Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince point of discussion (Spoilers)

Joshua Dyal said:
I don't think it's a question of suitability, it's a question of her not wanting to kill Harry (I expect, and I believe from transcripts of a few interviews I've read with her) and I suspect she also knows that it would be a phenomenal marketing blunder because most of the audience would hate that too.

Might be that she likes Potter too much to kill him (although killing Dumbledore makes me think otherwise - that woman is ruthless!).
But I don't believe that the richest woman in the UK would consider if it's bad for business to kill him. She already said that there'll be 7 Potter books, not more. Why not kill the brat? So she can make another billion with merchandise?

Frankly, I don't believe she'll kill Potter. But that's the thing: I don't know it.
She'll do whatever is best for the story, whether this involves killing Potter or not.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Harry, Horcruces and Death

Folks, Harry is not a Horcrux.

Points of evidence:

* The only reason Voldemort bothered to kill Harry was because of Trelawney's prophesy. Thus, Harry would not have been on Voldemort's list of items with which to make seven Horcruces. If he wanted to make seven Horcruces, he would have already chosen seven other items.

* You're splitting your soul into seven parts. Destroying one of those seven parts puts you one-seventh closer to mortal again. You don't destroy one of those parts. Voldemort intended to kill Harry Potter, something fairly clear from his using Avada Kedavra, as spell which thitherto had a 100% fatality rate if the victim could not move out of the way or cast a blocking spell. Killing off one-seventh of your soul strikes me as something The Whiny Witch wrote in Seven Stupid Things Dark Lords Do to Mess Up Their Lives.

* Since Voldemort gave the option of life to Lily Potter, he did not intend to use her death in making the Horcrux, and the protective magic she cast on Harry probably would have foiled that anyways.

* From the memories in the Pensieve, it does not look like making a Horcrux is a spur-of-the-moment deed. Bringing back Voldemort's body took plenty of planning and work on the part of Voldemort and Wormtail. Voldemort busted into Godric's Hollow and fought off two wizards -- one to whom Voldemort gave the option of living. He did not have the luxury of time.

On the subject of death: the structure of the Monomyth lends itself to trips into the world of the dead. She has already given us the technology with which one can meet the dead -- the Veil. At some point, there has to be some way for something to come out of the Veil, as voices do, as otherwise, it's just a big weapon. It could be as simple as Harry sliding Sirius's mirror under the Veil and using that to talk to Sirius and others, or more involved, like Harry figuring out (or, more likely, Hermione figuring out and telling Harry) how to use the Veil to be able to go through it both ways. I think of Aeneas and Orpheus entering the realms of the dead. Let me put it this way -- Sirius died in the way he died for a reason, which is to show everyone how the Veil works. We have to know how the Veil works for it to be something other than a deus ex machina in book Seven. She has done this before, namely with the Polyjuice Potion episode in Chamber of Secrets. You can omit that without changing the plot of that book too much, but then you have the ending of Goblet of Fire needing a thitherto unknown potion that happens to change the look of the drinker to be someone else. It would have been harder to take. Knowing this is one of Rowling's strengths as a writer. Indeed, she does this better than almost anyone else.

The other issue is that at some point, Voldemort will cast the Killing Curse again on Harry Potter and nothing will stop it. He has done this three times, all three times stopped -- first time by Lily Potter's sacrifice and protective magic, the second by Priori Incantum and the third by Dumbledore blocking the flash. What will happen to Harry is anyone's guess. Part of me thinks that he does die, but somehow comes back through the Veil, maybe only to finish his mission (Rowling believes that dead is dead), or using the excuse from Heaven Can Wait that he was not supposed to have died then.

FWIW, my SWAG (semi-wild-assed guess) is that while Harry does destroy the Horcruces, someone else -- likely Neville -- delivers the killing blow to Voldemort. I have nothing to back up this, other than that I am a Neville Longbottom fan.
 

Lord Rasputin said:
Folks, Harry is not a Horcrux.

Points of evidence:

* The only reason Voldemort bothered to kill Harry was because of Trelawney's prophesy. Thus, Harry would not have been on Voldemort's list of items with which to make seven Horcruces. If he wanted to make seven Horcruces, he would have already chosen seven other items.

* You're splitting your soul into seven parts. Destroying one of those seven parts puts you one-seventh closer to mortal again. You don't destroy one of those parts. Voldemort intended to kill Harry Potter, something fairly clear from his using Avada Kedavra, as spell which thitherto had a 100% fatality rate if the victim could not move out of the way or cast a blocking spell. Killing off one-seventh of your soul strikes me as something The Whiny Witch wrote in Seven Stupid Things Dark Lords Do to Mess Up Their Lives.

* Since Voldemort gave the option of life to Lily Potter, he did not intend to use her death in making the Horcrux, and the protective magic she cast on Harry probably would have foiled that anyways.

* From the memories in the Pensieve, it does not look like making a Horcrux is a spur-of-the-moment deed. Bringing back Voldemort's body took plenty of planning and work on the part of Voldemort and Wormtail. Voldemort busted into Godric's Hollow and fought off two wizards -- one to whom Voldemort gave the option of living. He did not have the luxury of time.

On the subject of death: the structure of the Monomyth lends itself to trips into the world of the dead. She has already given us the technology with which one can meet the dead -- the Veil. At some point, there has to be some way for something to come out of the Veil, as voices do, as otherwise, it's just a big weapon. It could be as simple as Harry sliding Sirius's mirror under the Veil and using that to talk to Sirius and others, or more involved, like Harry figuring out (or, more likely, Hermione figuring out and telling Harry) how to use the Veil to be able to go through it both ways. I think of Aeneas and Orpheus entering the realms of the dead. Let me put it this way -- Sirius died in the way he died for a reason, which is to show everyone how the Veil works. We have to know how the Veil works for it to be something other than a deus ex machina in book Seven. She has done this before, namely with the Polyjuice Potion episode in Chamber of Secrets. You can omit that without changing the plot of that book too much, but then you have the ending of Goblet of Fire needing a thitherto unknown potion that happens to change the look of the drinker to be someone else. It would have been harder to take. Knowing this is one of Rowling's strengths as a writer. Indeed, she does this better than almost anyone else.

The other issue is that at some point, Voldemort will cast the Killing Curse again on Harry Potter and nothing will stop it. He has done this three times, all three times stopped -- first time by Lily Potter's sacrifice and protective magic, the second by Priori Incantum and the third by Dumbledore blocking the flash. What will happen to Harry is anyone's guess. Part of me thinks that he does die, but somehow comes back through the Veil, maybe only to finish his mission (Rowling believes that dead is dead), or using the excuse from Heaven Can Wait that he was not supposed to have died then.

FWIW, my SWAG (semi-wild-assed guess) is that while Harry does destroy the Horcruces, someone else -- likely Neville -- delivers the killing blow to Voldemort. I have nothing to back up this, other than that I am a Neville Longbottom fan.

A lot of great points. And I agree on Neville. He really came into his own in Order of the Phoenix. He may be clumsy and a dope at times but he has a lot of heart.
 

Lord Rasputin said:
* You're splitting your soul into seven parts. Destroying one of those seven parts puts you one-seventh closer to mortal again. You don't destroy one of those parts. Voldemort intended to kill Harry Potter, something fairly clear from his using Avada Kedavra, as spell which thitherto had a 100% fatality rate if the victim could not move out of the way or cast a blocking spell. Killing off one-seventh of your soul strikes me as something The Whiny Witch wrote in Seven Stupid Things Dark Lords Do to Mess Up Their Lives.

The part I'm still working out, is the contradiction from the start to the end of the paragraph (in the stories, not your post). When the soul fragments are destroyed, I don't think Voldemort gets them back, so he's still got 1/7th of a soul. He doesnt' seem attached to the soul fragments (ala Riddles Diary), so I think he just wants to insure there are still enough out there to guarentee his survival. The objects themselves mean nothing, IMO.
So, why would having 1/7th of a soul mean something?

As far as Harry being a Horcrux, Nagini proves it can be a person, but I don't think it works that way.

HOWEVER, it does seem that Harry has the ability to intrude on Voldemort's mind, as Voldemort does Nagini.
So, maybe Voldemort is Harry's Horcrux, created by the enchantments he wove to create a horcrux. Perhaps Harry "killed" Voldemort. :)
 

Vocenoctum said:
The part I'm still working out, is the contradiction from the start to the end of the paragraph (in the stories, not your post). When the soul fragments are destroyed, I don't think Voldemort gets them back, so he's still got 1/7th of a soul. He doesnt' seem attached to the soul fragments (ala Riddles Diary), so I think he just wants to insure there are still enough out there to guarentee his survival. The objects themselves mean nothing, IMO.
So, why would having 1/7th of a soul mean something?
Nothing in particular. My point is that it makes little sense to make something as a protective measure and destroy it in the process of making it protect you, especially since once destroyed, it no longer protects you.

Vocenoctum said:
As far as Harry being a Horcrux, Nagini proves it can be a person, but I don't think it works that way.
Speaking of Nagini ... is Nagini the snake Harry frees in Philosopher's Stone?

Vocenoctum said:
HOWEVER, it does seem that Harry has the ability to intrude on Voldemort's mind, as Voldemort does Nagini.
So, maybe Voldemort is Harry's Horcrux, created by the enchantments he wove to create a horcrux. Perhaps Harry "killed" Voldemort. :)
Brings to mind the whole Raistlin-Fistandantilus issue. There's still a whole bunch about that night at Godric's Hollow we don't know, which is part of the appeal of the books, as a mystery.
 

Flyspeck23 said:
Might be that she likes Potter too much to kill him (although killing Dumbledore makes me think otherwise - that woman is ruthless!).
But I don't believe that the richest woman in the UK would consider if it's bad for business to kill him. She already said that there'll be 7 Potter books, not more. Why not kill the brat? So she can make another billion with merchandise?

Frankly, I don't believe she'll kill Potter. But that's the thing: I don't know it.
She'll do whatever is best for the story, whether this involves killing Potter or not.


Personally, I don't think she'll kill Potter. I believe this because I think she can probably write a more interesting resolution to the story with him alive rather than with him dead. I can think of very interesting ways to handle Potter once his prophecied mission in life is done rather than have him die with completion of his quest.
 


Lord Rasputin said:
Nothing in particular. My point is that it makes little sense to make something as a protective measure and destroy it in the process of making it protect you, especially since once destroyed, it no longer protects you.
Voldemort is pretty free with destroying Horcruxes, so that's why I think the significance isn't in the number of horcrux, but rather how much his soul gets fragmented. (i.e. leaving him with 1/7th of a soul). Except of course, hard to say if it's an even split or what.

Speaking of Nagini ... is Nagini the snake Harry frees in Philosopher's Stone?
Interesting, but I've not seen anything one way or the other.
 

I was somewhat disappointed with this book.
It felt very rushed, and was WAY too full of exposition.

I thought the Ginny/ Harry thing was way too trite and cliche.


All that said, my thoughts/ speculation for the next book:

A) Snape is defintely still working for Dumbledore. Dumbledore probably made Snape swear to do whatevr he was told. This forced Snape to kill Dumbledore so that Draco woudln't have to.

B) Draco will be redeemed. I've said that from the beginning, but they really emphasized Draco's insecurities and doubts in the last two books. (Of course, to my annoyance, in the movies [at least the last two, anyway], they've cheapened the character of Draco by making him a buffon akin to Gimli in the LotR movies.)

C) Harry will die. Either he or Neville are the last of Voldemort's Horcruxes.

D) Neville will play a large part in the next book, perhaps even becoming the new hero after Harry dies. (Harry's death spurs Neville to take on the mantle of hero and kill Voldemort.)
 

Kid Charlemagne said:
If Harry is a horcrux, it would be an accidentally created one, I think that's pretty certain.
Yep. Would go a long way to explaining things. A backfired Death Spell does sound like something that carve out a chunk of a soul so accustomed to having chunks carved out of It.

;) Shadow, are you sure it is not you liking of Draco that makes you hope he will be redeemed? Any mayhap your dislike of the Ginny/Harry thing is from your hope for a different type of Harry slash Draco than that book gave you? ;)

I strongly doubt that nagini was the snake from book one. I have a hard time thinking nagini would tell potter "Thanksss amigo" & If that is the case then Rowling has gone from things simply growing dark in dark times to "No good deed goes unpunished". Which is IMHO darker than Potter needing to kill himself to stop Lord Moldybutt. But I cannot simply say "no, that snake is not Nagini" since "Raised in captivity" on a muggle zoo's sign, really is not a sure bet.
 

Remove ads

Top