Skip to main content

voldemort - Why Couldn't Harry Destroy the Horcruxes With His Bare Hands?


Again, just using the spoiler tag as a courtesy. Anyhow. . .


In Sorcerer's Stone, Harry is able to destroy Professor Quirrell, possessed by Voldemort, by his mere touch. JKR reveals at Pottermore the following information about Professor Quirrell:



Quirrell is, in effect, turned into a temporary Horcrux by Voldemort. He is greatly depleted by the physical strain of fighting the far stronger, evil soul inside him. Quirrell’s body manifests burns and blisters during his fight with Harry due to the protective power Harry's mother left in his skin when she died for him. When the body Voldemort and Quirrell are sharing is horribly burned by contact with Harry, the former flees just in time to save himself, leaving the damaged and enfeebled Quirrell to collapse and die.




Source: POTTERMORE (Screenshot)


IF:



Professor Quirrell was a Horcrux and Harry destroyed Quirrell by his touch. . .



THEN:


Why couldn't Harry destroy the Horcruxes by touch?



Answer



I'll lead with Dumbledore's description of the Quirrell incident:




[Harry]: "But why couldn't Quirrell touch me?" [Dumbledore]: "Your mother died to save you. If there is one thing Voldemort cannot understand, it is love. He didn't realize that love as powerful as your mother's for you leaves its own mark. Not a scar, no visible sign ... to have been loved so deeply, even though the person who loved us is gone, will give us some protection forever. It is in your very skin. Quirrell, full of hatred, greed, and ambition, sharing his soul with Voldemort, could not touch you for this reason. It was agony to touch a person marked by something so good."



So I see two important points here. First, Harry didn't so much physically destroy Quirrell as cause him unbearable agony. And yes, I remember that this caused physical burns on Quirrell, but I don't think it would have destroyed him to the extent one would have to on order to destroy a horcrux. And second, this was so painful for Quirrell because he was sharing his soul with Voldemort. Horcruxes don't have souls (beyond the one stored in them), so they wouldn't be subject to the same pain, and being (for the most part) inanimate, they couldn't feel the pain anyway and so it couldn't destroy them. At most, the part of Voldemort's soul would "feel" the pain (if that were possible in some manner), but we know Voldemort couldn't even feel when they were destroyed entirely, so he probably wouldn't have felt that pain at all. And consider the part of Voldemort's soul that was inside Harry. If any of the horcruxes would have been destroyed by Harry's touch, would have been that one.


So in summary, I think it boils down to the fact that it was the pain that destroyed Quirrell, because of sharing his soul with Voldemort, and being inanimate objects with neither a soul to share nor the capability to feel pain, much less be destroyed by it, the remaining horcruxes (with the possible exception of Nagini) would not have been destroyed by Harry's touch.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...
Post a Comment
Read more

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...
Post a Comment
Read more

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....
Post a Comment
Read more