Horcrux Cheat by JKR? (Was Tom Riddle and the RoR)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 181883

> Carol:
> 
> However, it does seem that he used "fresh" murders for the 
> creation of Horcruxes (not necessarily "significant" murders as
> DD suggests, though). Here's the list that JKR provides in a
> webchat, extracanonical, I realize:
> 
> (I've changed the order given on Mugglenet to reflect the probable
> order in which they were created.)
> 
> The diary - Moaning Myrtle
> The ring - Tom Riddle Sr.
> The cup - Hepzibah Smith, the previous owner
> The locket - a Muggle tramp
> The diadem - an Albanian peasant
> Nagini - Bertha Jorkins 

Mike:
Thanks for re-ordering the list into chronological order, Carol. This 
now points out another problem with JKR interviews. (BTW, check out 
my vote in the polls. If JKR is giving us backstory she used when 
writing the story, or it comes from her notes, or I'll count that as 
canonical. So I don't reject ALL of her interview information. The 
question is, does this information fall under those parameters? Or 
was this another *off-the-cuff* comment?) OK, back to the problem:

I agree with you, Carol, Voldemort must have been using relatively 
fresh murders to make Horcruxes. If you remember, I argued pre-DH 
that the Horcrux must be made at the time of the murder, but there 
was never any canon to uphold or refute my position. This list would 
indicate that Voldemort must have needed to create the Horcrux 
proximate timewise to the murder, if he used such a rag-tag group for 
creation. 

Also, that indeed Dumbledore was wrong about his "significant murder" 
speculation.So, was DD's speculation simply a red herring, or was it 
a cheat? That is, when Dumbledore said those words, weren't we 
suppose to assume that he had *some* knowledge to back up those 
statements? When has Dumbledore ever taken a shot in the dark like 
this; with no real knowledge to back up his pronouncement?

A second problem: By this Horcrux creation timeline (with which I 
agree if those are indeed the "Horcrux murders"), Tom would have made 
his second Horcrux *BEFORE* his conversation with Slughorn. It was 
made clear in DH, imho, that Tom already knew how to make a Horcrux 
before that conversation, but according to DD (as told by Harry) what 
Tom *needed* to know was whether one could split ones soul more than 
once. Now why would he *need* to know this AFTER he had already made 
two Horcruxes?



> Carol:
> The Prophecy seems to have spurred him to hide any Horcruxes that
> he still had with him, including the locket and the diary. As for
> Nagini, she didn't need to be hidden. She could be controlled.

Mike:
I concur with your speculation on the prophecy impetus. And I bow to 
your wisdom in picking Nagini as a Horcrux, I thought she was a red 
herring. I still wonder if the story about LV's Four Founders 
obsession was fruitful. True, he did get Helga's cup and Salazar's 
locket, and Rowena's diadem came out in DH. But I don't understand LV 
giving up that four-fold quest in favor of using Nagini, no matter 
how "dear" to him the snake was.


> Carol:
> So to return to the question of how they made LV feel, they were
> important to him either for their connection with Hogwarts or their
> connection to his Slytherin heritage (Nagini could fall into the
> second category),

Mike:
Right, but why would he need another connection to his heritage if it 
would cause him to fail in his quest to make one each from something 
of the four founders? Tom Riddle doesn't strike me as the type to 
give up on such an important quest so easily. At the time he made 
Nagini a Horcrux, as far as he knew, he still had five intact 
Horcruxes. What was the rush? And if there was a rush because of the 
prophecy, why didn't he make one before he went to GH?

Put another way, it was always his plan to take over Hogwarts, and 
indeed he succeeded. If it was also always his plan to abolish the 
house system, it seems using the Sorting Hat as his fourth and final 
in the founder set would be highly significant on two fronts. And he 
abandoned all that to make Nagini? And he did it while he was in his 
frail Baby!Mort condition? It just doesn't make sense, from 
Voldemort's point of view, imho?



> Carol:
> <snip> and perhaps wearing them would give him a feeling of
> pleasure or wholeness, but he seems to have been more concerned
> with preserving and protecting them than with whatever sensation
> he felt when he wore or used them.

Mike:
I still wonder if having them close by would be painful. That is, 
would a soul piece in close proximity to his primary, albeit terribly 
fractured, main soul attempt to rejoin the main piece? Clearly soul 
pieces have a sort of sentient quality to them. The diary even tried 
to reform itself into human form. Would that desire to become human 
again manifest as a pull on that fractured unstable soul within 
Voldemort's body?

Mike, wondering if JKR's "Scottish Book" is going to have any 
backstory fill-in, or if it is simply going to explain technicalities 
that she didn't have time to explain in the books