Harry does not have to kill Voldemort aka VANQUISHING Voldemort [Archive]

kismetgirl

November 18th, 2003, 6:14 am

AurorSlayer

November 18th, 2003, 9:18 am

lilducky04

November 23rd, 2003, 10:48 pm

An inanimate object huh?...hmm...I like it!! I think Harry will master oculamency(sp??haha) the thing he did with snape. Anyhow, Voldemort will try and take over harry's mind again but this time he won't be able to. What if Harry thinks/yells..about everything he has that's good..how his mother and father died to save him and how Voldemort's just didn't want him..or something..how he has support by people who love him not FEAR him.

While in this process Voldemort would be unable to stay in his body anymore because of the love that drove him out previously..only this time maybe when he goes back to his own body people would be ready? I'd like to see them turn him into stone as soon as he gets back into his body. Then have harry take his wand and break Voldemort into several little blocks...viola!! Voldemort is no longer once piece and it was cause Harry did it..lol...far fetched??--just a little lol!

ana_banana

November 24th, 2003, 12:04 am

I'm sorry, but i dont think there is any doubt that Harry has to kill Voldemort in order for him to live.

Spirit

November 24th, 2003, 12:14 am

I like this theory. Lord Voldemort is a persona not a person. The prophecy doesn't say "The one with the power to vanquish Tom Riddle". If Harry kills Voldemort, that makes him no better than Voldemort. Besides, I do not think that J.K.R. is just going to have it 'Harry killed Voldemort, end of story!' or 'Voldemort killed Harry, end of story!' :huh: If it was going to be like that, would she have told us about the prophecy in book five or would she have waited until book seven? Why would she tell us the ending of the series when she still has two books to go? I think that this is a great theory, and has far more of a chance of the others that are simply 'Harry killed Voldmort', 'Voldemort killed Harry', or 'Neville turned out to be the one.' :agree:

remus81

November 24th, 2003, 1:22 am

While I don't feel that this theory is totally without merit, I think it is a unlikely that one or both of them will die. The fact has been proven through the first four books that Voldy, even in a half form of life, cannot exist and not try to take over the world.

He's one of those "never gonna change" kinda guys, and, in order for him to be defeated, I think he will have to die.

Does that mean that Harry will kill him? Probably, but not definately.

Maybe Harry destroys him before his death. For instance, the seed has already been planted that the Deatheaters don't necessarily know he is a half blood. Perhaps Harry destroys his support as a way to get to him, and then someone else kills him.

The chances, I think, are rather slim though.

JimmyPotter

November 24th, 2003, 2:25 am

Perhaps what it will be is that Harry somehow induces Voldemort into one of those worse than death situations that Dumbledore spoke of. Voldemort then commits suicide rather than face that alternative. Voldemort is often compared to Adolf Hitler, who committed suicide rather than face potentially being captured by the Soviets.

Even if Harry does kill Voldemort, it would not necessarily be murder. There is a war going on, and Voldemort is clearly the "general" of the enemy army. Killing an enemy in war is not murder.

Marcy

November 24th, 2003, 4:38 am

Hmm...I hadn't thought of this before...but what if we take the Prophecy laterally instead of literally:

either must die at the "hand" of the other. At the hand? Hmm...who is indebted to Harry that has a special "hand' Wormtail!

lilducky04

November 24th, 2003, 8:08 pm

either must die at the "hand" of the other. At the hand? Hmm...who is indebted to Harry that has a special "hand' Wormtail!

Good thinking!!! I never thought of it that way. Wormtail sort of IS Harry's hand except I dunno...I would be sort of dissapointed if Wormtail did it. As a reader I think I would be more satisfied if Harry "vanquished" him... :shrug:

ae1vart0n

November 24th, 2003, 9:03 pm

While we're twisting things...

What if Harry has "the power to vanquish the dark lord", but he can't use it. Instead he needs to transfer it to someone else. Then, because "either must die at the hand of the other" Harry has to die for the transfer to work, or he is killed by Voldemort after giving up the power. Finally, someone else, maybe dumbledore, finishes him off.

Or even better, he has to transfer it to Voldemort, perhaps because Voldemort wants his own power back, and the power destroys Voldemort just because Voldemort has it.

:shrug:

ae1vart0n

November 24th, 2003, 9:35 pm

Let me elaborate, but please consider this rambling separate from the last post.

First off, when the Killing Curse failed on Harry, it didn't destroy Voldemort's body.

What destroyed it was, as Harry got some of Voldemort's power, Voldemort got some of Harry's.

Where Harry can live with some of Voldemort's power, Voldemort is hurt by Harry's
"power to vanquish the dark lord".

It almost destroyed him, but it didn't because he didn't get the full dose. When he's possessing Harry he feels it, but to have the power would destroy him.

The prophesy says Harry has a power the Dark Lord doesn't know about. Voldemort thinks it's the protection spells that were put on Harry. He doesn't know about this power.

So Voldemort, wanting his power back from Harry tries a transfer, killing Harry. Harry has to die here, or the "either must die at the hand of the other" would not be fulfilled.

Voldemort, taking the power from Harry, is vanquished by that power.

It's only a theory. Have fun tearing it apart.

Raven

November 25th, 2003, 4:36 am

"And Either must Die at the hand of the Other" (capitalization my own).

Maybe "The Other" means a third person.

Floria

November 25th, 2003, 4:50 am

"And Either must Die at the hand of the Other" (capitalization my own).

Maybe "The Other" means a third person.

Haha...maybe not....

I agree with the idea that Harry may have to die defeat Voldemort...The power is inside of Harry...It's a part of Harry...

Perhaps the power is Harry...the power can only be released if Harry dies

thethirdman

November 25th, 2003, 5:08 am

It seems so trite to me that in oder to defeat Voldemort, Harry would have to sacrifice himself. It seems too predictable for JK. I think maybe she's got something big with a bunch of twist in store for us.

Narami

November 25th, 2003, 5:26 am

I think its pretty clear that Harry is the one and only that has the power to kill Voldemort, he is the one that has to vanquish him since he is the one marked. “For neither can live while the other survives.” One them has to cease existing, the whole being (in Voldemort’s case) has to *poof* buh bye.

lilducky04

November 25th, 2003, 8:25 pm

I know this goes back to earlier theorys...but...

what if Harry killed the Dark Lord??

The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches.....now what if harry has the power to kill off the dark lord..as in Tom Riddle's persona??

It doesn't say Tom Riddle will die, which is who he is...it says the Dark Lord will be vanquished....kind of like, the dark lord will fall

following me?? So maybe Harry has something to vanqish

and either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives ...well Harry can't live his life the way he wants, if Voldy survives cause well...he just freaken complicates things. But if Harry vanquishes the part of Tom where Voldemort exists, they both live...

any takers? lol

Enkidu

November 25th, 2003, 8:45 pm

"either must die at the hand of the other"

Define "die" :p

p.s. Define "at"

Spirit

November 27th, 2003, 4:01 am

"either must die at the hand of the other"

Define "die" :p

p.s. Define "at"

Yeah, but the prophecy didn't say Tom Riddle. It said 'the Dark Lord.' I agree with the idea that 'the Dark Lord' is a persona, not a person. Tom Riddle wasn't born 'the Dark Lord.' Besides... do you really think J.K.R. would give away such a large clue to the ending? I don't. I really don't think it is going to be that simple.

Kaonashi

November 27th, 2003, 4:36 am

Here's a possibility that I've been thinking about.

Lord Voldermort was originally Tom Riddle. It was only after the many magic experiments and spells (not to mention a lot of bitterness and hate) that he undertook that "Tom Riddle" became no more and Lord Voldermort arose. Unfortunately, we don't know what happened between Tom Riddle and his father when he paid them that fateful visit, but I bet a sack of Galleons that was the turning point for poor Tom. It would appear that he opened the Chamber after he paid dear old dad a visit, but I'm not sure of that timeline.

Now perhaps there's a way to kill Voldermort (the evil controlling side of Tom) while still leaving Tom Riddle intact. If that occurs, Harry will still be fulfilling the phophecy without actually killing anyone.

thethirdman

November 27th, 2003, 4:46 am

Navy Blues

November 27th, 2003, 6:30 am

Firstly, I'm pretty sure that Tom said he'd been mucking around with the Chamber for a fair chunk of his school years, and I'm pretty sure he was seventeen when he killed his father.

A lot of good ideas here, but there are two more I'd like to throw into the mix. I don't necessarily think they're right, but they're things to consider.

1. "Vanquish" and a fate worse than death. To my thinking, and I think to LV's as well, to be utterly defeated and then be forced to live and see your conqueror enjoy his triumph, all the people you despised lording it over you and treating you as less than dirt - that is a fate worse than death. To lose and not die.

2. This is based on the similarity of Harry and Tom's upbringings, and on another thread: a thrust of the next two books is that Harry is tempted by replacing Voldemort rather than destroying him. Their similarity, the stresses in Harry's life and the way people treat him, could all lead to him being tempted by the Dark Arts. I think the Crucio at the MoM was a foreshadowing. That way, Harry's victory over Voldemort at the end (presuming a lot, of course) becomes a redemptive story.

I think we have to accept that the ending of the series is going to be cliched. The problem is guessing which particular cliche Rowling will choose.

lilducky04

November 28th, 2003, 3:46 pm

This is a little off topic, but maybe it will play out in the end...

in GoF--remember when the Twins make that bet with Bagman?? All of their life savings that Krum(?) will catch the snitch but Ireland will win, and Bagman basically said fine but the chances of that are slim to none??

How did the twins know that would happen? Do they have some sort of time travel machine?? or some type of gadget?? If so, don't you think this could be helpful against Voldy? A lot of people were saying time travel could have something to do with this, if so, could this possibly be where they get the machine from??

Raven

November 29th, 2003, 4:51 am

No, I don't think that had anything to do with the prophecy or time travel, Ducky. I think that Fred and George knew Quidditch and the two teams well enough to accurately guess who would win and who would get the Snitch.

SnowyOwl

November 29th, 2003, 5:47 am

CoS tells us that Tom Riddle's most "intimate" friends were calling him Lord Voldemort at school. Further, Tom opened the Chamber during his fifth year at Hogwarts. It seems Tom had delusions of grandeur from early on. I would guess that Tom killed his father after he graduated from Hogwarts before he dropped out of sight to immerse himself in the Dark Arts.

Regarding the topic at hand, as I've said before, I seriously doubt that the end of the conflict will be a well-aimed AK curse. I'm sure Rowling has some twists up her sleeve, and I am hoping Harry will not have to kill Voldemort except for in an indirect fashion. I would like a nicely complex fulfillment of the prophecy. :D

thethirdman

November 29th, 2003, 6:41 am

Regarding the topic at hand, as I've said before, I seriously doubt that the end of the conflict will be a well-aimed AK curse. I'm sure Rowling has some twists up her sleeve, and I am hoping Harry will not have to kill Voldemort except for in an indirect fashion. I would like a nicely complex fulfillment of the prophecy. :D

I concur. It's just not JK's style to have the series end with Voldy making a long dramatic speech and then Harry AKs him. I'm all set to find some twists and turns in book 7. Maybe Harry just so happens to set a chain of events in motion that lead to Voldemort getting himself killed. So in a sense Voldy will have died at the hand of Harry...just in a round about way.

eggplant

November 29th, 2003, 9:33 pm

thethirdman

November 30th, 2003, 12:14 am

I would be very surprised and disappointed if Rowling caves in to the politically correct crowd and doesn’t have Harry kill Voldemort in book 7, preferably in a bloody and rather horrible manner. Remember this is a war and in wars nice kind decent people kill people, even other nice kind decent people; so killing Voldemort should not cause any ethical dilemma for Harry as the Dark Lord is not nice kind or decent. Yes I know Harry could not find it in himself to murder Wormtail in book3 but he’s stronger and wiser now and I don’t think he’d make the same mistake.

Eggplant

It's Harry Potter not Battle Royale! And killing of any kind poses and eithical and moral dilemma, unless the person doing the killing is a sociopath. The simple fact is that Harry would have to destroy something that is or was at one point in time human. And being nice has nothing to do with it. It's not justifiable to kill someone because they're not "nice, kind and decent." It never is. And gratuitous blood and gore will do nothing more than detract from the story. That's why Wes Craven doesn't win Oscars.

GryffindorSeeker

November 30th, 2003, 1:23 am

"Die at the hand of the other" Yes, one has to kill the other. Shame we couldn't set the Dementors on him. A little inhumane, but he deserves it, I bet. So that's just set plain and in stone is it? One has to die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives. Argh! It's running through my head...

eggplant

November 30th, 2003, 8:45 am

thethirdman

November 30th, 2003, 9:58 am

> killing of any kind poses and eithical and moral dilemma

But in war millions of nice kind decent people have killed other nice kind decent people, I see no reason why Harry will be immune from that horror.

Eggplant

Of course he won't be immune from it, but you make it sound like Harry ought to be cutting every Death Eater's throat. Even if he is angry, his conscience is still going to nag him should he actually kill. And if he's caught in the moment, he'll regret it later when he comes to his senses. You sound like you want to see a complete blood bath in book 7.

eggplant

November 30th, 2003, 4:41 pm

Jill

December 1st, 2003, 3:28 am

> You sound like you want to see a complete blood bath in book 7.

Yes, I think the series could use a little more blood. And years later many veterans of wars are troubled when they reflect on the terrible things they had to do, I expect the same thing will happen to Harry, assuming he survives the war which I doubt.

Eggplant

I do not think that Harry will kill Voldemort but merely free or vanquish what lies deep within the dark lord himself. There is a theory going around based on Nagini possessing Voldemort and therefore controling his life. Vanquish what posses the dark lord and he will be mortal (Nagini is a god, so you can not kill a god but it is said, you can vanquish one). Either Harry does not have to kill Voldemort or that the only way to stop Nagini from possessing him again, would be to kill Voldemort or Voldemort kill himself with his by his own hand. This theory could go either way but in the end it will be J.K.Rowling who decides on what truely happens in the final conflict. :)

kismetgirl

December 2nd, 2003, 1:53 am

I still think that Harry has to kill the Dark Lord persona. Remember in CoS, Dumbledore telling Harry that once Riddle left school he left the country and did many magical things that once he returned you could not recognize Riddle and definitely the description of Voldemort in GoF is not altogether naturally human.

Now, let's think about another villian who needed redemption which sounds very similar to Dark Lord. I am of course talking about Darth Vader. It is stated that Anakin Skywalker was so mechanical that he was no longer recognizable as himself and we know that Luke basically killed the persona of Darth Vader but not his father.

I see a very similar yet original scenerio with Voldemort. I still think that is very significant that DD kept calling Voldemort, Tom during the MoM scene.

I also think that if Voldemort can make Harry feel his emotions, as in OotP, then it has to be a two way street and if Harry can ever become powerful enough then he can make Voldemort feel his emotions.

ae1vart0n

December 2nd, 2003, 4:24 am

kismetgirl

December 2nd, 2003, 4:45 am

What good will it do if Harry can make Voldemort feel his emotions? How is Harry going to be able to project any positive emotions while thinking about Voldemort? It seems to me this could only help Voldemort.

I think he called him Tom because they weren't in the school or in a very public setting. Dumbledore is nothing if not considerate, and if there's anything remaining of the Riddles or their property, he wouldn't want them being harassed because he was the one who let it slip who Voldemort was.

I will start by saying that the second part of your posting makes no sense to me at all. If DD was trying to be considerate as you said why call him Tom at all. Why not call him Voldemort like always. Having said that, I would assume there is nothing left of the Riddles after Voldemort killed his father and grandparents b/c in GoF it stood empty. But this is a side note.

On the question of what good will it do if Harry can make Voldemort feel his emotions. We know for a fact that Voldemort could not remain in Harry's body b/c of the love he felt when thinking about Sirius.

This is pure speculation, but lets say Harry does in fact learn to project his love into Voldemort's mind. First, I think it would drive Voldemort crazy, he would not be able to stand it. Secondly, if you go on the theory of killing the persona and not the person, I think that would be the key to driving the Voldemort persona from Tom Riddle. Think of a reverse dementor kind of a thing. Instead of sucking happiness, hope, love from someone, infusing them with it.

Tom Riddle was not born wanting to take over the world and power hungry. I think his rejection by his father and his mother's death left huge emotional scars on him. He apparently never felt love in the orphanage he grew up in, due to the fact in CoS in his memory he is asking to stay at Hogwarts for summer break. Obviously, Voldemort has never felt loved in that true unconditional way.

ravenclaw02

March 26th, 2004, 5:09 pm

After re-reading OOTP for what must be the millionth time last night, I was struck with something that I've never picked up on before, but that I think might become important in Book 7.

On page 835 (US version), Dumbledore tells Harry that on the night his parent died, "Voldemort had been vanquished hours before, but his supporters - and many of them are almost as terrible as he - were still at large, angry, desperate, and violent."

Now, we look at the prophecy, on page 841 (US): "THE ONE WITH THE POWER TO VANQUISH THE DARK LORD APPROACHES ..."

The use of the word "vanquish" in both of these scenarios is what stood out to me. According to Dumbledore, Harry has already "vanquished" the Dark Lord. (Which, I believe, proves that Harry and not Neville is the "Chosen One" beyond all doubt).

"EITHER MUST DIE AT THE HAND OF THE OTHER FOR NEITHER CAN LIVE WHILE THE OTHER SURVIVES..." (841 US) We see here that "killing" and "vanquishing" are two seperate concepts. This brings me to my theory - Harry may be able to "vanquish" the Dark Lord, then still be killed by him. It would fulfill the prophecy ... From what I've read on these forums, I feel like most people here believe that for Harry to vanquish LV, he'll kill him. I just thought I'd open up a different point of view - what do you all think?

(If this is a repeat forum, mods, feel free to shut it down. I did a search but couldn't find anything close to this subject :) )

Discordia

March 26th, 2004, 5:23 pm

Oooh! I thin you should go here:http://darkmark.com/forum/index.php?act=ST&f=67&t=19281&st=750
There's this amazing theory on what your talking about over there but I;m not sure if this thread has been started elsewhere though.

CydVicious2486

April 24th, 2004, 4:01 am

Hey everyone....I was reading the OoP yesterday, and when i got to The Lost Prophecy chapter, one of the last lines is "...And Either Must Die At The Hand of The Other For Neither Can Live While The Other Survives..." I wonder how they will try to kill each other. I'm guessing it will be in some sort of battle like in the end of OoP, but I'm just guessing. I also think that one of them will have to disarm the other, since their wands wont work on eachother.
"They will not work properly against each other." said Dumbledore, "If, however, the owners of the wands force the wands to do battle...a very rare effect will take place. One of the wands will force the other to reguritate spells it has preformed..." page 697 GoF US version.
So anyways, I was just wondering what everyone else thought...thanks!
*CydVicious2486*

Lil Red Head

April 24th, 2004, 6:40 am

Given that it is a children's series, I have a hard time seeing Harry actually do someone in, even if it is LV. I just don't see Harry as being the kind of person to pull off doing AK, even if he wants to.

I'm thinking something else will happen, like LV will get pushed into the Room Fulla Luv, and they'll lock the door and throw away the key.

I'm pretty certain that no matter what, Harry and LV will have a hard time doing damage to each other with their wands, esp given what we saw in GOF.

lilducky04

April 28th, 2004, 12:36 am

It is said that either must die at the hand of the other. What if it is literal? Peter Petegrew gave his "right hand" for LV. Maybe he's LV's hand. This could make Ron Harry's "right hand man." Hermoine, handwise, would be his left as....ooo I forgot her name, the women close to LV, who drove Neville's parents insane...she'd be LV's left hand?? Bellatrix, is that her name?

Anyway, Peter owes Harry for letting him go, maybe at this point he won't be able to hurt Harry...Maybe it will have to do with Ron and Peter, or just the "hands" of Harry and LV

Marie Lexis

April 28th, 2004, 1:07 am

I think that Harry will end up killing Voldemort. But not because he has to, or not, but for his own revenge. Voldemort killed his parents, was the cause of his godfathers death, and who knows who else he will kill who is close to Harry. He is going to break sometime and get his revenge. Even if he doesn't need to. I highly doubt that Harry will let someone else have the honor.

M0nG

May 2nd, 2004, 12:48 pm

i think in the end it will be harry and Dumbledore VS Voldemort.
because i can not see how harry could do it him self unless Voldemort
falls over and breaks his 100 yr hip (hes old i think).

Harry isnt that powerfull compared to Voldemort and Dumbledore.

i also think that Harry will get special permission to be able to use magic in the holidays so he can get privite lessons from Dumbledore to close his mind and become a better dueler.

oh and maybe harry will get a 2nd wand so he can duel Voldemort better and strap it to his leg like ppl do with guns :evil:

First post woooo

Amina

May 2nd, 2004, 1:27 pm

with respect to the thread of this conversation referring to 'gratuitous' bloodshed at the end of the series, i just wanted to point to something in the text that demonstrates that jkr does not condone gratuitous killing.

if you refer yourselves to 'padfoot returns' in gof:

crouch's principles might've been good in the beginning...he started ordering very harsh measures against voldemort's supporters. the aurors were given new powers-powers to kill rather than capture for instance...crouch fought violence with vilence and aurthorised the use of the unforgivable curses against suspects. i would say he became as ruthless and crul as many on the Dark side.

then, later on in *** same chapter:

i'm not sure he trust anyone at all, and after thethings he's seen, it's not surprising. i'll say this for mood though, he never killed if he could help it. always brought people in alive where possible he was tough but he never descended to the level of the death eaters.

so, there you go; through sirius' mouth i think she quite clearly illustrates the way she feels about 'gratuitous' killing. for further reference, see the scene in the shreiking shack in poa. harry is not, naturally, a killer. my own personal view, however, is the killing of voldemort would not be written in a way that it could be perceived to be gratuitous in any way.

i think that probably both of them will end up dead, but that's a whole other thread. to leave voldemort alive at the end of the book, however, would be a vast oversight in the triumph of good against evil. there is no way voldemort is going to repent, no matter what you may say about there being good in everyone.

i don't know how many people have read the his dark materials series, but i think that perhaps will's attitude to killing people will prove to be not disimilar to harry's. by the end of the trilogy, he has killed several people, and in all cases it was a situation in which he must kill, or be killed; yet, even though it was unavoidable, he feels terrible, sick to the core, about what he has done. at one point, he just breaks down and shouts about the horror it brings to him every time he does it.

voldemort is not going to stop short of harry; he would kill harry in a shot, and harry standing there saying, 'hey, why dont' we try to talk this through?'. the deaths will not be pretty, or gratuitous, but they will be there. fr the sake of the story, i think they have to be.

Dumblemort

July 29th, 2004, 7:29 pm

(Please be kind...i'm not an author)
I'm sure this has been beaten to death...BUT here's how i'd like to see the end of the whole series.....we pick up the conversation between Dubledore and Harry before the final showdown with Voldermort....Dumbledore begins....

Harry, our life paths have crossed for a reson. You and I both know the prophecy says you are the only one who can kill Voldermort and I believe that to be true. But I have a secret to reveal and part to play as well. Let me explain......

Harry, there is good and evil in every world, muggle and magic. You have tasted this in your past dealings with Voldermort. It is sad, but that is the balance of things. The most ancient wizards realized this and knew there would always be evil to fight. Most of the evil is easiliy handled by the forces of the Ministry of Magic. But even thousands of years ago, wizards of the time realized there would always be anomolies. Extremely powerful wizards who would go bad...in this generation it's Voldermort. I think it's safe to say he's the most powerful evil wizard ever in history. But there have been others.

In thier wisdom, they realized that each generation would have to have, and would have to choose one wizard to be the most powerful of all wizards. To do this they created and invoked the most ancient and powerful of magic that allowed them, upon thier death to transfer thier magical power and knowledge onto thier chosen "good" wizard. This can also be done before the older wizard dies...but they will die within minutes after the transfer.

This is my great secret and now it is yours. No other wizard knows that the previous "super good wizard" chose me, at about your age, to be the most powerful wizard of my generation. He was the headmaster at Hogwarts and saw in me the qualities needed, courage, wisdom, kindness and bravery. There are powerful wizards Harry but none can defeat me, as I have the power and accumulated knowledge of hundreds and even thousands of wizards over time. No other wizard has the knowledge of generations, nor do they have the knowledge of how to pass this power on. It's the greatest magical secret and only one person can know the secret. It makes the reciever the most powerful wizard of thier time. Voldermort has somehow equaled my power, I don't know how nor do I have time to find out he did it but I cannot kill him. You have to.

That is why it is my time to die Harry, I have to transfer my power and the accumulated power of all those before me to you. You will be the most powerful wizard of your time. I know it's difficult but i'm an old man and my time has been spent well. You cannot kill Voldermort with your current magical power and knowledge. I cannot kill him because there is something special within you that I do not have. But you're something special combined with the power of the great wizard of the time....might have a chance. I know you're very young and this will steal your youth. As you recieve the power you will recieve the wisdom of me and all the other ancient wizards. You will become wise beyond your years. But the transfer has to take place. After the transfer of power Harry, you will basically become all powerful. Able to do pretty much anything you want with just a thought. You must choose to abide by the rules of the world, you must continue to see the value of the rules of the magical and the muggle world. You will easily be able to destroy and manipulate...I have chosen you because you have been mistreated and understand the value of goodness, kindness and humility.

Before I transfer my power and life to you Harry, a few instructions. First, I give you all my worldly possessions. In this office I have books and items of great magical power. Some items are so dangerous that they have to be kept in the posession of the "one great good wizard" for only he can control them. Guard them well, if anyone gets hold of some of my items, the power unleashed could well destroy the world. Two, this transfer of power is the greatest secret of all magic. No one except you and I know the secret of the "one great good wizard" and I soon will die with the transfer of power. You must NEVER tell anyone. With this transfer of power you could take over the magical world and the muggle world. You must never use the full power of your magic after this transfer. Use only enough to stop the evil that you face. Third, Fawkes will be yours to command, she is bound to the power of the "one great good wizard." She is not mine, not yours she belongs the the great wizard of the time. Fourth, when you reach old age you must choose another wizard to pass the power along to. Choose well, I think I have. Finally, here is the book that contains the instructions to use the power. As you add yoru power to the "super wizard" write in it your secrets and observations for use. The book must be protected at all costs there is only one and can only be one. For in it is the spell to make the transfer possible. You will be the only one who can read the book and you cannot make copies.

I have written my final arrangements on this document. Professor McGonnogel will become the new headmaster at Hogwarts, you will be offered a teaching spot here at Hogwarts. Harry, you have a choice of course but I ask that you take it. You will be the one, you will be the protector of all that is good and you must protect and teach the new witches and wizards the ways of the good and light path. In time, you will become headmaster.

Once the transfer is complete you will know all the secrets I posess, all the spells all the magic I and my predecessors have done will be at your disposal. Use any and all to defeat Voldermort. You saw me fight Voldermort at the Ministry of Magic, you must use all tools at your disposal to defeat Voldermort. You may even have to try the forbidden curse. Do not worry about the ramifications, you must defeat him at all costs. He will be equal to your magic power...but hopefully the special something inside you will make you more powerful than him. That is our only hope.

Be happy Harry, be humble with your new power.
Lets start the transfer....

Harry goes on to fight and defeat Voldermort....but at a price....maybe his scar always hurts for the rest of his life etc...

ravenfeather

July 30th, 2004, 3:30 am

I like to think that Harry will not physically kill Voldemort but the the Voldemort persona will die.

I do think that Harry and Voldemort are the flipsides of a coin. It goes back to the passage about in GoF about the look of triumph in DD eyes and then the terrible sadness.

When Voldemort used Harry's blood to create himself a new body, I think an unbreakable link occurred and one of two things have to happen. Harry will become Voldemort in essence or Voldemort will become Harry in essence, like a twin. Hence, the prophecy saying neither can live while the other survives. One of them is going to have to break the other's whole belief system down hence the dying part. I think DD knows this and that is why there is sadness in his eyes b/c this is not going to be an easy journey for Harry and one DD is not quite sure Harry will win.

All throughout OotP, Harry feels like he is the snake which I find very significant. What if Harry becomes knowledgeable and powerful enough, to make Voldemort feel like him.

Another interesting fact, is that the whole time DD/Voldemort duel in the MoM, DD never addresses him once as Voldemort but as Tom. Prior to this DD has never to my recollection, excluding CoS when telling about his time at school, done this.

You have to realize to that second chances/rebirth is a strong theme through the series. And by the way, what animal represents rebirth and is conveniently residing in both Harry's and Voldemort's wands.

I think that the DD passage about there being things more terrible than death is also important b/c if Voldemort does loses his hatred and power thing he is still going to have to live with the things he has done. A quote that I have always liked fits nicely here.

It's not the doing that gets you, its the the consequences.

although not new, i do love this theory. it sort of hearkens to the (thoroughly excellent) changeling hypothesis and also gives the young audience an 'out'. plus, i think that such an ending would fit with the moral tone of the series in general (choices, personal redemption, etc.)
i agree that 'war is hell' and all that, but at the same time, where is the saving grace in such a plot? where is the emotional redemption? much nicer and saner and generally more "instructive" (hate that word in this context, but couldn't think of a better...) to have harry killing the "dark lord" without spilling the blood of the being within. of course, maybe tom riddle dies anyway without LV, since LV was the freaky-magic-dabbling-death-defeating power behind the entity, but i think i would really hate it if harry had blood on his hands at the end of the series.
and if he does kill and it's just for revenge, well that i would abhor. jo, don't do that to me! so, LV is a really bad dude and all that. completely irredeemable within his persona, but revenge-killing... that's so crass.

aggiefan1206

July 30th, 2004, 4:35 am

I think the last one is the best definition it sticks out as the one that could be what destorys voldemort. Too much love and passion= problemo for VOldemort

atherella

August 31st, 2004, 4:49 pm

*I know that there are threads that discuss the prophecy, and things worse than death, but since this rather a new theory, I'm hoping that it will be deemed worthy of a new thread, if not, maybe we could merge it with a thread that is appropriate.

Ok, last night, I discussed this idea briefly with some people who are night owls like I am, and we had a lot of great feedback, so I'm going to try to put it out there and see what everyone thinks.

Ok, by now, I'm sure we all know what the prophecy says:

"The one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord approaches...born to those who have thrice defied him, born as the seventh month dies...and the Dark Lord will mark him as his equal, but he will have power the Dark Lord knows not...and either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live while the other survives...the one with the power to vanquish the Dark Lord will be born as the seventh month dies..."

I want to focus on the aspect of vanquishing Voldemort, and how it may tie into what he considers a fate worse than death.

The definition of vanquish is: (From dictionary.com)
*To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate. (To bring under control; conquer. To make subservient; enslave.)
*To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition.
*To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress:
* Hence, to defeat in any contest; to get the better of; to put down; to refute.
*v : come out better in a competition, race, or conflict;

Notice, in none of the definitions does it mention that vanquish directly equals - KILL. I think that is very important, because I don't think JKR will want to make Harry a murderer. But, we also know that one must die at the hand of the other. (I'll get to how he dies a bit further down.)

So, if Harry was to vanquish Voldemort, he basically has to defeat him, get the better of, bring under control, or make him subservient.

Now, here is where it gets interesting. We all know that Voldmorts greatest ambition is to - CONQUER death - become immortal. We saw something very interesting from DD in the DoM battle in OotP. DD stated:

'We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom.' Dumbledore said calmly, continuing to walk toward Voldemort as though he did not have a fear in the world, as though nothing has happened to interrupt his stroll up the hall. 'Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit-'

I bolded the 2 really interesting parts that got me thinking. I tried to imagine what would be worse than death to Voldemort, and also, what DD meant by other ways to destroy a man. And, what WOULD satisfy DD, with regards to Voldemort. So, putting those together, I came up with the following.

In the end, the final battle between Harry & Voldemort, what if Harry is able to strip LV of his powers (somehow, haven't worked that out yet), or if he is stripped of his powers and forced to live as a muggle. (Remember when Hagrid was upset with himself and mentioned he ought to be made to go and live as a muggle, so we know that appears to be a possible punishment the MoM can employ.)

Let's face it, LV has stated his ultimate goal in life is to defeat death. If his powers are stripped, he obviously will never achieve immortality. Thus, his entire life's work will have been for naught, he'll have been thwarted by Harry yet again, and have no magic left. Now, I don't think LV will be stripped of his powers as a punishment. If it were to happen, I imagine it will happen through something Harry does (which is where I have no guesses as to how he'd do it). But, ultimately, it would be that LV would be 'vanquished' as the Dark Lord, fulfilling the prophecy, yet Harry would not have to turn into a murderer and kill him either.

Now, there is still the part of the prophecy that says 'one must die at the hand of the other'. This seems so simple if the above turns out to be correct. If Voldemort is stripped of all his magic, and if Voldemort is mortal again (which he will be), he will simply DIE someday, old age, whatever. Now, how does that mean that Harry is 'responsible' for his death - well, if Voldemort's powers are stripped because of Harry, he won't be able to do magic anymore, and he won't be able to take any steps to try to achieve immortality. It will be indirectly Harry's fault, yet Harry will not be turned into a murderer. I have to emphasize how important I think that is. I just don't think JKR wants to turn 17 year old Harry into a murderer. Remember in PoA when Harry saved Pettigrew's life, it was because he didn't think his parents would want to turn Sirius and Lupin into murderers. Same way I don't think JKR will want to turn Harry into one.

I think this would be a wonderfully fitting end to Voldemort's reign of terror - he is stripped of his powers, which would destroy his quest for immortality - his ultimate goal! I imagine to Voldemort, THAT would be a fate worse than death, and would satisfy Dumbledore. Being stripped of his power, being mortal and able to die, and being humiliated by a 17 year old boy who has defeated him over and over again. It would also bring Voldemort full circle. It seems he became evil, due to the anger he has at his MUGGLE father's abadonment. He went on a quest for immortality - all while killing and torturing, all to achieve his 'ultimate goal', yet in the end, with no powers left, he is reduced to what he despises most - a person with no magical power.

So.... any takers?

Kimmetje

August 31st, 2004, 4:57 pm

You might want to check;

The Changeling Hypothesis (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html)
A Changeling Hypothesis look at (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt23.shtml)

Buckbeak2004

August 31st, 2004, 4:58 pm

poster

August 31st, 2004, 5:20 pm

:agree: Neat theory. You've obviously done a lot of work and you do have alot of evidence, but I would still like a big flashy show down :)

Haha, I can imagine Voldemort as a muggle. Shopping down Walmart, taking the kids down the park, dancing to N-Sync... haha!!! It would be extremely amusing :rotfl:
It could still be big and flashy, I doubt taking away someones powers is as easy as a flick of the wand.
Anyway, back on topic, I really like this theory atherella (it kind of reminds me of LotR, though that's not the reason why I like it :D), how long do you think Voldemort would last as a muggle, seeing as he's so old. There's only one thing that concerns me though, "the power" the prophecy speaks of. The one Voldemort doesn't have. As much as I wanted it to be something less obvious, it really seems like it will be love JK said herself, Voldemort is the way he is because he has never loved or been loved. This seems too important to be a passing comment to me, I keep thinking there's more to it. Where do you propose the power fits in? Could it have to do with the stripping of his powers? Just a few thoughts, tell me what you think.

Nicole

August 31st, 2004, 5:31 pm

The theory seems to fit nicely with Harry having "power the Dark Lord knows not" part, too. Baby Harry only partly vanquished Voldemort because he had little or no control of that power as a toddler. Voldemort refers to his band of wizards perhaps believing "a still greater power could exist, one that could vanquish even Lord Voldemort...".[Voldy thinks this is Dumbledore for some strange reason, even though V has heard the part of the prophecy about who will have the power to vanquish him....]
Voldemort says that after the encounter with toddler Harry, "Only one power remained to me. I could possess the body of others." Harry will have to destroy Voldy's power of possession the next time, won't he?

Lash Dresden

August 31st, 2004, 5:34 pm

Great theory! And that would be poetic justice for Voldemort to have no magic at all. How faithful do you think any one of his death eaters would be then?!

grrliz

August 31st, 2004, 5:44 pm

Some interesting points, atherella!Now, there is still the part of the prophecy that says 'one must die at the hand of the other'. This seems so simple if the above turns out to be correct. If Voldemort is stripped of all his magic, and if Voldemort is mortal again (which he will be), he will simply DIE someday, old age, whatever. Now, how does that mean that Harry is 'responsible' for his death - well, if Voldemort's powers are stripped because of Harry, he won't be able to do magic anymore, and he won't be able to take any steps to try to achieve immortality. It will be indirectly Harry's fault, yet Harry will not be turned into a murderer. I have to emphasize how important I think that is. I just don't think JKR wants to turn 17 year old Harry into a murderer. Remember in PoA when Harry saved Pettigrew's life, it was because he didn't think his parents would want to turn Sirius and Lupin into murderers. Same way I don't think JKR will want to turn Harry into one.I wouldn't think JKR would want Harry to be a murderer either, but there have been instances where Harry's actions have seemed "murderous". In PS/SS he "killed" Quirrell by envoking the fact that Voldemort could not have contact with Harry bodily; in CoS, he "killed" Tom Riddle in the diary. Both instances were instances of self-defence, but Harry did prove that early on he was capable of "killing" at an early age. I put "killing" in quotations only because the memory of Riddle in the diary wasn't a real person (although wasn't Voldemort going to inhabit his body if his plan had worked, which would indicate that he was real? :huh:), and with Quirrell we don't really know what happened to him in the end. If Harry kills Voldemort in an act of self-defence, it isn't murder.

I think this would be a wonderfully fitting end to Voldemort's reign of terror - he is stripped of his powers, which would destroy his quest for immortality - his ultimate goal! I imagine to Voldemort, THAT would be a fate worse than death, and would satisfy Dumbledore. Being stripped of his power, being mortal and able to die, and being humiliated by a 17 year old boy who has defeated him over and over again. It would also bring Voldemort full circle. It seems he became evil, due to the anger he has at his MUGGLE father's abadonment. He went on a quest for immortality - all while killing and torturing, all to achieve his 'ultimate goal', yet in the end, with no powers left, he is reduced to what he despises most - a person with no magical power.I love the irony of Voldemort being reduced to that which he hates most and that which started his quest for immortality and domination in the first place: a Muggle. It would be incredibly fitting, but, I think, not entirely satisfying in the end. There's one thing I've learned from reading Lord Of The Rings: the one thing you never do is assume that a formerly powerful wizard is no longer a threat just because he's been stripped of his power. Look at Sauruman. Gandalf let him go, and he ended up terrorizing the Shire. I can see the same thing happening if Voldemort ends up living like a Muggle. He may not have his own magical power, but being the great dictator that he once was, I'm sure many of his followers (well, those who survive the war without being caught or killed) will come back to him and he would still be fully capable of using their magical abilities to his advantage. Let's assume that the Ministry would make sure that Voldemort was under constant surveillance, but someone as crafty as Voldemort could easily find a way around that.

Is there any poetic justice in letting Voldemort die of old age? :p

Nicole

August 31st, 2004, 6:03 pm

I love the irony of Voldemort being reduced to that which he hates most and that which started his quest for immortality and domination in the first place: a Muggle. It would be incredibly fitting, but, I think, not entirely satisfying in the end. There's one thing I've learned from reading Lord Of The Rings: the one thing you never do is assume that a formerly powerful wizard is no longer a threat just because he's been stripped of his power. Look at Sauruman. Gandalf let him go, and he ended up terrorizing the Shire. I can see the same thing happening if Voldemort ends up living like a Muggle. He may not have his own magical power, but being the great dictator that he once was, I'm sure many of his followers (well, those who survive the war without being caught or killed) will come back to him and he would still be fully capable of using their magical abilities to his advantage. Let's assume that the Ministry would make sure that Voldemort was under constant surveillance, but someone as crafty as Voldemort could easily find a way around that.

Is there any poetic justice in letting Voldemort die of old age? :p
I know we can't really use the movies as canon, but what if all the stuff Voldy did in his attempt to attain mortality caused him to crumble like Quirell when Voldy is stripped of his magical powers? Rats, doesn't make him spend any time as a muggle....

woop

August 31st, 2004, 6:20 pm

*
So.... any takers?

athatrella, i like the theory, BUT...

ok, i too think that there is a possibility that voldy will be vanquished by stripping him of his powers. for example, harry could cause him to become a mortal and then stab him through the heart with godric's sword. it would be a cool ending, if ... i hadn't seen it done a hundred thousand times before in movies and books. two examples are the mummy (rachel weisz says an incantation, the mummy becomes human, and rick kills him) and superman II (superman pretends to become human when he starts that process thing at his hideout and instead it's the bad guys whom become human while superman becomes safely encased. then he crushes zod's hands and kills him. even lois lane gets to kill a bad guy!).

as much as a like the idea, i really hope that jk's got a really original plan for the end of voldy. personally, i think she's already given it away because she's got the last chapter down already which, according to her, is just what happens to everyone after the last book. to me, i think harry will die, right along with voldy. that would be the best ending possible.

...
I love the irony of Voldemort being reduced to that which he hates most and that which started his quest for immortality and domination in the first place: a Muggle. It would be incredibly fitting, but, I think, not entirely satisfying in the end. There's one thing I've learned from reading Lord Of The Rings: the one thing you never do is assume that a formerly powerful wizard is no longer a threat just because he's been stripped of his power. Look at Sauruman. Gandalf let him go, and he ended up terrorizing the Shire. I can see the same thing happening if Voldemort ends up living like a Muggle. He may not have his own magical power, but being the great dictator that he once was, I'm sure many of his followers (well, those who survive the war without being caught or killed) will come back to him and he would still be fully capable of using their magical abilities to his advantage. Let's assume that the Ministry would make sure that Voldemort was under constant surveillance, but someone as crafty as Voldemort could easily find a way around that.

Is there any poetic justice in letting Voldemort die of old age? :p

i'm with you girrlz, i think letting him live is bad. he'll come up with something to get back. i'm sure some wizard somewhere has made a wizard out of a muggle or something like that. i wouldn't leave him hanging around.

Lash Dresden

August 31st, 2004, 6:28 pm

to me, i think harry will die, right along with voldy. that would be the best ending possible.

No way! Harry dying would not be good!

I don't think any of the Death Eaters would be loyal to Voldemort anymore if he had no powers, so he would be stuck living as a muggle. And then he should have to go back and live in that orphanage where he grew up -- that would certainly be a fate worse than death to him! :elaugh:

ramones

August 31st, 2004, 6:46 pm

Atherella

Just to sum up your post and make sure I understood you:
You are saying that Harry will find a way to strip LV of his power. Because of that, LV will never be able to do magic (therefore making his a Muggle) and will never be able to become immortal.
You also said that Harry will not kill LV.
Am I right?

The idea is good, but I have some problems with it.

1) The prophecy states that either must die at the hand of the other.
I believe that Harry will be triumphant and will vaniquish LV. That means that LV must die at the hand of the other: Harry.
I don't think that Harry will simply use the AK curse, that would be to simplistic, but I do believe that Harry will kill LV somehow, and the prophecy confirms that. If LV simply died of old age, he wouldn't die at the hand of his enemy, even though that enemy did take his power away.

2) DD said (I don't have the exact quote): 'Failure to understand that there are things worse than death has always been your greatest weakness'.
You say that destroying LV's quest for immortality would a fate worse than death. That might be true for LV. His worse fear is death and not letting him become immortal and condemning him to die anyway is worse.

LV doesn't think there is anything worse than death, but DD does. DD does not fear death.
Would DD think think that not becoming immortal is worse than death? I don't think so. So whatever DD is talking about is not losing his power and becoming a Muggle.

What I am trying to day is that, striping LV of his powers would be LV fear, not DD's. And DD is the one that says there are things worse than death.
I'm sorry if I'm not being to clear.

OnlyAngels

August 31st, 2004, 6:53 pm

I was wondering, you know of people who have experienced "clinical death" and have been resuscitated...could that apply to this situation? If LV expirienced this, it would technically fulfill the prophecy, and Harry wouldn't have the stigma of being a murderer(and if LV was defeated and lost his powers also, wouldn't that be good too?).

atherella

August 31st, 2004, 6:54 pm

I'm really enjoying the feedback. I obviously don't have a totally formulated theory just yet, because I have no idea how it would be possible to strip someone of their powers. I also have never *gasp* read the LotR series, so I have no ideas of any parallels there.

If in fact LV is stripped of his powers and allowed to 'live' - being basically reduced to a muggle, I don't imagine he'd be just set 'free', which would still leave him as a threat. He could end up in St. Mungos with some sort of 'brain' injury, or he could even be sent to a muggle prison, but that seems too corny for JKR. I'm sure she'd be able to put some fabulous spin on it. Because, whatever the ultimate fate of Harry, I don't think JKR will allow any doubt that Voldemort is VANQUISHED for good. That would leave too many people begging for more books.

Like I said, I don't know how it would all work out, that's where I was hoping some of the great minds here would come into play. I just think that as the ultimate end, it would be very fitting, it would tie in the 'fate worse than death' that we have heard mentioned numerous times, and would enable Harry to go through life without 'techinically' being a murderer. Although, like grrliz points out:

I wouldn't think JKR would want Harry to be a murderer either, but there have been instances where Harry's actions have seemed "murderous". In PS/SS he "killed" Quirrell by envoking the fact that Voldemort could not have contact with Harry bodily; in CoS, he "killed" Tom Riddle in the diary. Both instances were instances of self-defence, but Harry did prove that early on he was capable of "killing" at an early age. I put "killing" in quotations only because the memory of Riddle in the diary wasn't a real person (although wasn't Voldemort going to inhabit his body if his plan had worked, which would indicate that he was real? ), and with Quirrell we don't really know what happened to him in the end. If Harry kills Voldemort in an act of self-defence, it isn't murder.

Harry has shown the ability to do something 'murderous'. (I, too, put murderous in quotes, because the things Harry has done aren't quite the same as outright killing someone.)

I don't think any of the Death Eaters would be loyal to Voldemort anymore if he had no powers, so he would be stuck living as a muggle. And then he should have to go back and live in that orphanage where he grew up -- that would certainly be a fate worse than death to him!

I agree with the D.E.'s not standing by Voldemort's side, as they are all very into being against muggles. I don't think that he'd have any control over them at all. Remember, after what happened with baby Harry, most of his followers pretended to have been forced to do his work, pretending to be under the Imperius Curse, etc. They basically denounced him, and none were faithful enough to try to help him or find him - except that rat and the Lestranges. But, with an LV that has no hope of ever regaining powers, I don't think they'd even stick around. (Although, I hope Bella and PP both bite the bucket, so to speak). Even at the Quidditch World Cup, when the D.E.'s saw the dark mark, none of them rallied together, rather, they were fearful and ran from it.

I just LOVE the sweet, sweet irony of this all if it were to come into play like this (or similarly). And, I always enjoy the idea of things coming full circle, which I feel this idea would complete.

*Side note - even though I am ultimately thinking that JKR will not have Harry MURDER LV, that does not mean that I dont' think there will be huge battles, dueling, etc. I think we'll see many, many battles. Basically all my idea is tying into is the final conclusion where LV will be vanquished for good.

Edit - I didn't see ramones post when typing up this reply so I'll edit in my responses here.

Just to sum up your post and make sure I understood you:
You are saying that Harry will find a way to strip LV of his power. Because of that, LV will never be able to do magic (therefore making his a Muggle) and will never be able to become immortal.
You also said that Harry will not kill LV.
Am I right?

Right - somehow, Harry will strip LV of his power for good. No chance of it returning - EVER! (Unfortunately, I don't have it worked out how that will work. :shrug:) Since he would be stripped of his power and have no magic left within him, he'll be reduced to the status of a muggle. As a muggle, he will be mortal. (Although, I do believe him to be mortal now as well)

The next part is tricky - I'm saying Harry won't directly kill LV, although he will still fulfill the prophecy because he will be responsible for his death. I'll continue that thought with the next part of your post.

1) The prophecy states that either must die at the hand of the other.
I believe that Harry will be triumphant and will vaniquish LV. That means that LV must die at the hand of the other: Harry.
I don't think that Harry will simply use the AK curse, that would be to simplistic, but I do believe that Harry will kill LV somehow, and the prophecy confirms that. If LV simply died of old age, he wouldn't die at the hand of his enemy, even though that enemy did take his power away.

Now, like I said, I don't think that Harry will murder him outright, but if Harry finds a way to strip him of his power, ENSURING that he will never be able to reach his goal of immortality, than Harry will still be indirectly RESPONSIBLE for his death, because he would have been the one to strip him of his magic, ensuring he never gains immortality, and thus, he must die. So, at least in my mind, that would still fulfill the prophecy. Harry would be the one was responsible for his death -- at his hand -- by stripping him of magic, and preventing him from gaining immortality. Do you understand what I mean? I don't know if I am using the right words to describe what I am trying to get across. It makes sense in my mind, but I don't know if I am doing my thoughts justice trying to put them into words.

2) DD said (I don't have the exact quote): 'Failure to understand that there are things worse than death has always been your greatest weakness'.
You say that destroying LV's quest for immortality would a fate worse than death. That might be true for LV. His worse fear is death and not letting him become immortal and condemning him to die anyway is worse.

LV doesn't think there is anything worse than death, but DD does. DD does not fear death.
Would DD think think that not becoming immortal

As for what DD has said, I've always been of the mind that DD is referring to LV's fears. When he is constantly telling LV that there are things worse than death, he could mean in relation to LV - reminding him that things can be done to him (LV) that would be worse than his death, although, I do see what you are getting at. I'm just trying to play with this thought a bit. I'll have to think about this one.

mel

August 31st, 2004, 6:59 pm

atherella, your theory is very interesting and a similar one was proposed in The North Tower Series (specifically "The End of Days" One (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt06.shtml) and Two (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt07.shtml) - I highly recommend them). I think both of you are onto something - that the prophecy is not foretelling the physical deaths of either Harry or Voldemort. In the NT articles, the author points out that the figures referred to in the prophecy are "The One" and "the Dark Lord." These could represent the personas (Love and Evil, respectively) that Harry and Tom Riddle embody, not their actual persons. Maline, the author, suggests that in the end, Harry will vanquish the evil in Tom Riddle, but not necessarily kill him (otherwise, Voldemort will destroy the Love that resides in Harry, essentially turning him into Son of Voldemort :evil:). However, neither of them will necessarily die, in the strictest sense of the word.

Another theory regarding the end of the series and the Harry-Voldemort connection is the Changeling Hypothesis (which Kimmetje links to in her post). This theory is pretty complicated but quite plausible, and right up JKR's alley. It's hard to explain, but the gist of the CH is that when Voldy AKed Harry in Godric's Hollow and the spell bounced back at him, it split LV's soul in two - the consciousness and memories remaining with Vapormort, and the temperment/emotions going to Harry. Neither is aware of this, but both are aware of the connection. This sounds outrageous because I'm not giving any of the evidence, but follow the links and you just might be convinced (Original Hypothesis (http://www.redhen-publications.com/Changeling.html) and Maline's (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt23.shtml) Articles (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/thenorthtower/nt24.shtml)). I'm not sure which one I'm leaning towards, but most likely the other one, because it's broader than the Changeling Hypothesis, and doesn't hurt my head to think about it. :p

as much as a like the idea, i really hope that jk's got a really original plan for the end of voldy.Oh, I'm quite sure she does. :evil:

personally, i think she's already given it away because she's got the last chapter down already which, according to her, is just what happens to everyone after the last book.How does this give anything away? It means she will be tying up loose ends regarding the (surviving) characters' lives - but we have no idea what those loose ends will be.

to me, i think harry will die, right along with voldy. that would be the best ending possible.Not in my opinion. :sad: Like I said above, I don't think either of them have to physically die in order to fullfill the prophecy. Read "The End of Days" to see what I mean. :)

grrliz

August 31st, 2004, 6:59 pm

I don't think any of the Death Eaters would be loyal to Voldemort anymore if he had no powers, so he would be stuck living as a muggle. And then he should have to go back and live in that orphanage where he grew up -- that would certainly be a fate worse than death to him! :elaugh:Initially I thought that as well -- the Death Eaters certainly ignored him until he called them back at the end of GoF. But there would be a difference between Voldemort* stripped of his powers and forced to live as a Muggle and the Voldemort of the first three books. None of the Death Eaters knew where Voldemort was in the early books; no one was sure if he was dead or just lying low (or so Hagrid says). There was confusion, there was uncertainty. They didn't try to contact him because they didn't know how / where they could do so. It was only by chance that Quirrell happened upon him in Albania.

If Voldemort were stripped of his powers, the Death Eaters would still know that he were alive and well, just unmagical. While I'm sure that the Ministry wouldn't make where Voldemort was living public knowledge, the Death Eaters would have their way of finding out. The question is, would the Death Eaters bother to seek out Voldemort knowing he lost all his power? Because that's ultimately what they too wanted by siding with him: power. Voldemort himself may not have the magical power to be powerful, but I would argue he would still be a powerful influence in the wizarding world and on his former (or current) followers. Their own magical ability could help bring Voldemort back to some level of power again.

Even when everyone thought he was gone the first time round, just saying his real name was enough to make most people shudder. That's a pretty powerful ability. Even knowing he was forced to live as a Muggle, most people would still probably hiss at you if you mentioned the name "Voldemort" in conversation. Fear of a name increases fear of the thing itself. Dumbledore said one of Voldemort's talents was spreading discord, and that's also something he can definitely still do as a Muggle; it takes no magical power to spread discord.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that the types of things that the Death Eaters initially followed Voldemort for are not things that are unique and unpracticeable without magic. Magic was simply a means to an end for Voldemort, and with the help of his surviving Death Eaters and their magic, he could still wreak a lot of havoc.

::edit:: Regarding the argument that the Death Eaters wouldn't want anything to do with Voldemort should he become a Muggle because they all hate Muggles: there is a difference, though, in being a born Muggle (the type of Muggles they hate) and being stripped of your powers and being forced to live as a Muggle. The DEs might not see Voldemort's situation as his fault, which might give them added reason to help him out: to vindicate his situation. That being said, they've also chosen to conveniently ignore that he's a half-blood (although maybe it just hasn't sunk in yet, they haven't had that much time to think about it), so it isn't a stretch that they might ignore his Muggleness because they won't see it as being his fault.

*If he turned back into a Muggle, do you think he'd insist on still being called Lord Voldemort, or would he revert back to Tom Riddle?

mel

August 31st, 2004, 7:11 pm

2) DD said (I don't have the exact quote): 'Failure to understand that there are things worse than death has always been your greatest weakness'.
You say that destroying LV's quest for immortality would a fate worse than death. That might be true for LV. His worse fear is death and not letting him become immortal and condemning him to die anyway is worse.

LV doesn't think there is anything worse than death, but DD does. DD does not fear death.
Would DD think think that not becoming immortal is worse than death? I don't think so. So whatever DD is talking about is not losing his power and becoming a Muggle.

What I am trying to day is that, striping LV of his powers would be LV fear, not DD's. And DD is the one that says there are things worse than death.
I'm sorry if I'm not being to clear.No, I understand. :) What DD said about death was stated in a universal context: "there are things worse than death" not specific to LV. I agree. I don't think mortality will be his punishment if LV lives because, really, mortality is death, and this is worse than death.

Re: The DEs loyalty
I think the vast majority of the DEs are motivated by fear and/or lust for power. Remember, we don't know for sure who was and wasn't being manipulated by Imperio, Hagrid et al just assume the former DEs are lying. Without anyone to impose fear or bring power, the DEs would surely leave.

atherella

August 31st, 2004, 7:13 pm

*If he turned back into a Muggle, do you think he'd insist on still being called Lord Voldemort, or would he revert back to Tom Riddle?

Ahhhh, I've changed my mind, the ULTIMATE irony would be if all the above (my original post) happened, Voldemort decides DD was right -- there are things worse than death (ie - having no powers) and decides to kill himself. :p

grrliz

August 31st, 2004, 7:17 pm

Aw, Voldy suicide! That would be so sad. :)

::edit:: Voldicide: would that be Voldemort killing himself, or someone else killing Voldemort? :huh:

Lord Spade

August 31st, 2004, 7:21 pm

-I don't think that turning Voldemort into a muggle and stripping him of his magical power would do any good, like Mel said earlier, Magic is just a means to an end for him. I don't think that he would kill himself if he was a made mortal, think he would be afraid of turning back into his banished lifeless state again. In the books, they talk of a hidden and secret power that not many people (including Voldemort) do not understand. They also spoke of the power of Love and how Voldemort detested it. I think that these two powers are linked somehow and it is these two powers that Harry will use to destroy the Dark Lord once and for all.

ramones

August 31st, 2004, 7:25 pm

This is becoming an interesting thread. I've always been fascinated by what 'things worse than death' could mean. I can't remember the title, but that was probably my favorite chapter in OotP.
I can't wait to see the movie. DD vs LV. Wow! :cool:

Regarding the DE, they are definitely motivated by desire for power. At the same time, most of them are cowards.
There were rumors that LV was in Albania, but they didn't bother to look for him. Those that managed to stay out of Azkaban were leading normal lives, nobody suspected them. They were comfortable and obviously didn't care to have LV back.

poster

August 31st, 2004, 7:30 pm

I think something a little more ironic (and worse than death) would be Harry stripping Voldemort of his powers, but Voldemort being immortal. The immortality he's worked for finally works out, only for him not to be able to do anything. Maybe he could even be captive somewhere, but I kind of like the idea of him walking the earth forever powerless.

I'm really enjoying the feedback. I obviously don't have a totally formulated theory just yet, because I have no idea how it would be possible to strip someone of their powers. I also have never *gasp* read the LotR series, so I have no ideas of any parallels there.

When I said it reminded me of LotR, I was referring to a part in the second book where one wizard (Gandalf) takes the evil wizard Saruman's place as the highest in "the order" and strips him of his powers. Incidently, LotR is a very good read, I highly recommend it, even if you've just seen the movies, they left things out and there's some things you just can't put on film.

mel

August 31st, 2004, 7:34 pm

winter snow

August 31st, 2004, 7:45 pm

Okay, you already know my thoughts on this as I shared them with you last night. =)

I had a thought while reading this post. Voldermort is around 69 or 70 years old. He was born in 1927. Considering all the **** he has done to himself to obtain immortality, he can't be in great health should he be returned to muggle status. Who's to say he would live as long as Dumbledore? I say he wouldn't. First of all, He would become extremely bitter. We all know that much negative energy is detrimental to our bodies. I propose that Voldermort would become so angry about losing his powers that he would roar and carry on and possible it would affect his heart. I'm not sure how this could be done. But, maybe something along these lines.

As for Voldermort's Death Eaters, they are only loyal to him out of fear. Once Voldermort lost his powers, his followers would be gone. I really don't picture them rallying around him if he was turned into a muggle. He wouldn't be able to threaten them anymore. Think about it one of the most powerful wizards reduced to to a mere muggle. I think his followers would be out of there as fast as they could run.

As for the LotR storyline, I don't see Jo copying that at all. She's already said she's not going for any "Star Wars" plotlines, and I doubt if she would go with LotR plotlines. I just don't see it. That was Tolkien's story, I doubt it's Jo's. She doesn't strike me as being the kind of writer who would borrow that much of a storyline. But, that's just mho. :)

I also believe the ending could be packed with plenty of action if it ended up where Voldermort loses his wizard powers. I'd loved to hear Voldermort scream with impotent rage when he realizes he's powerless. That would be poetic justice.

grrliz

August 31st, 2004, 7:57 pm

Well, I'm just throwing this out there, but what did Dumbledore say about the locked room? That it contained a power more beautiful and more terrible than anything else, and it's the power that Harry has that LV knows not? I think most of us agree that that power is Love, right? Well, if it's the most terrible power, it's more terrible than death, right? And since Voldy has never experienced Love, he would not know about it being "worse than death." From past experiences, I can see how the painful side of Love could be worse than death...I joked in another thread the other day that perhaps Harry could love Voldemort to death, as that would be one of his worst fears coming true. Now that he's able to touch him, can't you see Harry trying to bear hug Voldemort to death? :)

As for the LotR storyline, I don't see Jo copying that at all. She's already said she's not going for any "Star Wars" plotlines, and I doubt if she would go with LotR plotlines. I just don't see it. That was Tolkien's story, I doubt it's Jo's. She doesn't strike me as being the kind of writer who would borrow that much of a storyline. But, that's just mho. :)No one said she was copying, we were just drawing parallels between a couple of minor ideas and themes.

winter snow

August 31st, 2004, 8:23 pm

I joked in another thread the other day that perhaps Harry could love Voldemort to death, as that would be one of his worst fears coming true. Now that he's able to touch him, can't you see Harry trying to bear hug Voldemort to death? :)

No one said she was copying, we were just drawing parallels between a couple of minor ideas and themes.

I stand corrected! :)

I just think if Jo were to end the story in this fashion, that Voldermort would be without his powers permanently. I agree with the thought that Jo wouldn't want to make Harry a murderer. This is a children's book after all. I rather think she would point children towards another solution. I think she's got something pretty awesome thought up.

slavetopadfoot

August 31st, 2004, 8:48 pm

haha LOVE voldy to death... that would be *ahem* interesting... but anyways, i really want harry et al to vanquish voldy by stripping him of his powers somehow and sending him to live as a muggle! maybe with the dursleys... muahahaha...

ndshawn4

August 31st, 2004, 9:27 pm

ok, so im not exactly sure what they could do to voldemort to destroy him in a way worse than death. however, i think the whole "love" issue is a bit off. i agree with most of the arguments about it (not about to make this thread about that), but i just dont know if thats what dumbledore exactly means in OotP. I think that it is Harry's ability to feel, to experience emotion that is his greatest strength. AKA, his ability to love, and feel sad, etc... maybe thats all connected to love... but thats what causes Voldemort to be unable to possess Harry. So rather then "loving him to death," or turning him into a muggle somehow, isnt it possible that Harry has to somehow make Voldemort feel great pain about something? Im just wary to say that its necessarily love, because Dumbledores says "it was your heart that saved you" not your love of sirius (not that he knew that, but whatever)... now, i dont know how someone could kill someone, with the ability to care, but i definetly agree that (as Harry/JKR shows in the 5th book, that the emotions that Harry feels make him wish for death, or to be anyone else... so its quite obvious at least some things that DD/JKR could think are worse than death... i dont know, those are just my random thoughts...

Lord Spade

September 1st, 2004, 1:49 am

-It may not be the "love" we think of. To destory him by means of something he cannot comprehend or ever experience may be the key to defeat him. In other words, he will be defeated by the very power he has waged war against. I'm speulating that Harry will defeat the Dark Lord with mercy, possibly even the ability to spare your worst enemy's life. This may drive a stake right through what soul he still posseses, and destroy him. I couldn't think of a harder thing to do than to spare the life of someone who has ruined your life, taken the lives of those you love and charish, who's soul existence was to take freedom of living away from those that have it, because he can't enjoy the pleasures of life we can.

-This is probally what Dumbledore was speaking of. Harry is the only one that can show Voldemort mercy, with that kind of power.

ndshawn4

September 1st, 2004, 4:49 am

but wouldnt voldemort look at mercy as a weakness... i mean not just in theory, but unless he was already defeated in some way. maybe that could be like the finishing move... but thats an excellent point, since we have already seen harry show mercy towards pettigrew... hmmm, interesting. but then again, Harry may be the single person who has lost the most to voldemort (of course thats just speculation, since plenty of people have lost a lot), but i guess that relates more to the neither can truly live while the other survives... a lot to ponder

mel

September 1st, 2004, 2:37 pm

I'm speulating that Harry will defeat the Dark Lord with mercy, possibly even the ability to spare your worst enemy's life.Oh very good! :agree: I think you may have hit the nail on the head! After all, mercy for those who have done wrong comes from a love for all humans, no matter who they are, and that's what Harry has. I think his mercy for Pettigrew may have been foreshadowing this.

It would also draw strong parallels between Harry and Jesus. I don't know if that's something JKR would want to do, to take a big step into that realm, Matrix Revolutions-style. It might even make Harry too unrealistic. I don't know... it's interesting to think about. :huh:

Another thing, I wonder how Harry would feel after sparing LV's life, after all the pain he has caused him. Would it be an emotional release for him, allowing him to let go of the past and move on with a clean soul? Or would it always haunt him, the way (I think) Pettigrew does? Would he always wonder what would have happened if...? Will he need the complete closure of taken LV's life?

ramones

September 1st, 2004, 4:35 pm

Lord Spade

September 2nd, 2004, 5:06 am

mel

September 2nd, 2004, 5:47 am

Well, I think DD is most key as Harry's mentor. His role is as Harry's surrogate father, a guide and protector. He has made mistakes, but I think Harry would have been much worse off without him. I think in the final showdown, DD will not be there - not necessarily because he is dead, perhaps incapacitated, or just out of the way because he knows there is nothing more he can do.

But this is kind of OT, isn't it? :shrug:

atherella

September 2nd, 2004, 5:50 am

-Right...back on topic, I beleive that Dumbledore will die or be killed at the hands of Lord Voldemort, making it possible in someway or the other for Harry's chance to defeat the Dark Lord, and end the 2nd and final war. Does anyone have any idea's or details as to how Dumbledore will play a key role of defeating the Dark Lord?

If DD dies, I think he will leave Fawkes to Harry (I, and others, have made lots of posts about that in other threads). Fawkes would be very useful to Harry, as his song lightens Harry's mood and well, Fawkes is just very clever obviously. Not sure how it will help Harry in the defeating of LV, but I'm sure JKR could put a nice twist on it. I dont' know how to tie that in with this particular thread, though.

Lord Spade

September 2nd, 2004, 5:55 am

-No, I'm quite sure Dumbledore will die by the time Harry defeats the Dark Lord, or at least at the end of the conflict. Dumbledore's purpose was to fight this war, and see it to its end. I think he will do this while ending it with his life and beginning his next adventure.

-Yea, I also agree that Fawkes will also be a key character and aid to Harry in the final struggle and conflict. It would make sense that Dumbledore (when his life ends) gives possesion of the service of Fawkes to Harry.

Tymm

September 2nd, 2004, 7:49 am

http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=32112

rotsiepots

September 2nd, 2004, 1:17 pm

I think this thread ties in with an existing topic called:
Harry does not have to kill Voldemort aka "Vanquishing" Voldemort (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=15410).

I'm going to merge these two together. Please conduct a search etc etc.

hmm

September 3rd, 2004, 3:04 pm

I was thinking while I was Reding apage somewhere, If Harry dies then why would noone be able to defeat Voldermort. Someone else could probably kill him. Then I thought about people talking about a final battle. Then a thought wnt into my mind. Maybe after the final battle Voldermort will be immortal.

LadyElvenMagic

September 3rd, 2004, 3:10 pm

did you read the fifth book? because only harry can defeat voldemort, but it also said that wil die trying to defeat the other.

HarryPotter190

September 3rd, 2004, 3:12 pm

Very interesting theory here... I think that if Harry dies, because of the prophacy that was made, no one else will be able to defeat Voldemort. The prophacy that was smashed was only a copy of it. This prophacy tells us that Harry is the only one who can "vanquish" the Dark Lord. What you said about the becomeing immortal, umm, he kind of is already... but if Voldemort defeats Harry no one else will ever be able to rid him.

LadyElvenMagic

September 3rd, 2004, 3:17 pm

you have a point

filius

September 3rd, 2004, 3:20 pm

Harry can be killed by a bludger for instance and die. But Voldemort can only be killed by Harry. Thats what I think. I'm sure there's already a thread on this but i'm having trouble finding it.

Sherlock Holmes

September 3rd, 2004, 3:21 pm

This is more-or-less discussed in "Harry does not have to kill Voldemort", so I will merge these two.

Please do a search before starting new threads, and :welcome: to CoS, Hmm!

ravenfeather

September 3rd, 2004, 4:58 pm

Harry can be killed by a bludger for instance and die. But Voldemort can only be killed by Harry. Thats what I think. I'm sure there's already a thread on this but i'm having trouble finding it.

i can't believe i've never thought about this before, but you make an interesting point. is it true that harry could be killed by an 'inanimate' object? i wonder. if 'either must die at the hand of the other", it stands to reason that nothing and no one could kill harry except voldemort OR after voldemort is dead. i wonder...

Snidget66

September 3rd, 2004, 5:02 pm

Don't vanquish and kill mean the same thing?

atherella

September 3rd, 2004, 5:10 pm

Don't vanquish and kill mean the same thing?

From dictionary.com
VANQUISH
van·quish ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vngkwsh, vn-)
tr.v. van·quished, van·quish·ing, van·quish·es

*To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate.

*To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition.

*To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress: “She had had to wrench herself forcibly away from Katharine, and every step vanquished her desire” (Virginia Woolf). See Synonyms at defeat.

*Hence, to defeat in any contest; to get the better of; to put down; to refute.

*v : come out better in a competition, race, or conflict; "Agassi beat Becker in the tennis championship"; "We beat the competition"; "Harvard defeated Yale in the last football game"

There is no mention of 'killing' in the definition of 'vanquish'. Some synonyns of vanquish are defeat, conquer, overcome, beat, thwart, subdue

KILL
*To put to death.

*To deprive of life: The Black Death was a disease that killed millions.

*To put an end to; extinguish: The rain killed our plans for a picnic.

*To destroy a vitally essential quality in: Too much garlic killed the taste of the meat.

*To cause to cease operating; turn off: killed the motor.

*To cause death or extinction; be fatal.

*To commit murder.

IMHO, there's a HUGE difference between vanquishing someone and killing them. You can defeat someone without killing him.

ravenfeather

September 3rd, 2004, 5:11 pm

Don't vanquish and kill mean the same thing?

vanquish can mean 'kill', but it can also mean 'to overcome;to defeat'. you can defeat someone without killing them, particularly someone in a position of power. take their power away, and they're vanquished, even if they're still alive.

Snidget66

September 3rd, 2004, 5:13 pm

Oh, well I guess Harry vanquishing LV is a possibility.

atherella

September 3rd, 2004, 5:18 pm

Oh, well I guess Harry vanquishing LV is a possibility.

Try this thought out, I posted it a bit more in detail up above, but here's a short version.

Harry 'defeats' LV in the final battle, and LV is stripped of his power. This means that LV will NEVER become immortal, thus, failing to reach his ultimate life goal - to become immortal. When LV's powers are stripped, he is vanquished as the Dark Lord - he has been defeated, thwarted (a word LV uses to describe Harry's defeat of him on past occassions) by Harry. Since ultimately if Harry were to strip LV of his powers - he would be responsible for ensuring that LV would never reach immortality. Anyone who is not immortal is mortal and will die, therefore, even if LV were to die of say, natural causes, his death would still be at 'the hand of Harry' because Harry was the one to ensure he could die. That would fulfill the prophecy, at least, IMHO.

Snidget66

September 3rd, 2004, 5:34 pm

But hasn't Harry stopped Voldemort from becoming immortal in the PS/SS? So hasn't his plan already been thwarted. Plus there are many ways of becoming immortal. And Harry has to stop Voldemort doing any of them. No, I thinkHarry will kill LV.

marauderlupin

September 3rd, 2004, 5:51 pm

It may be some sort of 'soul force' show down. Harry wouldn't physically kill LV, he would just vanquish the evil within and leave a very weakened and confused Tom Riddle. Yes, I know. I's sounds so lame, but JKR is a master and she can make it so great and dramatic. I'm sure.

But hasn't Harry stopped Voldemort from becoming immortal in the PS/SS?

Dumbledore said LV took steps to become immortal. So, even if he's wasn't fully immortal, he was part immortal (whatever that means) I personally think that's why the AK curse didn't kill him when it rebounded. Of course, everything changed when he took Harry's blood. I think LV is now a mortal.

Tane

September 3rd, 2004, 6:46 pm

The fact that the prophecy also states that one can not live while the other survives, suggests too that one will die to allow the other to live. I have stated in the past that vanquishing the dark lord does not mean death but I'm really not sure due to what I stated in the first line within this post.

Snidget66

September 3rd, 2004, 7:17 pm

marauderlupin

September 3rd, 2004, 8:35 pm

Lowrie

September 3rd, 2004, 9:11 pm

Polychrome

September 9th, 2004, 7:11 pm

I think I actually have a pretty good idea on Voldy's defeat. My ideas borrow HEAVILY from the Ouroboros theory, which you can find a big thread about on this forum. Though, I've revised my ideas on this several times. I figure somebody out there will try to mesh this with that Changeling idea somehow.

First, we think of the blood protection. Does it have something to do with Dumbledore's look of triumph? I think it does. Voldemort stole blood from Harry to make himself immune to Harry, BUT we learn from Dumbledore in Order of the Phoenix that around his own blood, Harry's protection is much stronger. For example, he supposedly cannot be touched around Aunt Petunia.

Harry has not been hit with any spells that would cause him physical harm since Voldemort stole his blood. True, he's hit by the cruciatus several times, but the worst this seems to be able to do, other than cause horrendous pain during the casting, is cause mental illness. Frank and Alice Longbottom for example, insane or not, appear to be mostly intact physically.

In Order of the Phoenix, Dumbledore seems to be around mostly to prevent Harry being hit by any spells, rather than to actually fight Voldemort. Very odd, considering Harry is the ONLY one in that story who doesn't end up injured at the end.

Back to Voldemort stealing Harry's blood protection. Voldy now has Harry's blood (and therefore his mother's blood) flowing through him. This, I believe has two effects. One, it has made him mortal. (As he admits upon his ressurection.) Two, I think what Voldy has inadvertantly done is made both him, AND Harry, invincible, in each others' presence. (This could be what the Priori Incantatem scene was foreshadowing.) Voldemort has not only marked Harry as his equal with the scar, but with Harry's own blood. Obviously, if one must kill the other, this presents a HUGE problem.

We turn to the Ouroboros Theory. (I'm too lazy to search for the thread, but it's pretty easy to find.) It states that we should pay attention to the following:

1. Voldemort is Slytherin's last remaining *ANCESTOR*. (JKR said this was deliberate.)

2. "Voldemort is my Past, Present, and Future."

3. We learn in Goblet of Fire, by Voldemort's own admission, that he is now mortal. (Immortality might be prevented by the very ritual Voldy used to bring his ressurection, as each step used pieces from the human body, therefore, putting a little human into him. Hagrid said that previously, there wasn't enough human left in Voldy to die. Will Voldy's own rebirth ritual be his undoing?)

4. We learn in Prisoner of Azkaban that time travel is possible. We see people travel to the past, but we've never been given any real indication that somebody could travel to the future.

5. You CANNOT change time. While you do have free will while travelling to the past, your consequences are learned early, in the present.

So how could Harry, in effect, kill Voldy, without actually "killing" him?

Well, if Voldemort is Slytherin's ancestor, then we start to wonder, HOW?

The idea is that Harry will somehow dump Voldemort into the past, specifically, into medieval times. There, he is not around Harry's blood, and therefore is not only mortal, but loses his invincibility. The ironic twist to the whole deal is that Harry has, inadvertantly, been responsible for creating Voldemort and Slytherin. Common gag in the superhero genre. The good news is that Voldemort, in the past and mortal, will eventually die. So in the present, he has "died" at Harry's hand.

This can also be tied to JKR's two "questions we should ask". Why didn't Dumbledore attempt to kill Voldemort? Aside from the obvious answer that he knows the prophecy, Dumbledore, I have the feeling, already knows that this whole scenario is one huge time paradox. I think Prisoner of Azkaban happened for a reason, and Dumbledore sent Harry and Hermione back in time not to save Sirius, but to TEACH them how time travel works. He wants Harry to know that Time cannot be changed. Dumbledore knows that no matter what he does, he cannot kill Voldemort. BUT, he also may know that the blood protection, with Harry and Voldemort so close to each other, will tip Voldemort off about the possible invincibility. The other question, what did Voldemort do to make himself mortal I think will be tied to the blood protection yet again. Will Voldemort be able to do what he did again? Or is it a one time deal? It might be linked to the whole changeling idea. Or it might be something completely different. Ouroboros can't explain it, but I think the answer to the question will turn out to be very important.

There's some other weird quirks it could explain. The entrance to the chamber of secrets is in a girl's bathroom, which is supplied with modern sinks and toilets. The entrance is marked by, of all things, a faucet. These are relatively recent inventions, when you're considering they have been there since Medieval times. While the Romans had a sort-of-toilet, it was more like a hole that led directly to the sewer. The toilet as we know it was invented in 1832 by a dude named Thomas *******. (I guess we know where that word comes from.) Obviously, Voldemort would probably enjoy the modern conveniences more than just going in a chamberpot or on the ground. He may have a toilet of his own, the idea of which would be passed on to Slytherin eventually, who would therefore build the bathrooms in Hogwarts, as well as....you guessed it. The Chamber of Secrets. Well, I guess it's a Chamber of Secrets in more ways than one! LOL

I don't know if this is all the most accurate guess of the end. Sure, it could turn out to be something completely different. But judging from JKR's rather goofy sense of humor, it almost seems perfect. :)

HedwigOwl

September 12th, 2004, 4:56 am

Try this thought out, I posted it a bit more in detail up above, but here's a short version.

Harry 'defeats' LV in the final battle, and LV is stripped of his power. This means that LV will NEVER become immortal, thus, failing to reach his ultimate life goal - to become immortal. When LV's powers are stripped, he is vanquished as the Dark Lord - he has been defeated, thwarted (a word LV uses to describe Harry's defeat of him on past occassions) by Harry. Since ultimately if Harry were to strip LV of his powers - he would be responsible for ensuring that LV would never reach immortality. Anyone who is not immortal is mortal and will die, therefore, even if LV were to die of say, natural causes, his death would still be at 'the hand of Harry' because Harry was the one to ensure he could die. That would fulfill the prophecy, at least, IMHO.

Atherella -- great post. The "Dark Lord" may be a separate essence from LV aka Tom Riddle. Remember when Harry asked Snape, during occlumency, why he & DE's all referred to LV as the "Dark Lord"....Snape was about to answer when they were interrupted. Always left me wondering if that's an important piece of information.

phoenix8

September 12th, 2004, 5:47 am

Even if LV is "vanquished", I doubt that he would turn back into tom riddle because Tom Riddle wasn't innocent either. He got Hagrid expelled and killed his father. I think taht he will be killed. After all the things that LV has done I for 1 think he deserves what's comin' to him!

Great post!I think there is a possibility that lord voldemort dies and tom riddle survives.It is possible that at the end all the evil (LV) from Tom Riddle is gone.Harry will be successful in vanquishing LV(or evil) and yet his human part still remains alive(Tom Riddle)and turns a new leaf.Yeah but this phrase is contradictory to my statement " Lord Voldemort was my past, present and future."

Now if Tom Riddle wants to live with his past then his future is surely doomed.He has to die.Yeah but he deserves it.People deserve what they choose.

One thing is certain from this whole thread,"Death is certain" and whether only Voldemort dies or both Voldermort and Riddle die or both Harry and LV die.....

Kobila

September 12th, 2004, 5:58 am

"the one withthe power to vanquish the dark lord approaches..born to those who have thrice dedied him. born as the seventh month dies...and the dark lord will mar him as his equal, but he will jave power the dark lord knows not..and either must die at the hanf of the other for neither can live while the other survives..the one with the power to vanquish the dark lord will be born as the senenth month dies..."

thats what dumbleodre showed harry from his *****ve i wonder if some of it dumbledore forgot

oh my goodness
:blush:

i need a spell check

ravenfeather

September 12th, 2004, 6:24 am

thats what dumbleodre showed harry from his PENSIEve i wonder if some of it dumbledore forgot

dumbledore tells us that the person who heard the prophecy has the ability to recall it perfectly. i dont think he forgot any of it. i think the ...'s are just dramatic pauses.

Sheep

September 17th, 2004, 5:47 pm

dumbledore tells us that the person who heard the prophecy has the ability to recall it perfectly. i dont think he forgot any of it. i think the ...'s are just dramatic pauses.

in fact it is a very interesting subject. Well, we all know that people's mind tend to twist and turn and show some things in a different light... could it be that the same thing happens to thoughts that are placed in the pensieve?

MioneWhite

September 17th, 2004, 5:48 pm

If only it were that simple...

Sheep

September 17th, 2004, 6:19 pm

Great post!I think there is a possibility that lord voldemort dies and tom riddle survives.It is possible that at the end all the evil (LV) from Tom Riddle is gone.Harry will be successful in vanquishing LV(or evil) and yet his human part still remains alive(Tom Riddle)and turns a new leaf.Yeah but this phrase is contradictory to my statement " Lord Voldemort was my past, present and future."

Now if Tom Riddle wants to live with his past then his future is surely doomed.He has to die.Yeah but he deserves it.People deserve what they choose.

One thing is certain from this whole thread,"Death is certain" and whether only Voldemort dies or both Voldermort and Riddle die or both Harry and LV die.....

This is a great idea! I have been thinking about it for quite a long time. You see, it's interesting that the name of the Dark Lord doesn't appear on the prophecy. So maybe it really isn't one concrete person, maybe it's something abstract? Maybe that's why Voldemort didn't take the prophecy in MOM, even if he was there... maybe he's not sure that he really IS the dark Lord?

There is one thing about this Riddle thing that we forget- Harry killed him, harry killed Riddle.. or at least memories about him...

And still there something totally wrong about all this situation with the Prophecy. A prophecy should be some kind of prediction of what is going to happen, it shouldn't be the reason why something is done. However, Voldemort went to the Potter because he knew the part of the prophecy. he tried to influence what was going to happen just because he had heard some kind of prophecy. I does seem a little awkward...

C8H10N4O2

September 17th, 2004, 7:13 pm

I had a thought while reading this post. Voldermort is around 69 or 70 years old. He was born in 1927. Considering all the **** he has done to himself to obtain immortality, he can't be in great health should he be returned to muggle status. Who's to say he would live as long as Dumbledore? I say he wouldn't. First of all, He would become extremely bitter. We all know that much negative energy is detrimental to our bodies. I propose that Voldermort would become so angry about losing his powers that he would roar and carry on and possible it would affect his heart. I'm not sure how this could be done. But, maybe something along these lines. There truly could be nothing worse to Volemort if he were a muggle. Worse than death, worse than begin subjected to Harry's emotion, he would be the epitome of what he hates (and already half is). I hadn't thought of this possibility, but Dumbledore/JKR are pretty sharp and very well could be thinking along these lines. Good post!!!

As for Voldermort's Death Eaters, they are only loyal to him out of fear. Once Voldermort lost his powers, his followers would be gone. I really don't picture them rallying around him if he was turned into a muggle. He wouldn't be able to threaten them anymore. Think about it one of the most powerful wizards reduced to to a mere muggle. I think his followers would be out of there as fast as they could run.There would probably be some in denial who would try to show their loyalty the way the Lestranges and Crouch Jr. did the first time. But by and large, most would probably clear out this time like they did last time.

Red Quaffle

September 18th, 2004, 3:13 am

HedwigOwl

September 18th, 2004, 5:58 am

"'There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!' snarled Voldemort.
'You are quite wrong,' said Dumbledore...

I believe this is the fate that lies in store for Voldemort. A fate worse than death. As soon as I read this line it stood out in my memory. It seems such a deliberate line that I'm sure it must have some bearing in future books.

What is worse than death, though? I don't like the idea of Voldemort becoming Tom Riddle again. Only for the fact that it doesn't make for a good ending. The topic is open for speculation...

So there are a couple of things that will almost certainly play a part:

1) Look of triumph in Dumbledore's eyes (Voldemort using Harry's blood)
2) Life debt from Wormtail
3) Something worse than death

Maybe the "fate worse than death" is not in VM's future, he may be living it already......VM has been living life with no love whatsoever, either coming from him or going to him. It could be as simple as VM being called the "Dark Lord" because he chooses only the dark stuff, and that's his whole experience.

As far as VM carrying Harry's blood, VM may have started his own downfall (or redemption), since Harry's blood carries the mark of his mother's love. As DD said, choices make us what we are. VM chose (however unwittingly) to use Harry's blood, although he could have used the blood of any wizard who opposed him. While it may not be quite the same for VM as Harry, it is blood with the mark of love nonetheless.

Red Quaffle

September 18th, 2004, 7:22 am

Maybe the "fate worse than death" is not in VM's future, he may be living it already.

"'We both know that there are other ways of destroying a man, Tom...Merely taking your life would not satisfy me, I admit -'"

The quote above makes me think that this thing worse that death is in Voldemort's future, and not his current lifestyle. What does Dumbledore mean by "merely taking your life would not satisfy me"? We know he's using this phrase quite literally because he also states that there is something worse than death later on.

He also goes on to say that the Voldemort's inability to comprehend that there is nothing worse than death, has been his greatest weakness.

It could be a weakness that Harry will capitalize on somehow.

Stayce

September 18th, 2004, 10:07 am

I think a fate worse than death is describing his life and total waste of it and this will be verified to him before he dies. He will realize the error of his life. I do think that there must be an end and that he will in fact die somehow.

BloodyBlackRose

September 18th, 2004, 1:45 pm

He could defeat him but he could kill him in the end. I'd kill the sick son of a *****. (censored for the sensetive to swearing)
I think that Voldemort should die because then he can be taken care of in the afterlife. He doesn't deserve to live all though living is suffering but we wouldn't want to have to deal with him anymore if he tried to once again rise to power.

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 1:56 pm

There are some on thehpn.com who think that "from the hand of the other" could also mean from the hand of Wormtail... as Voldemort gave him the silver hand...

Kalth

September 18th, 2004, 2:43 pm

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 2:48 pm

indeed, I don't remember who said it... but : Wormtail is in debt of Hp... maybe in the end, he will repay his debt by killing LV :p

but, I think Harry can KILL LV...

you are forgetting that HArry is now full of anger and revenge against the Lestrange and LV...

LV kill HP's parents and lestrange kill Sirius...
As we can see in the end of the book 5. Harry was very, very, very³³³³³ upset by what happend... I think that rage will come back and "take control" of him... rage will allow him to put away his feeling about life. ( except indeed if Sirius is back ;) )

Oh, I soo hope he comes back...
But in the end of OOTP we see that Harry is not able to perform any of the forbidden curses, even if he does want to... He wanted to hurt Bella, there's no doubt about that, but he couldn't perfort the Crucious curse... I think, if he does kill Voldemort, than it will be a good kind of magic... or maybe not even magic

GodricHollow

September 18th, 2004, 2:57 pm

[B]"'There is nothing worse than death, Dumbledore!' snarled Voldemort.

We know there's things worse than Death at this stage already don't we? Certain Dementors come along and suck your soul out, that's got to be worse than death right?

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 3:00 pm

We know there's things worse than Death at this stage already don't we? Certain Dementors come along and suck your soul out, that's got to be worse than death right?

Yes, this is interesting.. Because DD has said himself that Dementor's kiss is worse than death...

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 3:08 pm

lol if you read the Prophecy typically, Harry has to choke LV to death to kill him.

'At the hands...'

But It means that One of them has to die Because of the other ones.

And in the whole prophecy is says nothing about killing Tom. Tom can be good if he has enough love and compassion...think about it, If harry had no love and stuff, he'd be just like LV. Give LV the amount of love, compassion, etc Harry has,a nd he'll be just like Harry anway, and will no longer be LV which in a way says that Harry killed LV.

hpcrazybillybob

September 18th, 2004, 3:12 pm

The prophecy says "neither can live while the other survives". I interpret this to mean that they are destined to kill each other.

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 3:29 pm

Not each other, one has to kill the other one and live on...

But why is everyone thinking that LV will be the one that dies? Harry has an equal amount of chance to die. After all, it'd be the perfect upset wouldnt it? :D

GodricHollow

September 18th, 2004, 3:38 pm

I think that the bit about one can't live while the other survives is more on about the idea of the other being able to forget about the other when his adversary is gone.

HedwigOwl

September 18th, 2004, 5:18 pm

There are some on thehpn.com who think that "from the hand of the other" could also mean from the hand of Wormtail... as Voldemort gave him the silver hand...

You've said something interesting here.....either must die at the hand of the other .....maybe the "other" doesn't refer to Harry or LV, but literally someone else....maybe it's the other boy also born as the 7th month dies.....what if it's Neville??!!!!

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 5:22 pm

Neville! I don't think he will...Or will he!? Ah, we seem to have gone one level further in the mystery of the prophecy ;)

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 5:34 pm

Neville! I don't think he will...Or will he!? Ah, we seem to have gone one level further in the mystery of the prophecy ;)

I've been thinking about neville aswell... because it can't be just a coincidence that he's born the same time... maybe Neville will be the one who will have to kill either Harry or Voldemort...

I somwehere saw this interpretation aswell:

"and either (H or Vol) must die at the hand of the Other (Neville), for neither (Harry or Neville) can live while the other (Vol) survives... "

I still think that it's too twisted... Thinking more about Wormtail's hand

braulio1670

September 18th, 2004, 6:35 pm

I think that in the end Harry will be possesed by Voldemort and Harry will feel Voldemort's hate and Voldemort will feel Harry's love and they will both kill each other.

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 6:37 pm

I think that in the end Harry will be possesed by Voldemort and Harry will feel Voldemort's hate and Voldemort will feel Harry's love and they will both kill each other.

why would Voldemort kill Harry if he felt his love???

Mafalda04

September 18th, 2004, 6:40 pm

The prophecy spoke of the one with the power to *Vanquish* Voldy.... now, according to the dictionary

"van·quish ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vngkwsh, vn-)
tr.v. van·quished, van·quish·ing, van·quish·es

To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate.
To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition.
To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress: “She had had to wrench herself forcibly away from Katharine, and every step vanquished her desire” (Virginia Woolf). See Synonyms at defeat. "

Defeat.. not necessarily kill. Everyone *assumes* that the only way to defeat him is to kill him... but even Dumbledore said that there were worse things than death. Granted, Dumbledore said that One would have to kill the other... but as we learned in OoTP, Dumbledore is far from infallible. Granted, the prophacy says that "one may not live while the other survives" But Harry could defeat him and someone else do the actual killing.

Later in the books it says that Harry didnt feel right the next last days at hogwarts knowing that he will have to either be killed or kill another, meaning either way it will end in murder... (not exactly out of the books but close enough) you get the point...

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 6:42 pm

Later in the books it says that Harry didnt feel right the next last days at hogwarts knowing that he will have to either be killed or kill another, meaning either way it will end in murder... (not exactly out of the books but close enough) you get the point...

And the prohecy goes on saying "either must die.."

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 7:17 pm

I've been thinking about neville aswell... because it can't be just a coincidence that he's born the same time... maybe Neville will be the one who will have to kill either Harry or Voldemort...

I somwehere saw this interpretation aswell:

"and either (H or Vol) must die at the hand of the Other (Neville), for neither (Harry or Neville) can live while the other (Vol) survives... "

I still think that it's too twisted... Thinking more about Wormtail's hand

Wow...now that is an EXCELLENT interpretation! wow...if that is true...

And the prohecy goes on saying "either must die.."

Yes but it might not be litteral. And even if it is, it doesnt say that Tom Riddle or Harry must die at the hands of The other. It says the dark lord. There may be a way for the Dark Lord to 'die' without killing Tom

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 7:27 pm

Yes but it might not be litteral. And even if it is, it doesnt say that Tom Riddle or Harry must die at the hands of The other. It says the dark lord. There may be a way for the Dark Lord to 'die' without killing Tom

Yes, of course, this is what I've said some posts ago.. the Dark Lord idea can be abstract... maybe that's why Voldemort didn't take the prophecy himself in the MOM, maybe "The Dark Lord" is only a part of his personality...

lupislune

September 18th, 2004, 7:42 pm

I am convinced that Harry or Voldemort must die by the quote. A vanquishement will not suffice:

either must die at the hand of the other . . .

I am also convinced that "the other" is Harry or Voldemort. I am in disagreement with those who try and replace the phrase "the other" with proper names (Wormtail, Ron, Neville, etc.) With this type of logic I could put any name in that place such as Dudley, Dumbledore, Snape, or any other ridiculous name that can be thought of.
Needless to say, I think the idea that "the other" is someone other than Harry or Voldemort is ridiculous. The is better debated in other thead, however.

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 7:45 pm

I am convinced that Harry or Voldemort must die by the quote. A vanquishement will not suffice:

I am also convinced that "the other" is Harry or Voldemort. I am in disagreement with those who try and replace the phrase "the other" with proper names (Wormtail, Ron, Neville, etc.) With this type of logic I could put any name in that place such as Dudley, Dumbledore, Snape, or any other ridiculous name that can be thought of.
Needless to say, I think the idea that "the other" is someone other than Harry or Voldemort is ridiculous. The is better debated in other thead, however.

I have no doubt that something must die, but i am not sure what it means by die. It could be litteral, but it might not be

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 7:47 pm

I am convinced that Harry or Voldemort must die by the quote. A vanquishement will not suffice:

I am also convinced that "the other" is Harry or Voldemort. I am in disagreement with those who try and replace the phrase "the other" with proper names (Wormtail, Ron, Neville, etc.) With this type of logic I could put any name in that place such as Dudley, Dumbledore, Snape, or any other ridiculous name that can be thought of.
Needless to say, I think the idea that "the other" is someone other than Harry or Voldemort is ridiculous. The is better debated in other thead, however.

I've been saying that I find all these theories a bit absurd, and you would have noticed that if you had read the posts properly... We were only pointing out different variations that have been arounf the web...
I think this thread is the Only place where we speak about speculations about what the prophecy could mean.

lupislune

September 18th, 2004, 7:58 pm

I've been saying that I find all these theories a bit absurd, and you would have noticed that if you had read the posts properly... We were only pointing out different variations that have been arounf the web...
I think this thread is the Only place where we speak about speculations about what the prophecy could mean.

There are a large amount of threads that discuss the prophesy's meaning.
Also, I did not say in my post that what I said was directed at yours. So, I am a bit baffled by your response.

Also, If die doesn't mean die what does it mean? Are you suggesting that JKR is changing the definition of the word? If she meant vanquish why wouldn't she use that word again, or another word which means the same thing. The definition of die is far less varying than the definition of vanquish.

Sheep

September 18th, 2004, 8:03 pm

There are a large amount of threads that discuss the prophesy's meaning.
Also, I did not say in my post that what I said was directed at yours. So, I am a bit baffled by your response.

Also, If die doesn't mean die what does it mean? Are you suggesting that JKR is changing the definition of the word? If she meant vanquish why wouldn't she use that word again, or another word which means the same thing. The definition of die is far less varying than the definition of vanquish.

I am sorry if I hurt your feelings, I just answered because it was me who has typed down the last few variations about who could be who in the prophecy.

PS- and most of the others should be locked with a link to this one. not all, but most!
Peace

atherella

September 18th, 2004, 8:26 pm

You've said something interesting here.....either must die at the hand of the other .....maybe the "other" doesn't refer to Harry or LV, but literally someone else....maybe it's the other boy also born as the 7th month dies.....what if it's Neville??!!!!

Here's a thread you all might want to check out if you really think that the 'other' refers to a third person.
Wormtail's Hand, the Prophecy, and the Death of Voldemort (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=33215&highlight=prophecy)

Insanity

September 18th, 2004, 8:59 pm

I have 2 theories, now I haven't read through the whole thread so I'm not sure if this has been posted before, please forgive me if it has.

Ok, 1st thing.

Can't Voldy die the same way his powers were destroyed when Harry was a baby? Can't he try to kill Harry, but the spell backfires? And this time it won't be Harry's mom who supplies the love, but Aunt Petunia.

I have no evidence for this, just a wild guess...

2nd thing.

If Harry feels the way Voldy feels, it means they're connected. If they're connected, how can one die and the other live? I think there's a catch. I think if Voldy dies, Harry will too, or at least lose all his powers himself.

Again, no evidence, just a guess. Please tell me what you think.

Taelia

September 18th, 2004, 9:41 pm

Insanity

September 18th, 2004, 11:04 pm

You're completely entitled to state your opinions insanity :) I'm not entirely sure what i actually believe will happen.

To an earlier post, someone said that was someone else suggesting that JKR was changing the meaning of death - no. She might have meant it rhetorically. She doesnt have to have meant the dictionary definition did she? What does death mean to you? Is it merely the end of life, or is it something far greater?

To me, it's the end of existence. I mean, there's death when you die, but you're always remembered and loved, and there's death which is being extinguished from life without leaving a trace.

Labellemort

September 19th, 2004, 12:04 am

The prophecy spoke of the one with the power to *Vanquish* Voldy.... now, according to the dictionary

"van·quish ( P ) Pronunciation Key (vngkwsh, vn-)
tr.v. van·quished, van·quish·ing, van·quish·es

To defeat or conquer in battle; subjugate.
To defeat in a contest, conflict, or competition.
To overcome or subdue (an emotion, for example); suppress: “She had had to wrench herself forcibly away from Katharine, and every step vanquished her desire” (Virginia Woolf). See Synonyms at defeat. "

Defeat.. not necessarily kill. Everyone *assumes* that the only way to defeat him is to kill him... but even Dumbledore said that there were worse things than death. Granted, Dumbledore said that One would have to kill the other... but as we learned in OoTP, Dumbledore is far from infallible. Granted, the prophacy says that "one may not live while the other survives" But Harry could defeat him and someone else do the actual killing.

I agree. Defeat does not always mean "kill." Such as in a sport, the team is not killed when they are defeated, but they simply lost. There was a great analysis done by Maline in the North Tower section of Mugglenet. You guys might want to check it out if you already haven't.

Taelia

September 19th, 2004, 1:34 am

Yeah labellmort! Her theories are well thought out and clear. I have her to thank for clearing up a lot of things for me :)

McBeth

September 19th, 2004, 3:09 am

I think this is JKR's way of having a loophole so she can do something worse to Voldemort than killing him. Personally, I just wish that somehow he could go over to the good side, although that'd probably be really corny. No, I don't HATE him, I just despise him. Something must've happened to him to make him have those stupid veiws of muggles. . . . However, he does deserve to die or worse.

Taelia

September 19th, 2004, 2:01 pm

Its because his father left him thats he's so abd. He's never experianced love in his life, and therefore he despises love in any form, and those who weld it. He hates muggles because his father left him to die and he was a muggle. His mother died when he was born - just long enough to give his name she lived - so he never felt any love. He lived his life in an orphanage which must have been bad enough, but no one actually loved him there. Then he came to Hogwarts and realised that he was Salazar's heir, and that his legacy was to destroy the muggles, he accepted it.

Slaide

September 19th, 2004, 7:21 pm

Well I did one theory im sure has been said but here goes...

IMHO Harry will NOT kill Voldermort per say. And when I mean killing I mean the act of completely wiping from existance.

No, when harry was a baby, he couldnt use offensively the powers his mother put on him (and consecutively, Lord Voldemort), he could only stand there and let the defensive part do its thing. Which almost killed LV.

If you remember carefully, when Lord voldemort made his speech to the returning death eaters in GOF, he said that the his wandering period was the worst thing that ever happened to him (or to such effect).

now, if you remember when harry was speaking to N. Headless nic, nic gives hint to harry that it takes very special circumstances for a wizard to become a ghost. he also makes allusion that being a ghost is more a curse than a blessing and would he had the choice again he wouldn't make the same decision, according to nic, being a ghost is even worst than death.

now, Lord Voldemort has a HUGe ego, there are endless clues which points to that.

After all that, take into consideration what dumbledore said to voldie when they were fighting in the ministry. Something to the effect of there being something much worst than death. Voldie of course completely disagreed to that but I think Dumbledore was not speaking about something which would be worst to EVERYONE but to voldemort itself.

Imagine for a second that your the most powerful on earth (LV which is IMHO stronger than dumbledore), you are feared to hell, you have the BIGGEST reputation there is. There isnt a SINGLE wizard who doesn't know AND fear you (other than prolly dumbledore)...

Starting to see where I am going with this?

IMHO harry will not kill voldie, but will use his powers to completely remove voldemort soul from his body which he never managed to accomplished when he was a baby due to a lack of power. Leaving him with NO powers whatsoever and removing his ability to "reincarnate". Now Voldie would be a ghost. Powerless. A mere glimpse of the greatness he was. All that would live would be his legend, but now he would be a spectre, ridiculed by all who once feared him, completely powerless to watch as Harry grows up and got the best of him.

It would match the prophecy since voldie would be officialy dead. And with voldie gone, harry could now live in peace (if he survives).

Why not a simple death? Rowling has that tendency to give away clues with meaning. DUmbledore would NOT have spent time to tell Voldie there was something WORST than death if Voldie will not die under special circumstances...

IMHO, Voldie will die and become a ghost, a wandering soul with NO powers whatsoever, not alive, but unable to die either... Cursed to watch as the one who could now live does...

ManwÃ«

September 19th, 2004, 8:59 pm

All right, I'll try to write a short reply:
Why would Harry have to kill Voldemort? couldn't Dumbledore just call some Mafia members and shoot at him from the top of a building? people like to complicate things....

ravenfeather

September 19th, 2004, 9:12 pm

Why would Harry have to kill Voldemort? couldn't Dumbledore just call some Mafia members and shoot at him from the top of a building? people like to complicate things....

that would seriously contradict everything we've been led to believe since the beginning of the series, though, wouldn't it? ;)

Taelia

September 19th, 2004, 9:19 pm

The prophecy. Simple.

sueky

September 19th, 2004, 9:47 pm

Taelia

September 19th, 2004, 10:16 pm

ravenfeather

September 19th, 2004, 11:40 pm

Might Voldemort be put into the large bell-jar (as the deathEater in OoTP whose head returned to baby-shape) and returned to infancy, but then could be brought up as a loved child, hence in future making good choices (as Harry does) rather than the bad choices that Tom does originally. Hence that would 'vanquish' Voldemort by taking away his 'Future'.
JKR does seem to make the point that evilness is not necessarily inherent, but is a product of our 'nurture' and the Choices we make.

this is an interesting interpretation and prediction.
however, i'm going to have to disagree with the notion that JKR places any value at all on environment as a factor toward behaviour in the HP books. it is rather choices that are the important element. here's an excerpt of something i posted in another thread that works here right now (because i'm lazy and don't want to type it again! :p ) :
a lot of our key characters have had difficult beginnings or histories of mistreatment: harry, emotionally abused and neglected by the dursleys; neville, brought up by his extended family who were consistantly and vocally disappointed in him; sirius, despising and reviled by his family; lupin, feared and hated from a young age. and yet, all of these characters (with the possible exception of sirius, who is a bit of a snotrag at times) are okay people who care about others and treat other people carefully. they made the choice to overlook their early environment and passed through the fire of hatred and abuse to become stronger, better people. on the opposite side of the coin we have characters like riddle, malfoy, crouch jr., and snape who came out of their respective fires damaged and burned, rather than tempered by the flames. their personal choice was to live vicariously through their awareness that they have been victims and to make the rest of the world pay for what others did to them.
so, basically, what i'm saying is that one of the overriding themes of the series is the importance of not using your past as an excuse. if riddle was shrunk in the bell jar in order to give him a better start and, thus, a better life, that would repudiate the idea of making good choices despite what the world has given you.
but it was definitely an interesting thought!

Red Quaffle

September 20th, 2004, 2:05 am

Thats a good point sueky! i never thought of that!

Also, though it says that Harry (if indeed it is Harry who is the one) must be the one to kill LV it doesnt say anything about weakening him. Maybe someone else weakens him and HP lands thw killing blow? Possible...

That doesn't sound like a very dynamic plot to me. I tend to believe that Harry's final encounter with Voldemort will occur when they are both alone, as they have met so many times before. His friends and Dumbledore may have a large role in the lead up to the final show down, but in the end I think the burden rests on Harry.

Taelia

September 20th, 2004, 4:27 pm

That doesn't sound like a very dynamic plot to me. I tend to believe that Harry's final encounter with Voldemort will occur when they are both alone, as they have met so many times before. His friends and Dumbledore may have a large role in the lead up to the final show down, but in the end I think the burden rests on Harry.
Yes, thats true. But i picture it as some kind of big battle, with Ron fighting a few death eaters, and Hermione next to him, with the teachers nd stuff, but the center of the battle is HP vs LV. Then i heard this theory that said that there might be a big battle at Hogwarts and that fitted in nicely.

dragonlady

September 20th, 2004, 4:57 pm

A Question:

Suppose Harry kills Voldemort by accident, the same way "he killed" Quirrel?

The reason I'm saying this is because, even though LV used Harry's blood to override the protection given by Lily, even Harry himself, the first hand holder of the protection charm given by his mother, has to return to his Aunt Petunia for a few weeks once a year to refresh that protection. He has to be able to call the place where his "mother's blood lives" (his mother being the person who died to protect him) his home. That's the reason there has been a huge "rescuing Harry from the Dursley's" scene at the start of Books 1-5.

LV can't exactly drop in on Aunt Petunia to refresh the charm every year, and has the charm only via the second-hand method of stealing it from Harry's blood. So the charm may have already worn off by Book 6 (but we won't know it at that point, since there will be seven books).

In GOF, when Harry was telling Dumbledore about the fight, when he got to the part where Wormtail used Harry's blood as a part of the restoration charm, Dumbledore got what Harry thought was a momentary smile of "triumph".

What the heck is that smile all about? We all know that Dumbledore isn't infallable, but generally speaking, his hunches are more accurate than most people's "logic". What was on his mind then? ;)

atherella

September 20th, 2004, 5:09 pm

In GOF, when Harry was telling Dumbledore about the fight, when he got to the part where Wormtail used Harry's blood as a part of the restoration charm, Dumbledore got what Harry thought was a momentary smile of "triumph".

What the heck is that smile all about? We all know that Dumbledore isn't infallable, but generally speaking, his hunches are more accurate than most people's "logic". What was on his mind then? ;)

There are all kinds of theories about the gleam of triumph Harry thought he saw in DD's eyes. If you're really interested in the subject, there's a thread discussing different possibilities you might enjoy. Here's a link. :)

New theories on Dumbledore's "Look of Triumph"! (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=16076&highlight=triumph)

Actually, there's another one too, but this one discusses the idea that DD might be evil.
Is Dumbledore Evil? The "Look of Triumph" whats that about? (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=47&highlight=triumph)

robbie1

September 20th, 2004, 5:31 pm

I agree with the wormtail idea,i think worntail will turn good in the end and repay harry by killing voldemort,i just cant see harry killing him.

C8H10N4O2

September 20th, 2004, 5:37 pm

I am convinced that Harry or Voldemort must die by the quote. A vanquishement will not suffice...It is hard to get around the entire text of the prophecy. Vanquish is one thing by itself, but as lupislune quoted from the prophecy, "one must die," which has a specific meaning, as opposed to vanquish, which would otherwise leave the door open for other things to happen. I agree totally with lupislune that someone will die, not just lose the battle.

ravenfeather

September 20th, 2004, 6:53 pm

It is hard to get around the entire text of the prophecy. Vanquish is one thing by itself, but as lupislune quoted from the prophecy, "one must die," which has a specific meaning, as opposed to vanquish, which would otherwise leave the door open for other things to happen. I agree totally with lupislune that someone will die, not just lose the battle.

i'm going to agree with you, with some conditions.
"and either must die at the hand of the other / for neither can live while the other survives...."

you could wrangle the first part to mean something like 'if one of them must die, than it must be at the hand of the other one' and still come out with vanquishment and not murder. however, the second part seems to say that one of them is going to have to die. however, the prophecy is about harry and the dark lord... not harry and voldemort or harry and tom marvolo riddle. the dark lord persona could be 'killed', could 'die', without destroying the underlying life. JKR said that she did some fancy wordplay with that prophecy. there's a hidden meaning there somewhere, i'm sure of it.

Taelia

September 20th, 2004, 10:03 pm

ravenfeather

September 21st, 2004, 1:30 am

Ravenfeather, It doesnt actually say 'Harry Potter' either, although that is who it must be.

Dragonlady, I think that your idea is a good one except for one thing. Harry's mother's blood resides in Harry too. So if Voldamort sees Harry/is near Harry, the blood pact is refreshed, and the same with Harry Potter - Unless you take the meaning litterally and say that the person must live at the blood place

that's true, Taelia, it doesn't say harry potter, but that wasn't really the point i was trying to make. i'm sorry if i wasn't clear. what i meant was that the prophecy names the 'dark lord', who, while sharing the history of tom marvolo riddle, may not share enough in common to actually be viewed by an oracle as still being tom marvolo riddle (please, folks, don't quote JKR's FAQ answer about tom riddle=lord voldemort. i've read it! i'm not talking JKR here, i'm talking sybil trelawney's inner eye). so harry could, potentially, overthrow that contemporary persona of 'the dark lord', leaving the original tom riddle behind and living. i am always struck by the fact that dumbledore consistantly refers to *that guy* as voldemort or lord voldemort when speaking of him, but when speaking to him, he refers to him as 'tom'. therefore, harry could 'kill' the 'dark lord', but actually be innocent of murder, thereby tying in with vanquishing the dark lord. the 'dark lord' entity would be, for all intents and purposes, dead, but harry wouldn't have to live his life with blood on his hands. a lot of folks hate this theory, because it seems too... maudlin, i guess. but i rather like it.

Red Quaffle

September 21st, 2004, 1:47 am

I do think that Wormtail will have an important part to play, though I don't believe he will kill Voldemort, I think only Harry can destroy him. Wormtail is undoubtedly bad but the life debt that he owes Harry is unbreakable and neither he nor Harry have a say in it.

As for the final fight between Harry and Voldemort I still side with them fighting with no one else around him. It would seem fitting that there would be no one to help Harry at the end, just him and the big man.

Also, you know how JK Rowling said that there was one scene in the movies that got very close to an occurence in future books? I think perhaps this might be in the first movie when Voldemort tempts Harry to join him in order to bring his parents back. I don't remember this in the book. This could happen during the final battle.

robbie1

September 21st, 2004, 5:32 am

well if the final fight is just harry and voldemort,then i see very few options for harry to kill voldemort,without using Avada Kedavra the killing curse,which could lead him into big trouble. Besides i cant see harry using that anyway.

Taelia

September 21st, 2004, 8:45 pm

that's true, Taelia, it doesn't say harry potter, but that wasn't really the point i was trying to make. i'm sorry if i wasn't clear. what i meant was that the prophecy names the 'dark lord', who, while sharing the history of tom marvolo riddle, may not share enough in common to actually be viewed by an oracle as still being tom marvolo riddle (please, folks, don't quote JKR's FAQ answer about tom riddle=lord voldemort. i've read it! i'm not talking JKR here, i'm talking sybil trelawney's inner eye). so harry could, potentially, overthrow that contemporary persona of 'the dark lord', leaving the original tom riddle behind and living. i am always struck by the fact that dumbledore consistantly refers to *that guy* as voldemort or lord voldemort when speaking of him, but when speaking to him, he refers to him as 'tom'. therefore, harry could 'kill' the 'dark lord', but actually be innocent of murder, thereby tying in with vanquishing the dark lord. the 'dark lord' entity would be, for all intents and purposes, dead, but harry wouldn't have to live his life with blood on his hands. a lot of folks hate this theory, because it seems too... maudlin, i guess. but i rather like it.

Yes you're right, but you were perfectly clear, i think it was me who was unclear. It could be that the one could be destroyed but not the body that is Harry Potter...now that i say it like that it doesn;t sound right anymore -_- But yes, i know what you are driving at,a dn i think that you're right.

Also we musn't forget, that Harrry might be the one to die. It doesnt have to be LV who dies.