On Integrity and Transcendence-

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

This is going to be a whole lot shorter than that title would suggest. It's really just a question, brought about by Sunnyskywalker's post below on the meaning of the prophecy. Here goes--

Many of us were disturbed by the flayed child in Harry's visit to the afterlife--or whatever that train station was. You remember, he at first felt compassion for the child, and then ignored it. And didn't Dumbledore say the child was Voldemort? Or, to be precise, Voldemort's soul fragment?

But we know Dumbledore is not always truthful, and we know he is not truly wise. So who is the flayed child? Where did it come from?

Clearly, it is the part of Voldemort's soul that resided in Harry for seventeen years. That child is Harry, not Voldemort. Oh, I know: J.K. Rowling would like us to think the soul fragment has nothing to do with Harry. In her story world, everything about Harry that was at all like Voldemort--his vengeful feelings, his rages, his self-absorption, his parseltongue, heck, perhaps even his magical ability--came from the soul fragment and Harry is a completely separate individual. But I can't believe that.

I can't believe it because Harry is actually written as a fairly consistent character. He  IS vengeful and self-absorbed, understandably so at first, and he becomes more so as the series progresses. I am not going to give him a free pass on his behavior in books six and seven, for example, and just say: "Oh, that was Voldemort. It wasn't really Harry." That's not how emotion works. We all have negative feelings and impulses. We can deny them, but that's not healthy, is it? Rather than rejecting our worse impulses and negative feelings, we can try to turn that energy around. We can try to transcend the negative aspects and use them for good. But we can only do this if we first recognize and accept those feelings and impulses.

So what I think is that, in that train station, Dumbledore teaches Harry to reject a part of himself. It's a dreadful thing to do. It is bound to limit Harry's moral and spiritual development. What do you think?

Comments

[jana-ch.livejournal.com]

Didn't JKR say someplace that the baby represents, not the soul fragment in Harry's head, but Voldy's remaining soul, pulled into the afterlife along with Harry? As I understand it, the fragment in Harry's head was wiped out by the AK.

Of course, the text never explains what's going on, so we readers are free to interpret it as we please. Either way, Harry and Dumbles should not be ignoring a suffering baby. Albus will be in that train station until he picks up and comforts that baby. And when Harry dies, the crying baby will be waiting for him, right where he left it.

[mary-j-59.livejournal.com]

Oh, yes, that's a possible interpretation, too. I can see that the baby might be meant to represent Voldemort's soul fragment. But here's the thing: nowhere in the books does it say that the AK destroys anyone's soul. What it does is to kill you by expelling your soul from your body. So I really think my interpretation makes as much sense as Rowling's.

And I love your final paragraph! I agree.