[HPforGrownups] Six Horcruxes - is Dumbledore right?

[dracojadon at yahoo.co.uk]

No: HPFGUIDX 169960

On 4 Jun 2007, at 23:55, Miles wrote:
<snip>
> But - never say never, and here it is: How many Horcruxes of Lord  
> Voldemort
> were created?
>
> Well, Dumbledore tells us there are six, and so most of the time we
> discussed what are these Horcruxes. From time to time mails, mainly  
> from new
> members, are sent to the list, speaking of seven Horcruxes.
<snip>

Six for practical reasons:

1) it probably takes quite a while to hunt down horcruxes. Assuming  
two have been destroyed (and we don't know that RAB _did_ destroy the  
locket), that's four mini-quests in 608 pages. Five might get a bit  
repetitive.

2) we _trust_ DD ... even though he's wrong, erm, a lot of the time,  
he does have a reputation for mysteriously understanding Voldemort's  
brain.

3) we've got used to the idea of there being six. If we suddenly find  
out there were seven, there's got to be a plot twist around it, or  
we'll wonder: what was the point of believing in six for two years?  
E.g. Harry, believing he has destroyed all horcruxes and V is now  
approaching mortal, attacks in final confrontation and -- oops, Harry  
dies.

4) if we're going to deviate from the audience-accepted number, we  
could at least do it in a sensible way, starting with _not_ telling  
Slughorn how many pieces we're going to be splitting our soul into...

> "He made seven Horcruxes?", said Harry, horror-struck, while  
> several of the
> portraits on the walls made similar noises of shock and outrage.(...)
> "... no, Harry, not seven Horcruxes: six. The seventh part of the  
> soul ...
> remains inside his regenerated body."

Maybe Harry's right here. That last piece is closer to a horcrux than  
a soul, and as for the death -- the death of V's soul as the  
culmination of sequence of horcrux creations could qualify.

jadon