![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
karohemdI finished it just before 5 this morning because I couldn't stop. I thought about stopping because I have really important Stuff™ to do today but I knew that first thing would be to pick up the book again so it didn't really matter. It's good, it's long but it doesn't drag and most of it made sense.
- The deaths: Rowling said that central characters would die so I was sure it would be if not Ron or Hermione, at least Hagrid in a stunt of self-sacrifice to save one of the three friends or at least one of his beloved creatures. Moody was an auror, so was Tonks. I had an inkling Lupin would die but in a more meaningful way, something like being used as a playing card against Harry because he was the last surviving member of the Marauders and Harry sacrificing him for the greater good. OK, some of their toys came in useful now and then and they put up a good fight at the end, but I've always seen Fred and George as comic relief rather than important. Snape had to die.
- I knew that Dumbledore's death was part of the plan (a bit like Obi-Wan dying in A New Hope) but not that it was done because he would have died from the Gaunt ring's curse, anyway
- Why did the Resurrection Stone work differently for Harry than it did for the second brother? The second brother was haunted for the rest of his life by the one he brought back and for Harry, it was just a convenient way of getting through the Dementors.
- Harry's (not) death. So the prophecy was wrong and only the bit of Voldemort in him died. A bit of a let-down. What was the whole in between afterlife bit with Dumbledore about? Just so Rowling could fill in the gaps? This was the bit I didn't understand.
- Voldemort: Why did he not die when the last Horcrux was destroyed? If he split his soul into 7 pieces (the horcruxes), he should have died. So he actually split his soul into 8 (unbeknownst to him) as surely one piece had to remain in his actual body?
- The deaths: Rowling said that central characters would die so I was sure it would be if not Ron or Hermione, at least Hagrid in a stunt of self-sacrifice to save one of the three friends or at least one of his beloved creatures. Moody was an auror, so was Tonks. I had an inkling Lupin would die but in a more meaningful way, something like being used as a playing card against Harry because he was the last surviving member of the Marauders and Harry sacrificing him for the greater good. OK, some of their toys came in useful now and then and they put up a good fight at the end, but I've always seen Fred and George as comic relief rather than important. Snape had to die.
- I knew that Dumbledore's death was part of the plan (a bit like Obi-Wan dying in A New Hope) but not that it was done because he would have died from the Gaunt ring's curse, anyway
- Why did the Resurrection Stone work differently for Harry than it did for the second brother? The second brother was haunted for the rest of his life by the one he brought back and for Harry, it was just a convenient way of getting through the Dementors.
- Harry's (not) death. So the prophecy was wrong and only the bit of Voldemort in him died. A bit of a let-down. What was the whole in between afterlife bit with Dumbledore about? Just so Rowling could fill in the gaps? This was the bit I didn't understand.
- Voldemort: Why did he not die when the last Horcrux was destroyed? If he split his soul into 7 pieces (the horcruxes), he should have died. So he actually split his soul into 8 (unbeknownst to him) as surely one piece had to remain in his actual body?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 29/7/07 12:45 pm (UTC)http://community.livejournal.com/its_a_fake/98859.html#cutid1
no subject
Date: 29/7/07 12:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 29/7/07 02:18 pm (UTC)The second brother kept the one he brought back & wanted her to stay- she could not be fully there, as she was dead. This drove him mad, so that he eventually killed himself to be with her properly. So the 2nd brother was only haunted for the rest of his life, because he refused to relinquish her until he killed himself.
Harry merely called those who were close to him briefly, but did not try to keep them with him indefinitely.
- Harry's (not) death. So the prophecy was wrong and only the bit of Voldemort in him died. A bit of a let-down. What was the whole in between afterlife bit with Dumbledore about? Just so Rowling could fill in the gaps? This was the bit I didn't understand.
The prophecy was that neither can live while the other survives- Dumbledore made a mistake here, by thinking that Harry would need to die, as he was a Horcrux that needed to be destroyed. Clearly, if just Harry had died, Voldemort could have survived. However, since Harry was a Horcrux, Dumbledore could not conceive of a way in which Voldemort could die fully, so long as Harry was alive. However, when Voldemort used a killing curse (and this is me speculating here), he may only have killed one of the two 'lives'- namely the Voldemort part within Harry, rather than Harry himself.
The alternative explanation could be that Harry was, in effect, the holder of the three Deathly Hallows (he had the cape and the ring, and he had beaten Malfoy, and was thus the 'rightful' owner of the elder wand), and thus could choose the time of his own death.
The bit in King's Cross would actually work better with this second theory- Harry, at this point, had the choice of whether to head on towards death, or back to life. Voldemort's soul, or at least that part of him that had been within Harry, was also there.
- Voldemort: Why did he not die when the last Horcrux was destroyed? If he split his soul into 7 pieces (the horcruxes), he should have died. So he actually split his soul into 8 (unbeknownst to him) as surely one piece had to remain in his actual body?
Yes- when the Horcruces are explained in the Half Blood Prince, it explains that you split your soul. Thus you don't transfer your entire soul to the Horcrux, but only a part. A part remains within yourself (or, if the body is destroyed, the Horcruces allowed Voldemort's soul to roam bodyless until he found a new body).
no subject
Date: 29/7/07 02:53 pm (UTC)Ah, yes the bit about Harry being Master of Death and therefore able to choose what happens makes sense.
*nods*
no subject
Date: 1/8/07 01:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 30/7/07 01:06 am (UTC)The stone had been broken. It was in two pieces. As long as Harry held them together, he could make it work. When he dropped the stone and let the pieces fall apart again, the people he had summoned vanished.
- Harry's (not) death. So the prophecy was wrong and only the bit of Voldemort in him died. A bit of a let-down. What was the whole in between afterlife bit with Dumbledore about? Just so Rowling could fill in the gaps? This was the bit I didn't understand.
Yes. It was a plot device so he could chat with DD. Voldemort can't kill Harry because of his mother's protection, but he could kill the Voldy bit in him. Voldemort never did understand the power of love and didn't realise that there was a bit of him in Harry.
- Voldemort: Why did he not die when the last Horcrux was destroyed? If he split his soul into 7 pieces (the horcruxes), he should have died. So he actually split his soul into 8 (unbeknownst to him) as surely one piece had to remain in his actual body?
As whiskylover said, Voldy didn't know that his soul was in eight bits. One bit always remained with him -- his bit was indestructible as long as there were horcruxes (which is why he didn't die in Godric's Hollow 16 years ago.) He didn't know about the bit in Harry.