The Scaly Flaky Baby

A very good point you have made here, but the only hole I find in it is that even though the soul is torn when murder is commited, you don't neccesarily split your soul when you kill, that happens, or so I believe, as you make the actual Horcrux. Otherwise, for instance, anyway who had killed wouldn't have a complete soul, but I don't think that's neccesarily true, because then it would include Mrs. Weasley and quite a few other people. It's not just murder, it'd the next step of dark magic that created Voldemort as he is now.
Another thing is that when Dumbledore was explaining it to Harry he said Voldemort split is soul into 7 parts. We don't know if these pieces are of equal size or not, but I thought it could have been implied there (which is why there's all this 1/8 talk.)

well i suppose if you were going to get technical. but the fractions are just for the purpose of explaining.

considering horruxes were invented by JK, i would think its safe to say that anyone could be right, maybe one horcrux did have 'bigger chards'.

the bottom line is that everyone basically agrees on the same theory.

Explain the theory to me again I am utterly confused at this point. 1/8, 2/8, 6/8, 7/8, 1/64, split in half, murder splits. Excuse me for saying this, but my head is doing the splits right now. The math is easy, but you guys have thrown so many numbers in there, lets just say that it's all gone a bit weird eh.

Ponder on this for a bit. Something I think Neville said about sticking Voldy with a sword. If Voldy had not used magic to kill Harry in the forest, if he had throttled him or stabbed him, would Harry have come back to life? Or would he be roaming around in a wraith-like form that Voldy took the first time his BODY was destroyed? Coversely, if Voldy had been killed again using traditional non-magic means while some of his horcruxes were still intact, would his soul have left the body to find or make another body for himself as he did earlier? Or would he do a vampire and live on in a mortally wounded body?

I can't believe that JK meant that the parts of the soul have any specific size. We are not talking about anything material, and I think JK has made that clear before.
I think she wanted to tell us, that Voldemort has damaged himself in an unnatural way. And that there is no way back for him. He is no human beeing any longer.
The soul is something abstract, and normally you can not split it. You can not take a part away, like cutting your arm off your body, or so.
Dumbledore even wanted to belive that Grindelwald had some regretts before he died. And I think that was the reason he did not kill Grindelwald.
He believed in the good in everyone until his death. But because of the Horcruxes he could not believe in the good in Voldemort.

basically we all agree the baby represents voldemort - in some way.

psyduck explained it "It sounds like a replica of the thing in GoF, before Peter dropped it in the cauldron."
which can go on to mean that it is a weaker version of voldemort.

victoire said "I think the baby was like Voldemort's soul...undeveloped and tortured. I mean, you can't expect his soul to look great after being split up seven times."
which also explains everyones justification as the fraction of his soul remaining. because, our natural response to reading, is visualising the words.
so we picture a soul (which in the first place is intangible) but as a whole, and then we know he gradually tore it into 8 different parts, basically. each residing in different forms (horcruxes). seeing as harry and the others had destroyed all parts but 2 (voldemort himself and nagini) by the time kings cross came around, voldemort's life was deteriorating rapidly.

the story went from voldemort trying to kill harry, and then the next thing we know the story takes him to kings cross.
waking in an empty room only containing harry. and the gross baby.

the way i see it, that baby had been the part of voldemort resisiding in harry (for visualisation sake - lets say it was the scar)
now in this limbo stage;
Elisabeth: In the chapter of kings cross, are they behind the veil or in some world between the real world and the veil?
J.K. Rowling: You can make up your own mind on this, but I think that Harry entered a kind of limbo between life and death.

harry had finally rid himself of voldemorts soul which had been in him since age 1.
dumbeldore was saying , don't worry, it's beyond help etc etc.

other things regarding this;
the absence of his scar, glasses
prescence of dumbeldore
being in kings cross

as discussed earlier, people have said they think it was because harry wanted it to be so.
and JK confirmed this to be true. in an 'ideal' world he woulndt have the scar, not need the glasses, and in limbo between life and death, requires dumbeldore and his knowledge in order to understand the situation in its entirety, and to put at rest his concerns from the past (especially regarding dumbeldores life etc)

when harry returned to consciousness, he had at that time discovered that there were 2 and only 2 parts (of a whole) left of voldemorts soul - little did voldemort know!

harry realised voldemort had also been unconscious, however after reading over everyones thought i think maybe that could just be the avada kevadra curse backfiring - and not killing him because he had in fact made it less powerful (the magic may have been consumed by the horcrux in harry)
anyway voldemort created the horcruxes to ensure he could basically live forever. so an avada kedavra curse wouldnt have killed him, it would have just maybe turned him into a weaker, grosser version of himself!


hahah right i apologise that that was so large, but i think it all had to be summarised.

i was just trying to show that everyone who posted responses were basically right!

No, because we are still confused about the main point.
The thing under the chair was Voldemort, not the shard that was in Harry.

I've had a good long hard think on this one. My thoughts are:

1. Agreed that the 'thing' is Voldemort.
2. The 'afterlife' is ever-present and you need to be in a state of 'death' to be witness there. This would explain why Harry can then talk to Dumbledore (already in the afterlife).
3. Given the Harry/Voldemort connection, the presence of Voldemort is 'awaiting' the final moment of Voldemorts destruction.

"I think" said Dumbledore, "that if you choose to return, there is a chance that he may be finished for good. I cannot promise it. but I know this, Harry, that you have less to fear from returning here than he does."

Harry glanced again at the raw-looking thing that trembled and choked in the shadow beneath the distant chair.

"Do not pity the dead, Harry".

Voldemort was in a state of death here.

I say this because in the next chapter:
'The death eaters had been huddled round Voldemort, who seemed to have fallen to the ground. Something had happened when he had hit Harry with the Killing Curse. Had Voldemort, too, collapsed? It seemed like it. And both of them had fallen briefly unconscious and both of them had now returned.

I think they were both in the afterlife while at Kings Cross Station. Voldemort - the hideous baby. Harry - the flawless one.

I think that when the final moment of death was to arrive for Harry and Voldemort - their 'afterlife' physicality is now pre-determined.

that all sounds right
this is obviously the two sided theory we're all having trouble with.
your justification seems right

however when i thoughtabout it... this was my idea

As logically as I can put it;
- harry was a horcrux (or 'had' one)
- which was destroyed right before kings cross
- so the horcrux was gone
- so it must be that the baby was the horcrux now removed from harry
being once harry leaves kings cross, it is left to 'get on a train' so to speak, and be gone for good.
it was beyond help.

I re-read the kings cross chapter and it appears as though it was implied that the flaky gross thing was the shard of voldemort...
"I let him kill me,' said Harry. 'Didn't I?'
'You did,' said Dumbeldore, nodding. ' Go on!'
'So that part of his soul that was in me...'
Dumbeldore nodded still more enthusiastically, urging Harry onwards, a broad smile of encouragement on his face.
'...has it gone?'
'Oh, yes!' said Dumbeldore. 'Yes he destroyed it. Your soul is whole, and completely your own, harry.'
'But then...'
Harry glanced over his shoulder, to where the small, maimed creature trembled under the chair.

but in saying that. there are arguments for both. either way it was cleverly symbolic of harry's task reaching its end.

Quote:

Originally Posted by teddylupin ...even though the soul is torn when murder is commited, you don't neccesarily split your soul when you kill, that happens, or so I believe, as you make the actual Horcrux...

Murder is what rips the soul apart.

HBP, chapter 23, page 497:
"Well, you split your soul, see," said Slughorn, "and hide part of it in an object outside the body. Then, even if one's body is attacked or destroyed, one cannnot die, for part of the soul remains earthbound and undamaged..."

"How do you split your soul?"

"By an act of evil -- the supreme act of evil. By committing murder. Killing rips the soul apart. The wizard intent upon creating a Horcrux would use the damage to his advantage: He would encase the torn portion..."