For Neither Can Live While the Other Survives

[SharonDWB]

Discussion for the Burrow article For Neither Can Live While the Other Survives by RedSparks. Spoiler Warning!

[acw]

This is a good response to the Harry is a Horcrux theory. Very well thought out. Good job.

[Dyrnwyn]

I'm very much against the "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, but if the only way to destroy a human Horcrux is death it occurs to me that there are still ways that the prophecy can come true. If Harry had done something to Voldemort so that he was DYING but not actually dead, and yet would definitely be dead very very soon, he could then kill himself... or have someone do it for him. We're probably talking muggle means of near-death here... or maybe even Snape's rip-you-to-pieces spell (I forgot what it's called). I'm just pointing this out, I actually don't think Voldemort will die at all. Be defeated? Yeah. Die? Probably not- it's been repeated that there are things worse than death, so my guess is one of these things is happening to Voldemort... and I'm laughing when it does.

[Kaeli Karali]

I loved this editorial! Thank you! There are so many reasons why Harry cannot be a Horcrux, most of which you adressed (here's another: if Harry had a piece of Voldemort's soul in him surely his scar would always be burning like mad). In any case, the question that has been bothering me, which I don't believe anyone else has adressed yet, is not whether or not Harry is a Horcrux but what Voldemort was intending to turn into a Horcrux after murdering him. Does the as-of-yet-unexplained significance of Godric's Hollow have anything to do with it?

*sigh* two years is such a long time!

Anyway -thank you very much for writing this editorial!

[all4potter]

whoa! i had to reread most of the sentences just to get what the editorial was saying. that was a chunk load of info and i am one of the people hoping that harry need not die in book 7.

the "in essence divided" has been bugging me since i finished OotP and til now, i'm afraid i still don't fully understand it. what did DD mean by it when he said it?

nice ed. and i'm really looking forward to reading about Godrics Hollow. the name sounds so interesting, i wished i live in "Godrics Hollow", lol. and i want to know more about the place as we got to know a lot about Little Hangleton.

and another thing, if Harry is to go to his old house in G.H. would he find it as it was the night his parents were murdered? full of rubble and debris? i mean i understand that his parents were buried and that he's gonna visit their graves but what about the house? do we know if it was destroyed? or merely left alone for the past 16 years?

"No sir- house was almost destroyed but I got him out all right before the Muggles started swarmin' around." (Hagrid, PS: 16, paperback) this is all we know about G.H. or did i miss something?

[BJTexan]

Great editorial and I definitely agree that Harry is not a horcrux, there is too much logical evidence against it. Additionally, I liked your analysis of the prophecy.

And either must die at the hand of the other for neither can live while the other survives

I think this definitely means what Dumbledore said. Neither of them can just turn their back on the other and try to live a normal life while the other one is living. Harry could not just go back to school, graduate, and then get a job. Just like the Dark Lord could not just go ahead with his evil plans and ignore Harry's presence out there in the world. Both of them will hunt the other one down until the deed is done. Then and only then can one of them "live" a normal life.

[Thetis]

Whew, that was long! But it sure was worth it! Another reason why Harry cannot be a Horcrux: Voldemort's soul can't reside in a body so full of love. It was the only thing that saved Harry from being completely possessed by Voldemort in the MoM in OotP, remember?

Wonderful editorial. I have been hoping to not see Harry die in the end, but a little (ok a lot) worried that will die.

I like your theory on how Harry is not a horcrux or his scar isn't. I just think it is too tricky to do it giving the circumstances (I assume). Plus, you are right when Harry didn't die, how could his death have caused the horcrux.

Anyway, thank you for the great thought put into the editorial!

[thewidowblack]

So far, everyone who has commented, is against the Harry is a horcrux theory, as am I. I do hope you have managed to sway some of the other camp into thinking that also.

[dramatical]

Yea, I agree that Harry can't be a horcrux. Or if he was he would have unknowingly destoyed the horcrux inside him when he felt love! Speaking of this, I think love definitely has some connection with destroying the horcruxes...

[eawft]

I pretty much agree that Harry is not an Horcrux and that he does not have to die : it's much too hard to read the prophecy in a manner that would be consistent with that (although DD warns us against giving too much importance to the prophecy...)

JKR has said that currently the last word in the last chapter of book 7 is "scar". Knowing JKR is very careful about what "info" she releases about future books, so it's meant to give us some info and help us speculate.

For one thing, this led me to believe Harry wouldn't be dead at the end of book 7 : hard to draw a very precise reasonning that would link the two but it just seemed to me that if Harry was dead at the end of book 7, we wouldn't give a **** about his scar and therefore it would be silly to end the book on that.

Continuing on the potential significance of the "scar", it does seem to have a life of its own, it was created as a murder was being performed, and it has clear very close ties to Voldemort, so I was wondering whether it could not be in some way the 6th or even a 7th Horcrux, although I don't pretend to be able to explain how the scar could be a horcrux independently of Harry... But speculaing si what this forum's about, right ?

[susannahr]

what a great editorial, thanks, i have never been swayed by any of the 'harry is horcrux' stuff and everything (and more) that i had been thinking as to why he couldnt be was covered by your editorial, and i have to say far better than i could have said it myself!!! well done!!

[lilyprocks]

Great editorial! It was long but interesting. I too do not think that Harry is a horcrux. Given what was said in the books and the editorial, there is a spell to create a horcrux. Despite the fact that Harry is the only one to date to survive the death curse, I do not think that there are two coincidences in his defeating the curse and the horcrux spell.

If nothing else, then Lily's death provided Harry with the protection of love. In the Goblet of Fire, Voldemort used Harry's blood to help bring him to human form. In turn, he also gained some of that love protection, and it will be interesting to see how that play's out, if at all. I am hoping that Voldemort's use of Harry's protected blood will turn on him in the end with Lily's final protection of Harry by rendering Voldemort less powerful than Harry (or something like that) during a duel with Harry and Voldemort in the end.

[susanova]

Superb editorial! This was thorough and very well written. I was especially intrigued with the association of the 'divided serpent' scene from Dumbledore's office. JKR doesn't typically put these things in just as filler, so it must be relevant. I think that scene warrants closer examination by all of us.

[gabrielle26]

Amazing editorial! I agree with you completely, I don't believe Harry is a horcrux, and I'm glad someone was able to explain it so clearly.
I really enjoyed your analysis of the prophecy, and the explanation for the scene of the serpent, I never thought of that, and it makes perfect sense.
Very well written editorial!

[crevecoeur]

Great editorial! I am also against the Harry as a Horcrux theory. It just seems to fly in the face of how the horcrux spell would work. I do have a thought on Nagini, however. If, as Dumbledore assumes, Nagini is a horcrux, then she is indeed a most unusual one. Why would Voldemort choose her? I think we ought to remember that the piece of soul in a horcrux is not a static essence. Like its owner, it is capable of acting and interacting, as the diary horcrux demonstrated (perhaps this is also what makes destroying a horcrux so dangerous - it's almost like battling the person himself). What is the advantage, then, of Voldemort using Nagini as a horcrux? Nagini and Voldemort's soul-piece can go places and do things that would be impossible if the horcrux was an inanimate object. Dumbledore also says he doesn't believe Voldemort can sense what is happening with a horcrux, because it is something separate from himself. However, Voldemort as a Parselmouth can speak to Nagini and find out what she knows, and her capacity to "know" stems from the fact that she is a horcrux with a piece of the Dark Lord's soul in her. He may not need to possess her at all if she is a horcrux. Possession of a living creature seems a dangerous thing to me, since it results in the life of the creature being drained away, resulting ultimately in its destruction (Quirrell, Ginny . . . almost).

[Athos]

In addition to the reasons described, one other thing occurred to me as to why Harry, in all likelihood, is not a Horcrux.

At the end of OotP, LV possesses Harry in order to try to bait DD to kill him. However, he is not able to possess Harry for long b/c they are so inimical to each other (as DD puts it, because Harry is full of love, which LV cannot abide).

If Harry were truly a Horcrux, wouldn't this give LV the "in" he needs to be able to possess Harry without having to shortly give it up as a bad job? Alternatively, could a portion of LV's soul truly reside in Harry if they are so inimical to each other?

I guess it might be possible, but it certainly seems unlikely. Add to this the objections in the editorial, I feel pretty certain that Harry is not a Horcrux.

(this does not mean, of course, that Harry will necessarily survive book 7, though I tend to think he will. After all, as Redhen pointed out, the prophecy says "either" will die at the hand of the other, not "both").

[ylh98]

Excellent editorial. Ingenius use of the prophecy to proof that Harry is not a horcrux.

[SecretKeeper7]

Very well thought out editorial, but I believe the main reasons Harry-as-Horcrux theory is wrong is due to two facts: that "Voldemort cannot reside in a body so filled with love." Something Harry has in abundance. It is why Voldemort could not stand to inhabit Harry's body at the Ministry (OotP) and that Lily died to protect him "an ancient magic," a protection that would prevent any type of possession be the would-be murderer and why Harry cannot possibly be a Horcrux.

[wandsrokmysocks]

Great Editorial. I liked that you made it longish to prove your point really well. The main reason I think Harry is not a Horcrux is that Voldemort was planning on using Harry to make his last Horcrux, but Harrry never died so therefor the Horcrux was never and could never have been made.

Also, we know that their are other spells needed to create a Horcrux, so Voldemort would not have had the means to make Harry one (seeing as how he turned into a vapor and whatnot when the spell rebounded..... )