Horcrux dispatching (was Re: Harry's Soul with Harry as horcrux)

[juli17ptf]

No: HPFGUIDX 155453

<snip>

> Mike here:
> Julie, are you mixing up Horcrux hunting with destroying Horcruxes? 
> Because Dumbledore didn't even get a Horcrux from the cave much 
less 
> destroy one.

Julie:
You're right, I did mix those up! Dumbledore located and retrieved 
the locket Horcrux, he didn't destroy it (and it turned out to be a 
fake, of course). Since he never got around to telling Harry about 
his "thrilling adventure" with the ring Horcrux we don't know how 
hard it is to actually destroy one. Maybe the most difficult part is 
just getting possession of it in the first place. That task certainly 
negatively impacted Dumbledore's health, which makes me wonder what 
part of the ring Horcrux adventure caused the severe damage to his 
hand--retrieving the horcrux or actually destroying it? 

> 
> Julie again:
> > But I also think horcrux hunting in the way Dumbledore performed  
> > it in HBP won't happen in the Book 7. Been there, done that, 
after 
> > all, and JKR isn't one to repeat herself, especially when she has 
> > about a thousand other things to deal with in Book 7! Certainly   
> > the rest of the horcruxes will be addressed and destroyed, but    
> > probably in a manner and perhaps with an expediency we can't yet  
> > fathom ;-)

> Mike again:
> I agree, there won't be a lot of paragraphs wasted on the great 
> Horcrux hunt. But if, as you say, the rest of the Horcruxes must be 
> destroyed, I didn't see DD give Harry any lessons, verbal or non-
> verbal, on how to do it. Like I questioned elsewhere, maybe 
> destroying Horcruxes is the easy step in this whole process and 
> Harry doesn't need any lessons on the destruction part. Maybe the 
> whole trick is getting your hands on the things, avoiding or 
getting 
> around any spells/booby-traps that LV set up to protect the things. 
> But we have no indication in canon that this is the case. That's 
why 
> Alla and I, amongst many others, think DD left Harry in the lurch 
on 
> this point. Dumbledore, who is powerfully magical and infinitely 
> more learned than Harry, got a whithered hand from destroying one 
> Horcrux. Harry's got four to go, but only two hands last I 
> remembered. Maybe this is where Ron and Hermione lend a hand! (Ooh, 
> that was bad!)<g>

Julie:
I still wonder what part of the process injured Dumbledore's hand. 
Dumbledore says "The ring, Harry. Marvolo's ring. And a terrible 
curse there was upon it too....(mention of Snape's timely action in 
saving him)...a withered hand does not seem an unreasonable exchange 
for a seventh of Voldemort's soul. The ring is no longer a Horcrux." 
Which leaves it a little unclear whether it was the retrieval of the 
ring itself or the destruction of the Horcrux inside that nearly 
killed Dumbledore.

And even if Dumbledore intended to show Harry how to actually destroy 
the Horcrux inside the locket (if he still actually believed it was 
the real Horcrux locket), I don't think it really impacts whether he 
chose to die or not on the Tower (Alla's original point). He's still 
going to choose to leave Harry in the lurch rather than leave Harry 
potentially dead (should Snape refuse to kill DD, then become 
incapacitated or immediately drop dead from the UV, leaving Harry--
and Draco, and the still very-sick-if-not-dying-Dumbledore--
vulnerable to Fenrir and the Death Eaters). 

Julie