Dumbledore's pleading/What Horcruxes Dumbledore and Harry destroyed?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 141596

Nora:
> In fact, I think the whole "JKR is super-twisty" line of argument, 
> which is practically fandom gospel, is probably overrated.  We haven't 
> had anything Scabbers-class BANG-y in wot, three books or so--but PoA 
> continually gets pulled up as the model to follow, rather than the 
> exceptionally fine (but exceptional) twist of plotting.


> I expect some things to be resolved and explained, but I suspect I 
> expect more of it to stand as 'dude, just the way that things happen, 
> you know', than you do, my dear Pippin.  That said, consequently my 
> rate of wildly off guesses is much lower. :)

Pippin:
::shrugs:: There's no penalty for being wrong. Er, except for looking
a bit silly. Whether people who spend hours of their time discussing
an imaginary universe on the Internet should be worried about that
is not for me to say <g>.

 I predicted that if and when any of my fiercely 
defended theories proved wrong, there'd be  plenty of
disappointed Shippers eating crow along with me, and *that* 
prediction, you must admit, was dead on. <veg>

I suppose it's a statistical certainty that somewhere in this huge
archive of posts are the predictions of The Poster Who Has Never
Yet Been Wrong. But I'd give even money it's not a name even old
post trawlers would recognize off hand. I don't read posts to find
out what's going to happen in the next book, I read them to be
entertained, and sometimes enlightened, by what's going through
my fellow posters' minds. 

All predictions can tell us is what the readers expect (or fear) to get 
out of the next book, not what the author intends to put there. All 
ESE!Lupin tells you is that I expect a nice, juicy mystery plot, and
have taken the liberty of inventing one from the information at hand. As
I don't consider myself a brilliant inventor, it's my assumption that
JKR went there first. I could be wrong.

But I don't see how you could take JKR's constant references to
clues, hints, red herrings and detective stories at face value and
*not* conclude that there is an unresolved mystery plot and that
it's rather bangy. Whether it has anything to do with ESE!Lupin
and/or DDM!Snape we'll all know when Book Seven comes out and
not before, but we have established, I think, that neither can
be refuted without resort to Flints and/or poetic license.

Either is, of course, a possibility, but Rowling has corrected
Flints that seemed to impinge on major plot points, and she
has never yet, to my knowledge, explained away a major, plot-
relevant discrepancy by claiming artistic license. 

Pippin
sorry for the late answer to this post