When Voldemort temporarily “kills” Harry at the end of The Deathly Hallows, does it completely destroy the part of himself that existed within Harry? I couldn’t remember if Harry dying meant the part of him that was Voldemort stayed dead or if being “The Boy Who Survived” meant their souls were hopelessly intertwined in a way that could never be truly separated.

I was thinking about how the story begins with Voldemort dying and coming back to life and ends with Harry dying and coming back to life. Is it possible to interpret this to mean as long as one of them survives, they both survive?

  • 3
    Regarding the tangential question: scifi.stackexchange.com/q/27613/76048
    – F1Krazy
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 10:49
  • 4
    Voldemort is as dead as JKR bank account needs it to be... As Anyone in SF/Fan setting, he can easily be revived if needed.
    – dna
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 11:04
  • 2
    Kinda like how characters die & come back in the MCU...
    – FreeMan
    Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 16:28
  • 1
    I'm a bit spoiler phobic, but could you please change the title, maybe to something like 'how definite is the fate of Voldemort at the end of Harry Potter?" Commented Dec 1, 2023 at 19:56
  • 2
    @WiggotheWookie Done! And thank you for the suggestion. I thought about this as I was writing but couldn’t think of a tasteful way to phrase it. Hope I didn’t ruin Harry Potter for anyone! Commented Dec 2, 2023 at 3:11

1 Answer 1


We have an unequivocal statement that Voldemort died, based on the description of the fight from Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows.

And Harry, with the unerring skill of the Seeker, caught the wand in his free hand as Voldemort fell backwards, arms splayed, the slit pupils of the scarlet eyes rolling upwards. Tom Riddle hit the floor with a mundane finality, his body feeble and shrunken, the white hands empty, the snake-like face vacant and unknowing. Voldemort was dead, killed by his own rebounding curse, and Harry stood with two wands in his hand, staring down at his enemy’s shell.

And the script for the movie adaptation.

VOLDEMORT BELLOWS IN PAIN and turns, firing on Harry.

Instinctively, Harry raises his wand, countering...

... and the Elder Wand sails from Voldemort’s hand, turning end-over-end, the spell...

... ricocheting back on him. He stands, utterly still for a moment, his eyes on Harry, then drops.


This is also backed up in Harry Potter and the Cursed Child, with the fact that Harry no longer feels his presence or speaks Parseltongue as further proof.

HARRY: That’s — I’m not supposed to be understanding — that’s Parseltongue.

HERMIONE: And what does it say?

HARRY: How do I . . . ? I haven’t been able to understand Parseltongue since Voldemort died.

HERMIONE: And nor has your scar hurt.

Note, however, that he's Superman dead, not Uncle Ben dead, and can be brought back with the turn of a time-turner or the flick of a wand, should Rowling need the money.

  • 1
    Good note but whoa, with the trope of dead or dead dead, "Superman dead, not Uncle Ben dead," does it unfortunately evoke the rice brand and recent remarketing campaign for anyone else? Context sort of like how Mr. Peanut is dead, poor taste?
    – livresque
    Commented Dec 2, 2023 at 3:34
  • 2
    @livresque - With great power comes great riceponsibility.
    – Valorum
    Commented Dec 2, 2023 at 10:49
  • 2
    I'd call it "Palpatine dead".
    – Spencer
    Commented Dec 2, 2023 at 15:29
  • 1
    @Spencer somehow Voldemort returned
    – tilley31
    Commented Dec 2, 2023 at 21:01

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.