That damn blood protection thing

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

My sincere apologies if this has been addressed before, but I haven't found anything on it yet.

We are told that Harry survives the Killing Curse from Voldemort because Voldemort is now a "blood relative" and Harry can't be harmed in the presence of his "blood relatives." But at that point, hasn't the "blood protection" spell already ended, since Harry is now 17 and no longer lives with the Dursleys? Have I missed something?

Comments

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

The reason he survives the AK is not because of the Dumbledore-created 'blood relative' protection, but because Voldemort took HIS blood specifically (meaning, not just having a partial blood link like Petunia, but actually having Harry's blood and nobody else's), and Lily's protection itself inheres in that blood.

But before Voldemort took Harry's blood, he still couldn't hurt Harry. He couldn't even touch him while possessing someone else. In Voldemort's understanding, taking Harry's blood gives Voldemort an advantage because he's now overridden the blood protection. Which seems to be correct, as he can now safely touch Harry. Why shouldn't he now be able to kill him as well?

If the logic were that Voldemort had tricked himself into becoming Harry's "blood relative," and subjected himself to Dumbledore's protection, I could appreciate the ironic twist. But as we've established, Dumbledore's protection is no longer in effect.

He still has his fundamental mother's-love protection in his skin and blood, because that is not the result of a spell that ends but is just somehow part of him...Like it was a substance.

So now Voldemort also has that anti-Voldemort substance in his blood. If Voldemort now couldn't touch or kill himself, that would make some kind of sense. As it is, he couldn't hurt Harry before, and he can't hurt him now.

...

[condwiramurs.livejournal.com]

Yes, but like I said, it's badly handled and it's a new twist to what we had already seen of how Lily's protection worked. I don't think JKR thought it through very well at all, but this is the best I've been able to make of it so far. *shrugs*

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

So now Voldemort also has that anti-Voldemort substance in his blood. If Voldemort now couldn't touch or kill himself, that would make some kind of sense. As it is, he couldn't hurt Harry before, and he can't hurt him now.

This was a really weird feature. Especially since it had no payoff - before DH I read a theory that having pure love running through his veins would mean Voldemort had become capable of remorse and would surrender himself to justice or commit suicide by Chosen One. As it was, pure sacrificial protective love is just a bigger weapon.

[oryx_leucoryx]

But before Voldemort took Harry's blood, he still couldn't hurt Harry. He couldn't even touch him while possessing someone else. In Voldemort's understanding, taking Harry's blood gives Voldemort an advantage because he's now overridden the blood protection. Which seems to be correct, as he can now safely touch Harry. Why shouldn't he now be able to kill him as well?


Because while he overcame one protection, he unwittingly installed a different one in its stead.

Before the protection was against any direct physical and magical contact originating in Voldie himself. Quirrell can touch Harry, QuirrellMort can't. QuirrellMort can curse Harry's broom, but not Harry himself. (Other people can hurt Harry, probably even kill him. The bit about protecting Harry from DEs can't possibly work. And in fact, if you read very carefully what he says in OOTP, you see Albus never actually says Harry was protected from DEs. It is a tricky bit of misdirection.)

After the cemetery resurrection Voldie can touch Harry, he can torture him, he can bring Harry almost to the point of death, but he can't kill him all the way, as long as Harry's body is intact and available for his soul to return from limbo. But not just Voldie - nobody can kill Harry all the way now - as long as Voldie retains the body made with Harry's blood and Harry's body is intact. Which means that from the moment Voldie resurrected the only time Harry was really in danger of dying was with Crabbe's Fiendfyre. That was the only time Harry was in danger of losing his body. If Voldie had any brains he wouldn't have AKed Harry, he would have set Nagini on him. And told her to eat enough of him.

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

I guess that works well enough. It would have been nice if we actually had an understanding of blood-Horcruxes as well as the soul-Horcruxes that Voldemort uses. But I can just about accept that explanation.

[fishinginthemud.livejournal.com]

Wait, except for the part where Dumbledore says Voldemort has to be the one to AK Harry. If no one can kill Harry anyway, why should that matter? Wouldn't the soul fragment still get destroyed if someone else AK'd Harry instead?

[sharaz-jek.livejournal.com]

Yes, it would. Except for the Prophecy. "Either must die at the hands of the other" (did Voldemort know that part or was it just Dumbledore?) As far as I can tell there was no physical reason why no one else could kill Voldemort, but destiny (or a clumsy author) would contrive it so that no one else ever managed it.