Skip to main content

voldemort - Why didn't Tom Riddle kill Harry Potter in Chamber of Secrets?



In the Chamber of Secrets, Tom used Harry's wand to cast Flagrante to spell out ‘Tom Marvolo Riddle’ and unscramble it to ‘I am Lord Voldemort’. If he was able to cast any spell with Harry's wand, why didn't he try to stop Harry from destroying the diary? He could have even petrified Harry and then let the Basilisk finish him.


Even while Fawkes was healing Harry after he got poisoned by the Basilisk he's just watching and shouting.



Get away, bird. Get away from him — I said, get away.



It seems he forgot that he was a wizard...he raised the wand after the healing completed. Even after that he was not fast enough.


So why didn’t he just immediately kill Harry himself?



Answer



I think that the premise went like this:


Ginny has been writing on the diary for quite a while. Turns out she's been writing, all the time, about how the famous Harry Potter defeated the Dark Lord - as a baby.



If the baby Harry destroyed Voldemort, knowing this, would Tom Riddle dare try again, without first figuring out how exactly did it happen? He's not stupid enough to commit the same mistake twice... ok yes, yes he is, but this time it is pretty obvious that it would be overly imprudent to attack someone who somehow destroyed his adult version with no reasonable explanation.



  • (from Chamber of Secrets - Chapter 17 - The Heir of Slytherin)



"I have many questions for you, Harry Potter". "Like what?" Harry spat, fists still clenched. "Well," said Riddle smiling pleasantly, "how is it that you -- a skinny boy with no extraordinary magical talent -- managed to defeat the greatest wizard of all time? How did you escape with nothing but a scar, while Lord Voldemort's powers were destroyed?" There was an odd gleam in his hungry eyes now. "Why do you care how I escaped?" said Harry slowly. "Voldemort" said Riddle softly, "is my past, present, and future, Harry Potter..."





"To business, Harry," said Riddle, still smiling broadly. "Twice -- in your past, in my future -- we have met. And twice I failed to kill you. How did you survive? Tell me everything. The longer you talk," he added softly," the longer you stay alive."




On the other hand, asking the Basilisk - a third party - to kill Harry seems to be safest bet. If Harry has some sort of miraculous defence mechanism, it will be the Basilisk that ends up dead, rather than Tom Riddle.


So Harry kills the Basilisk. Why didn't Tom, on a desperate move, attempt to kill Harry? Because Harry was already doomed anyway: Tom knew that Harry was poisoned and it was just a matter of time for him to die, so there is no need to cast a spell that may or may not have adverse effects on Tom.


So, the safest bet is to simply wait for Harry to die off from the poison...


... aaaand Fawkes arrives.



Riddle's face contorted. Then he forced it into an awful smile. "So. Your mother died to save you. Yes, that's a powerful countercharm. I can see now... "



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Do the Kwikspell courses work?

In Harry Potter we are introduced to Kwikspell course in The Chamber of Secrets (and never hear about it again). We see Filch taking courses, presumably by mail. The descriptions of Kwikspell make me think it is for people who are weak in magic (kind of like how Neville was supposed to be when he was younger), but had magic in them nonetheless. However, Ron's comments later in the chapter make it sound like it is mainly for Squibs to learn magic. However, it is strongly implied through out all the books that Squibs are essentially Muggles, and will never be able to do magic. How then is a Kwikspell course supposed to work? Do we have any information to know if it works at all? Is it a scam? An answer from any level of canon is welcome. Answer Kwikspell courses are (probably) useful to some wizards, but not to squibs. The Kwikspell course literature comes with two testimonials. Madam Z. Nettles of Topsham writes: ‘I had no memory for incantations and my potions were a family joke...
Post a Comment
Read more

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.
Post a Comment
Read more

star trek - Warning regarding forward saucer section in Nemesis?

In Star Trek: Nemesis , just before the Enterprise rams into the Scimitar, Picard sends a text message from his captain's chair arm pad to Troi — who is manning the helm in lieu of the crewman who was just blown out through what was once the view screen — indicating that she should put full impulse on standby. (Literally, if you watch the scene closely, Troi's console prefaces the order with "TXT MSG" !) My question is: Did Picard also somehow warn crew members in the forward saucer section about what was about to happen? The ramming of the Scimitar was a heat of the moment decision. Considering that he also resorted to calling the auto-destruct sequence shortly after (which ended up being offline), he probably was of the mindset that any losses would be acceptable in order to hault Shinzon's march to Earth. Still, I'm curious. Answer The original script indicates that he called for the crew to " brace for impact ". Whether that call (or the comma...
Post a Comment
Read more

star wars - What "exactly" happens when someone turns to the Dark Side?

When I saw the original Star Wars saga as a kid, the concept of the Dark Side imprinted in me was quite simple. You did a bad thing, so you're a bad person so you go to the Dark Side and keep doing bad things. Now, obviously this doesn't hold true in reality. In my mind it is perfectly reasonable for Luke to kill the Emperor and Vader and then just flee the Death Star and rejoin the Alliance. After all they are at war, those are enemy officers that have captured him and are taunting him by threatening with death of all loved ones and the whole operation was intended to kill the Emperor anyway. The same would hold true for Anakin. He could have killed Mace Windu to save the Chancellor and Padme but that doesn't mean he's going to then go mad and kill all Jedis including children. It doesn't add up from a merely psychological point of view. He had a set of objectives and that made him want to keep the Chancellor alive (quite valid by the way, Mace Windu is quite clums...
Post a Comment
Read more