In this context it is unlikely that Voldemort would ever have accepted, or even considered for a nano-second, remorse. But, it does not follow that remorse was not an option. It was improbable, stunningly unlikely, barely conceivable, but, not impossible. The reason I think it has to remain possible is because Rowling clearly believes it to be so. If she did not, she would never have Harry offer it as “all you’ve got left.” (p594 uk)

Rowling sticks steadfastly to her belief that remorse, repentance, and redemption, remain available no matter what the circumstances or the individual concerned. If, the individual refuses to accept that choice then they face the consequences. In Voldemort’s case it was to suffer in “the form of a small naked child, curled on the ground, its skin raw and rough, flayed looking … shuddering under a seat where it had been left, unwanted, stuffed out of sight, struggling for breath,” presumably for eternity. (p566 uk)

That’s why I think Harry offered Voldemort one last chance to redeem his soul, as a witness to its potential fate he felt bound to warn Voldemort of the consequences of his actions, even though he, Harry, knew better than anyone Voldemort would choose to reject it. Voldemort had chosen his path, and stuck to it. However, it does not follow that no other path existed. In fact I would argue that Harry’s offering Voldemort “one last chance” is further proof that Rowling believes redemption to be immanent.

Last week on a forum, the issue of Voldemort and the extent to which his lack of nurture determined him came up. One poster wrote:

I think that by the time he turned 11, the damage was done. He had already developed his desire to dominate, to control, to inflict pain. Even if Riddle was placed in a loving home, he’d have learned to conceal his darker nature, but still act on it. In my opinion, he needed a family from the start. His only hope would have been to have a mother who would have raised him right, instead of festering in his own hatred.

My response, I think fits in with the discussion you’ve been having about remorse as an authentic option:

I would tend to disagree that Riddle was so damaged (either by nature or nurture) that he could not have taken a different path. I don’t see any evidence, actually, that the text ever argues for determinism or fate. It argues for choice and free will.

Harry had no loving home, no mother to raise him right. And he even had a piece of Voldemort’s soul living inside him. Yet, Harry turned out okay. Part of that was due to his mother’s sacrifice. But part of it was because of the choices Harry made. Nurture does not seem to be a crucial factor.

So that brings us to nature. Was Voldemort’s nature so marred that only nurture could have contained it? The text indicates that choice is always a bigger factor than nature. There is always a choice – even up to the last minute of a character’s life. A character (like Voldemort) may have made so many horribly bad choices that his soul is marred and he becomes resistant to making the right choice. But the text never argues that characters have no choice but to be who they are. The damage that is done can always be mitigated… if the character chooses remorse.

If Voldemort was utterly incapable of choice from at least the age of 11, then it’s more likely that he was a complete sociopath. And if he was a sociopath, then no amount of nurture, even by the most loving parents, could ever cure him. But the text never treats him as a sociopath. It treats him as someone who has allowed himself to become marred. He has allowed himself to destroy his soul.

I’m not saying that it’s not sad that he was left orphaned on the day he was born. And I’m not saying that he did not sustain damage from that. I’m saying that the text makes the case that damage can always be undone if the character chooses to undo the damage. There are points of contrast to Voldemort in the text – other characters who have made horrible, soul damaging choices and yet who turn around – either in a huge way (like Severus Snape) or in a small way (like the Malfoys).

If Voldemort was just a victim of lousy upbringing and a bad nature, then Harry’s admonition for him to try to find some remorse is completely pointless. And I really don’t think the text is encouraging us to think it is.

Rowling would never have Harry, at the climax of the whole series, tell Voldemort to consider remorse unless it was a vital, elemental, choice available to him.

Though Harry realizes how insane Voldemort is, he still offers remorse, so he believes it to be possible, though Voldemort must “try” for it. Voldemort’s grandiosity, though, makes him unwilling to destroy his prized mortal body.

But had remorse for Voldemort not been a real possiblity, it would have been as useless as a bit of broken junk in The Room of Hidden Things.

I’ve re-read the Narnia books in the past few years. I haven’t read the Space Trilogy in quite awhile. But I definitely picked up on echoes of Lewis in Rowling.

BTW, I think the summation of your analysis nails it. Showing the option to choose remorse/repentance to the very end reminds me of a similar moment at the end of Lewis’ That Hideous Strength. It’s been a (very) long time since I read that book, but I clearly remember that the most evil character in the story has an opportunity to repent even at the last moment. And he rejects it.

To clarify and sum up:
AdamR. Yes, Devil’s Advocate is sometimes a necessary position to take but I believe it flawed for the following reasons -
1. Dumbledore says: “Lord Voldemort use tin cans or old potion bottles to guard his own precious soul? You are forgetting what I’ve shown you” (HBP uk p471) Dumbledore is clear Voldemort valued his soul. And again: “Voldemort would have chosen his Horcruxes with some care.” (HBP uk 471)
2. Voldemort valued his soul parts because they were what made him “immortal.” (HBP uk 470)
3. No soul part was ever “unwanted” by Voldemort for precisely that reason. Hence the soul part referrred to in KC can only refer to that part of soul that Voldemort himself unwittingly ‘destroyed’.
4. This in turn confirms Dumbledore’s insistence to Snape that Voldemort alone attempt to kill Harry, as only Voldemort could, with certainty, destroy the soul part resident in Harry. If Harry had been attacked by someone else there was always the risk as Ron accidentally-on-purpose pointed out that it could “just go and live in something else.” (p90 uk; classic Rowling clue)
5. Hermione and Harry both say that Voldemort could, through feeling remorse, redeem and reclaim his soul (DH uk p89 and p594 “it’s your last chance”). It would destroy him physically but it was still possible. This is in keeping with Christian tradition: Genuine and heartfelt remorse and repentance do lead to redemption of the eternal soul.
6. The part of soul in KC was separate, out of sight, and alone as well as “unwanted.” Only Voldemort could have redeemed this soul part he himself had destroyed (in the sense of cut off). Hence Dumbledore says twice in KC that neither Harry nor he “can help.” (p566-7) As a Christian Rowling’s position (I think) is clear, however wholly improbable it is that Voldemort would choose to repent or feel remorse, the option to do so, was, even right up until his final moment, open to him. Just because he chose not to take it does not mean that it was not there. Choice is central to the whole series, whether for good or evil.