On a horcrux in book 4, wand question & wrappers-JKR interview

[Chys Lattes]

No: HPFGUIDX 134539

http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview3.shtml

Chys: I don't mean to flood if it's already mentioned, but JKR said 
that the clues to what the other horcruxes are, or where they can be 
found, are in the previous books. (At least that's what I kind of 
gleaned from this part of the interview):


-------
MA: Here at the end you sort of get the feeling that we know what 
Harry's setting out to do, but can this really be the entire 
throughline of the rest of the story?

JKR: It's not all of it. Obviously it's not all of it, but still, 
that is the way to kill Voldemort. That's not to say it won't be 
extremely an torturous and winding journey, but that's what he's got 
to do. Harry now knows — well he believe he knows – what he's facing. 
Dumbledore's guesses are never very far wide of the mark. I don't 
want to give too much away here, but Dumbledore says, `There are four 
out there, you've got to get rid of four, and then you go for 
Voldemort.' So that's where he is, and that's what he's got to do.

ES: It's a tall order.

JKR: It's a huge order. But Dumbledore has given him some pretty 
valuable clues and Harry, also, in the course of previous six books 
has amassed more knowledge than he realizes. That's all I am going to 
say.

----

Chys:
Ok, again, too many posts to see if anyone mentioned it:

Is Peter's hand a horcrux, because LV made it after he killed Cedric, 
and it wouldn't be like putting your soul into something, more like 
transfiguring it into a metal hand? Why did the priori incantatem 
thing show the Hand, then the ghostforms of the dead people, instead 
of the killing curses/whatever that he'd been shooting at Harry 
before? Was it just for things involving something having been alive 
and either created or destroyed by the wand?

Just a guess, but I dunno if there's anything to really base it on.

Added to that, according to this interview, I was right all along on 
the gum wrapper theory, which I am kinda sad about, actually. It's 
just sentimental value:

----
MA: Our next winner question is from Delaney Monaghan, who is 6 years 
old, via her mother, Vanessa Monaghan. They're from Canberra, 
Australia. "What is the significance, if any of the gum wrappers that 
Mrs. Longbottom keeps giving Neville?"

ES: Quick, go on the record [with what you think] before she answers —

MA: I think they're a sad mark of an insane woman.

JKR: That was also asked of me this morning. That idea was one of the 
very few that was inspired by a real event. I was told what, to me, 
was a very sad story by someone I know about their elderly mother who 
had Alzheimer's, and the elderly mother was in a closed ward. She was 
very severely demented and no longer recognized her son, but he went 
faithfully to visit her twice a week, and he used to take her sweets. 
That was their point of connection; she had a sweet tooth, she 
recognized him as the sweet-giver. That was very poignant to me. So I 
embroidered the story. Neville gives his mother what she wants, and 
(it makes me sad to think of it) she wants to give something back to 
him, but what she gives back to him is essentially worthless. But he 
still takes it as worth something because she's trying to give, so it 
does mean something, in emotional terms.

But, the theories on the sweet wrappers, are really out there.

ES: You can't blame them.

JKR: I mean she's not trying to pass him secret messages.

MA: She's not really sane —

JKR: No. You're right. But that's a classic example of, "Let's just 
shut that one down," because it doesn't really lead anywhere very 
interesting even if they're wrong. 

MA: It's probably one of the most touching moments in the books.

JKR: I think it is important as a character moment.

----

Chys: But it is kinda neat, all the stuff you guys came up with! I 
really rather liked the noble in the graveyard idea.


Chys