Accidental Harrycrux : a theory

[Ken Hutchinson]

No: HPFGUIDX 155310

>
> > "Ken Hutchinson" wrote:
> 
> <snip part about Hermione's DA list curse for brevity>>
> 
> >> The horcrux spell *could* work in a similar fashion, this is *all*
> >> speculation of course since we know next to nothing about how JKR
> >> pictures that this works. You put a spell on Hufflepuff's cup, for
> >> example, that connects it to your soul and enables it to grab a
> >> piece of your soul, if/when/and-only-if your soul is ever split.
> >> It isperfectly logical that this could be done before you commit a
> >> murder and tear your soul. Then, when you actually do commit a
> >> murder one of the torn pieces of your soul automatically gets sucked
> >> into the horcrux object. No further action is required on your part.
> >>You dohave to cast the horcrux spell in order to create a horcrux but
> >> you don't necessarily have to cast it *after* the murder that splits
> >> your soul. We just don't know for sure; until JKR issues a ruling on
> >> the matter one is as plausible as the other.
> >
> > Mike:
> > Thank you Ken, you explained my theory better than I did! Good
> > analogy to Hermione's jinxed DA membership list. Considering how JKR
> > likes to reuse plot devices, well, makes the idea more plausible.
> >
> 
> Rebecca:
> 
> Let's say for argument's sake, that this is possible.  The only issue that I 
> have with it is what Slughorn said in HBP to young Tom Riddle - specifically 
> that there is a spell but not to ask him what it is as he doesn't know. 
> It's typically JKR vague as with most of the mysteries we debate here, 
> however it is specific in that there's a "spell". I also have to question 
> when in fact that Tom Riddle made the diary and the ring Horcruxes - we 
> don't know how old Riddle was in the memory, but he "did" have the ring on 
> his hand because Harry notices it in the memory Slughorn gave him. Just 
> curious, but if it was a Horcrux then, why did he ask Slughorn about them? 
> As far as the diary goes, we have seen how memories can be "saved" - so 
> while it contains Riddle's memories as a 16 year old, it could have been 
> created as a Horcrux later, which again denotes separate spells.  (At least 
> at that point in time - I haven't forgotten what Dumbledore says about 
> Voldemort's brilliance.)
> 
> Rebecca
>

Ken:

I'm not sure I understand your objection. You seem to be making a 
point of the fact that Slughorn uses the singular. We are proposing
that there is a single spell used to create a horcrux. We are just saying
that it could be cast before the murder. If the spell works as we have
outlined it could be cast after the murder instead, it just doesn't *have* 
to be cast after the murder. A murder has to be committed too and 
that apparently may or may not be done by means of another spell.
DD says LV could have created a horcrux by using the caretaker's
murder and he used Nagini to commit that murder.

During the scene where we finally see Tom Riddle asking Slughorn
about horcruxes Harry comments on how smooth an operator 
Tom is. It is possible he is being smoother than we realize. He 
may already know how to create a horcrux, his real intent may
have been to sound Slughorn out on the possibility of creating
multiple horcruxes. He overplays his hand a bit since he seems
to have thought a little too much about multiple horcruxes to 
have been as ignorant of them as he claims when he first asks
about them.

Ken