The Nature & Destruction of Horcruxes ( was:... the Forest scene )

[Geoff]

No: HPFGUIDX 191174

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboyminn at ...> wrote:

Steve:
> > The problem is, we need some working definition of "Destroyed". 
What if someone had poisoned Nagini? Would that have sufficiently 
rendered the snake useless as a Horcrux, keep in mind that dead 
inanimate objects can be Horcruxes. 

 <snip>

Steve continues that thought: 
> I've had some further idea about the nature and destruction of 
Horcruxes, and from my previous post, you can see that this extends
from my thoughts on Harry as a Living Horcrux. 
 
<snip>

> I suspect in the long history of wizard, very very very few have ever 
thought to bond a soul fragment to another living thing. That's just too 
unpredictable. 
 
Geoff:
This is borne out by Dumbledore:

'"The snake?" said Harry, startled. "You can use animals as Horcruxes?"

"Well, it is inadvisable to do so,: said Dumbledore, "Because to confide a 
part of your soul to something that can think and move for itself is 
obviously a very risky business."
(HBP "Horcruxes" p.473 UK edition)

Steve:
> So, simply Harry's death, or if your prefer destruction, is not sufficient 
to break that Horcrux bond. But perhaps the Avada Kadavra is enough? 
 
> I speculate that Avada Kadavra is enough to break the bond, and if it 
were used on the Hufflepuff Cup or the Riddle Diary, there is a chance 
that simply casting that spell on an inanimate object would break the 
Horcrux bond between them. 
 
> But then ... I speculate.

Geoff:
How do you see Basilisk fangs and the Sword of Gryffindor fitting into 
your speculations as successful destroyers of Horcruxes?