There's not much to go on

[Barry Arrowsmith]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "pippin_999" <foxmoth at q...> wrote:
> --- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, Barry Arrowsmith
> <arrowsmithbt at b...> wrote:
> > Mind you, I'm particularly interested in her hints about the
> Chamber   "holding very important clues to the ultimate end 
> of the series with   crucial information in book 6" 
> 
> Pippin:
> I had a thought about that --there are hints all through FBAWTFT that
> the wizards are in the habit of using monsters as treasure guardians. 
> Even way back in Book One Harry thinks there might be dragons
> guarding Gringotts. Now suppose the basilisk was actually bestowed in 
> the Chamber to guard some secret that Riddle never discovered at all?
>  
> And, like Goldilocks, it's still there...
> 

Treasure - or secrets yet to be revealed.

That Chamber presents differing plot opportunities depending on one's
own personal tastes. No ambiguity as to my preferences, I plump for it
being/having been the centre, the nexus, of the spirit (actual and 
metaphorical) of Slytherin - the person and the House.

But there again I have a vivid imagination. That scar that Harry sports,
subject of lots of rune, lightning speculation and who knows what else by
the fans. Nah, not for me -  it's a stylised 'S' for Salazar, stylised very 
similarly to the collar flashes of the SS in the not-so-recent European 
unpleasantness. 
Old Sally is at the bottom of all this, you mark my words - and Harry's
job is to extirpate the rotten core, if he can.

Goldilocks?
Wasn't she the one who inflicted herself on the innocent ursine household?
Don't remember her hanging around afterwards, though.
Or have I got it wrong again?

Kneasy