Half-Blood Prince Discussion, Spoilers Options

[jordanriane]

Since Anna mentioned a new topic for discussion of the book, I figured I'd just create the new topic, that way people can talk about the book here, instead of in the other thread, that people can use who haven't finished/read the book yet.

and i also know who  RAB is.

Regulus Black, the brother of sirius black, who was murdered by the dark lord ages ago.

How were you able to figure that it was him?



The only real problem I had with this book, was the first chapter, with the Minister. I don't really see that it was too relevent, other then telling us that the muggle world saw these deaths are regular murders (aside from trying to figure out how someone died when they were alone and locked up) and whatnot.. But it was just really irrelevent, and ticked me off that it had really little meaning with the rest of the book.

Maybe it'll tie in for book 7, hopefully.

[*disco infiltrator*]

1) Yes, I realized that, but as Dumbledore pointed out, it would be foolish in the first place to make a living, moving, breathing thing a horcrux. Why would he make another?

2) Surely you don't think that was the real reason. Trelwaney only thought that. He was listening to the prophecy she was telling, and Dumbledore said he had only heard half of her prophecy, which is the point I was trying to make.

3) Dumbledore's hand was burnt before he tried to destroy the ring..


Also, I do think Kreacher was used in removing the locket. Rowling pointed out several times that his voice was often very scratchy. Dumbledore's voice was very hurt after drinking the liquid; he could barely talk. Perhaps, after time, Kreacher was able to speak, but his voice was still damaged.

[sadolakced acid]

1) Yes, I realized that, but as Dumbledore pointed out, it would be foolish in the first place to make a living, moving, breathing thing a horcrux. Why would he make another?

2) Surely you don't think that was the real reason. Trelwaney only thought that. He was listening to the prophecy she was telling, and Dumbledore said he had only heard half of her prophecy, which is the point I was trying to make.

3) Dumbledore's hand was burnt before he tried to destroy the ring..
Also, I do think Kreacher was used in removing the locket. Rowling pointed out several times that his voice was often very scratchy. Dumbledore's voice was very hurt after drinking the liquid; he could barely talk. Perhaps, after time, Kreacher was able to speak, but his voice was still damaged.

it wasn't intentional. when the dark lord when to godric's hollow, he intended to kill the boy and make the seventh horcrux. however, the killing curse backfired on the dark lord. you must remember the dark lord had just killed to rather gifted wizards. so it's certainly possible that he unintentionally make harry a horcrux, which would explain:

why harry can read the dark lord's mind, and see things from his POV
why harry was scarred, when the killing curse leaves no marks
why harry can speak parseltongue
why harry is powerful instead of weak like neville
why the sorting hat wanted to put harry in slytherin, when his family was gryffindor and he didn't have any slytherinic tendencies.

[jordanriane]

it wasn't intentional.  when the dark lord when to godric's hollow, he intended to kill the boy and make the seventh horcrux.  however, the killing curse backfired on the dark lord.  you must remember the dark lord had just killed to rather gifted wizards.  so it's certainly possible that he unintentionally make harry a horcrux, which would explain:

why harry can read the dark lord's mind, and see things from his POV
why harry was scarred, when the killing curse leaves no marks
why harry can speak parseltongue
why harry is powerful instead of weak like neville
why the sorting hat wanted to put harry in slytherin, when his family was gryffindor and he didn't have any slytherinic tendencies.

In order to create a horcrux, it seems as if it needs to be in a spell, not just by killing people, or trying to kill someone and failing and them being a horcrux.

He. never. killed. Harry. In order for a horcrux, a person needs to be killed.
Even so, unintentially making a horcrux is like Harry learning occlumency. ;d

It's been mentioned that Harry has some of Voldemort in him, not soul, but rather his power, his abilities.


Maybe there really IS no sixth horcrux.
When voldemort went to kill Harry, he would've needed a soul.
Obviously he had died.

I mean, how is voldemort able to be alive now without using a horcrux to obtain a soul? Or was the vapor a symbol of only Voldemort's soul surviving, which would insinuate that he's the 7th horcrux to be destroyed.

[mocassinsx29]

In order to create a horcrux, it seems as if it needs to be in a spell, not just by killing people, or trying to kill someone and failing and them being a horcrux.

He. never. killed. Harry. In order for a horcrux, a person needs to be killed.
Even so, unintentially making a horcrux is like Harry learning occlumency. ;d

He killed Harry's father before he went on to kill him [even though his mother stood in front of him] but why would he make Harry a horcrux after he killed James when the reason he went to Godric's Hollow was to kill Harry after hearing half the Prophecy?

[jordanriane]

He killed Harry's father before he went on to kill him [even though his mother stood in front of him] but why would he make Harry a horcrux after he killed James when the reason he went to Godric's Hollow was to kill Harry after hearing half the Prophecy?

I don't know why you quoted what I said, because it's the same thing as what you're saying.

That's what I've been saying.

Voldemort did not want to kill James, Lilly and Harry to make him a horcrux.
He wanted to kill the parents and harry, simply because harry is the "chosen one." (well, to voldemort's knowledge, even though Voldemort could've picked Harry or Neville.)

ok, so here's what happened:

the dark lord kills james and lily, and then went on to kill harry.  the curse, however, backfired.  You cannot stop or dodge a killing curse, but you probably have enough time for one spell.  Thus, the dark lord transfered a segment of his soul to harry.  it wasn't his intention when he went there- but he had to adapt to the circumstances.

I think you should refrain from "here's what happened," seeing as though you haven't the slightest clue.

There wasn't ten minutes in between with Voldemort saying "f**k, the curse failed! I shall make him a horcrux now!" Then he just dies/turns into vapor for no reason whatsoever.

Yeah, wrong.

I'm sorry, but if you have read the books, then you would've read that the minute the curse failed, was when Voldemort died/turned into vapor. Which would mean that he had no time to make a horcrux, or to even think of making a hocrux.

[font=times]And Ginny being one is ridiculous. Is she something of Ravenclaw's or Gryffindor's? No.

Perhaps...James or Lily's dead body is a horcrux? I mean, he used trophies from his murders as horcruxes...perhaps he just used one of their bodies?...I mean, as we all would assume, of course Harry would want to visit his parents' graves at some point. But why would she make it a point to include that he wanted to? You never know..I mean, as Dumbledore said, it would be foolish to make a horcrux a living thing (another reason Harry and Ginny are not horcruxes, he already has one living thing; why risk another?) so why not just use the dead bodies?

First off, it's not rediculous. It's just a theory.

Second, it does not mean the other horcrux will be Ravenclaw or Gryffindor.
It may seem so, but it does not have to be.

Also, Harry parents a horcrux, I doubt it.
DUmbledore mentioned about using inferi as a horcrux, and discredited his own theory (or harry's, can't remember which.) So it's very unlikely Harry's parents would be one.

I mean, you said so yourself, it'll be an object.
Not a dead body (which could be considered an object, but no.) not a person..
Also, it's a theory that Nagini is a horcrux, we could all be wrong, but it seems as if the snake would be one..