h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

oooohhhhh. I like it... But then I guess the next logical question is why did he choose to betray voldemort?

Must go back and read that. Can we be certain that the original horcrux in the potion was a locket? Or did RAB have some random object (ie, the locket) on his/her person that was substituted for the 'real' horcrux, which was actually something else?

It's a possibility, but it lacks poetic finesse, a bit, doesn't it?

B

The locket lying around in Grimmauld Place and Mundungus Fletcher selling Sirius's personal stuff - what do you make of that?

Yeah, it was Slytherin's locket that the old woman had. (Since her name is Hepzibah Smith and she's a descendant of Hufflepuff, does anyone else think that she's Zacharias Smith's grandmother or something, and he might be the heir of Hufflepuff?) I assumed he would have to destroy it, but thinking about it, Dumbledore did stop that ring being a Hrocrux without destroying it. How does one "un-horcrux" something then? Harry destroyed the diary but would it have worked if Riddle hadn't been out of the diary at that point?

Lots of questions!

I think that was just to emphasise to Harry that Sirius is dead....or maybe he was doing it at Dumbledore's request - sneaking in, taking stuff and giving it to dumbledore...(im streching here..)

Yes...that's a good point. I suspect Mundungus might actually be in possession of the locket and there will be an amusing 'beat up the ginger' episode, probably involving McGonagall, to get it back.

B

Wasn't it Slytherin's locket and RAB just created a facsimilie. As for why regulus turned against Voldemort, I think that'll be a major part of book 7

idea here....what if Dumbledore already had the locket. And he took Harry with him to show him what he was doing, and keep him away from the school, as he had guessed what was going on.

That's what I thought - it as Slytherin's locket, and RAB just replaced t with a fake. Though why he couldn't conjusre a more accurate fake is puzzling, since wwe're told it doesn't actually look the same.

So RAB could be Dumpledore...

B

Or even Dumbledore....

B

i think dumbledore knew the locket was gone, but he was showing harry how to find them, and where they could be hidden. and also maybe to give Harry a hint on how to kill Voldemort - i.e. discover who RAB is.

I'm not convinced about this theory, I think Dumbledore would simply tell Harry things like this

yes i know. its just i find it odd that dumbledore took Harry with him to find the locket.

I think Dumbledore knew he'd need another person. Also he probably planned to show Harry what he was up against, but I don't think Dumbledore knew it was a fake

Neither do I. Dumbledore wouldn't want to go through all this (eg., drinking that awful potion) just to give Harry an impression of his *work*.

However, I re-read the passage about Dumbledore's death , and I noticed that Dumbledore addresses Snape with a "pleading" voice, but all he ever says is "Severus". Not "Don't do it, Severus", nothing like that. So?

I think more important is that Dumbledore is the only character to call him that, everyone refers to him as Snape. I think this might be a indication of why Snape is loyal to Dumbledore, DD treats him as a man

Dumbledore always refers to him as either Severus or professor Snape and always corrects Harry when Harry calls him just "Snape".


Hey... looking back on the first book it's obvious now that Dumbledore has always arranged things so that Harry would face Voldy so it should come as no surprise when Dumbledore brings Harry along to retrieve the horcrux.

Just a thought.

My point is, does Snape kill him because he's being loyal (which leads on to the question "Why does Dumbledore want this?") or because he isn't? (I still refuse to believe he's an evil baddie through and through.)
Doesn't Dumbledore call all his staff by their first names? Of course, it certainly indicates that he trusts him.