Skip to main content

harry potter - Is romantic love able to trigger "love protection" charm?


There are two example in canon of someone sacrificing themselves for love and thus protecting someone from Voldemort:




  • Lily's sacrifice for Harry




  • Harry's sacrifice in DH for everyone at Battle of Hogwarts.





One is an example of parental love, one of "love of your fellow humans".


Is it possible to trigger the same sacrificial protection when it's romantic love? (e.g. if James Potter was given a choice and chosen to sacrifice himself for Lily).



Answer



Probably. (Although this is fairly unusual and advanced magic, and those are the only two instances of it in the canon.)


The best discussion of this I can find comes in a JK Rowling interview in 2005 with The Leaky Cauldron and Mugglenet, where she discusses the aspect of sacrificial protection, and whether it would have worked for James:



ES: This is one of my burning questions since the third book – why did Voldemort offer Lily so many chances to live? Would he actually have let her live?


JKR: Mmhm.


ES: Why?



JKR: [silence] Can't tell you. But he did offer, you're absolutely right.


Don't you want to ask me why James's death didn't protect Lily and Harry? There’s your answer, you've just answered your own question, because she could have lived and chose to die. James was going to be killed anyway. Do you see what I mean?


I’m not saying James wasn't ready to; he died trying to protect his family but he was going to be murdered anyway. He had no – he wasn't given a choice, so he rushed into it in a kind of animal way, I think there are distinctions in courage. James was immensely brave. But the caliber of Lily's bravery was, I think in this instance, higher because she could have saved herself.


Now any mother, any normal mother would have done what Lily did. So in that sense her courage too was of an animal quality but she was given time to choose. James wasn't. It's like an intruder entering your house, isn't it? You would instinctively rush them. But if in cold blood you were told, “Get out of the way,” you know, what would you do? I mean, I don't think any mother would stand aside from their child. But does that answer it? She did very consciously lay down her life. She had a clear choice—


ES: And James didn't.


JKR: Did he clearly die to try and protect Harry specifically given a clear choice? No. It's a subtle distinction and there's slightly more to it than that but that's most of the answer.



I think it’s the bravery, and the fact that they chose to die rather than let the other person be harmed, that conferred the protection. To me, this reads as if James’s sacrifice would have protected Lily and Harry, if he’d been offered that choice. So it can work for romantic love.


You might be able to go further: perhaps this protection is conferred if you are offered the choice to live, but sacrifice yourself to protect somebody who you don’t actually love. Or would that fall under “love of your fellow humans”? The unusual aspect of Lily’s murder was the choice, less her maternal love for Harry (although that surely had a part in it).


(Note that this interview was written before the publication of Deathly Hallows, so the fact that Snape loved Lily, and asked Voldemort to spare her, was then unknown. It may be why he gave her a choice. If it was Neville’s mother on the line, I’m sure she would have made the same choice, but it might never have been offered.)



Consider also that there was romantic love between Harry and Ginny when he sacrificed himself in Deathly Hallows, but this may have been part of the wider “love for fellow humans”.


Also note that in the same interview, we get confirmation that this is an unexplored, and unknown branch of magic:



MA: Did she know anything about the possible effect of standing in front of Harry?


JKR: No – because as I've tried to make clear in the series, it never happened before. No one ever survived before. And no one, therefore, knew that could happen.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

languages - Do we ever see written English in the Star Wars films?

In Empire Strikes Back , we see a transcription of what R2's beeps and bloops mean, but it's not English (sorry for the low quality, it's from the 2004 DVDs): I'd assume it's what Basic looks like when written, but is there some point in the the Star Wars films we see written English instead? (This sort of spun off from a discussion in How do people understand astromech droids? .) Answer At one point there was English but it has been phased out in subsequent versions of the films. Chris Gould at DVD Active did a comparison of all versions of each of the Star Wars films, and in his comparison of Episode 4 , there are a couple of screenshots showing how the power gauge for the Death Star tractor beam was changed. I imagine there are probably more to be found in his other comparisons but I haven't got around to reading those yet.

Was the "pure soul" of Harry's what had really hurt Voldemort?

In the Order of the Phoenix, Voldemort possesses Harry, and it hurts. Greatly. I think that Dumbledore explained that it was because Voldemort's rotten soul was incapable of assimilating Harry's pure soul, that Voldemort didn't understand the love and friendship etc that Harry has in his heart. But, I think it was a lie. Remember that in Deathly Hallows, while looking for information regarding Horcruxes, it is discovered that it is in fact possible to merge a soul fragment back, but that the process was extremely painful. Now then, if Voldemort tried to possess Harry, and Harry had a fragment of Voldemort's soul, I think that it could have been the true cause of Voldemort's pain: the fact of having his soul so close of another fragment. I think that Dumbledore knew that fact, but had to lie to Harry because it was inappropriate to let him know that he had one of Voldemort's soul fragments at the moment. Is that right? Or was it truly the pure soul of Harry's...

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...

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...