Sprinkler Systems Uhaul move Lawn care Roses and trees Ford Parts Chrysler Parts Lake Powell New IPod Touch Apps New IPhone Apps IPhone Apps IPad Information IPad Apps Android APPS Android Games APPS Android Systems Android Tablets APPS and Beyond Smartphone Apps Smartphone Games Apps Repair and Tools Tablet PC Car Sharing Car Leasing Tabler Pc Fly Fishing Toyota Cars Vacation Rentals Stock market NYSE SSE Stock Freight & Shipping News Gluten Lactose Gout My Coupon Life Campgrounds Check Outdoor Kitchen Design and Redoo Bath Remodeling Palm Springs Las Vegas Vacation Tipps Lake Powell Boating Homes for lease Electric and green Car Blog Pearls and diamonds Whatsapp and forget SMS Blog, What is Whatsapp App Solar Panel Solar Energie Sun Power Blog
Reader


[Suche]  [Administrator]  [Hinweise zum Reader]  [Startseite]
Fantasy » alt.fan.harry-potter » Horcrux Harry
Horcrux Harry [message #231020] Mo, 06 März 2006 23:55
wadkin2000  
First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
sorry posting this!)
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231028 ] Di, 07 März 2006 00:39
Brent Braten  
<wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
> sorry posting this!)
>

No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that Tom's
award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The reason
I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
trophies.

BB
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231033 ] Di, 07 März 2006 01:14
Froggy  
"Brent Braten" <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote in message
news:45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com...
>
> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>> sorry posting this!)
>>
>
> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that
> Tom's
> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The
> reason
> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
> trophies.
>
> BB
>
>

There's an idea... Good point.
--
(*)(*)
(------)
Froggy
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231043 ] Di, 07 März 2006 03:26
Baronjosefr  
"Froggy" <shelbel007_2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4g4Pf.650$k75.225 [at] newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>
> "Brent Braten" <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote in message
> news:45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com...
>>
>> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>>> sorry posting this!)
>>>
>>
>> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that
>> Tom's
>> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The
>> reason
>> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
>> trophies.
>>
>> BB
>>
>>
>
> There's an idea... Good point.
> --
> (*)(*)
> (------)
> Froggy
>

I mentioned that possibility a couple months ago. I am still thinking that
Harry is the fourth, rather than Nagini though. V had alreay indicated, when
talking about how he possessed creatures to survive, that snakes were better
and easier for that purpose. So V possessing Nagini isn't so great a thing.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231067 ] Di, 07 März 2006 08:16
Joe C  
<wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message =
news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or =
bad)
> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the =
obvious
> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. =20
<snip>

If Harry's scar is a Horcrux, V created it by ACCIDENT when he tried
to kill Harry. I dont think any of them, V,DD, or Harry are aware of it.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231086 ] Di, 07 März 2006 14:53
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com>, "Brent Braten"
<bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote:

><wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>> sorry posting this!)
>>
>
>No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that Tom's
>award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The reason
>I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
>trophies.

I've been saying something similar for 7 months now. But I think the award
might be a plaque that simply stays at the school. After all, Harry and
Ron were both given "Special Awards for Services to the School" in CoS -
Ch. 18. Neither of the two has mentioned having anthing tangible in their
possession.

CoS - Ch. 13:
"Riddle¹s burnished gold shield was tucked away in a corner
cabinet. It didn¹t carry details of why it had been given to him
(»Good thing, too, or it¹d be even bigger and I¹d still be polishing
it«, said Ron). However, they did find Riddle¹s name on an old
Medal for Magical Merit, and on a list of old Head Boys."

Tom's "Medal for Magical Merit" sounds like he might have taken it with
him, turned it into a Horcrux, at his leisure, and, any time later, found
a way to smuggle it into the trophy room (or was it that flick of the
wrist?). Perhaps the award was even initiated by Rowena Ravenclaw.

But that's not my point. It's not worth a quibble. I think the idea of a
Horcrux in the trophy room fits well with two other ideas.

1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
he needs a quick *soul lift*?

2) Who is in charge of the trophy room and who is going to perform magic
for the first time very late in life (perhaps the last minute of his
life)? Might he simply be the catalyst who activates some piece of the
ancient magic which permeates Hogwarts itself?
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231094 ] Di, 07 März 2006 18:32
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <CqaPf.11318$Sp2.3878 [at] fed1read02>, "Steve Szostek"
<nospam [at] here.com> wrote:

><wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message =
>news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or =
>bad)
>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the =
>obvious
>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. =20
><snip>
>
>If Harry's scar is a Horcrux, V created it by ACCIDENT when he tried
>to kill Harry. I dont think any of them, V,DD, or Harry are aware of it.

I tend to agree with the "if" part. I also see the possibility that Lily
somehow set it all up so that it couldn't become a Horcrux in the first
place. Perhaps she knew that LV, very shortly, would have a freshly ripped
soul fragment with her name on it. Perhaps she used ancient magic to
secure the transfer of *her* bit to Harry. It may now be in his scar, but
that alone doesn't make it a Horcrux that LV would have free access to.

I wish I had an answer for wadkin2000's opening question, but I'm sure
that Jane Grey will jump in!
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231106 ] Di, 07 März 2006 19:54
tbarry22  
But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231112 ] Di, 07 März 2006 20:59
drusilla  
tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com escribió:
> But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
> who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
> reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
> that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
> books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
> anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)

If RAB told DD about the Horcruxes, then DD had not made a unnecessarily
trip that costed his life
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231117 ] Di, 07 März 2006 21:30
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:

>But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
>who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
>reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
>that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
>books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
>anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)

As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<snip>",
I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my little
thoughts from the posting preceding yours.

JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly know a
damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231127 ] Di, 07 März 2006 23:30
tbarry22  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
> >who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
> >reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
> >that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
> >books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
> >anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
>
> As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<snip>",
> I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my little
> thoughts from the posting preceding yours.
>
> JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
> revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
> dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
> put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly know a
> damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
> capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
> have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
> deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
> --

We do know that Lily didn't perform any magic that saved Harry's life.
The AK backfire was a magical reaction to her sacrifice. We know she's
not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket. We also know
that whenever JKR wants to convey an irrefutable fact to the reader,
then she has Dumbledore or Hermione say it. We therefore can conclude
that there are three or four peple who know about the Horcruxes (it IS
possible that RAB told Dumbledore about it before going to retrieve it,
if that theory is correct). At the very least, we know that there
could at most be only a handful of people who even know about
Horcruxes. Also, when did JKR say we were going to learn something
"shocking" about Lily? Learning something we don't already know about
a character doesn't necessarily mean the new information is shocking.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231128 ] Di, 07 März 2006 23:34
wadkin2000  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
> >who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
> >reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
> >that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
> >books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
> >anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
>
> As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<snip>",
> I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my little
> thoughts from the posting preceding yours.
>
> JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
> revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
> dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
> put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly know a
> damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
> capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
> have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
> deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
> --
> Chris


It will be very interesting to see what the shocking information is
about Lily Potter in book seven!
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231138 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 02:31
Matt Clara  
"BaJoRi" <baronjosefr [at] aol.com> wrote in message
news:Pb6Pf.21347$Pu3.8966 [at] fe12.news.easynews.com...
>
> "Froggy" <shelbel007_2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4g4Pf.650$k75.225 [at] newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Brent Braten" <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote in message
>> news:45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com...
>>>
>>> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>>>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>>>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>>>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>>>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>>>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>>>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>>>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>>>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>>>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>>>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>>>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>>>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>>>> sorry posting this!)
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that
>>> Tom's
>>> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The
>>> reason
>>> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
>>> trophies.
>>>
>>> BB
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There's an idea... Good point.

>
> I mentioned that possibility a couple months ago. I am still thinking that
> Harry is the fourth, rather than Nagini though. V had alreay indicated,
> when talking about how he possessed creatures to survive, that snakes were
> better and easier for that purpose. So V possessing Nagini isn't so great
> a thing.
>

And I'm still going with the "Harry is a Horcrux is such a lame plot twist
that JKR could never stoop so low" theory.

--
Regards,
Matt Clara
www.mattclara.com
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231149 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 04:00
wadkin2000  
tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> > In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> > tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >
> > >But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
> > >who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
> > >reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
> > >that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
> > >books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
> > >anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
> >
> > As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<snip>",
> > I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my little
> > thoughts from the posting preceding yours.
> >
> > JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
> > revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
> > dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
> > put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly know a
> > damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
> > capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
> > have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
> > deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
> > --
>
> We do know that Lily didn't perform any magic that saved Harry's life.
> The AK backfire was a magical reaction to her sacrifice. We know she's
> not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket. We also know
> that whenever JKR wants to convey an irrefutable fact to the reader,
> then she has Dumbledore or Hermione say it. We therefore can conclude
> that there are three or four peple who know about the Horcruxes (it IS
> possible that RAB told Dumbledore about it before going to retrieve it,
> if that theory is correct). At the very least, we know that there
> could at most be only a handful of people who even know about
> Horcruxes. Also, when did JKR say we were going to learn something
> "shocking" about Lily? Learning something we don't already know about
> a character doesn't necessarily mean the new information is shocking.


JK gave an interview in 1999 with WBUR Radio and she said, "The
important thing about Harry's mother, the really, really, significant
thing, you're going to find out in two parts. You'll find out alot
more about her in Book 5 or you'll find out something very significant
about her in Book 5. Then you'll find out something incredibly
important about her in Book 7." Now, granted, "significant" and
"incredibly important" do not necessarily mean "shocking", but I think
you get the idea. Regarding the knowledge of the horcruxes, IMO, I
don't think we can safely conclude that there are three or four people
who know about them. There isn't enough evidence to support that.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231170 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 06:05
Oly Ink  
"Green-Eyed Chris" <cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de> wrote in message news:cwlNOSPAM-
> I would rather have such things rehashed a hundred >times than to watch
this place deteriorate into a Charlie >Brown Theological Seminary.
*tee-hee! I love that. I'm using it in our next meeting at work. ;)
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231180 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 07:57
Toon  
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:53:20 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
Chris) wrote:

>
>1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
>the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
>he needs a quick *soul lift*?
>
He wants to take over Hogwarts?
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231182 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 08:02
Toon  
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 18:32:26 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
Chris) wrote:

>In article <CqaPf.11318$Sp2.3878 [at] fed1read02>, "Steve Szostek"
><nospam [at] here.com> wrote:
>
>><wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message =
>>news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or =
>>bad)
>>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the =
>>obvious
>>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. =20
>><snip>
>>
>>If Harry's scar is a Horcrux, V created it by ACCIDENT when he tried
>>to kill Harry. I dont think any of them, V,DD, or Harry are aware of it.
>
>I tend to agree with the "if" part. I also see the possibility that Lily
>somehow set it all up so that it couldn't become a Horcrux in the first
>place. Perhaps she knew that LV, very shortly, would have a freshly ripped
>soul fragment with her name on it. Perhaps she used ancient magic to
>secure the transfer of *her* bit to Harry. It may now be in his scar, but
>that alone doesn't make it a Horcrux that LV would have free access to.

Lily killed somebody?!
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231183 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 08:02
Toon  
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:59:10 -0500, drusilla <me [at] me.net> wrote:

>tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com escribió:
>> But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
>> who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
>> reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
>> that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
>> books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
>> anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
>
>If RAB told DD about the Horcruxes, then DD had not made a unnecessarily
>trip that costed his life

Unless he wanted to die
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231184 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 08:05
Toon  
On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 21:30:27 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
Chris) wrote:


>capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
>have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
>deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.

Good Grief!
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231194 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 13:26
Kish  
Toon wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:53:20 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
> Chris) wrote:
>
>
>>1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
>>the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
>>he needs a quick *soul lift*?
>>
>
> He wants to take over Hogwarts?

Well, then he could give himself the DADA professor job, you see.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231196 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 14:28
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <1141770657.660248.214210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:

>Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
>> In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
>> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>>
>> >But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
>> >who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
>> >reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
>> >that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
>> >books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
>> >anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
>>
>> As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<snip>",
>> I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my little
>> thoughts from the posting preceding yours.
>>
>> JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
>> revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
>> dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
>> put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly know a
>> damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
>> capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would rather
>> have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
>> deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
>> --
>
>We do know that Lily didn't perform any magic that saved Harry's life.
>The AK backfire was a magical reaction to her sacrifice.

You see Lily as being passive with regard to the use of magic. I see the
possibility that she was being active (proactive?) in a manner that did
not necessarily have anything to do with the rebounding AK (e.g Lily's
eyes).

> We know she's
>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.

We do not!

> We also know
>that whenever JKR wants to convey an irrefutable fact to the reader,
>then she has Dumbledore or Hermione say it.

Hermione knows less about Lily than Harry. DD withholds information from
Harry until he believes he is old enough to handle it.

> We therefore can conclude
>that there are three or four peple who know about the Horcruxes (it IS
>possible that RAB told Dumbledore about it before going to retrieve it,
>if that theory is correct).

At least four know specifically about *the* Horcruxes at present time; our
trio and LV.

> At the very least, we know that there
>could at most be only a handful of people who even know about
>Horcruxes.

That includes all the Death Eaters? GoF, Ch.33:

"And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I
would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long
ago, to guard myself against mortal death?"

"I, who have gone further than
anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my
goal ­ to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared
that one or more of my experiments had workedŠ for I had not
been killed, though the curse should have done it."

> Also, when did JKR say we were going to learn something
>"shocking" about Lily? Learning something we don't already know about
>a character doesn't necessarily mean the new information is shocking.

I purposely refrained from the use of quotation marks as I had only read
about the remark. I trust that wadkin2000's reference contains the correct
quote.

My overall impression is that you are working with a somewhat personalized
version of what "we know".
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231204 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 16:41
wadkin2000  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <1141770657.660248.214210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>,
> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
>
> >Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> >> In article <1141757641.848016.98940 [at] p10g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>,
> >> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com wrote:
> >>
> >> >But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
> >> >who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
> >> >reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even kn=
ow
> >> >that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
> >> >books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
> >> >anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
> >>
> >> As you neither use the standard method of followup posting nor a "<sni=
p>",
> >> I am forced to proceed on the presumtion that you are addressing my li=
ttle
> >> thoughts from the posting preceding yours.
> >>
> >> JKR has said that there is still something huge and/or shocking to be
> >> revealed about Lily. We do not know the extent of her knowledge of the
> >> dark arts. We do not know if she knew RAB or not. We do not know if she
> >> put the note in the locket or not. If you think about it, we hardly kn=
ow a
> >> damned thing about Lily. We do not know what ancient magic is or is
> >> capable of. I was simply taking the liberty of speculating. I would ra=
ther
> >> have such things rehashed a hundred times than to watch this place
> >> deteriorate into a Charlie Brown Theological Seminary.
> >> --
> >
> >We do know that Lily didn't perform any magic that saved Harry's life.
> >The AK backfire was a magical reaction to her sacrifice.
>
> You see Lily as being passive with regard to the use of magic. I see the
> possibility that she was being active (proactive?) in a manner that did
> not necessarily have anything to do with the rebounding AK (e.g Lily's
> eyes).
>
> > We know she's
> >not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>
> We do not!
>
> > We also know
> >that whenever JKR wants to convey an irrefutable fact to the reader,
> >then she has Dumbledore or Hermione say it.
>
> Hermione knows less about Lily than Harry. DD withholds information from
> Harry until he believes he is old enough to handle it.
>
> > We therefore can conclude
> >that there are three or four peple who know about the Horcruxes (it IS
> >possible that RAB told Dumbledore about it before going to retrieve it,
> >if that theory is correct).
>
> At least four know specifically about *the* Horcruxes at present time; our
> trio and LV.
>
> > At the very least, we know that there
> >could at most be only a handful of people who even know about
> >Horcruxes.
>
> That includes all the Death Eaters? GoF, Ch.33:
>
> "And then I ask myself, but how could they have believed I
> would not rise again? They, who knew the steps I took, long
> ago, to guard myself against mortal death?"
>
> "I, who have gone further than
> anybody along the path that leads to immortality. You know my
> goal =AD to conquer death. And now, I was tested, and it appeared
> that one or more of my experiments had worked=8A for I had not
> been killed, though the curse should have done it."
>
> > Also, when did JKR say we were going to learn something
> >"shocking" about Lily? Learning something we don't already know about
> >a character doesn't necessarily mean the new information is shocking.
>
> I purposely refrained from the use of quotation marks as I had only read
> about the remark. I trust that wadkin2000's reference contains the correct
> quote.
>
> My overall impression is that you are working with a somewhat personalized
> version of what "we know".
> --
> Chris


It does.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231211 ] Mi, 08 März 2006 17:24
drusilla  
Toon escribió:
> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:59:10 -0500, drusilla <me [at] me.net> wrote:
>
>> tbarry22 [at] yahoo.com escribió:
>>> But according to Dumbledore, he, Harry and Voldemort are the only ones
>>> who know that Voldemort posesses Horcruxes. Lily would have had no
>>> reason to suspect Voldemort was creating Horcruxes, nor do we even know
>>> that she knew, since it seems like they aren't even mentioned in any
>>> books. (Of course, RAB knows, but it seems unlikely he told
>>> anyone...perhaps he told Dumbledore?)
>> If RAB told DD about the Horcruxes, then DD had not made a unnecessarily
>> trip that costed his life
>
> Unless he wanted to die

Why don't destroy the HOrcrux first, considering it was in his own
organisation HQ.?
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231291 ] Do, 09 März 2006 10:18
Toon  
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:26:08 GMT, Kish <Kish_K [at] pacbell.net> wrote:

>Toon wrote:
>> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:53:20 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
>> Chris) wrote:
>>
>>
>>>1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
>>>the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
>>>he needs a quick *soul lift*?
>>>
>>
>> He wants to take over Hogwarts?
>
>Well, then he could give himself the DADA professor job, you see.

I think the job was a cover for his true plans, which could involve
the Dark Arts excused as research for Defense and countering. I doubt
he was so obsessed with the positron when he was practically promised
Minister by Slughorn a few years back.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231293 ] Do, 09 März 2006 10:21
Toon  
On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
Chris) wrote:

>> We know she's
>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>
>We do not!

Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231302 ] Do, 09 März 2006 13:07
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
<toon [at] toon.com> wrote:

>On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
>Chris) wrote:
>
>>> We know she's
>>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>>
>>We do not!
>
>Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
>Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
>the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.

Prove it.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231305 ] Do, 09 März 2006 14:01
Lady Grey  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
> <toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
> >Chris) wrote:
> >
> >>> We know she's
> >>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
> >>
> >>We do not!
> >
> >Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
> >Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
> >the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
>
> Prove it.

check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.

---
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231329 ] Do, 09 März 2006 19:12
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <1141909308.014736.139440 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
>> In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
>> <toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
>>
>> >On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
>> >Chris) wrote:
>> >
>> >>> We know she's
>> >>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>> >>
>> >>We do not!
>> >
>> >Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
>> >Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
>> >the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
>>
>> Prove it.
>
>check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.

Are you trying to insinuate that I didn't memorized that one long ago?

I suggest that you look up the definitions of "know" and "prove" to
understand the direction of my argumentation. Hint: it has something to do
with scientific method and academic discussion. Put another way, think of
how you had to defend your instant Horcrux creating soup mix (my words).

BTW, I'm glad to see that you've decided to neglect your scholastic
obligations and return here, where you belong (although it was nice and
quiet). Those stupid old nasty tests aren't going to understand you
anyway, are they? ;-P
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231350 ] Do, 09 März 2006 22:39
Lady Grey  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <1141909308.014736.139440 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
> Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> >> In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
> >> <toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
> >> >Chris) wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>> We know she's
> >> >>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
> >> >>
> >> >>We do not!
> >> >
> >> >Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
> >> >Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
> >> >the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
> >>
> >> Prove it.
> >
> >check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.
>
> Are you trying to insinuate that I didn't memorized that one long ago?

you're right i shoulda known better! :)

> I suggest that you look up the definitions of "know" and "prove" to
> understand the direction of my argumentation. Hint: it has something to do
> with scientific method and academic discussion.

hmm, so what is the merit in getting someone to state a canonical proof
(of which there likely isn't one) for something that you youself
(outside of canon) know to be true?

> Put another way, think of
> how you had to defend your instant Horcrux creating soup mix (my words).

yes, definately your words :)

> BTW, I'm glad to see that you've decided to neglect your scholastic
> obligations and return here,

i was only going to have a peek but i ended up writing a load of
replies... i guess i must be addicted or something :S

> where you belong (although it was nice and
> quiet). Those stupid old nasty tests aren't going to understand you
> anyway, are they? ;-P

or if they do they are keeping it awfully quiet

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231415 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 10:00
Toon  
On Thu, 09 Mar 2006 13:07:26 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
Chris) wrote:

>In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
><toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
>>Chris) wrote:
>>
>>>> We know she's
>>>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>>>
>>>We do not!
>>
>>Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
>>Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
>>the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
>
>Prove it.

OK, JK specifically stated Lily's never been a DE. If Lily had the
horcrux, she'd have bargained Harry's life for it. Lily wouldn't risk
her life and abandon her son and husband on a suicide mission. RAB is
initials. LE or LP doesn't really fit, even if her middle name starts
with A. RAB was left as a direct reveal to Vodlemort. Upon seeing
RAB, he would immediately think of one specific person. Someone he'd
never expect to do this to him. Lily thrice defied him. It'd make
more sense for her to try a fourth. And so no mocking note would be
needed.

However, I'll grant you she might have known RAB (especially if it is
Regalus), and wrote the note and placed it in the fake locket. But
she didn't steal it. and there's 1 99% chance she didn't help in any
way, shape, or form. But you can have she wrote it.
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231419 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 10:48
Lady Grey  
Toon wrote:
> On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 12:26:08 GMT, Kish <Kish_K [at] pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> >Toon wrote:
> >> On Tue, 07 Mar 2006 14:53:20 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
> >> Chris) wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
> >>>the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
> >>>he needs a quick *soul lift*?
> >>>
> >>
> >> He wants to take over Hogwarts?
> >
> >Well, then he could give himself the DADA professor job, you see.
>
> I think the job was a cover for his true plans, which could involve
> the Dark Arts excused as research for Defense and countering. I doubt
> he was so obsessed with the positron when he was practically promised
> Minister by Slughorn a few years back.

but according to AD's speculation Tom was more interested into getting
back at Hogwarts to search for heirlooms and convert students than
politics.

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231447 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 15:59
cwlNOSPAM  
In article <1141940387.744969.312310 [at] u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
>> In article <1141909308.014736.139440 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
>> Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> >Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
>> >> In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
>> >> <toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
>> >> >Chris) wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>> We know she's
>> >> >>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>We do not!
>> >> >
>> >> >Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
>> >> >Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
>> >> >the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
>> >>
>> >> Prove it.
>> >
>> >check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.
>>
>> Are you trying to insinuate that I didn't memorized that one long ago?
>
>you're right i shoulda known better! :)
>
>> I suggest that you look up the definitions of "know" and "prove" to
>> understand the direction of my argumentation. Hint: it has something to do
>> with scientific method and academic discussion.
>
>hmm, so what is the merit in getting someone to state a canonical proof
>(of which there likely isn't one) for something that you youself
>(outside of canon) know to be true?

Gobbledygook and codswallop! You flaunt my suggestion and continue to
misuse the word "know"! (Detention and twenty points from Hufflepuff!)

Had you, at least, put the word "know" in quotation marks, I could have
responded: OK, typical female logic. Her brain is the slave of raging,
torrential hormonal influences and no further discussion is possible. (Of
course, I purposely exaggerate my point. Emotive intelligence should never
be underestimated. I believe I owe a few points to that myself.)

You, yourself, deliver a key word, "canon", which I would, for the sake of
discussion, equate with truth. Let's just agree that proven knowledge is
equal to canon. If something cannot be proven, but does not contradict
canon, it is a valid (soup mix) theory. So if I maintain that the
possibility exists that Lily was RAB, or his friend, and you cannot
disprove it with canon, then I say keep your fingers off the keyboard.
What you emotionally believe that you or we *know* is not worth dragon
dung.

>
>> Put another way, think of
>> how you had to defend your instant Horcrux creating soup mix (my words).
>
>yes, definately your words :)

The time it took you to concede that it was only a possibility and that
you didn't believe in it yourself <wink, wink> annoyed the hell out of me.
But I did take positive note of your tenacity.

>
>> BTW, I'm glad to see that you've decided to neglect your scholastic
>> obligations and return here,
>
>i was only going to have a peek but i ended up writing a load of
>replies... i guess i must be addicted or something :S

I'm biting my tongue on that one (I need a fix every now and then myself).

>
>> where you belong (although it was nice and
>> quiet). Those stupid old nasty tests aren't going to understand you
>> anyway, are they? ;-P
>
>or if they do they are keeping it awfully quiet

They're lurking in foxholes with their guns pointed in your direction. You
need to surprise them and attack from their rear. Go in prepared and they
will faint from the shock! I am speaking from experience and trying not to
sound fatherly in doing so.
--
Chris
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231478 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:03
Zolak of Twylo  
On 2006-03-06 18:39:23 -0500, "Brent Braten" <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> said:

>
> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>> sorry posting this!)
>>
>
> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that Tom's
> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The reason
> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
> trophies.
>
> BB


I just finished rereading CoS and that exact same thought occurred to me!!!!
Great minds think alike?

--
Enjoy,

Zolak of Twylo
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231479 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:03
Zolak of Twylo  
On 2006-03-06 21:26:55 -0500, "BaJoRi" <baronjosefr [at] aol.com> said:

>
> "Froggy" <shelbel007_2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:4g4Pf.650$k75.225 [at] newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net...
>>
>> "Brent Braten" <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote in message
>> news:45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com...
>>>
>>> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>>>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>>>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>>>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>>>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>>>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>>>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>>>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>>>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>>>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>>>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>>>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>>>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>>>> sorry posting this!)
>>>>
>>>
>>> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that Tom's
>>> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The reason
>>> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
>>> trophies.
>>>
>>> BB
>>>
>>>
>>
>> There's an idea... Good point.
>> --
>> (*)(*)
>> (------)
>> Froggy
>>
>
> I mentioned that possibility a couple months ago. I am still thinking
> that Harry is the fourth, rather than Nagini though. V had alreay
> indicated, when talking about how he possessed creatures to survive,
> that snakes were better and easier for that purpose. So V possessing
> Nagini isn't so great a thing.


Nah. Too many holes in the "Harry is a Horcrux" idea.

--
Enjoy,

Zolak of Twylo
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231480 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:06
Zolak of Twylo  
On 2006-03-07 08:53:20 -0500, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed Chris) said:

> In article <45idnZixwowVWpHZnZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d [at] bresnan.com>, "Brent Braten"
> <bbraten [at] bresnan.net> wrote:
>
>> <wadkin2000 [at] yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:1141685737.060729.299210 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com...
>>> First off, let me preface this by going on the record (for good or bad)
>>> that I am not a member of the "Harry is a Horcrux" club. However, a
>>> thought did occur to me today regarding this. It seems that the obvious
>>> disadvantage of putting a horcrux in a living being is the
>>> contradictory mortality/immortality issue. However, when Nagini
>>> attacked Arthur Weasley in the MOM, Harry said that he was the snake at
>>> that time, and I think it was DD who told him the reason he experienced
>>> it in that manner was because Voldemort was possessing Nagini then. In
>>> OOTP, Ch.37, Voldemort takes possession of Harry and taunts DD to kill
>>> him. If, hypothetically, an advantage of placing a horcrux in a living
>>> being is possession of that being, wouldn't that add support to the
>>> whole "Harry is a Horcrux" theory, since both Harry & Nagini at
>>> different times were possessed by Voldemort? (I know I'm going to be
>>> sorry posting this!)
>>>
>>
>> No, don't be sorry. However, I am more leaning towards the idea that Tom's
>> award for Special Services to the School is the unknown horcrux. The reason
>> I am leaning this way is because of Dumbledore's comment that Tom likes
>> trophies.
>
> I've been saying something similar for 7 months now. But I think the award
> might be a plaque that simply stays at the school. After all, Harry and
> Ron were both given "Special Awards for Services to the School" in CoS -
> Ch. 18. Neither of the two has mentioned having anthing tangible in their
> possession.
>
> CoS - Ch. 13:
> "Riddle¹s burnished gold shield was tucked away in a corner
> cabinet. It didn¹t carry details of why it had been given to him
> (»Good thing, too, or it¹d be even bigger and I¹d still be polishing
> it«, said Ron). However, they did find Riddle¹s name on an old
> Medal for Magical Merit, and on a list of old Head Boys."
>
> Tom's "Medal for Magical Merit" sounds like he might have taken it with
> him, turned it into a Horcrux, at his leisure, and, any time later, found
> a way to smuggle it into the trophy room (or was it that flick of the
> wrist?). Perhaps the award was even initiated by Rowena Ravenclaw.
>
> But that's not my point. It's not worth a quibble. I think the idea of a
> Horcrux in the trophy room fits well with two other ideas.
>
> 1) What are LV's goals? To kill Harry and take over Hogwarts. So where is
> the *final showdown* going to take place and where is LV going to go when
> he needs a quick *soul lift*?
>
> 2) Who is in charge of the trophy room and who is going to perform magic
> for the first time very late in life (perhaps the last minute of his
> life)? Might he simply be the catalyst who activates some piece of the
> ancient magic which permeates Hogwarts itself?

Yes. Those thoughts occurred to me as well. It all fits in with what we know
and what JKR has hinted at.

--
Enjoy,

Zolak of Twylo
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231483 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:09
Lady Grey  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> In article <1141940387.744969.312310 [at] u72g2000cwu.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
> Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> >> In article <1141909308.014736.139440 [at] e56g2000cwe.googlegroups.com>, "Jane
> >> Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
> >> >> In article <epsv02tdiaap4n24h5n3rjs8nvjohpuupp [at] 4ax.com>, Toon
> >> >> <toon [at] toon.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >On Wed, 08 Mar 2006 14:28:41 +0100, cwlNOSPAM [at] freenet.de (Green-Eyed
> >> >> >Chris) wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >>> We know she's
> >> >> >>>not RAB and therefore did not put the note in the locket.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>We do not!
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Yes we do. A DE did it, and Lily was no DE. RAB does not equate to
> >> >> >Lily Unknown Potter in any plausible way. Lily would have destroyed
> >> >> >the locket right then and there, and left it to mock Voldemort.
> >> >>
> >> >> Prove it.
> >> >
> >> >check this out; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R.A.B.
> >>
> >> Are you trying to insinuate that I didn't memorized that one long ago?
> >
> >you're right i shoulda known better! :)
> >
> >> I suggest that you look up the definitions of "know" and "prove" to
> >> understand the direction of my argumentation. Hint: it has something to do
> >> with scientific method and academic discussion.
> >
> >hmm, so what is the merit in getting someone to state a canonical proof
> >(of which there likely isn't one) for something that you youself
> >(outside of canon) know to be true?
>
> Gobbledygook and codswallop! You flaunt my suggestion and continue to
> misuse the word "know"! (Detention and twenty points from Hufflepuff!)
>
> Had you, at least, put the word "know" in quotation marks, I could have
> responded: OK, typical female logic. Her brain is the slave of raging,

i think it's unfair of you to relate my comment to my being female...

> torrential hormonal influences and no further discussion is possible. (Of
> course, I purposely exaggerate my point. Emotive intelligence should never
> be underestimated. I believe I owe a few points to that myself.)

okay, whatever

> You, yourself, deliver a key word, "canon", which I would, for the sake of
> discussion, equate with truth. Let's just agree that proven knowledge is
> equal to canon. If something cannot be proven, but does not contradict
> canon, it is a valid (soup mix) theory. So if I maintain that the
> possibility exists that Lily was RAB, or his friend, and you cannot
> disprove it with canon, then I say keep your fingers off the keyboard.
> What you emotionally believe that you or we *know* is not worth dragon
> dung.

so you believe that it is still possible that RAB isn't Sirius'
brother? either it is possible or it isn't. whether we know, (yes know,
not "know") due to reasons outside of canon or due to reasons within is
irrelervant. and debating it is counter-productive. and wasteful of
time. and you might as well ignore all of JKR's interviews.

> >> Put another way, think of
> >> how you had to defend your instant Horcrux creating soup mix (my words).
> >
> >yes, definately your words :)
>
> The time it took you to concede that it was only a possibility and that

I have always proposed the idea as a possibility. see my first ever
post about it, in thread "Harry probably is a horcrux, yknow!" (note
the probably and not definately) where i refer to it only as an idea or
theory or probability, never a certainty.

> you didn't believe in it yourself <wink, wink> annoyed the hell out of me.

i believe it is very likely but it is impossible for me to believe in
it 100% before book7 comes out.

> But I did take positive note of your tenacity.

well that was forced out of me in response to others' (misinformed)
insistance that there was no way harry could be a horcrux.

> >> where you belong (although it was nice and
> >> quiet). Those stupid old nasty tests aren't going to understand you
> >> anyway, are they? ;-P
> >
> >or if they do they are keeping it awfully quiet
>
> They're lurking in foxholes with their guns pointed in your direction. You
> need to surprise them and attack from their rear. Go in prepared and they
> will faint from the shock! I am speaking from experience and trying not to
> sound fatherly in doing so.

:S are we still talking about paper and ink? :)

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231485 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:16
Lady Grey  
Zolak of Twylo wrote:
<snip>
> Nah. Too many holes in the "Harry is a Horcrux" idea.

really like what?

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231486 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:22
Lady Grey  
Matt Clara wrote:
<snip>
>
> And I'm still going with the "Harry is a Horcrux is such a lame plot twist
> that JKR could never stoop so low" theory.

so you don't think that if harry had a portion of LV's soul in him then
it would explain:-

1) how harry has LV's powers (concidering that we know that the diary
had LV's powers and was a horcrux)
2) why, in CoS, "Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he didn't
just throw
Riddle's diary away. The fact was that even though he knew the diary
was blank, he kept absentmindedly picking it up and turning the pages,
as though it were a story he wanted to finish. And while Harry was
sure he had never heard the name T. M. Riddle before, it still seemed
to mean something to him, almost as though
Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, and had
halfforgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends before
Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."
3)how harry is able to drift into LV's mind
4)why harry feels pain when LV is near

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231487 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 21:26
Lady Grey  
Green-Eyed Chris wrote:
<snip>
> Gobbledygook and codswallop! You flaunt my suggestion and continue to
<snip>

btw, I didn't mean to flaunt anything (honest)

--
Jane Grey
Re: Horcrux Harry [message #231501 ] Fr, 10 März 2006 23:08
Joe C  
"Jane Grey" <jane.grey [at] hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message =
news:1142022173.572593.109120 [at] z34g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Matt Clara wrote:
> <snip>
>>
>> And I'm still going with the "Harry is a Horcrux is such a lame plot =
twist
>> that JKR could never stoop so low" theory.
>=20
> so you don't think that if harry had a portion of LV's soul in him =
then
> it would explain:-
>=20
> 1) how harry has LV's powers (concidering that we know that the diary
> had LV's powers and was a horcrux)
> 2) why, in CoS, "Harry couldn't explain, even to himself, why he =
didn't
> just throw
> Riddle's diary away. The fact was that even though he knew the diary
> was blank, he kept absentmindedly picking it up and turning the pages,
> as though it were a story he wanted to finish. And while Harry was
> sure he had never heard the name T. M. Riddle before, it still seemed
> to mean something to him, almost as though
> Riddle was a friend he'd had when he was very small, and had
> halfforgotten. But this was absurd. He'd never had friends before
> Hogwarts, Dudley had made sure of that."
> 3)how harry is able to drift into LV's mind
> 4)why harry feels pain when LV is near
>=20

5) (from COS) "Voldemort put a piece of himself in me?"=20
Dumbledore says "it certainly seems so" "Not something he intended to =
do, I'm sure".
Vorheriges Thema:YARABT (Yet Another RAB Theory)
Nächstes Thema:Christian home, Harry Potter rules
Gehe zu:
  


aktuelle Zeit: Fr Mai 25 13:50:41 CEST 2012

Insgesamt benötigte Zeit, um die Seite zu erzeugen: 0,13098 Sekunden
.:: Startseite - Hinweise - Impressum ::.

Powered