Harry Potter

I think it's clear that Dumbledore suspected that Voldemort had Horcruxes for a very long time and he knew from Day 1 seeing the Scar on Harry's forehead what that meant. That a piece of Voldemort's soul was in him and that something had gone horribly wrong. He suspected that at the time and that simply got stronger when Harry came to Hogwarts, had these scar pains, and spoke Parseltongue but the minute he saw the Diary, his suspicions got confirmed.

What happened in Chamber of Secrets was that he had definite proof...because the Diary was a Horcrux and the fact that it was a weapon, i.e. a Horcrux intended by Voldemort to be smuggled into Hogwarts at some point, proved that there were more since that's way too reckless a thing to do if you are going to just make one. So that led him to start thinking where the rest are, what they could be, how many and fix a definite timeline. And Dumbledore openly tells Harry at the end of Chamber of Secrets that some of Voldemort's abilities got transferred to him at the night he made that attack...hes' basically letting it slip there.

Dumbledore says that sometimes he makes educated guesses and they turn out right but definite proof allows him to formulate concrete plans. He's obviously spent years investigating Riddle's past and digging up those memories.

Yeah, that's a good point.

Oh God! Natural light!

I didn't want to think (too) deeply into it but I'm still stuck in "overly defensive of Dumbledore" mode. T_T

Come on, Fandom, if you want to save someone from hell, don't put in a replacement.

Honestly, it shouldn't be (too) hard to redeem Voldemort without vilifying Dumbledore. (If I stated this wrong, sorry - double negatives are confusing.)

Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.

Redeem Voldemort? You sure live up to your name...

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you

Who here was talking about redeeming Voldemort?

Oh God! Natural light!

Voldemort is essentially utterly irredeemable as far as I'm concerned. You can argue that maybe the circumstances of his birth were far from ideal as far as growing up well adjusted are concerned, but to paraphrase Dumbledore, it's a person's choices that truly define them... and Voldemort chose to be a monster.

"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."

Voldemort is meant to be pitiable, not redeemable.

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Oh I understand now. Probably Insane, aside from being probably insane, was probably actually talking about redeeming Snape.

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you

Which would be almost as difficult.

Ohhhh, gotcha. That makes much more sense.

Still unlikely. Snape has fewer big things to redeem himself over, and is mostly meant to be an Antihero Antagonist, a force of conflict and drama who is ultimately on the same side as DD and Harry and the rest but whose primary purpose nonetheless is to be an obstacle to Harry's progression.

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

I made this question a bit ago, but... What would happen if the Horcruxes were destroyed during Voldie's stint as a parasite?

You know, if Harry or Ron decided to ask the twins to teach them how to prank, and they used it against Snape and Malfoy, it'd be more of a rebellion against an unfair authority and a bully who loves to flaunt his connections.

edited 26th Oct '16 6:09:11 PM by Blueace

Wake me up at your own risk.

Hmm. I'm not sure.

I'd say it depends on if a horcrux keeps Voldemort from dying via the parasite form, or places him into that form when he otherwise would have died.

Sorry for the confusion - I meant the sector of the fandom who loves to redeem Voldemort (via Harry proxy) while turning Dumbledore evil.

When it comes to putting leather pants on evil characters, I sorta made my peace with that fandom aspect by focusing on the forgiveness aspect.

But I'm back to square one when it's coupled with turning good characters evil.

Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.

Depends on how you define good. I don't think those that are pro-Riddle are any worse, really, than those that oppose him. Because those anti-Riddle forces are the same ones that built Azkaban and thought it was a ripping idea to feed goodness knows how many peoples' souls to the Dementors housed there, and entered into bargains with those things in the first place.

Well, yeah... the "good" also did stuff I have issues with. Also with things that they didn't do.

Like for example, as much as I am currently defensive of Dumbledore, I'd have to agree with those who think that he shouldn't have let Harry be raised by the Dursleys. (Though I can argue that that likely has more to do with Rowling wanting her protagonist to like Cinderella or Snow White. Giving the protagonist awful relatives makes him/her more sympathetic/relatable.)

But anyway, just want to clarify that it's the Ron the Death Eater aspect I've got the greater issue with. I can go with evil characters getting leather pants, but not if good characters are bashed to justify (the costs of) those leather pants.

Plants are aliens, and fungi are nanomachines.

I'm pretty sure Harry just has a scar for Rule of Cool purposes. As for what happens if all of Voldemort's Horcruxes are destroyed while he doesn't have a body, he exists as 1/8 of a soul, right? It doesn't make much sense, but I think I remember reading that the Horcrux user's body has to be the last soul receptacle that's destroyed if he/she is to be killed.

The question of ontological inertia as it applies to liches is a generally popular one. In some stories, destruction of the phylactery immediately kills the lich. In others, it simply prohibits the lich from ever respawning again without making a new one.

Harry Potter uses the latter. Voldemort demonstrably has ontological inertia even if his horcruxes are destroyed. This is demonstrated when the last horcrux, Nagini, is killed by Neville and Voldemort does not immediately drop dead on the spot.

edited 27th Oct '16 1:31:22 PM by TobiasDrake

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Fawkes: Deus Ex Galerum!

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you

Voldemort is a special case in as much as he is the first and only person known to have ever made more than one Horcrux - and implicitly therefore each one contains less of his soul (and presumably his power) than a single Horcrux would do.

Someone with one Horcrux might therefore be rather more debilitated if it's destroyed given it's half their soul gone whoopsadaisy instead of one eighth as in Voldemort's case.

"These 'no-nonsense' solutions of yours just don't hold water in a complex world of jet-powered apes and time travel."

I would rather compare Harry to David Copperfield. Interestingly enough, Daniel Radcliffe also played that role as a kid.

edited 27th Oct '16 3:16:38 PM by Furienna

For the loss of one, sure, but given that they were all destroyed over the course of the story, I would reason the opposite. Voldemort does seem to feel the loss, but the fact that after 7/8 of his soul has been destroyed, he's still largely fine seems to indicate that having your horcrux destroyed is only really a big deal insofar as you are now vulnerable to dying.

My Tumblr. Currently liveblogging Haruhi Suzumiya and revisiting Danganronpa V3.

Nah, Harry is straight up Wart(King Arthur) from TH White's The Once and Future King.

JK Rowling even says that Wart is Harry's spiritual ancestor.

And Dumbledore is Harry's Merlin.

edited 27th Oct '16 3:25:58 PM by MadSkillz

"You can't change the world without getting your hands dirty."

Yeah, and he can't make any more Horcruxes. I mean, every time one is made, it messes up his soul, and at the point he is in now, he might end up like he decided to make out with a Dementor if he tries again. He really was on his last legs towards the end of the Battle, better seek another path to inmortality.

edited 28th Oct '16 6:27:10 AM by Blueace

Wake me up at your own risk.

I'm sure that, like a chain smoker who keeps on huffing while unaware or uncaring that their lungs are blackened and diseased, Voldemort can keep on screwing up his spiritual health until the cows come home. The reason given for why he didn't intentionally make more was that he's an old school pretentious wizard who thought having seven of something made it more special.

"The difference between reality and fiction is that fiction has to make sense." - Tom Clancy, paraphrasing Mark Twain.

I was under the impression that the Horcruxes were merely acting as anchors keeping him alive, and that if one was destroyed the piece would... I dunno. Transfer back?

Say to the others who did not follow through You're still our brothers, and we will fight for you