Have I just transfigured out the Horcrux!Locket?

[saraquel_omphale]

No: HPFGUIDX 137963

Saraquel in response to Jujube:
What a delight to find that whilst I was sleeping SSSusan and Jen 
have both written a spirited defence of my right to speculate, and 
made such wonderful points, that it appears I will not have to write 
much in my defence on that count. My thanks to you both.

Jujube, I want to say that I appreciated your detailed reply, and I 
have always appreciated your insistence that we tie our speculation 
to canon, having read a fair number of your posts. I also think that 
canon is very important, and if you have read my past posts, you 
will usually find them scattered with actual quotes from the text. 

However, I would like to say, in a simple and non-critical tone, 
that for me, your written tone sometimes comes over as quite abrupt 
and confrontational.  I am *not* making a personal criticism here, 
please do not take it that way, as I have already said, I appreciate 
your input.  I'm just commenting on how your posts appear to me and 
possibly others – hence, I speculate, (as I can in no way speak for 
Jen, SSSusan and others) the spirited replies that you receive to 
them. I look forward to reading more of your posts, and trust in you 
to continue to keep us all tied down to canon. :-) (Intended as a 
friendly smile not a joke.)

I would have to agree with you that my first post, was merely the 
stating of an idea to be followed up, and not written out as a fully 
fledged, canon backed theory.  Hence my call for opinions at the end 
of it and making the subject line a question.  I posted it without a 
great deal of in-depth thought because I was excited by the idea.  
My second post was a following up of initial thoughts, and I will 
admit, it was probably not a wise move to set out so many ideas 
without a more careful consideration of canon.  

However, I see the list as being more of a conversational type of 
list, where ideas are batted around for a while, with possibilities 
being built up or knocked down, by consecutive interactive posts, 
rather than a place where fully fledged theories are posted like 
articles in a professional magazine, to be defended against all 
comers. 

Having got a couple of responses to my ideas, I was able to see more 
clearly where the holes lay and think more deeply about whether the 
theory had any value.  In the response to Jen and mz_annethrope I 
think that I was clear about the value of the theory:

>Being out of character in such a character driven plot would be a 
>fatal flaw. But, climbing down from the fence, I think that this 
>theory deserves further consideration, and so I will set out a 
>humble, but considered riposte. I by no means anticipate it to be 
>watertight, or even markedly convincing, but I will do my best.

In what followed, I think that I presented my arguments in the light 
of canon, and I'm quite willing to accept that this interpretation 
is not plausible to everybody (or maybe even anybody :-) )  Here 
endeth my defence of my posts. 

Now to answer some of your points, Jujube, that have not already 
been taken up and answered in the way I would like to answer them, 
by SSSusan or Jen.

All quotes from UK Editions

Jujube wrote:
>Where is there any canon for any of this? We have no proof of
>Voldemort making anything else false. Why would the locket be false?

Saraquel:
The locket Harry now has is not False or Fake, it is a real horcrux 
but it is disguised.  The notion that it is false or fake, comes 
from Harry's interpretation of it.
HBP end ch28 p569.
"Harry neither knew nor cared what the message meant. Only one thing 
mattered: this was not a Horcrux"
I beg to differ with Harry on that count, and this is a pattern that 
we have seen in the books, that Harry's first impressions are 
mistaken.

On the count that Voldemort would not make the locket appear false. 
I think the difference between using the word disguised rather than 
false, is substantive not simply semantic.  Voldemort is the master 
of disguise.  As I have previously argued, he disguised his true 
character and intentions.

A couple of quotes from DD to illustrate:
In the chapter The **Secret** Riddle, page 259
"He shed his name, as you know, within a few short years of that 
conversation and created the mask of "Lord Voldemort" behind which 
he has been hidden for so long."
Ch 17 p337
"He showed no sign of outward arrogance or aggression at all.  As an 
unusually talented and very good-looking orphan, he naturally drew 
attention and sympathy from the staff almost from the moment of his 
arrival.  He seemed polite, quiet and thirsty for knowledge. Nearly 
all were most favourably impressed by him."
"Didn't you tell them, sir, what he'd been like when you met him at 
the orphanage?" asked Harry.
"No I did not."
(So bang goes any thought that a staff member found out about the 
cave through DD. I see no reason to specualte that DD was lying 
here.)

Jujube quoted from my post:
>>No-one had to find the cave.
>
>How else would the locket be found.

Here, I was referring (not clearly, I concede) to the real problem 
that RAB faced in finding out about the cave. (See also Jen's input 
here) I think this is the major obstacle to the Regulus Black 
theory.  Nowhere in canon, as far as I can see, is there any 
indication as to how Regulus (or any of the other characters, bar 
DD) could have found out about the cave. My not being able to see a 
plausible canon explanation, was the main impetus for me to search 
for an alternative.  

Jujube wrote:
>Actually, from his speech to the Death Eaters in the graveyard in
>GoF, it is clear that not only do some or all of the DEs know about
>the idea of a Horcrux, it is logical to infer, from the canon, that
>they know there are multiple Horcruxes.

Saraquel:
Even if the DEs knew about the horcruxes, this still does not 
explain how Regulus found the cave.

Jujube wrote:
>Well, first of all, the discovery that the locket is fake is 
>revealed at that point in the story line for maximum dramatic 
>impact.

Saraquel:
Well, we'll have to agree to differ here. I think discovering the 
locket was a "fake" in Harry's eyes, would have made DDs death even 
more poignant, and would have been a fitting build up. 

Jujube wrote:
>Second, neither of them look at the locket because of the life and
>death nature of their quest:

Saraquel:
I agree with your reasoning here, BUT, JKR made a distinct point of 
telling us that Harry didn't look at the locket. HBP p537 
(Harry) "leapt to his feet and seized the goblet he had dropped in 
the basin; he barely registered the golden locket lying curled 
beneath it." 

It's quite possible that JKR did not want Harry to realise about the 
locket at that particular moment because it would have been a 
diversion from the desperate situation regarding DD.  But it might 
have been, because she did not want Harry to know about the locket 
until after DDs death. And to add weight to my argument, I do not 
think that the discovery would have impacted on the ensuing events.  
DD had to be returned to Hogwarts asap, he was not in a fit state to 
start wondering about what they had found and answering questions.  
As soon as they arrived back, the first priority would still have 
been to fetch help and then to get up to the astronomy tower to deal 
with the dark mark situation. It is this that makes me wonder about 
JKRs intentions to deliberately tell us that Harry didn't notice the 
locket.  

Regarding my second post with the speculation on the other Horcurxes:

Jujube wrote:
>What canon is there for any of these contentions? IMO they are
>entirely unsupported.

Saraquel:
I agree here and make no defence.

Jujube wrote:
>Why would she suddenly now add a clumsy, convoluted story which adds
>nothing to the emotional richness of having Harry solve all of these
>mysteries with the information he has at hand?

Saraquel:
Interestingly enough, that was pretty much my initial response to 
the RAB note, when I first read HBP. To me, explaining how Regulus 
Black (if that is who we are thinking RAB is, and from your post 
Jujube, It looks like you think it is) actually found the cave and 
managed to retrieve the Horcrux was looking, and still looks, pretty 
difficult to me. (Not that I'm saying that JKR cannot do it to my 
satisfaction, she's rarely failed me before). 

Regulus was young and therefore in all probablility inexperienced, 
plus the fact that his only mention by anyone except Sirius, is by 
Slughorn – I would have liked the pair. No indication is given that 
he was a talented wizard in any way, there are no details or 
descriptions in canon that have gone before, to indicate he was 
special.  And we have had indications for others spelt out to us – 
e.g. Lily.  

In fact, I would say that canon has done absolutely nothing to 
prepare us to expect Regulus to be capable of this feat, rather to 
the contrary.  Sirius' description of him is not particularly 
flattering. 

"No, he was murdered by Voldemort. Or on Voldemort's orders, more 
likely; I doubt Regulus was ever important enough to be killed by 
voldemort in person.  From what I found out after he died, he got in 
so far, then panicked about what he was being asked to do and tried 
to back out."

The only bit of canon that I see as relevant is that Regulus was a 
DE who wanted to escape and that Sirius thought he wasn't important 
enough to be killed by Voldemort personally.  So Sirius would have 
to be very wrong – which I admit is possible.  Regulus, rather than 
being a foot soldier on the extremes of what we have canon evidence 
of being quite a sizeable army (outnumbered 20 – 1), would 
presumably have had to be in Voldemort's inner core, because I doubt 
Voldemort told every DE that he had horcruxes. What qualifications 
would Regulus have had to promote him to the inner core? 

Along with the question about how he found the cave, what do we make 
of the enchantments in place when Harry and DD arrive – whose are 
they? DD's assertions that 
1)HBP p540 "One alone could not have done it", who is Regulus 
Black's accomplice (a reasonable case has been  made for Kreacher 
but with regard to point 2, is he a very great wizard?) 
2)"None but a very great wizard would have found the boat." HBP p527
3)DD believes that the protections in the cave are Voldemort's, HBP 
p 527 "Magic always leaves traces,' said Dumbledore 
<snip> "sometimes very distinctive traces. I taught Tom Riddle. I 
know his style."  DD did not look at the potion and say, hmmm not 
Voldemort's style.  So is it a refilling potion or what?

I think it is possible that all these could be construed as anvil 
sized hints that there is something very fishy in the cave, and that 
we should *not* take the locket at face value.

So if my own theory has a few holes, then the Regulus Black theory 
is not immune to that disease either. Personaly, I think we need an 
alternative to the Regulus solution, and although not perfect, I 
think my explanation makes for a simpler one in the end.  As I've 
said before, Harry can quickly check out the Grimauld Place locket, 
JKR has shown us the route for that.  When it comes to dead end 
(which obviously, I think it will) and there is no snake on the 
locket face, Harry will be forced to think again, teaching him more 
about the subtlety and cunning of Voldemort, the magnitutde of which 
I don't think he has fully appreciated yet.
  
Personally, I loved mz_annethrope's idea here, that if my 
speculations are correct and it is a transfigured horcrux, it will 
be Ron who realises it.

I now invite you, Jujube to post an explanation of how Regulus Black 
found the cave, that is non-speculative and "firmly grounded in 
patterns, details, descriptions, and events of what has gone 
before." Because, without it, IMO, insisting that Regulus Black 
found the real horcrux is mere speculation :-) And I am not lying 
when I say, I would be genuinely glad to have this gigantic obstacle 
removed from the path.

Thanks for forcing me to search out more evidence to support my 
viewpoint.

Amicalement (to quote another poster)

Saraquel. 
Who has taken most of the day to write this, and really should get 
out more!