CHAPDISC: HBP 23, Horcruxes

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 160213

> CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter 
> 23, Horcruxes
<snip summary>
> 
> 1. Given that Harry, in the course of the series, has often turned
up late to the Gryffindor Tower without a real complaint from the Fat 
> Lady, why do you think she is so liverish in this instance? 

Carol responds:
Interesting question. Maybe it relates to the Felix Felicis wearing
off and shows that it's a close call? But doesn't Harry usually wear
the Invisibility cloak and have someone let him back in? (My memory on
this minor point is a bit fuzzy.) 
> 
> 2. Do you think there is any significance in the Astronomy Tower 
> being the Bloody Baron's favourite haunt (pun intended) when it is 
> also later the scene of Dumbledore's death?

Carol:
Well, it brings the astronomy tower to our notice. I can't remember
it's having been mentioned earlier in the book. And it also answers a
longstanding question of mine, whether the Bloody Baron can actually
talk (we never hear him speak). The momentary image of Dumbledore
claning and howling on the tower is a nice bit of JKR-style humor, but
I don't think there's anything significant. Unless, maybe, the Bloody
Baron reports to McGonagall that Harry's Invisibility Cloak is still
on the tower and she sends him a note to come and claim it. (That's
one way to get Harry back to Hogwarts. Then again, she'll probably
just send it by owl post.)
> 
> 3. What other business would you think Dumbledore had to attend to 
> after midnight on a school night, as alluded to by Nick?

Carol:
Harry asks later if it's related to the Horcruxes, so I'd guess that
he was checking out the seacoast near the cave where the Horcrux is
hidden. 
> 
> 4. However insignificant the distinction, is the difference in the 
> description of Slughorn's wagging finger between the two versions 
> perhaps a clue to something?

Carol responds:
I think it's odd that Harry notices this detail at all the first time
around, given his usual inattention to such things. If it were
important, I think he'd have noticed it the second time around rather
than the first. I think that JKR is merely trying to make the two
descriptions similar without being identical, to refresh our memories
without boring us. I don't for a moment think that even Tom Riddle
would use a potion on the Potions master, who could detect the potion
by its effects even if it were tasteless and odorless like
Veritaserum. He doesn't need a potion, anyway. The way to impress
Slughorn is through bribery, charm, and flattery.
> 
> 5. This segment of his memory, although perhaps embarrassing and no 
> longer a view that Slughorn holds, does not appear to do any harm to 
> Slughorn, unlike the later part regarding Horcruxes, so why do you 
> think he covered up this portion from his fogged memory?

Carol:
I think the segment injures his bride. He prides himself on his
ability to distinguish talent and potential greatness, but in this
case, he was wrong about the direction the boy's prodigious talents
would take him. Here he was, ready to write a glowing recommendation
for a future Dark Lord! Embarrassing memory for old Sluggie.
> 
> 6. Why would Uncle Horace become excited when describing Horcruxes?

Carol:
As others have pointed out, Slughorn is uncomfortable, especially when
Tom seems to imply that he would make a Horcrux. It's Tom who's excited. 
> 
> 7. Was Tom Riddle initially listening to information he already 
> possessed, or did he have no knowledge of Horcruxes at all prior to 
> this conversation?

Carol:
Canon implies that he didn't know how it was done, especially the
details of the spell. "How do you split your soul?" "But how do you do
it?" "Encase? But how?" Not questions that someone who *only* wanted
to know if it was possible to make more than one Horcrux would ask. In
fact, I don't see why the question about multiple Horcruxes has to be
asked at all. He's already killed four people (Myrtle and the
Riddles), sufficient soul bits for four Horcruxes if he had enough
objects. Why not just do it if he already knew how? And yet he asks
those questions and is still wearing the ring. IMO, Dumbledore (or
Dippett, on Dumbledore's advice) has made sure that the library does
not contain the information that a Dark Wizardling would need to
create a Horcrux. Perhaps he's researching Horcruxes himself in
relation to Grindelwald, whom he defeats about two years later, and
makes sure that any book on the subject is in his office. Grindelwald
is not yet dead, but Horcruxes are already a taboo topic at Hogwarts.
As for what Tom knew before the conversation, he obviously knew the
word and apparently he knew that they were considered Dark magic
(which IMO is why he asked Slughorn, who likes him and won't be
suspicious of him, about them instead of asking, say, Professor
Merrythought, the old DADA teacher). I'm guessing that he thought that
murder was involved (note his lack of response to the information that
killing is required). He may also know the definition of a Horcrux (an
object in which a person has concealed part of his soul). He says that
he encountered the term when he was reading and didn't quite
understand it. I think most likely what he didn't understand was not
the nature of Horcruxes but how to make them and, secondarily, whether
it was possible to make more than one (preferably six). The answer to
the second question is useless if he doesn't know the answer to the
first. How do you make one? How do you split your soul? how do you
encase it? Why ask those questions, repeatedly and urgently, if he
already knew the answer? IMO, if he knew the answer, he wouldn't have
come to Slughorn and he wouldn't be wearing the ring. (Maybe he found
what he wanted at Borgin and Burkes, or elsewhere in Knockturn Alley,
which is bound to have Dark magic bookstores.
> 
> 8. What compelled Horace to continue answering Tom's questions when 
> he was clearly described as being uneasy about the subject, was it 
> more than just a natural conversation in other words?

Carol:
A liking for Tom and Tom's innocent air of intellectual curiosity?
After all, he didn't tell him the actual spell. I don't think he
thought for a moment that Tom would actually kill someone in cold
blood, much less that he had already done it.
> 
> 9. Without going too deeply into the nature of Horcruxes, as that 
> aspect has been discussed almost ad nauseam, do you think Voldemort 
> actually has or had seven soul pieces, six of which are or were 
> Horcruxes?

Carol:
I have absolute faith in JKR's ability to believe that it's possible
to divide an intangible soul into seven equal parts even though
nothing I know of naturally divides into equal sevenths through more
than seven murders and to determine which piece of soul merits being
placed in a Horcrux again despite more than seven murders (or only
four at the time of the first two Horcruxes. We're not supposed to be
analyzing at this level. <g> And, yes, I think Dumbledore has
correctly identified the six Horcruxes (diary, ring, cup, locket,
snake, something from Ravenclaw). The Sword is safe, and he wouldn't
create additional Horcruxes because he somehow has exactly one-seventh
of a soul left. The magic, in his view, would be weakened by creating
an additional Horcrux and reducing him to, say, one-fourteenth of a
soul in his body.
> 
> 10. How had Dumbledore acquired his knowledge of Horcruxes and why 
> was it such thorough knowledge?

Carol:

As i said, I think he was researching ways to defeat Grindelwald, whom
he knew or suspected of having a Horcrux.
> 
> 11. Did Lord Voldemort treat the Diary Horcrux carelessly as 
> Dumbledore suggests or is there more to its destruction than 
> initially met the eye?

Carol:

I'm not sure that I understand the question. He wanted the Horcrux to
be used, probably soon after he murdered Harry as a weapon against
Dumbledore. He certainly didn't want it wantonly destroyed. I also
wonder what would have happened if Diary!Tom, animated by Ginny's
soul, had encountered Vapor!mort. Would he have allowed his own
seventh of a soul to possess him and re-formed the Death Eaters in the
guise of a sixteen-year-old boy?
> 
> 12. Would you agree that there are four Horcruxes to find, and if
not why not?

Carol:
Yes. I don't think that Harry or his scar is a Horcrux, and I think
that Dumbledore is right about Nagini being one (though perhaps he's
wrong about the timing for reasons I've explored elsewhere).
> 
> 13. As far as I recall the Sorting Hat was whipped from the head of 
> Godric Gryffindor (with the implication that it was his), so why 
> would Dumbledore not at least make a mention of this?

Carol:
I don't think that Tom would consider making the dirty old hat that he
sneers at in CoS into a Horcrux, whatever its powers, and Dumbledore
knows that Tom prefers objects that in themselves are valuable (and
durable), Objects that have "a certain grandeur"--preferably made of
gold, apparently. The Sorting Hat doesn't qualify. Also, since the
Sorting Hat can think for itself, its thinking would probably be
altered by the addition of a Horcrux, which Dumbledore would easily
detect and destroy. It doesn't seem to occur to DD that Riddle would
use the Sorting Hat any more than he'd use an old mouth organ if he
still had one. And it isn't really a relic of Gryffindor since, as
others have pointed out, it has "brains" from all  four Founders in
it. (For some reason, I'm getting menatal images of the Scarecrow's
brain from the book version of Wizard of Oz.)
> 
> 14. Do you agree with Dumbledore that Nagini is a Horcrux and if so 
> did he conclude this when consulting his machine in OotP or from
some other source?

Carol:

"Naturally, naturally. But in essence divided?" Yes, I think he means
that the snake's "essence" is divided into her own nature and
Voldemort's, especially when he's possessing her. I don't think that
the division of the snake into two heads has anything to do with
Harry. Like a two-headed Runespoor, Nagini is of two minds, hers and
her master's.
> 
> 15. At this advanced stage of the series do you think that the 
> summary of the remaining Horcruxes is correct or think that 
> Dumbledore is wrong, as he himself professes to be on occasion?

Carol:
It's possible that Nagini isn't a Horcrux and that LV is still one
short, but I don't think that Harry or his scar is an accidental
Horcrux, if that's what you mean. DD had the perfect opportunity to
present that idea to Harry when he was discussing Nagini and he didn't
do so. If accidental Horcruxes were possible, he'd have had a moral
obligation to point that out.
> 
> 16. Do you agree that Lord Voldemort is unaware when a Horcrux is 
> destroyed and if so, and given that he knows of the loss of the
Diary Horcrux, do you think he would create another?

Carol:
He didn't know that the diary was gone and there's no indication that
he knows about the ring (or that the locket in the cave was stolen).
And as I said before, he's not likely to diminish his soul further. By
JKR's calculations and his, if not by real math, he has one seventh of
a soul. He's not going to remove any more soul bits, IMO. (Besides,
we'd have a neverending Horcrux hunt. Enough Horcruxes already!)

> 
> 17. Why does Dumbledore not categorically say that Lord Voldemort 
> could be killed if his Horcruxes are destroyed, but only that it
will take uncommon skill and power to kill him?

Carol:
He's warning Harry that it won't be an easy job and also that he's not
going to be killed in a car accident or by a stray AK fom the Blond
Death Eater. Harry has to do it, and it's going to be hard work.
> 
> 18. Lord Voldemort is said to be a powerful and gifted wizard so why 
> would he set such store by the Prophecy?

Carol:
He's a superstitious egomaniac who stamps out anything that threatens
him. He doesn't dare reject the Prophecy as nonsense. Suppose it's
true and some kid wizard defeats him twenty years down the road. He
can't risk it. Crush the threat before it becomes one. Nip it in the
bud. Don't take any chances.

Carol, hoping that her answers weren't too repetitive