Reply
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



coreen222 wrote:


Psychee wrote:
Just to clarify about this wand business...

Dumbledore's initial plan was to neutralize the power of the wand by dying undefeated. He planned his death in such a way that when Snape killed him, Snape was not defeating him, he was merely giving a gift. Dumbledore knew that Voldemort would go after the wand after Dumbledore's death, and had the plan worked out, Voldemort would have only gotten a useless stick (or at best a non-powerful wand).

What went wrong was this: Draco got to Dumbledore before Snape did. When Draco did his Expelliarmus thing, and the wand flew out of Dumbledore's hand, Draco won Mastery of the Wand. Draco did not know this, of course. So, when Dumbledore was killed, he did not leave behind a useless stick wand, but a wand that still had power with a secret Master (Draco).

Voldemort retrieved the wand, and eventually concluded that the reason it wasn't working for him was because he wasn't its master. He then figured that Snape must be its master since Snape had killed Dumbledore. So he killed Snape, thinking that this would then make him the Master of the wand. He thought wrong.

Draco was the Master of the wand, not Snape, and during the story, at the Malfoy Mansion, Harry won Draco's wand. That was considered a defeat of the Master of the Elder Wand, so it sufficed to transfer the Master role of that wand to Harry.

In the final duel, Voldemort was using the Elder Wand against the Elder Wand's Master. The Elder Wand would not hurt its Master and instead, mid air, on its way to Harry, turned the AK curse on Voldemort himself.

Or, at least, that's my interpretation of the text!




This is what I understood from the text as well.

As for the dual between D and G, I think that just the wand being powerful does not make the master undefeatable (look at how many have been defeated). I think that the wizard has to have the skill to use the wand to its fullest potential. I think that if you catch a wizard off guard, the power of your wand hardly matters.




I think the part that is fuzzy is how Dumbledore defeated Grinderwald if Grinderwald was a master of the Elderwand even though he stole it.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

[ Edited ]

Psychee wrote:

coreen222 wrote:
.

As for the dual between D and G, I think that just the wand being powerful does not make the master undefeatable (look at how many have been defeated). I think that the wizard has to have the skill to use the wand to its fullest potential. I think that if you catch a wizard off guard, the power of your wand hardly matters.




I like the way you stated that, Coreen222. And the best example would be of Draco and his Expelliarmus on Dumbledore. Draco defeated the owner of the Elder Wand while that wand was still in his hands, doing something else (freezing Harry).




This bodes another question...how does a person gain mastery of the wand not just possession (does stealing count?) The text said that it makes the master undefeatable..so that is another question that we have. I think all of the hypotheses are terrific...just would like to see it backed up in writing. What is said in JKR's writing is the the Elder Wand is undefeatable when it is being used by the owner.

I love the debate but would love to have seen this explained better in book seven..one dilemma is really why JKR introduced other new elements without tying up the loose ends on what came before...but despite all of this..I loved the series..and Bravo JKR. I think she is correct..people will be talking and debating about the books for a very long time.

Glad everyone enjoyed the book as much as I did. Now I am off to other things..

Regards,

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-26-2007 08:35 PM
Contributor
crw1204
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎07-26-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

Yes, this was my reading, too. Thank you for getting all of that down!
Contributor
crw1204
Posts: 6
Registered: ‎07-26-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

Oops, I was replying to Psychee's description of the Elder Wand's ownership. I forgot to make that clear above... it was a brilliant summary.
New User
sexxymamasof1
Posts: 2
Registered: ‎07-26-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



FurmanGordhan89 wrote:
I loved how Harry matured so much that he became a seventeen-year-old Albus Dumbledore, by addressing the Dark Lord as "Tom," and I love the fact that he learned that Snape was a good guy, and not really bad, though he seemed to be evil.

And here I admit I was wrong: For all of you that knew how much I thought Snape was evil and bad and all that, I was wrong, and when I learned the truth about him, I was touched.

This series was arguably the greatest series (and this book, the greatest book) of all freakin' time!!!


I loved the fact that it was not actually Harry who killed Tom is was TOM. His own curse backfired. I loved that part in this chapter. the fact that Harry had the brains and courage to tell Ron and Herminone what had happend and why he had to go it alone was a very brave and noble thing of him to do also. I loved it loved it loved it.
Have a good day and GOD Bless you!!!
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wrote:
Just to clarify about this wand business...

Dumbledore's initial plan was to neutralize the power of the wand by dying undefeated. He planned his death in such a way that when Snape killed him, Snape was not defeating him, he was merely giving a gift. Dumbledore knew that Voldemort would go after the wand after Dumbledore's death, and had the plan worked out, Voldemort would have only gotten a useless stick (or at best a non-powerful wand).

What went wrong was this: Draco got to Dumbledore before Snape did. When Draco did his Expelliarmus thing, and the wand flew out of Dumbledore's hand, Draco won Mastery of the Wand. Draco did not know this, of course. So, when Dumbledore was killed, he did not leave behind a useless stick wand, but a wand that still had power with a secret Master (Draco).

Voldemort retrieved the wand, and eventually concluded that the reason it wasn't working for him was because he wasn't its master. He then figured that Snape must be its master since Snape had killed Dumbledore. So he killed Snape, thinking that this would then make him the Master of the wand. He thought wrong.

Draco was the Master of the wand, not Snape, and during the story, at the Malfoy Mansion, Harry won Draco's wand. That was considered a defeat of the Master of the Elder Wand, so it sufficed to transfer the Master role of that wand to Harry.

In the final duel, Voldemort was using the Elder Wand against the Elder Wand's Master. The Elder Wand would not hurt its Master and instead, mid air, on its way to Harry, turned the AK curse on Voldemort himself.

Or, at least, that's my interpretation of the text!




Correction: The Elder wand would not hurt its Master and instead, when the green jet hit the red jet, the green jet rebounded on Voldemort at the same time that the Wand itself went flying on its way to Harry. Harry caught it and saw Voldemort dead.
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36


iDigHermione wrote:
Uhm, alright, I read through this chapter very fast as I was very anxious to find out where Harry's fate would land him. So, now i'm pretty freaking confused. Where the hell where they? I understand that LV shot a killing curse at Harry and killed the part of his own soul that lived inside Harry. I understand how that part of LV's soul got inside Harry... but... why didn't Harry's actual soul die? Why couldn't LV only kill his own little piece of soul? WHy did the Elder wand rightfully belong to Harry? So, Harry is a Horcrux, but having Harry as another Horcrux would make more then 7 Horcruxes. I mean, the ring, the diary, the locket, the cup, the diadem, Nagini, and, I thought the 7th part of LV's soul was inside himself. But, it wasn't? It was in Harry. So, LV stayed alive without a soul in his body but off the use of Harry's blood? Which came from the scar on his forehead? And... what was so special about Harry letting LV "kill" him in the forest peacefully, without fighting back.

I think I got myself a little in line by typing it all out... but, I need to go re-read those chapters. I got lost in my question of Harry's survival.




On the question of Horcruxes -- Voldemort wanted to break his soul into 7 pieces, because he thought 7 was a powerful number. So he made 6 horcruxes -- the diary, the ring, the locket, the cup, the diadem/tiara, and Nagini. But another Horcrux was created by accident that he had no knowledge of -- that soul fragment that accidently latched onto baby Harry's own soul. So yes, there were 7 horcruxes in all, and if you add the remaining bit inside Voldemort, you get eight pieces in all, instead of the 7 that he was aiming for.

On the question of the Elder Wand -- When Draco disarmed Dumbledore on the Tower, the Elder Wand turned its allegiance to Draco. At the Malfoy Mansion, though, Harry captured Draco's regular wand, so the Elder Wand then turned its allegiance to Harry. Once the Elder Wand had done that, Voldemort could not hurt Harry with that wand until someone defeated Harry.

On the question of getting killed peacefully-- The soul chunk that was acting like a Horcrux that was attached to Harry's own soul had to be killed and was vulnerable to being killed, because it wasn't an ordinary soul attached to the body it belonged to. Real souls, though, are immortal. You could kill a person completely and not injure his soul at all.

Anyway, Harry went to his death so that that Horcrux inside of him would be killed, and fully believed that he was sacrificing his life so no more good people would be killed.

On the question of what happened -- Harry didn't know it, but he had two things going for him as he walked to his death.

1) The Elder Wand in Voldemort's hand would not hurt its master. It would kill the Horcrux, but not kill Harry.

2) Voldemort had some of Harry's blood in him. That blood contained the magical protection of his mother's sacrifice. As long as that enchantment still lived, it tethered the rest of it (inside Harry) to life. Think of it as a a "good" kind of horcrux if you want. That situation didn't protect Harry from everybody, but it did protect Harry from getting killed by his mother's murderer.


Where were they? The result of all those brakes on his death was that Harry was brought to that dividing line between life and death. While there, his soul had a nice conversation with Dumbledore's soul. The surroundings were lifted out of Harry's idea of an embarkation point -- a crossroads, if you will. So the form it took was of Kings Cross Station - the same place where Harry first embarked on his jouney to Hogwarts and the magical world.

On the side was the "scabby baby demon thing", which represented the chunk of Voldemort's soul which had previously been latched onto Harry. It was no longer connected to Harry, it lay abandoned on the side, dying.

Harry was given a choice when he was there -- he could, if he wanted to, choose to die. If he chose that, he could take a train to wherever good souls go after death. But he chose instead to live and therefore he woke up.

Once he woke up, he discovered that Voldemort had been knocked unconscious, too. The text doesn't explain why, but it seems reasonable to believe that his wand had partially backfired on him, the same way it did at the ending duel. Perhaps because the AK curse he sent did manage to kill something (that soul chunk), he didn't get a full killing curse back at him.

In any case, several things happened after that:

(a) Voldemort used his wand to Crucio Harry, but the Elder wand just tossed him around and did not make him suffer.

(b) Voldemort went out to the people and tried on several occasions to cast a silencing charm on the crowd. The charms did not hold, they had no power, people still yelled.

(c) Voldemort tried to set Neville on fire -- the hat caught fire, but Neville himself was unhurt. This situation, though, was caused by the fact that Harry went to his death to protect his friends -- he gave his friends the same kind of protection that his mother had given him when he was small.

And then there was the final duel...

Voldemort sent an AK to Harry using the Elder Wand, which would not hurt Harry. Harry sent an Expelliarmus to Voldemort at the exact same time. The green jet met the red jet in the center, the green jet bounced back and killed Voldemort, and Harry caught the Elder Wand as it was flying out of Voldemort's hand.

It's very complicated, isn't it?
Frequent Contributor
dcsbelle
Posts: 1,041
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

Actually, Psychee, I think the scarred baby thingy was the remainder of Voldy's soul, not the horcrux. Hermione read (in the beginning of the book) and DD told Harry (in that between world place) that horcruxes are destroyed so there is nothing to move on to an afterlife. My question is if Harry's blood protected Voldy when the AK rebounded the first time why didn't it do the same thing the second time?

Psychee wrote:
On the side was the "scabby baby demon thing", which represented the chunk of Voldemort's soul which had previously been latched onto Harry. It was no longer connected to Harry, it lay abandoned on the side, dying.

Harry was given a choice when he was there -- he could, if he wanted to, choose to die. If he chose that, he could take a train to wherever good souls go after death. But he chose instead to live and therefore he woke up.

Once he woke up, he discovered that Voldemort had been knocked unconscious, too. The text doesn't explain why, but it seems reasonable to believe that his wand had partially backfired on him, the same way it did at the ending duel. Perhaps because the AK curse he sent did manage to kill something (that soul chunk), he didn't get a full killing curse back at him.

In any case, several things happened after that:

(a) Voldemort used his wand to Crucio Harry, but the Elder wand just tossed him around and did not make him suffer.

(b) Voldemort went out to the people and tried on several occasions to cast a silencing charm on the crowd. The charms did not hold, they had no power, people still yelled.

(c) Voldemort tried to set Neville on fire -- the hat caught fire, but Neville himself was unhurt. This situation, though, was caused by the fact that Harry went to his death to protect his friends -- he gave his friends the same kind of protection that his mother had given him when he was small.

And then there was the final duel...

Voldemort sent an AK to Harry using the Elder Wand, which would not hurt Harry. Harry sent an Expelliarmus to Voldemort at the exact same time. The green jet met the red jet in the center, the green jet bounced back and killed Voldemort, and Harry caught the Elder Wand as it was flying out of Voldemort's hand.

It's very complicated, isn't it?


Debbie

Hedwig is not really dead; it was all just a big misunderstanding
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

[ Edited ]

dcsbelle wrote:
Actually, Psychee, I think the scarred baby thingy was the remainder of Voldy's soul, not the horcrux. Hermione read (in the beginning of the book) and DD told Harry (in that between world place) that horcruxes are destroyed so there is nothing to move on to an afterlife. My question is if Harry's blood protected Voldy when the AK rebounded the first time why didn't it do the same thing the second time?



I know some people have argued that they believe that that scabby baby thing was Voldemort's remaining soul, but I have problems with that. This was Harry's "pre-heaven" -- I can buy into the idea that a soul fragment that has been hanging like a leech onto Harry's soul might be there, as it was a part of him for 17 years -- but I can't wrap my head around the idea that a completely different live person, Voldemort's remaining soul, would be there. The other person there, Dumbledore, makes sense to me, as he would represent the guiding spirit from the Other Side.

Your argument that "there is nothing left to move onto an afterlife" is still consistent with my interpretation here -- we are not seeing an afterlife here -- we are seeing that interface between life and death -- and that thing is dying right there and will not move on.

The whole thing is open to interpretation and I think we're just going to have to wait for JKR to tell us what she was trying to depict there....

Your other question was about Harry's blood protecting Voldy -- Harry's blood never protected Voldy --Harry's blood inside of Voldy protected Harry FROM Voldy.

Message Edited by Psychee on 07-27-2007 10:28 AM
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



bentley wrote:

Psychee wrote:
Bently, the whole history of that wand has the wand being taken by theft. The Peverell brother who owned it got drunk celebrating his victory over his enemy and the next guy stole the wand and slit his throat. He was then the new Master. Lovegood gives a bunch more historical references doing essentially the same thing.

Lovegood says that you must "capture" it from the wizard who owns it. Dumbledore says you have to "defeat" the wizard who owns it. Maybe the difference is that Dumbledore was too noble to ever consider stealing it unfairly, and the only means that would then be left to him would be to capture it in a gentlemanly duel.

But according to your theory, there was some kind of duel between Gregorovitch (who owned it) and Dumbledore, in which Dumbledore won. Now, when would that duel have occurred? If it occurred before Grindelwald took the wand, then Dumbledore would have earned the wand himself and would have taken it. If it occurred after Grindelwald took it, then I'd have to ask, do you really think that Dumbledore would challenge an innocent wandmaker to a duel, knowing full well what an advantage he would have over the poor guy? That doesn't sound like our noble Dumbledore. The man is a model of manners...

No, I think we have to go back to the idea that Dumbledore won the duel with Grindelwald. It might have occurred through superior magic. It also might, in some way, have occurred because Dumbledore did not want the wand for the power it possessed; he wanted it only to keep it out of the hands of someone who would use it to hurt people. Dumbledore said that he was ONLY fit to use the wand for protective purposes. Maybe there's a clue in there as to how he captured the wand. Right now, though, I don't see how a wand which has been happily owned by centuries of bloodthirsty wizards would start to have a conscience and choose a different kind to break the cycle, do you?




I think there are some inconsistencies and Rowling tripped up herself in some instances....Snape was one of those inconsistencies and we can hypothetically take Rowling's explanation in this current book as being the reason why he was not the master of the wand..but then that in of itself raises other problems with her previous explanations.

Capture and Defeat are quite different terms. In another thread, you explained why Snape was not the master of the ElderWand even though he killed Dumbledore (and I agree). Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him at the appropriate time and Snape complied. Yet Snape did kill Dumbledore and Grinderwald stole the wand. Voldermort stole the wand as well while it lay in Dumbledore's grave but it did not feel right to him and he knew that he was not its master; therefore he thought by killing Snape who killed Dumbledore..that this would make all of the difference. I think you have stumbled on one of the inconsistencies not cleared up by Rowling; earlier in the thread I explored all of the possibilities. Do not have time to repeat them again...I think this is one of those open-ended questions.

Defeat can mean many different things..I do not think stealing a wand while someone sleeps who is alive or while someone eternally sleeps means that you have defeated that person. I think the wand knows who should be its master; just like the Griffindor Sword. Wands react differently to each wizard..even though the ElderWand was one of the three hallows and not the normal wizarding tool.

I appreciate your explanation but I believe this is one of those unanswered questions.

Additionally, somewhere I read that Dumbledore had in fact fought the person who Grinderwald stole the wand from and had in fact beaten him prior to the fight with Grinderwald. Possibly that is why he was the master of the wand that Grinderwald was using and maybe that is why he was able to overcome Grinderwald.

Rowling never summed this up well...so this remains open-ended for me..I just tried to explore some of the possibilities that have been discussed by others elsewhere.

Regards,

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-25-2007 05:54 PM




okay, so remember when in the very end Harry tells Voldemort that Snape wasn't the true master of the want BUT it was Draco Malfoy who was the said master? That is only because it was DRACO MALFOY who used expelliarmus on Dumbledore in book#6 when DD and Harry had just returned from the cave where Voldemort's fake locket horcrux was hidden. Anyhow, then at the Malfoy palace or whatever, Harry STOLE the three wands that Draco Malfoy was holding. STOLE. WITHOUT PERMISSION. And besides, I don't think that "permission" has anything to do with the transfer of the wand from one master to another. It just comes down to whether the previous master was somehow 'defeated' by the next. In Draco's case, the three wands from his hand (including his own) were taken BY FORCE by Harry. So Draco's OWN wand considered Harry its new wizard/master/etc. Then Harry puts is VERY WELL in his last duel with Tom Riddle in the Great Hall of Hogwarts. He says something like "now we shall see whether the Elder Wand recognizes that its true master (Draco Malfoy) has been 'defeated' by me and that I am its new master." With that Harry uses expelliarmus using Draco's wand and Voldemort uses a killing curse using the Elder Wand - Voldemort dies, Harry doesn't BECAUSE THE ELDER WAND BACKFIRES AS IT REFUSES TO CAUSE HARM TO ITS TRUE WIZARD/master/and the like. Kind of like the twin core story between Voldemort and Harry, isn't it? Harry has a bit of Voldemort's soul inside him (so he's kind of like a living, unintentionally-made, horcrux?). So when Harry is escaping with the 6 other Harrys in the beginning of the book, and Voldemort fires a curse at Harry, Harry's wand turns his arm around ON ITS OWN and then snaps Voldemort's wand in two - only because it is like Voldemort attacking himself (in Harry)! So a wand DOES chose its wizard and it seems that a wand also REFUSES to harm its chosen master.

Enough of my babbling, but I can give one of my fingers (not my whole hand though) that I am right on this - there is no need for any "permission" - that just makes no sense to me, respectfully!

So what do the rest of you think?
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wrote:


mastkudi25 wrote:
Yes yes, i know that part, but i was asking about the Great Duel between Grindelwald and Dumbledore. Remember that it was only after defeating Grindelwald that Dumbledore came to be the new master of the Elder Wand... so my question is, if Grindelwald was fighting with all the might of the Elder Wand behind him, then how come he lost the battle and was captured and defeated by Dumbledore? How is it possible that Dumbledore defeated the master of the Elder wand (Grindelwald) in a heads-on duel?

Previously, it had usually been the case where the masters of the Elder Wand were killed in their sleep, or defeated when caught off guard. BUT in Dumbledore's great duel with Grindelwald, Grindelwald was actually fighting, and so the UNBEATABLE Elder wand should NEVER have been beat/defeated. How did that happen? Any insights you guys might have on this?




I think there are two possibilities here:
(1) Grindelwald was not dueling with the Elder Wand -- maybe Dumbledore transfigured a look-alike before the fighting broke out.

(2) Grindelwald was using the Elder Wand but the "unbeatable" legend isn't perfectly true. It wasn't made by DEATH himself, it was made by a Brother. It might just be the most powerful wand in existence, and Dumbledore beat it through his incredible skills at Transfiguration -- he could have encased the man in the water bubble like he did with Voldemort. Or, Fawkes might have helped create a distraction.





I agree. Dumbledore's exceptional skills is what Rowlings had been referring to in all the previous books (even DD himself "most modestly" refers to his own amazing skills). Even that old woman who judges the OWLS at Hogwarts during Umbridge's reign of terror at the school says that the ministry can't find Dumbledore if "he doesn't want to be found!... I should know... saw him do things with A wand that I'd never seen before in his Newts" or something like that.

Also, did she use "A wand" or "his wand?" Is that important, you think? Was that a hint that Dumbledore is kind of good with all the wands? argh! This wandlore business is too important, and too confusing at the same time. hehe
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



bentley wrote:

Psychee wrote:
Bently, the whole history of that wand has the wand being taken by theft. The Peverell brother who owned it got drunk celebrating his victory over his enemy and the next guy stole the wand and slit his throat. He was then the new Master. Lovegood gives a bunch more historical references doing essentially the same thing.

Lovegood says that you must "capture" it from the wizard who owns it. Dumbledore says you have to "defeat" the wizard who owns it. Maybe the difference is that Dumbledore was too noble to ever consider stealing it unfairly, and the only means that would then be left to him would be to capture it in a gentlemanly duel.

But according to your theory, there was some kind of duel between Gregorovitch (who owned it) and Dumbledore, in which Dumbledore won. Now, when would that duel have occurred? If it occurred before Grindelwald took the wand, then Dumbledore would have earned the wand himself and would have taken it. If it occurred after Grindelwald took it, then I'd have to ask, do you really think that Dumbledore would challenge an innocent wandmaker to a duel, knowing full well what an advantage he would have over the poor guy? That doesn't sound like our noble Dumbledore. The man is a model of manners...

No, I think we have to go back to the idea that Dumbledore won the duel with Grindelwald. It might have occurred through superior magic. It also might, in some way, have occurred because Dumbledore did not want the wand for the power it possessed; he wanted it only to keep it out of the hands of someone who would use it to hurt people. Dumbledore said that he was ONLY fit to use the wand for protective purposes. Maybe there's a clue in there as to how he captured the wand. Right now, though, I don't see how a wand which has been happily owned by centuries of bloodthirsty wizards would start to have a conscience and choose a different kind to break the cycle, do you?




I think there are some inconsistencies and Rowling tripped up herself in some instances....Snape was one of those inconsistencies and we can hypothetically take Rowling's explanation in this current book as being the reason why he was not the master of the wand..but then that in of itself raises other problems with her previous explanations.

Capture and Defeat are quite different terms. In another thread, you explained why Snape was not the master of the ElderWand even though he killed Dumbledore (and I agree). Dumbledore asked Snape to kill him at the appropriate time and Snape complied. Yet Snape did kill Dumbledore and Grinderwald stole the wand. Voldermort stole the wand as well while it lay in Dumbledore's grave but it did not feel right to him and he knew that he was not its master; therefore he thought by killing Snape who killed Dumbledore..that this would make all of the difference. I think you have stumbled on one of the inconsistencies not cleared up by Rowling; earlier in the thread I explored all of the possibilities. Do not have time to repeat them again...I think this is one of those open-ended questions.

Defeat can mean many different things..I do not think stealing a wand while someone sleeps who is alive or while someone eternally sleeps means that you have defeated that person. I think the wand knows who should be its master; just like the Griffindor Sword. Wands react differently to each wizard..even though the ElderWand was one of the three hallows and not the normal wizarding tool.

I appreciate your explanation but I believe this is one of those unanswered questions.

Additionally, somewhere I read that Dumbledore had in fact fought the person who Grinderwald stole the wand from and had in fact beaten him prior to the fight with Grinderwald. Possibly that is why he was the master of the wand that Grinderwald was using and maybe that is why he was able to overcome Grinderwald.

Rowling never summed this up well...so this remains open-ended for me..I just tried to explore some of the possibilities that have been discussed by others elsewhere.

Regards,

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-25-2007 05:54 PM





It was DRACO MALFOY who was the true owner of the Elder wand because he used expelliarmus against Dumbledore and disarmed him BY FORCE (making a wizard part with his wand using force.... capture or defeat, but Draco still earned the wand's trust and respect... and became its new owner). So Snape killing Dumbeldore just fulfilled DD's wishes, except that Snape was never the rightful owner of the Elder Wand as the Wand did NOT recognize Snape defeating Draco Malfoy... the Wand's new, ignorant-to-this-fact, owner. IT was Harry Potter who defeated Draco at Draco's own house when Harry disarmed him of three wands which included Draco's own wand. Taht is why Draco's wand worked well for Harry while that other one that Ron had given Harry did no such thing. Since Draco was now 'defeated' by Harry, The Elder Wand also sensed this switch of masters... hence, it refused to hurt Harry when Voldemort used it against its true, chosen wizard.
Contributor
mastkudi25
Posts: 24
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wrote:
Just to clarify about this wand business...

Dumbledore's initial plan was to neutralize the power of the wand by dying undefeated. He planned his death in such a way that when Snape killed him, Snape was not defeating him, he was merely giving a gift. Dumbledore knew that Voldemort would go after the wand after Dumbledore's death, and had the plan worked out, Voldemort would have only gotten a useless stick (or at best a non-powerful wand).

What went wrong was this: Draco got to Dumbledore before Snape did. When Draco did his Expelliarmus thing, and the wand flew out of Dumbledore's hand, Draco won Mastery of the Wand. Draco did not know this, of course. So, when Dumbledore was killed, he did not leave behind a useless stick wand, but a wand that still had power with a secret Master (Draco).

Voldemort retrieved the wand, and eventually concluded that the reason it wasn't working for him was because he wasn't its master. He then figured that Snape must be its master since Snape had killed Dumbledore. So he killed Snape, thinking that this would then make him the Master of the wand. He thought wrong.

Draco was the Master of the wand, not Snape, and during the story, at the Malfoy Mansion, Harry won Draco's wand. That was considered a defeat of the Master of the Elder Wand, so it sufficed to transfer the Master role of that wand to Harry.

In the final duel, Voldemort was using the Elder Wand against the Elder Wand's Master. The Elder Wand would not hurt its Master and instead, mid air, on its way to Harry, turned the AK curse on Voldemort himself.

Or, at least, that's my interpretation of the text!





A great explanation! This is what I've been saying too (though you put it much, much better than I did)!
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



bentley wrote:


mastkudi25 wrote:


bentley wrote:


mastkudi25 wrote:
Neville was a true Gryffindor (probably spelt that wrong, sorry) at heart and so he got Godric G.'s sword from the hat. However, hadn't Voldemort (ooh, the Taboo-ed name!) set the hat on fire on Neville's head? How did it become whole again?

Also, I just want to have a "I was so right" song (in my head of course), but I can't help gloating a bit on these boards about my predictions for Snape and for Voldemort having a house elf (Kreacher, even though he only had poor Kreacher to test his dangerous experiments on him, for only that one night)! I feel so bad for Snape! Lily had called him "Sev"... and Severus Snape always loved her, since even before they got to Hogwarts. Love did win in the end, didn't it? It saved Snape from going on the wrong path for the rest of his life and Snape became one of the good guys because of the love in his heart for Harry's mother!

Anyhow, now that I have finished with my shameless gloating (heheh), I do have a question about the Elder wand. I don't really remember what chapter in the book talks about this, but I really would appreciate some feedback on this one -

The Elder Wand, the Deathly stick, etc etc, is supposed to be unbeatable. So then how did Dumbledore beat Grindelwald, and become the new master of the Elder wand?




Part of the answer is that Dumbledore never gave up being master of the wand since he planned his final demise with Snape so that Malfoy would not be the one to do it. So Dumbledore was still the master of the wand and not Snape as Voldemort assumed wrongly. I believe that then the transfer of power would be to whomever Dumbledore wanted it to go to or to someone who overcame Dumbledore and was able to kill him without him/his asking for it to be done. Snape did Dumbledore a favor. As you recall, Dumbledore was going to die anyways because of the ring and Snape at the very least gave him another year I believe and also was the one to put him out of his delirious misery when the time was right (as requested by Dumbledore himself).

Hope the above helps.

As far as the book itself, I loved it and though I was sad for the characters who did perish, I was delighted that the three main characters survived at the end. Great job Rawlings. I was also delighted to have Snape reconciled in my mind. I had always thought that he was a good guy but the first chapter of this book...made me stop and ponder. However, he was good to the end and was, I guess, the number one Dumbledore agent after the headmaster's demise. I also think that Rawlings wanted to convey messages of love, loyalty, friendship, family and goodness winning out despite great odds...to come across as the major themes of her epic and that love and goodness will overcome evil any day.

Loved the book.

Regards,

Bentley





Yes yes, i know that part, but i was asking about the Great Duel between Grindelwald and Dumbledore. Remember that it was only after defeating Grindelwald that Dumbledore came to be the new master of the Elder Wand... so my question is, if Grindelwald was fighting with all the might of the Elder Wand behind him, then how come he lost the battle and was captured and defeated by Dumbledore? How is it possible that Dumbledore defeated the master of the Elder wand (Grindelwald) in a heads-on duel?

Previously, it had usually been the case where the masters of the Elder Wand were killed in their sleep, or defeated when caught off guard. BUT in Dumbledore's great duel with Grindelwald, Grindelwald was actually fighting, and so the UNBEATABLE Elder wand should NEVER have been beat/defeated. How did that happen? Any insights you guys might have on this?




You are still going on the supposition that the Elder Wand believed that Grindelwald was its master.

I never saw a true explanation why in this instance Dumbledore was able to overcome Grindelwald except in the case that the wand might not always be unbeatable and also in the fact that the wand did not see Grindelwald as being its likely master.

Maybe the fact that Grindelwald stole the wand from Gregorovitch without his permission and without a fair fight did not transfer ownership.

Dumbledore may have defeated Gregorovitch in another battle and because of this may have been the true master of the wand when fighting Grinderwald who had simply been a thief while Gregorovitch slept.

Maybe though considered unbeatable, a more powerful wizard with goodness in his heart can always overcome evil forces. Maybe the wand acts like the Griffindor Sword acted and it assesses where it wants to be and the worthiness of its owner. Remember, from the very beginning of the Harry Potter series it was well known that the wand always chooses its wizard.




Maskuti, the information that I provided for you were the conclusions/hypotheses that had been reached on The Floo Network. I have seen the additional discourse and I find everyone's comments most remarkable and very interesting. JKR loves this site as well. You are probably very familiar with it but I will post the url just in case some others might not be. I think that a lot of folks are most inventive going far beyond what was is in any of the books. Even JKR did that in the interviews indicating that the fictional characters Ron and Harry are now aurors and many other tidbits including Hermione's career choice (lol).

But here is the url for anybody who has not discovered this site by now. JKR calls it her natural home.

Just love the passion of the discussion...but even though these characters have become our literary friends; they are still fictional...even though they live in our hearts.


http://www.hp-lexicon.org/index-2.html
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

Bently, people on the Floo Network can misinterpret stuff just like anyone else. Until JKR gives a definitive answer to this question, arguments like this will continue.

But I think even they have to recognize that in that last duel, the wand recognized Harry as the Master. And the only person on that list of possible former Masters that Harry had "beaten" was Draco. Therefore, Draco had to have been the Master.

Going back further, the only person on the list of possible former Masters that Draco had beaten was Dumbledore, and we know that Dumbledore was the Master of the Elder Wand.

Since Draco did this by taking Dumbledore by surprise and catching him while he was doing something else with his wand, this is a canon example of how one can beat the unbeatable wand.

It seems reasonable, therefore, to conclude that Dumbledore won the duel with Grindelwald in a similar manner.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

[ Edited ]

Psychee wrote:
Bently, people on the Floo Network can misinterpret stuff just like anyone else. Until JKR gives a definitive answer to this question, arguments like this will continue.

But I think even they have to recognize that in that last duel, the wand recognized Harry as the Master. And the only person on that list of possible former Masters that Harry had "beaten" was Draco. Therefore, Draco had to have been the Master.

Going back further, the only person on the list of possible former Masters that Draco had beaten was Dumbledore, and we know that Dumbledore was the Master of the Elder Wand.

Since Draco did this by taking Dumbledore by surprise and catching him while he was doing something else with his wand, this is a canon example of how one can beat the unbeatable wand.

It seems reasonable, therefore, to conclude that Dumbledore won the duel with Grindelwald in a similar manner.




JKR seems to think highly of the network. The information that I gave was not from just a random posting but was from the editors, etc of the network. I don't see any arguments on the Floo Network at all with the essays and the editors comments which JKR loves by the way; there is only definitive quoting/citations from the books themselves to either conclude or not. Being an attorney, hypotheses really do not hold much water unless they are backed up with facts (stated or otherwise). I am one to love a good debate..and do respect your convictions and your dedication. I just read the book, studied this one and others and have been thrilled with the journey.

I questioned other things which I have already noted..and honestly Psychee I enjoy your enthusiasm, your persuasiveness and appreciate how thoroughly you are adhering to your opinions. They are very well thought out; but remember we are dealing in a fantasy world where the only thing you can depend upon is what was written in the books (any of them). JKR seems to be going beyond them in her interviews and seems to me to be trying to answer the children's questions bringing them closure as well as her other fans. I do wish that she had just simply put all of the details in her books avoiding these debates afterwards where she is really simply making it up as she goes along. Much that has been said in the interviews is not anywhere in any of her thoroughly delightful books. I do not think anything is reasonable to conclude unless the facts are stated as such...and I think that they are not. JKR may give a wonderful story after the fact to conclude the matter; but there are many questions that she did not answer. Believe me, that is ok...I have enjoyed every minute and think that she and the books are pure genius. I agree to disagree. As JKR said: This is such a great site..my natural home. I think the open-ended items should be left just that way..open-ended and everyone can draw their own conclusions and have fun with their own imaginations and what is nice about fiction..they can decide to create the ever after to look just like they want it to.

Thank you again for your response..I really enjoy your postings.

Regards,

Bentley

Message Edited by bentley on 07-27-2007 05:05 PM

Message Edited by bentley on 07-27-2007 05:06 PM
Reader-Moderator
agnijay
Posts: 1,987
Registered: ‎06-14-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

I don't think Snape is dead. This is because there was no mention of his portrait in the headmaster's office.
☼☺♥ Jaya ♥☺☼

If we crawl/ Till we can walk again/ Then we'll run/ Until we're strong enough to jump/ Then we'll fly/ Until there is no end.
Frequent Contributor
bentley
Posts: 2,509
Registered: ‎01-31-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



agnijay wrote:
I don't think Snape is dead. This is because there was no mention of his portrait in the headmaster's office.




Didn't he say Look at Me as his final words to Harry and then die and then Harry filled up a vial (also coming from Snape). I really thought Snape died based upon the scene in the book where he did just that.

What mention of a portrait are you referring to? Curious?
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36

Bently, please don't misunderstand my opinion of the Floo network. Mugglenet, Accio!Quote and the Lexicon are extremely well done, and I have relied on their work for a long time. They deserve the commendation they received from JKR.

And I do believe that their editorials are well thought out and that they try, as much as they can, to base their theories on canon. But those theories are not canon in and of themselves; those theories often include speculative guesses. Take a look at the list of editorials written in the past now and you will see that many of the conclusions they reached prior to the publication of DH turned out to be wrong. The beauty of their work is that they are very careful to distinguish between personal opinion (editorial) and canonical fact (Lexicon), and I don't think they would be very happy about anyone claiming that something is true just because someone stated that as an opinion or guess or hypothesis in an editorial.

Going back to the wand, it is my understanding that you believe that Grindelwald was never the Master of the Elder Wand because he just stole it from Gregorovitch, and had not in any other way, insofar as we know, "defeated" him. You base your belief that he was not the Master of the wand on a further belief that "stealing" is not the same as "defeat". You then suggest that Dumbledore must have defeated the real last Master (Gregorovitch or someone before him) in a duel outside of what we were given as canon and that is how he became Master of the wand. (If I have misunderstood your position, please correct me...)

But I then say that canon tells us (through the story of the Three Brothers) that the first brother lost the Mastery of the wand in this manner: "That very night another wizard crept upon the oldest brother as he lay, wine-sodden, upon his bed. The thief took the wand and, for good measure, slit the oldest brother's throat."(p.408) First he stole it as a thief and then "just for good measure" killed him.

Lovegood then says that Masters of the Wand can be easily traced through history by the fact that "the possessor of the wand must capture it from its previous owner, if he is to be truly the Master of it."(p.412) He does not use the word "defeat"; he uses the word "capture".

He then says that one of the owners, Godelot, died in his cellar after his son Hereward took the wand from him. Again, this is an example of the wand being stolen or captured by another and the Wand then giving its allegiance to the man who captured it.

Then, we have the canon evidence that Harry never fought Draco to get his wand; he simply took it (and two others he was holding) out of his hand. In other words, he "captured" it.

We also have numerous instances in the book of wizards feeling powerless and impotent when their wands are taken from them or broken. Once a wizard loses his wand he feels "defeated".

Finally, the whole idea of "unbeatable wand" is only given to us as part of a Children's Fairy Tale -- " a wand that must always win duels for its owner". (p.407) Lovegood later tells us, though, that we can't take everything written by Beedle as actual truth; that it is, after all, a story for children.

On the basis of that canonical evidence, I believe that we can take the story at face value -- that even though he just stole the wand, Grindelwald was a true Master of the Elder Wand, and when Dumbledore somehow captured it from him, in a duel, Dumbledore became the Master of it.

I don't think I've strayed one iota from canon here, have I? Have I imagined duels that were not in the text, or third party people who were defeated who were not in the text?

But I do agree with you about one very important thing -- it really would have been nice to have had this "unbeatable wand beaten" thing (and several other logic puzzles she left us with) clarified more in the text of the last book. On the other hand, if you like puzzles, then her lack of clarification about these things was a Dumbledoresque gift. I happen to like puzzles, so this was an unexpected gift to me -- a logic puzzle that I was still thinking about a week after I had completed reading the book...

Let me just add that I am "persisting" in this debate only because it is a fun mental exercise for me and you are a fun person to debate things with... thanks for that! :smileyhappy:
Frequent Contributor
dcsbelle
Posts: 1,041
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: Discuss Chapter 36



Psychee wroteYour other question was about Harry's blood protecting Voldy -- Harry's blood never protected Voldy --Harry's blood inside of Voldy protected Harry FROM Voldy.

Message Edited by Psychee on 07-27-2007 10:28 AM


Then how come Voldy didn't die from the rebound of the first AK?
Psychee wrote:
Debbie

Hedwig is not really dead; it was all just a big misunderstanding
Users Online
Currently online:58 members 489 guests
Please welcome our newest community members: