we don't have quite enough information to be sure of a lot of things, which is part of the trouble with this whole debate in the first place, but bear with me here... I would assume that as the soul's natural state is to in the body with the rest of the soul, and the separating of it into another object is unnatural, the soul-piece (particularly if its at all cognizant, which I think we may have reason to believe that the soul-piece in Harry - if it is, in fact, there - would be; I'll explain why we have reason to believe that if anyone is interested) would be naturally inclined to want to return to Voldemort when he is nearby (all the more once he has a coporeal body, if you follow me here), so it first would make sense for it to cause pain when he is near. The soul-piece might theoretically feel his proximity, and struggle against its bindings (the scar) to get to him, causing Harry pain in his scar.

It also makes sense with strong emotion if we assume (and I think that canon also leads us to believe this) that emotion or at least a large sense of it resides in the soul, then the soul-piece would feel a strong emotion through the mental bond (which also makes perfect sense IF Harry is a Horcrux, though there hasn't yet been a good enough explanation as to why it exists if he's not), and react in the same way, once again causing pain to Harry.

I'll tell you what, I'm going to be VERY surprised if Harry doesn't turn out to be a Horcrux. Too much of it adds up, and it's all the more perfect for how so many people are disinclined to believe it (not unlike the mystery of the very first book: JKR uses our feelings against us to make us believe that Snape will be the bad guy, only for it to turn out to be Quirrel; all the signs were there, but we may not have seen it - I'm sure some did - because we were so inclined to dislike and mistrust Snape). I may be so surprised if it doesn't work out that I'll forget to pretend that I never believed it in the first place!

Traz-ak,

All very good points once again. Another thing that has been noted is the fact that the mental connection between the two is unique. Snape tells us that occlumency/legillimency(sp?) normally can only be performed when you are near the person that you intend to connect with. Of course, in Harry's case, distance is no barrier. It is just one more instance in which Harry and Voldemort's connection is unique. I believe that the reason that distance doesn't matter is that through the soul piece, Harry and Voldemort are always together. It is what I like to call Remotelemort.

traz-ak, that's the same thing I have argued several times before in the DH forum. Of course, you explained it much better than myself and also much more eloquently. I have always found it strange that Harry's scar caused him pain during those certain times, and especially the fact that they became much stronger after LV regained body form. Also, once LV started to perform Occlumency in HBP, the scar no longer caused him pain. I too believe that it is the soul fragement of LV sensing its master and wanting to reunite with him.

It's those arguements that also lead me to believe that the scar is a horcrux and not Harry as a whole. I would think that if Harry himself was a horcrux, he would feel this pain throughout his body. However, since it is isolated to his scar each and every time, it must be the scar itself that is the horcrux. This also gives us hope that Harry may be able to survive DH because it would be much easier to destroy a horcrux in a scar than in a person as a whole.

First things first...



Heh. I like it. Now if only I could properly pronounce it without my tongue getting all tied.

I've been putting this off for over a week now, but I'm running out of time to get it in there before we're all proven right or wrong, so... I'm going to go through these as quickly as possible...

There are actually numerous (at least twice) points throughout OotP that when Harry feels what Voldemort is feeling that IN ADDITION to just feeling the emotion, he randomly gets insight into why Voldemort is feeling this, and it is "as though a stranger was speaking them through Harry's mouth." These insights are specifically described as such MULTIPLE times. Is it just the author's description or is it more? I suggest that it is the bit of Voldemort's soul that provided those insights. Is it a foregone conclusion that this is the case? Of course not. If it were, then we wouldn't have to argue the possibility of Harry being a Horcrux; we'd simply already know. The point is that these things add up.

Then, of course, there's the oft-referenced bit after Harry sees Arthur Weasley being attacked by the snake. Dumbledore after conferring with his mysterious silver instruments that showed smoky snakes, muttered to himself, "But in essence divided?"

Now, what are we really supposed to think is going on here? Presumably, Dumbledore is concerned at this moment that Harry is becoming one with Voldemort, but why in the world would that be a concern if their mental connection is nothing more than a mental connection? It doesn't make any sense. But if Dumbledore by this point suspects that Harry has a piece of Voldemort's soul in him (regardless of whether its bound up in his scar; that's not necessarily the point right now), then it might make sense for him to be concerned that that soul-piece may be gaining power now that Voldemort is back and threatening to consume Harry's life-force, not entirely unlike what the diary-Horcrux attempted to do with Ginny.

Speculation? Yes, but grounded in canon.

For my part, I've often written about the fact that JKR has specifically told us in interviews (that I've quoted directly before only to be ignored, so forgive me if I neglect to do it again) that the reason for the connection HAS NOT BEEN EXPLAINED. The reason for the connection is something that she's been holding onto until the seventh book. One thing that I noticed in rereading the series that I woefully neglected to mark and thus can't reference directly right at the moment (and at this point, it's not like I have delusions of swaying anyone's opinion anyway, but I do at least want to get as much of my own personal reasoning out there as possible so that when those of us who believe are proven right - - and those who have refused to believe it start complaining that JKR didn't set it up properly, I can point to all this stuff...), but even Harry himself specifically stated (I wish I could remember if it was in OotP or HBP... sigh... I only just read it last week!) that Dumbledore had never satisfactorily explained why the connection existed...

And finally, what will probably be my final word on the matter until after DH... One of the most commonly argued points as to why Harry couldn't be a Horcrux is that Dumbledore would have told him... First off, if you absolutely can't accept my reasoning as to why DD didn't tell him that is about to follow, then I've also already given leeway in previous posts as to why DD MIGHT not have known. Though I belive DD definitely believed Harry to be a Horcrux. As to why he wouldn't tell him, I've mentioned it before, but it's been awhile and I want to reinforce my reasoning...

I think we need look no further than Harry's repeated questions in HBP about what happened to DD's hand. Throughout most of the book, each time he asks, DD makes it quite clear that he will tell him, but that it is not the time. When the time comes, he does tell him, but not before. The same is true of Horcruxes in general. DD tells him nothing about Horcruxes or his beliefs about how Voldemort has used them until Harry gets the memory from Slughorn. EVERYTHING about the way DD makes revelations to Harry in HBP show a progression. At no point does DD just sit Harry down and dump the whole complicated story on him. Harry's head probably would have up and exploded if he had. DD takes care to reveal the truth to Harry in a certain way, over time, encouraging him to draw his own conclusions before sharing with Harry his own ideas.

I point you also to DD's suggestion of Nagini as a possible Horcrux: notice how DD broaches the subject:



Notice how he doesn't just come right out and suggest that Nagini is a Horcrux. Instead, it seems to me like he says it in just such a way that suggests that he wants to gauge Harry's response.

In the end, no: nothing that I or anyone else has said positively concludes that Harry is a Horcrux. But the groundwork is undeniably there. There are hints. There are clues. The main arguments against it consist mostly of speculation about how it couldn't happen, but it's all based on things that we don't know. We hardly know anything about how a Horcrux is made. We have only the barest details. We don't know THAT much about how the soul would or wouldn't behave. All our theories in this matter, both for and against Harry being a Horcrux, are heavily biased by each of our own personal views on souls and the like. So little of it (on both sides) is grounded in canon that it's somewhat ludicrous that we've managed to spend at least two years (longer for those of us who supported the idea back when it was still the Changeling Hypothesis) arguing about it.

To finally get to the point of my very last word on the topic for as long as we're still in the dark, I leave you with this image: Voldemort's face on Quirrel's head. If Harry is a Horcrux, if the scar is representative of that fact... ESPECIALLY if the scar itself is, in fact, the Horcrux... then nothing could be more symbolic of that fact than presenting to us as our very first glimpse of Voldemort, no less, the representation of him ON A CHARACTER'S HEAD! There are other such symbolic indications all throughout the series, but none so powerful as that one, at least for my money.

So I ask you: is the reason you refuse to believe that Harry could be a Horcrux really because it can't be? Or because you just don't want it to be?

Traz-ak, you truly are the master of this topic. While I have added my opinion here as well as debated endlessly, almost fruitlessly, in the "Is Harry a Horcrux" thread on the main forums, I have never achieved a post as succinct and articulated as this.



So true.. so true. It's actually saddening when thoughts for this theory are met with explanations of dislike and improbability solely based on what the reader wants personally as well as what they think JK Rowling would or wouldn't do. A very good question you've got there, indeed.



Ahh one of the more truly random and enigmatic quotes of the series. Never before or since, at least in my memory, has such a mysterious and unprovoked response occured within the series.. especially by Dumbledore. We honestly have no idea what it means... but when applied to the Horcrux theory, one can easily being to fathom what such a phrase could entail.


But as you said, we will all know very shortly whether we are wrong or right. I have no inhibitions, however, is placing my full support and prediction in saying that Harry will turn out to be a Horcrux in the seventh book. Now that I've staked my claim so very close to the revealing, I must say that I am sure, Harry being a Horcrux or not, that Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows is going to be an appropriate end to a great series.

~Albus

I have to agree with Albus Dumbledore. You truly are the master of this thread, traz-ak. You've explained your points far better than I ever could! How can one not believe the possibility of Harry being a horcrux?!

Anyways, I especially love this point I pulled from your post. I have never even thought about this bit of symbolism. It wouldn't surprise me at all if JKR threw that in there with a bit of a chuckle at her own brilliance. It wouldn't be the first time. But LV on Quirrell's head would be a great symbolic gesture to LV's soul in Harry's scar on his head. Great catch on this!!

And in the final moments . . . I have this slight rebuttal:



I have never quite said that Harry can't be a Horcrux. I've said I think the evidence points more strongly that he is not. I like to believe that I've read the same books as you, examined the same passages, and based on my reading of the works. . .I have been led to a different conclusion on this matter than you. As far as the other portion of the above quote; it's not quite a fair statement, Albus Dumbledore. It seems that both sides cannot escape that they have both "based [our opinions] on what the reader wants personally as well as what they think JK Rowling would or wouldn't do." I base my opinions on what I've read as well as what I think JK Rowling would or wouldn't do, and so have you. That's why they are opinions.



Yes, it could be that he's talking about Harry and Voldemort containing the same soul. Or, could be he's actually talking about Voldemort's soul as it relates to the snake. As it was just the snake that they'd discovered . . .at any rate. We probably can't determine the exact meaning of this statement until Saturday.

At any rate, I stand by my initial reaction that Harry will NOT be a Horcrux.

Ahhh let me clarify the statement. I was not saying that ALL rebuttals against the theory are "explanations of dislike and improbability solely based on what the reader wants personally as well as what they think JK Rowling would or wouldn't do", but rather many of the them. That is what I find disappointing. I know in this very thread there have been thought-provoking discussions and great points based of canonical evidence for both sides. Its just that when looking at the topic as a whole, I find that we face more responses like this:



rather than:



But as I have said many times alongside each and every one of you, whether we want him to be a Horcrux or not, whether we think he is a Horcrux or not (wanting and thinking are, naturally, two seperate things) we will find out very very soon. I actually look forward to the post-book discussion on this topic, whether I am right or wrong in my thinking.

It's soo close, I can hardly wait!!

I second that. I certainly don't mean to say that all those who are against the idea are like that. I've debated with a number of very intelligent people with very good points who I respect very much, you being among them, passerby, who don't agree with me. I mean aboslutely no disrespect to you. Although, I do think that I can say with some confidence that my wants have little to do with my belief of the theory. The first time I heard what was once the Changeling Hypothesis, I absolutely did not want to believe it, but it was very compelling to me, I had to admit that it was at least possible, and it was my feeling as I read Half-Blood Prince for the first time, that it really seemed to be pulling that way more than ever as the Horcruxes were introduced. I think that there's a lot of evidence for it in the books; I think that JKR has very cleverly set it up; and I think that on the chance that it doesn't turn out to be true, I tend to think she at the very least put it in as a red herring...

... but I totally think it's true. Oh, but I should add:



Hm. That's a pretty good interpretation. I could almost buy that. It doesn't make quite enough sense to me, though. I mean, it's reasonable if DD is trying to determine at this point whether Nagini is a Horcrux. His mutterings might make sense then. But does the response really make sense? The response of the instruments indicate that they are still separate. A response that DD's response to is satisfaction, according to the words. Ultimately, it kind of seems like weak sauce to me to say that that's all he was talking about. But that's just my opinion.

Lastly, I would like to make note of the fact that I do tend to get carried away sometimes with this debate in particular. I think part of the reason is because it often feels like it's ten thousand people arguing against the three of four of us who are actually convinced that he is a Horcrux. It can make the best of us a little defensive, I think. Still, though, the plus side is that if we, the minority, turn out to be right, we'll likely get an awful lot of satisfaction over getting to say, "I told you so." There's always that to look forward to...

Ok, since this is a thread that we have an answer to now--- WITHOUT spoiling it for those that haven't read it yet--- I'm going to close this up.

I think that it's too tempting for people to post that have already read it, which really aren't theorising on it, since they know the answer.

For those that haven't read it yet, more than likely if you've got an opinion on this, it's already been posted

~Pix