Originally posted by DarkC
Definitely not going to happen, mom.
mom ???
Originally posted by vaya_the_elf
I'd think it would be very interesting. Why would she not write it?
I dunno , really . its just not how she does things.
Originally posted by Unicor777
DUMBLEDORE HAS BECOME A HORCRUX OF VOLDERMORT! THATS WHY HE ALLOWED [ORDERED] SNAPE TO KILL HIM. I CAN NOT THINK OF ANOTHER REASON.
A horcrux ? DUmbledore ? you're kidding ! i could be true but.........Dumbledore !
Originally posted by Unicor777
DUMBLEDORE HAS BECOME A HORCRUX OF VOLDERMORT! THATS WHY HE ALLOWED [ORDERED] SNAPE TO KILL HIM. I CAN NOT THINK OF ANOTHER REASON.
This is exactly how the Harry is a Horcrux came about. Some guy goes.. "WHAT IF HARRY IS A HORCRUX!!!!!!!!!!" and then people start to believe him, and then boom. Here we are now. There is no way Dumbledore is a Horcrux, and Harry too.
One thing I noticed:
I just saw a post by Zeke that said Rowling had said, in the Mugglenet/Leaky Cauldron interview, that if people reread HBP, she was sure they would pick up on at least one of the Horcruxes.
Or something to that effect. At least one of the Horcruxes... Does that mean that we have the ability to figure out the other mystery Horcrux, the one owned by Gryffindor or Ravenclaw?
Originally posted by hotsauce6548
Does that mean that we have the ability to figure out the other mystery Horcrux, the one owned by Gryffindor or Ravenclaw?
My feelings exactly. That's why I dropped in my suggestion about the tiara Harry used in the Room of Requirement. It seemed logical to me that Voldemort would have place a Horcrux in Hogwarts, as he had ties there, and JK casually throws that tiara in, as she threw in the bit about the heavy-set locket that nobody could open in OOTP when they were clearing out Sirius's house (RAB possibly being Regulus A. Black). JK just drops it in casually as if it has little value, but if the locket has a more significant meaning, then what's to say there's not another small mention of a trinket somewhere else?