posted
The whole Harry the Horcrux theory is so illogical it's almost funny. First of all, LV uses significant deaths for his Horcruxes. Lily and James are not significant deaths (or were not at the point of their death, we all know Lily's was important in the end), so obviously he wouldn't prepare a Horcrux death before killing them and then accidentally have it go off on Harry. That's such a pathetic blunder for such a powerful wizard.
Next, the whole reason Harry has LV-like powers is because, according to the full prophecy, LV will "mark him as his equal". Thus, he transfers several of his abilities to Harry.
Also, LV obviously WAS posssesing the snake when it attacked Arthur. They (being DD and Snape and other Order members) make countless references to LV finally noticing Harry's infringing upon LV's thoughts. LV had no clue that Harry could see into his mind until that point, and THAT is why he started using Occulemency in HBP, because Harry could infiltrate his mind with absurd ease while LV had to specifically try.
And, LV just isn't stupid enough to try to kill Harry if Harry is a Horcrux. Not only is he not stupid enough, it doesn't even make sense, plotwise for JKR to allow such a blunder from such a cunning wizard. Plus Harry is so overwhelmingly good, it's near impossible for him to be sharing a fragment, much less 1/7 of LV's soul.
And as for the wand, I'm not really clear on the whole Priori Incantatum business. If you watch, LV used his wand plenty on Harry. He Crucio'd Harry and made him bow down. I think it just doesn't work when the spells hit each other, and maybe when theyre opposing.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Could the scar itself be a Horocrux or a failed horocrux? Maybe LV put an object in the shape of the lightning bolt on Harry to facilitate the process - like the jewel in a phylactery - and it was consumed when the spell rebounded."
Dag, you know that in D&D a lich uses a "phylactery" to store its soul? The whole horcrux thing is straight out of D&D. I think I said it before, but Voldemort is a lich.
I think whether "Harry is a Horcrux" or not, you may be right about the shape of the scar. Dumbledore has commented several times about the significance of the scar. It seems like the shape is part of its significance. I wonder if there is some brief mention of an item with a lightening bolt on it somewhere that we've all missed.
I wouldn't bet that Harry is a horcrux, but I'm pretty sure the attempted horcrux-creation had something to do with it. There's something very horcrux-like about the whole Harry-has-Voldemort's-powers thing.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Didn't Harry see his Dad's ghost when he broke Voldemort's spell at the end of Book 4?"
Somewhere I read an explanation (maybe it was where Harry talked to Nearly Headless Nick) that what Harry saw was not his father's ghost, but some kind of image similar to a wizard portrait (maybe it was in the same interview where Rowling said Dumbledore's portrait was no great help). Wish I could remember where I read it.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's when DD is explaining the difference between an "echo" and "ghost" to Sirius, I believe. He brings Sirius and makes Harry account for what happened, and Sirius flips when Harry says he sees James. DD then explains an echo is just an imprint of the person.
And personally, I think the scar is a physical manifestation of Voldemort "marking" Harry as his equal. Although there is likely a as of yet unexplained reason for its existence. But no Harry Horcrux, I'll never buy that. It's like the Ron is Dumbledore theory. The only way Harry Horcrux is possible is if JKR says some crazy reason in book 7. Which would ruin all credibility for the books.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Dag, you know that in D&D a lich uses a "phylactery" to store its soul? The whole horcrux thing is straight out of D&D. I think I said it before, but Voldemort is a lich.
Yep, your reference was what reminded me of the word.
If the item was supposed to be the horcrux, then it might have been destroyed or could still be there. If the item was only part of the ritual, it might have been some kind of conduit that temporarily connects the victim and murderer.
Either way, it could be that the LV-Harry connection is the result of a horcrux-like object, created accidentally, that has a piece of both Harry and Voldemort's soul, although we've been given no indication that Harry's humanity is suffering.
posted
Aaah, I think JK just slammed the Snape-James theory.
From her website:
quote: Did James and Lupin switch bodies before James was killed? An ingenious theory, but no; James would never have saved himself and left his wife and son to die.
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: " I wouldn't bet that Harry is a horcrux, but I'm pretty sure the attempted horcrux-creation had something to do with it. There's something very horcrux-like about the whole Harry-has-Voldemort's-powers thing.
This is exactly what I was getting at -- I think LV's attempt at making a Horcrux from Harry's (SIGNIFICANT) death (interrupted by Lily's sacrifice) -- has a LOT to do with the connection between the two.
To ignore the obvious connection is so illogical it's almost funny. Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
How did Voldemort get his wand back after the failed curse? I'm assuming he dropped it after his body "died". Who picked it up and gave it back to him? From GofF we know that no one used it between killing the Potters and killing Bertha Jorkins (or the old gardener). If he had it, how did he carry it around and why didn't he use it?
Posts: 79 | Registered: Nov 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Squirmy Wormy probably picked it up, at least that's my guess. If not maybe LV has some mystical Sauron like obsession with his wand, and knows where it's at at all times. Were I him, I'd Horcrux my own wand.
Also, I can't remember if anyone ever discussed the methods to remove LV's soul from the Horcruxes. Seems to me that there is some advanced spell or incantation or some kind of magical procedure that can remove the soul without destroying the object. So technically, Harry wouldn't necessarily need to kill things would he? I mean, we're all assuming that Harry has to kill LV, which is what the prophecy implies. But if DD could extract LV soul from the Gaunt ring without destroying the ring, then couldn't Harry extract the LV soul from the Horcruxes and then use the same procedure to wrench LV's soul from his own body?
Edit: Scratch most of that second paragraph, as Harry destroyed the soul portion of the diary by detroying the diary itself...sort of...
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Harry destroyed the soul portion of the diary by detroying the diary itself...sort of... "
Note: Harry didn't just destroy the diary. He used a powerful magical creature's fang and venom to destroy it.
"Either way, it could be that the LV-Harry connection is the result of a horcrux-like object, created accidentally, that has a piece of both Harry and Voldemort's soul, although we've been given no indication that Harry's humanity is suffering."
Dumbledore explained to Harry that even though he carries some of Voldemort's characteristics, he still has his own free will. His actions and choices are his own. Kinda gets really deep into where good and evil resides. In the soul? In the mind? Voldemort retains all his magical powers despite removing 6/7ths of his soul from his body. And he remains just as evil without the rest of his soul.
I read an interview with Rowling where someone accused Hogwarts of being un-christian, and she kind of snickered and made a veiled comment about how christian Hogwarts actually is. It could have just been a reference to the fact that Hogwarts celebrates Christmas and Easter, but it could also be that ultimately Rowling will put her own spin on Christian forgiveness. The idea that "we are all sinners, but we're all forgivable" goes along with what we know about how Rowling writes characters. All of her heroes are flawed, and sometimes downright mean. But are they evil? Maybe she intends to answer that.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Olivet: DD made Snape agree to kill him, because he thought it was best. Remember Hagrid overheard Snape saying he 'couldn't do it' and DD talling him he had to...
Might have had a lot to do with DD trying to save Draco
At the end, he(Snape) stops Harry from using any unforgivable curses, and doesn't hurl back any of his own. He also tells him he has to learn Occlumancy or he's useless -- basically giving him lessons while he's fleeing.
Oh, and RAB is definitely Regulus. In book five, the kids find this big locket at Grimmauld Place and nobody can open it. DUH. Regulus is dead, sure, but the locket was there. Maybe Mundungus stole it and sold it, but it WAS there.
Olivet, I agree wholeheartedly with what you posted above. With all the setup we get in book six, book seven could be nearly completed.
Harry may have inherited more than one horcrux from Regulus. The object of the cave trip could have been to intercept Regulus' note to Voldy and thus prevent LV from discovering RAB's collection before Harry gets to it.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't actually buy the "Harry is a horocrux" theory, but why are peopel assuming that Harry has to remain alive to be a horocrux? Couldn't his preserved dead body serve just as well?
---
RAB, I think Regulus is too obvious an answer. JKR knew people were going to be looking intently for this and he's right there for the finding. I think it's either a nickname (like Right Angry Bastard or some such) or refers possibly to one of the owners of the store that Tom Riddle worked at, both of whose last names end in B.
---
I was really hoping that Ron would shine in this book. He's been by far the weakest leg of the tripod. The only reason he's special so far is that he's Harry's friend. He hasn't manifested any special powers or affinity for a specific area of magic. I was hoping that he'd show possibly some of the inventiveness of his brothers (and apparently Snape) to balance out Hermione's extensive book knowledge. Or maybe he's an animagus or something special. Right now, were I going dark wizard hunting, I'd want any of the Weasleys save Percy long before I'd take Ron. (I'm anticipating a James Bond/Q-like scene when they stop by George and Fred's s
---
I don't know about the Snape thing. I think that him being simply bad is see through, but him being good is only less transparent. JKR's a sneaky one. I wouldn't be suprised if there is something more going on there than just him working as a double agent.
It seemed to me like Dumbledore spent most of the book putting chairs up on tables, sweeping the floor, and turning off the lights. He was preparing to die (or at least not be there to help Harry). His advice always had an air of "And this will be useful kater when I'm not around." I could almost believe that he had already found the cave he led Harry to, that he was possibly even RAB, and used it as the last experience he could give Harry to train him. There's a bit in the end of HPatSS where Harry say something along the lines of "I think Dumbledore knew what was going on but felt I had a right to face Voldemort." I've regarded most of the dangers Harry's been exposed to as Dumbledore trying to train up the one person who can defeat Voldemort.
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:I'm anticipating a James Bond/Q-like scene when they stop by George and Fred's
This is exactly how I phrased this to my wife. Fred and George building the weapons for the good guys. I even made the James Bond/Q reference.
Posts: 1336 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm, I wonder what Voldy wanted to use when he went to GODRIC's Hollow to make his final Horcrux . . . perhaps a Gryffindor object? Perhaps a sword? Is there anything lightning shaped on the sword (check CoS)? And I'm sticking with Harry as the heir of Gryffindor. Red and gold sparks shot out of his wand . . . Godric's hollow . . . nice symmetry . . . etc.
Posts: 471 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
I mean, who says Voldemort didn't find some non-sword Gryffindor relic? All Dumbledore says is that the sword is the only one he knows about.
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:He(Ron) hasn't manifested any special powers
In HBP he became Master of Obscene Gestures. I'm curious to see how that will be handled in the movie.
Posts: 2655 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think JKR shot down Harry as the Heir of Gryffindor somewhere. I could be wrong though, I wish he was. It makes sense to me that there's a Gryffindoric object hangin' out around the hollow. At the same time though, JKR said that Ravenclaw would have their day so maybe the artifact is Ravenclaw's...
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't actually buy the "Harry is a horocrux" theory, but why are peopel assuming that Harry has to remain alive to be a horocrux?
For me, I got the impression that if that snake thingy is a horcrux, it must be killed to destroy it. So I was projecting that onto Harry. Dunno if I am remembering correctly, though. And perhaps a horcrux can be "transfered".
Posts: 7050 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, I do believe the object has to be destroyed to have the part of the soul removed. At one point, Harry observed that the ring had a "large crack" in it...
Posts: 1591 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
That's right, but I wonder if the physical mark on it came from destroying the object by magic or through physical means...
Posts: 4089 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I always figured it was like in most stories with magical objects (though nothing specific comes to mind right now), where, due to the intense magic needed and expelled during it's destruction, the object breaks slightly. The ring cracked, the diary...spewed ink and had a fang-hole in it?...and I'm assuming the others will be damaged in some way. I'm just wondering if there is any way for Harry to defeat LV without splitting his soul in the process. It seems like DD was adamant that the soul should remain in one piece, so why would he send Harry to do something that would rip it? He also tends to not put much faith into the prophecy...we, like Harry and LV tend to take it word for word, that they'll have to "kill" each other. But DD seems to think the prophecy is only important because LV won't give it a rest. So, maybe Harry actually CAN get rid of all the Horcruxes and then stop LV without killing him...
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
And maybe voldy will repent and become a monk. whatever happened to "neither can live while the other survives"? ONE has got to die. prophecies only DON'T come true when they're not set into motion, but voldy set it into motion by trying to kill harry. Dumbledore puts a lot of faith in this particular prophecy- he doesn't put faith into the ones that trelawny gave because she's a fraud. Supposedly, according to her, Harry's supposed to have died about 937 times before. hence why Dumbledore tries to not listen to her too much. But the REAL prophecies... there's something he puts faith in. But seriously... Voldy the Monk. That could make for an interesting fanfic. "What would have happened if he had parents who loved him..."
Posts: 1591 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I also don't think that the soul is ripped unless you want it to be ripped. Otherwise, the Death eaters would be unstoppable, because they've all killed so mmany people, they'd have horcruxes EVERYWHERE.
Posts: 1591 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, one doesn't HAVE to die. But one will if they both insist on fulfilling the prophecy. It's a poster child case for the self fulfilling prophecy.
I'm thinking Trelawney isn't done with her prophesizing either. I think she has one big one left in her. Why else would Rowling make sure to keep her alive in the story? Many other teachers have faded into the background without a peep.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Okay, to go back pages and pages of posts, there was someone insisting that Ron and Hermione are already solidly a couple, because Ron told Hermione he loved her. (I'm not arguing that they aren't going to end up together, just that it doesn't seem official quite yet.) I thought maybe I had missed something at the end but after listening to the whole thing again, I found the spot. Ron tells Hermione he loves her when he spills ink on his essay and she fixes it. That's not the same kind of an I-love-you. It was a you're-a-great-friend-and-you've-just-saved-me-hours-of-rewriting-I-love-you, not a you're-the-perfect-girl-for-me-and-I-want-to-spend-the-rest-of-my-life-with-you-I-love-you. He was still dating Lav Lav at the time, and trying to make Hermione jealous, not to woo her necessarily.
quote:Also, I don't think that Voldemort used one of his prior Horcruxes to resurrect himself after the AK backfired. That also wouldn't make sense, because then it wouldn't be "immortality" any more than a cat's 9 lives would be. I think that, since his souls are split amongst other objects, it makes the killing of the soul residing in his body impossible as long as those objects are around. That's why he's so pumped up about it. So when the AK backfired, it destroyed his body, but his soul, in addition to the other 5 (and soon to be 6, after Nagini in GOF) survived fully.
That's why it's considered "immortality", because you can kill his body as many times as you want and he'll survive. Thus, Harry must first destroy the remaining four Horcruxes before LV is vulnerable to a mortal death.
No one ever says that Volemort is actually immortal, just that he has gone farther along the path to immortality than any other wizard has. It seems to me as though each horcrux is like an extra life in Mario. It will save you once, but if you use it it's gone. Someone was also talking about how once you destroy all of the horcruxes Harry wouldn't have to kill Voldemort, simply extract the last piece of soul left in his body and kill that. If this were true, then the dementor's kiss would kill the victim, instead of leaving it an empty shell with a horrible existance. If your soul is removed or destroyed you can still live, but you can't really think or act. You're essentially a vegetable.
Finally, as to Trelawny making another prediction, I have no idea as to whether she will or not, but Rowling had other reasons to keep her prominant. Who else could/would have told Harry that it was Snape who had overheard the prophecy and passed the message on to Voldemort? Only she, Dumbledore, and Snape knew that, and the others weren't going to say anything. It would be nice if she or Firenze were able to add something usefull to Harry's store of knowledge, though.
Posts: 1547 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why would Ron and Hermione make such efforts to make one another jealous if they didn't have feelings for each other? By the end of the book they were both single, and both pleased at the fact that they were free to attempt dating one another. Certainly their feelings were at least partially out in the open at that point.
Solidly dating? No. Pushed really hard towards each other and on the verge of dating? Certainly.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:If this were true, then the dementor's kiss would kill the victim, instead of leaving it an empty shell with a horrible existance. If your soul is removed or destroyed you can still live, but you can't really think or act. You're essentially a vegetable.
The dementor's kiss does kill the victim.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
No- it says in the book that "A person can still survive without their soul, as long as their heart and brain are still working." Kind of like keeping someone on life support. Its in book 3.
Posts: 1591 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I also don't think that the soul is ripped unless you want it to be ripped. Otherwise, the Death eaters would be unstoppable, because they've all killed so mmany people, they'd have horcruxes EVERYWHERE.
Tinros, I believe that Dumbledore says explicitly that the act of murder splits a soul. It's just that a horcrux isn't automatically manufactured whenever a soul is split. Horcrux creation is a purposeful act of magic, and one that it is unlikely that someone like Voldemort would share, even with his followers.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote: I believe that Dumbledore says explicitly that the act of murder splits a soul.
I love these books. What a wonderful way to describe what happens to someone they do something evil.
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
That reminds me - didn't LV say something about his followers who knew what steps he had taken to prevent his demise at the end of GoF? So do his minions (or some of them) know about the horcruxes?
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Someone a while back was saying Ron’s didn’t pull his weight in the trio. I think Ron's special ability is his loyalty. He will always be there for Harry no matter what happens. His love (platonic) for Harry will come into play. DD kept driving home the point that Love was the power Harry has over LV.
I don't think the act of murder splits the soul. I think she said it caused a rip in the soul, which if someone wanted to could be used to split the soul into a Horcrux. So Harry being a Horcrux wouldn't work because LV would have had to do another act of magic after he was "killed" when the AV spell backfired.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Thank you Noemon! What some people don't tend to grasp is that if Voldemort is in a vegetative state, the dude is finished. If Harry gets rid of all the Horcruxes and then rips Voldy's soul out, Voldy is freakin finished. Then, Harry can maintain his complete soul.
And Dumbledore definitely doesn't put any store by the prophecy. That's why he asked Harry "Do you think every one of those prophecys in the Hall came true?" They are, like Lyrhawn said, mainly self-fulfulling prophecies. As is VERY evident in the stories, Trelawney's "predictions" are HIGHLY different from her "Prophecies" Every prophecy she's made has come true, mainly because people were there to hear the prophecy and set it in motion. So the prophecy itself has no power. Harry must defeat LV because LV is doing his best to kill Harry. But, if Harry can, there's no reason he couldn't just destroy his soul.
And if killing for Horcrux-only purposes is the only way to split the soul, then why don't any of the Order members ever try to kill? If you're going to tell me that DD can't just run around killing every DE he sees, you are very mistaken. He is well aware of the self-destruction that killing can cause and has found more efficient ways of dealing with baddies.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ron's not been unquestionably loyal. There's always been an undercurrent of jealousy in his relationship with Harry. This came to a point in Goblet of Fire.
Hermione has, on the whole, been the much steadier friend. It's not like the Harry-Hermione team would be lacking love or loyalty that including Ron would fix. Ron's main power seems to be "amusing, somewhat fearful sidekick"-ology and I was really hoping this book would give his character more powers and dignity.
Hermione been established as being remarkable book knowledge but not going beyond the book (Really, what's the big deal about following a different recipe book for making potions? "Oh you're cheating because I'm following the recipe in this book and you're following the recipe in another book that is better.") It would have been great if Ron started manifesting some outside the accepted boundaries powers, like his brothers inventiveness or something. As it is, he seems mostly there to be Harry's friend and Hermione's love interest. Anyone could play that role (throw Ginny Weasley in and you've reversed the roles, but picked up a more powerful Weasley).
Posts: 10177 | Registered: Apr 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote: I believe that Dumbledore says explicitly that the act of murder splits a soul.
I love these books. What a wonderful way to describe what happens to someone they do something evil.
Indeed, which makes me doubt that Dumbledore would want Snape to have his soul shattered that way, but would Snape figure that it's better for him to split his soul than Malfoy? He is rather fond of Malfoy after all...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Jealousy aside though, Ron tends to go with Harry on just about anything. I guess the question is about what defines loyalty? Hermy will disagree with Harry when she thinks he's doing something wrong, whereas Ron will just go with it. So Ron always has Harry's back, but Hermy always keeps him honest. If you put the two together, then you have like the perfect mix of loyalty. You have a friend who will keep you in check and stop you from doing real stupid things, and you have a friend who will back you up no matter how dumb your ideas are. But, I wouldn't be surprised if Ron plays an integral role in the final chapter.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that's a bit of what the argument between Snape and DD was. Maybe (and this is all based on the speculation that DD ordered Snape to kill him) either Snape's soul had already been split (we don't know what he did as a DE), so he figured one more rip might do the trick. Or, maybe SS was just ready to do what he could for Draco, his lil buddy.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote: Okay, to go back pages and pages of posts, there was someone insisting that Ron and Hermione are already solidly a couple, because Ron told Hermione he loved her. (I'm not arguing that they aren't going to end up together, just that it doesn't seem official quite yet.) I thought maybe I had missed something at the end but after listening to the whole thing again, I found the spot. Ron tells Hermione he loves her when he spills ink on his essay and she fixes it. That's not the same kind of an I-love-you.
Which is the whole point. It's not a gushy, dreamy eyed, homone driven, face sucking, body entwining immature kind of love. It's just a statement of fact. That comes from love, and not lust.
Just as Fleur's comment about being "pretty enough for both of them" speaks volumes about the validity of their love, Ron's simple statment is something he could never have said in his normal insecure state of denial, without suddenly realizing what he'd said and getting all embarrassed about it.
Later, Ron holds Hermione and strokes her hair to comfort her as she cries on his shoulder at Dumbledore's funeral. It's intimate physical contact, but with no sexual overtone. It's done in stark contrast to all the teenage puppy-love "snogging" that's gone before. Rowling slipped it in there for a reason.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Hermione been established as being remarkable book knowledge but not going beyond the book (Really, what's the big deal about following a different recipe book for making potions? "Oh you're cheating because I'm following the recipe in this book and you're following the recipe in another book that is better.") It would have been great if Ron started manifesting some outside the accepted boundaries powers, like his brothers inventiveness or something. As it is, he seems mostly there to be Harry's friend and Hermione's love interest. Anyone could play that role (throw Ginny Weasley in and you've reversed the roles, but picked up a more powerful Weasley)."
Ive always thought of Ron as the "muscle" of the group, the guy who would always go with the other two when they needed it and do what was necessary to help them. He is the support that Harry needs and the love Hermione needs. In this way, he is the glue of the group, and I dont think the group could survive without him.
Posts: 457 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
The "soul splitting" thing refers to murder. If Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him, it wasn't murder.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Glenn Arnold: The "soul splitting" thing refers to murder. If Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him, it wasn't murder.
That I did not think of... Still, it would feel like soul spliting to Snape if he is not evil.. Dumbledore seems to be the only person who loves him.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I have no doubt that doing something that emotionally distressing would have a profound effect on Snape. Or his soul. But it might be more like a "my heart is breaking" kind of effect rather than the kind of "twisted and cruel remains of a soul" that is left after a murder.
Posts: 3735 | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cry]](graemlins/cry.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
