For those who’ve finished Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. Thoughts appear at random.
OMGWTF HEDWIG.
Voldemort continues to be a sadly and unjustly underwritten character. The scenes with the Gaunts and at the orphanage turned out to be as pointless as they were overlong and unilluminating, because being a sociopath is not a hereditary condition, and there should be a reason the rest of the kids at that orphanage didn’t turn out snake-eyed, scenery-chewing mass murderers. Whoever said Voldemort is as much a part of the backdrop as Hogwarts got it exactly right. Which is fine, as it turns out, because he’s still terrifying in a way most Evil Overlords wish they were. His Public Address System of Doom was an excellent touch. His greatest joy is to frighten, to stir up fear like a kid poking an anthill with a stick, to watch you looking over your shoulder and checking under your bed for him. Killing is almost a disappointment to him, because dead people can’t be scared.
All of which is somewhat tarnished by the (however amusing) fact that he couldn’t kill Harry because he violated the Section D, Line 7 clause of the Stealing Someone’s Blood to Make Yourself a Body contract, and he died because he failed to read the fine print in the terms and conditions of lifting fairy tale wands from dead people.
I don’t know why I’m surprised that Rowling took the tired and obvious path with Snape. She’s been going for the obvious answer a lot lately, so I should have been expecting it. She’s done such a good job making Snape sympathetic and interesting that his story comes off fittingly tragic even as poorly as it’s recited to us. Dumbledore and Snape’s scenes in “The Prince’s Tale” might be the worst-written passages I’ve ever read in any book. I imagine them enacted by sock puppets in the movie.
My feeling in the end is that Snape, as a character, deserved better than to end up just another man who thought himself a hero for loving a woman who didn’t love him back, and to have nothing to comfort him his entire life but his doe Patronus. He deserved to grow up and move on. He deserved much more than Dumbledore did to take his own life, on his own terms. He deserved to have his story told better. Having Potter’s second-born named for him is not an adequate memorial to the man. (Also, “Albus Severus”? Poor little bastard.)
Rowling didn’t drop the ball on everyone. Dumbledore was a cold-blooded bastard all along, just like we all knew he was. Kreacher just wanted someone to be nice to him. Lupin had a nasty, cowardly side lurking underneath his impenetrable politeness. It hasn’t escaped Ron’s notice that he’s not allowed to be good at anything but chess when Harry and Hermione are around.
That “epilogue” was beyond belief. Next time, Rowling, leave the fanfiction to the fans. They’ve already done it better.
I don’t know if there needs to be a whole new department for Hermione – there’s already a department for diplomacy between wizards and non-wizard sentients.
I would hope Hagrid gets his path to full Wizard re-opened and takes some Kwikspell courses at least, but I can see why he wouldn’t go back to being a full-time student.
Slytherin’s popular? Why? Because the students of Slytherin are already showing bullying, proto-fascist tendencies by age 11? I don’t see it.
Magic. The Sorting Hat can already tell personality traits by age 11, as can people who know 11 year olds. Which ties right back into this:
Orphans with magic powers who struggle to survive in an uncaring world probably learn that force is the best tool, followed by fear, rather quickly.
And of course being Sorted reinforces personality traits, but I think you’re dismissing the experiences that fifth-graders have already had.
no Teddy’s middle name is Remus
Section: F.A.Q.
Why did Marcus Flint do an extra year at Hogwarts?
Either I made a mistake or he failed his exams and repeated a year. I think I prefer Marcus making the mistake.
Still, you’d think Voldie would understand by now that attacking Harry is bad for his own health. Why didn’t Voldie try having a lieutenant attack Harry? Wouldn’t that have worked? It’s a glaring omission from any of the Death Eaters’ considerations, that.
Eh, I think this is more of the fact that Voldemort is way too arrogant, and also too hung up on BS symbolism and revenge, to take other things into account. He also set too much store by the prophecy–he was convinced that he and he alone could kill Harry, and anyway he wanted that pleasure for himself. As for the Death Eaters, some of them aren’t that bright, some of them are but would be too scared of their master to call him on it, and the rest are… Bellatrix, who would never question him anyway.
It is where Neville finally learned that he wasn’t near a squib at all – he could actually do magic, he just needed more time and practise… not the dimissive crap he’d been getting from everyone EXCEPT Barty Crouch JR aka Mad Eye Moody and Sprout.
Oh, I dunno, we never saw Flitwick being mean to Neville, or Hagrid (someone remind me, did Neville take Care of Magical Creatures?) and Lupin went out of his way to make him feel included from the very first lesson. McGonagall was kind of a hardass, but I don’t think she made it personal, and in the sixth book we see that she knows Neville has talents even if they aren’t suited to Transfiguration, and actively encourages him to pursue what he’s good at instead of making himself miserable doing something he has no gift for (making her QUITE different from many, many real world teachers who are utterly convinced that skill at their subject and their subject alone is an accurate measure of intelligence).
Also, they were given tons of homework, and a lot of times the homework was in fact something along the lines of “practice summoning charms/mouse-teapot transfiguration/nonverbal spells.” We didn’t see them (except Hermione) doing a lot of this for the same reason there aren’t a lot of scenes in teen dramas of kids doing homework–it’s boring to watch.
Magic. The Sorting Hat can already tell personality traits by age 11, as can people who know 11 year olds.
Though Dumbledore does have that interesting conversation with Snape where he says that he’s starting to think that they Sort too soon, implying that Snape might have ended up somewhere else if he was a little more mature when the Sorting was done.
And the Sorting does seem to be pretty influenced by where the kid wants to go — it sounds like Snape’s mother was Slytherin, so of course he wants to be Slytherin as well, which may not be the best way for kids to choose.
Orphans with magic powers who struggle to survive in an uncaring world probably learn that force is the best tool, followed by fear, rather quickly.
Riddle appears to have been born without empathy. Sociopaths like him can’t learn or choose to care about other people. That he used magic to control people is secondary to the fact that he could never connect with them emotionally.
The Sorting Hat can already tell personality traits by age 11, as can people who know 11 year olds…And of course being Sorted reinforces personality traits, but I think you’re dismissing the experiences that fifth-graders have already had.
Why the hell would you want to reinforce a kid’s worst tendencies during their formative years? I’m not the same person I was at eleven, thank god.
The point I think Rowling’s glossing over is that it’s possible to be ambitious and look out for yourself without being a horrible person. She does portray a couple of decent adult Slytherins, but to make every single Slytherin student at Hogwarts a “bad guy” is inexcusable.
Random thought: I love the fact that JKR misled us about Snape’s worst memory when she showed it to us in “Order of the Phoenix.” The reason it’s the worst is not because he’s being tormented by James and his pals (yet again, it’s implied) but that he calls the woman he loves a “Mudblood,” something that she will never forgive (or at least won’t have time to forgive) and that he will never forgive himself for saying.
I also love that Hermione proudly calls herself a Mudblood. I was waiting for that to happen.
I don’t know everyone’s turning on Dumbledore. He wasn’t perfect, but it was clear that he was a much better man than most. Remember that the story of the sister resolved in a way that you realize that Dumbledore didn’t hate Muggles, though 3 raped and tortured his sister.
Plus, Dumbledore completely loved Harry. He knew Harry had to die. He could have left it at that, but instead he trained Harry to meet death gladly. That’s love; that’s done because you want a person to be proud of himself until the end.
Dumbledore completely loved Harry.
He really did. Being modest, unassuming, not terribly bright, and a Gryffindor is a great way to win Dumbledore over. It’s no wonder Dumbledore didn’t have any love left for Snape, which probably had a lot to do with why Snape resented Harry so much.
Honestly, I love Dumbledore, and I love hating on him because he’s so fascinating.
re: Molly Weasley…
I thought it was mentioned in Order of the Phoenix that Bellatrix was part of the group that killed Fabian and Gideon Prewett. So Molly’s family had already suffered loss at the hands of the Lestranges.
I don’t know everyone’s turning on Dumbledore. He wasn’t perfect, but it was clear that he was a much better man than most.
I think he was a great man, and a manipulative bastard, and a genius, and an idiot. He’s a great character, in other words. But I wouldn’t want to work for him.
AND has anyoen done the math on Teddy? How is it that Teddy he still on the train to Hogwarts when he is 19?
It says in the epilogue that he had come to platform 9 3/4 to say goodbye to Victoire. He wasn’t actually going off to school.
Ah missed that! Thank you! My son and I actually had that discussion in the car today, he missed it too. Teddy came to see Victorie off … So whose child do you suppose she is? Charlie, Percy, George or most probably Fleur and Bill’s
Sniper who is the book would you like to work for?
Sniper who is the book would you like to work for?
Maybe Aberforth – free booze!
I can understand your defensiveness about Dumbledore and the other teachers because I’m also (and obviously) emotionally invested in the book. My feelings of anger and disapproval are a response to literature, but they don’t affect my enjoyment of the book or the characters. If Dumbledore was really as saintly and omnipotent as Harry had imagined when he was younger I’d probably rupture myself rolling my eyes. Snape’s loveless state moves me a great deal, as do the deaths of Dobby and Hedwig, but I’m not going to wear mourning.
By the way, I experienced Sage on the Stage in university, but even when I was in middle school which was, um, a while back, nobody taught that way. Yes, everyone hated Umbridge and but she was still allowed to abuse students. From a literary point of view, this abuse was a great way to show how Harry stands up to authority but as a teacher I was reminded of parents who demand that we beat their children (I kid you not). Same with the bullying. Yes, it’s a way to get kids to identify with the underdog, but the idea that a headmaster/principal would slap the wrist of a kid who set up another student to be killed – ugh.
Incidentally, I figured Dudley would end up having a magical child as soon as I finished Chapter 1. And a million fanfics are born!
It’s no wonder Dumbledore didn’t have any love left for Snape, which probably had a lot to do with why Snape resented Harry so much.
Eh, I don’t think that Snape and Dumbledore had all that much to do with one another before Snape heard the prophecy. It’s pretty clear that Snape hates Harry because he’s James Potter’s son (and living proof that he’s lost Lily forever) — even his jealousy that Harry gets to hear things that he doesn’t has more to do with his feelings about James than with Harry himself. Not to mention that there’s a touch of Snape blaming Harry for Lily’s death. After all, if she had stepped out of the way and let Voldemort kill her baby, everything would have been fine!
Which is, again, one of the sad things about Snape: he’s never able to see Harry as a person in his own right. Everything is viewed through the filter of the past.
I think Dumbledore has flaws—I’m glad they made him human. But I’d like to work for him. He actually seems hands-off as a general rule, respectful of individual teacher authority.
I think the Dumbledore did love Snape, in a way. By the end, he was Snape’s only friend. But if it took a long time to get there—and if he was still cashing checks against Snape’s debt to the world—well, think about what Snape did. He had a lot to live down.
I don’t really think I’m reacting out of a childish defensive of the characters because I like the books. I think that it’s overreaching to say that revealing Dumbledore to be a flawed human is a better description than revealing him to be a bastard. That’s hardly defensive. I think we’re meant to take Harry’s extreme discomfort at the Dumbledore revelations to be an example of Harry’s continuing problem of putting everyone into camps of good and bad. Upon finding out Dumbledore was less than perfect, he had the urge to put him into the “bad” category. He needed to grow up and realize that people are not perfect.
I think that it’s overreaching to say that revealing Dumbledore to be a flawed human is a better description than revealing him to be a bastard.
Oh, I think he was a bastard, at least to Snape, and at least according to what JKR let us see. Albus’s brother appeared to think he was a bastard as well. The memories in “The Prince’s Tale”were a shock to me because I fully expected and was looking forward to seeing Dumbledore treat Snape with a little warmth. Instead we got contempt and what appears to be a quite deliberate (and successful) shot at cutting Snape’s emotional growth off at 21. Dumbledore tells Severus that the only thing he has to live for from now on is protecting Lily’s son, and, literal-minded headcase that Snape is, he bites. I wouldn’t put Dumbledore in the bad category at all, but he could be cold and manipulative and very ruthless – rather like any real-life general, I imagine.
Incidentally, I don’t think it’s at all childish to defend characters – any character – it’s one of the things that makes talking about books fun.
It’s interesting to speculate whether or not a Snape who lived without that guilt would have been a better person. Really, the more I think about it, the sadder and sadder Snape’s life seems.
in addition to making dumbledore into a really interesting, if less cuddly character, his revelation as an extraordinarily flawed individual in some ways redeems a bit of Harry’s CAPSLOCK! idiocy in book 5. I was so irritated with harry in book 5 for not *telling* dumbledore what was wrong (and thus prolonging the drama) and not trusting people in general once he heard something bad. I was worried with the whole Rita Skeeter bit that we were in for another round of Irritating!Harry but then it turns out Harry was right to be disappointed, and even right to be a little resentful (more than Dumbledore already apologized for) in book 5, and the way he deals with it this time around shows just how much he has matured in a believable, as well as less obnoxious way.
Also, I am really sad that Snape didn’t get a headmaster portrait to go alongside dumbledore’s. Imagine that conversation.
I don’t think that Snape and Dumbledore had all that much to do with one another before Snape heard the prophecy.
But they worked together for most of Snape’s adult life, during which Snape earned himself a little more than the callous contempt he got from Dumbledore.
It’s pretty clear that Snape hates Harry because he’s James Potter’s son (and living proof that he’s lost Lily forever) — even his jealousy that Harry gets to hear things that he doesn’t has more to do with his feelings about James than with Harry himself. Not to mention that there’s a touch of Snape blaming Harry for Lily’s death.
I don’t doubt that Snape started out hating Harry because of James, but I think he started to genuinely dislike Harry in his own right. He never let himself get to know the boy, but he used everything he did know to build up his resentment of him. And I don’t see how Dumbledore telling Harry things he didn’t tell Snape could have anything to do with James.
But they worked together for most of Snape’s adult life, during which Snape earned himself a little more than the callous contempt he got from Dumbledore.
I can’t entirely blame Dumbledore — spies are generally despised by those who control them, and double agents the most despised of all. Despite everything Dumbledore said, he was cautious with what he told Snape in case Voldy ever figured out that Snape was betraying him.
And, after having re-read “The Prince’s Tale,” I think that Dumbledore suspected that Snape might still turn on him because he underestimated Snape’s capacity to love. It’s not until he sees that Snape still uses Lily’s doe as his Patronus — the last conversation they have while Dumbledore is still alive — that he truly understands.
Which is why we keep talking about Dumbledore as a flawed character, but a better one for that. What’s more boring than a character who’s always good and always right?
his revelation as an extraordinarily flawed individual in some ways redeems a bit of Harry’s CAPSLOCK! idiocy in book 5.
You know, I think I must be the only person in the universe who wasn’t annoyed by Harry’s CAPSLOCKY rage in OotP. I’d be pissed too if I had this Super-scary Evil Snake Dude out to kill me, and no one was telling me anything. I mean, it’s not at all unusual for teenagers to have CAPSLOCKY rages anyway, for far lesser reasons. I mean, I remember having them because my sister turned off the music that I was listening to. Harry at least had a damn good reason for his rage.
I don’t doubt that Snape started out hating Harry because of James, but I think he started to genuinely dislike Harry in his own right. He never let himself get to know the boy, but he used everything he did know to build up his resentment of him.
But if he never really got to know Harry, how could he hate him in his own right. I think that Snape tried as hard as he could to see Harry as a second James, because acknowledging Lily’s heritage would have left him too vulnerable. If Snape had come to care for, or love Harry because of the Lily connection he would inevitably had to learn to care for or love part of James as well– and that was unacceptable to him. It is interesting though that Snape’s treatment of Harry does tend to bring out the most James-ish aspects of him– such as their first encounter in the Potions dungeon in Philosopher’s Stone, where Snape pushes Harry until he comes out with a smart-ass comment.
Oh, I forgot to add, that even if you didn’t like Harry’s CAPSLOCK in OotP, Deathly Hallows gives us yet another explanation for them that hasn’t been mentioned yet: the horcrux. After Voldemort comes back, he’s suddenly in communication with Harry, and the horcux wakes up, meaning that Harry gets all moody and irritable, like Ron when he was wearing the locket.
I can’t entirely blame Dumbledore — spies are generally despised by those who control them, and double agents the most despised of all.
Mnemosyne, I’ve heard that notion before and I’ve always wondered if that’s actually true and, if so, why?Spies risk their lives as much or more as any players during the war and they don’t have the same protections traditionally enjoyed by soldiers. Hmmm. Must look up spy psychology.
But if he never really got to know Harry, how could he hate him in his own right.
If nothing else, Snape hated Dumbledore’s obvious preference for Harry, which I don’t blame him for. Beyond that, he’s a petty, resentful, miserable bastard, and he would have seized on any opportunity to hate Harry for himself.
I do think it’s interesting that after Harry nearly kills Draco Malfoy in Half-Blood Prince, McGonagall’s telling Harry he deserves to be expelled, but Snape goes relatively easy on him by giving him detention. It’s like he’s either inexplicably decided to give Potter the special treatment he thinks the boy gets from everyone else, or he’s realized that in these troubled times you can’t afford to expose Potter to the just consequences of his actions. Since I had a hard time not disliking Harry after that incident, I would imagine it gave Snape an extra jolt of indignation.
Naturally. That lack of protection explains why there is no underlying crime in outing a spy during wartime. So why bother prosecuting anybody for perjuring themselves about it, especially since it’s ok if you’re a republican?
I think people have a visceral reaction to backstabbing and double-crossing. Even if spies have a very good reason to do it, I bet it does make one uneasy to be around anyone who’s good at it. I felt a little ill re-reading Book 6 with the sense that Snape was making the Unbreakable Vow to Cissy Malfoy in bad faith. Yes, she’s a rotten person, but he was still exploiting her vulnerable mother-love.
He wasn’t doing anything to hurt her, though. He was still protecting her son, which was all she cared about. If anything, she’s manipulating him into risking his life for her kid.
I do think it’s interesting that after Harry nearly kills Draco Malfoy in Half-Blood Prince, McGonagall’s telling Harry he deserves to be expelled, but Snape goes relatively easy on him by giving him detention … Since I had a hard time not disliking Harry after that incident, I would imagine it gave Snape an extra jolt of indignation.
Don’t forget, the curse that Harry used against Malfoy was one that Snape himself had come up with when he was in school. I think that Snape felt responsible for having created the curse in the first place, so it was hard for him to place the blame entirely with Harry.
That, and knowing that Harry was the only one who could kill Voldy, would stay his hand.
I felt a little ill re-reading Book 6 with the sense that Snape was making the Unbreakable Vow to Cissy Malfoy in bad faith. Yes, she’s a rotten person, but he was still exploiting her vulnerable mother-love.
Yes and no — in a weird way, Snape took the Vow so he could force himself to keep his promise to Dumbledore to (a) protect Draco and (b) help Dumbledore die a quick death instead of the slow, lingering one he dreaded. So the Vow was made in good faith, even though it also functioned as a feint to make Bellatrix think that he was Voldy’s man. It was lucky for Cissy that her interests and Snape’s promises happened to coincide, but I suspect that Dumbledore expected (or hoped) that she would ask that of Snape.
Yes, she’s a rotten person, but he was still exploiting her vulnerable mother-love.
Eh, I don’t think so. She approached him, backed him into a corner, and pretty much forced the unbreakable vow issue with her batshit crazy murdering sister right there. I see this as more resourceful and opportunistic than actually exploitive. Snape does appear to have cared for Draco in a personal way -although given what a weak, indecisive character he turned out to be in Book 7, it’s hard to see why.
What about Harry Potter and the abortion debate? Seriously. I’ve always wondered why the wizarding world is so surprised that the Dursley’s didn’t love Harry as their own. They didn’t want him, they weren’ prepared for him, and he turned out to be a lot of trouble with his uncontrolled magic. Okay, they’re drawn as cartoonishly awful people for the sake of creating a compelling myth, but put yourself in that position: your estranged sister’s kid is put on your doorstep, people you don’t know are issuing high-handed orders, and the kid in question seems to cause weird, unpredictable breakages. Then one of the “freaks” show up acting like the unwanted child is the incarnation of the Dahlai Lama, issues threats, and assaults your own child (I would call adding a pig’s tail to someone assault). This is not to say that the Dursleys have an excuse for child abuse and neglect any more than a parent of an unwanted SPED child has an excuse, but I think that, at the least, the Wizarding World could have provided a house elf to help out.
You know, I think I must be the only person in the universe who wasn’t annoyed by Harry’s CAPSLOCKY rage in OotP.
Nope – I didn’t mind it either, and I frankly thought it was about time (Harry had always seemed a little bland to me before that, though I think that’s because I was in my own young & angsty phase – on a reread, I found child-Harry of books 1-4 quite loveable, in his own way, and also a rather believable young, abused boy who had just found out he was not just a wizard, but The Boy Who Lived). I would have found it pretty unrealistic if it hadn’t happened.
That’s a good point about the Dursleys, Sniper. The pig-tail thing always made me a little uncomfortable. Presumably, a wizard more responsible than Hagrid would have removed it, but still…
And yeah, it can’t ahve been great for Petunia to have suddenly been dumped with a second toddler to take care of. As you say, it doesn’t excuse the way they treated him, but the assumption that it’s just okay to leave a child on someone’s doorstep is a bit screwed up. I guess this is where the intersection of the fairy tale boy hero schemat and the Real World becomes problematic.
I liked his caps-locky phase. I think that Rowling does a brilliant job of showing Harry as a normal kid in abnormal circumstances. He can’t always explain what he’s feeling, or figure out the mature way to express himself. And, he can’t always (or even frequently) come up with an intelligent witty thing to say to Malfoy’s quips (how many times does he say “Shut up, Malfoy”).
hmmmm Sniper – Hogmeade barmaid
I’m having problems getting onto Pandagon… my browser shuts down when I go there
yeah, i get the CAPSLOCK phase, it does make him a more realistic 15 year old, but it wasn’t all that fun to read by page 800. it all comes down to that fairy tale/real world divide, i suppose.
Also, my browser shuts down whenever i go to pandagon as well. is it internet explorer? does firefox help?
What about Harry Potter and the abortion debate?
Beyond the Dursleys issue, last night I was re-reading the bit where Lupin wants to come along with them, leaving the pregnant Tonks. One thing that stood out to me was that Harry seemed more concerned about him leaving the fetus behind than leaving Tonks herself, referring to it as “his child”. Now, to be fair, Lupin did seem to be suggesting that he would leave for good, meaning that the child would be born and grow up without him, and Harry does have very strong feelings about children being left without parents for obvious reasons. However, it just seemed to me that the moment the pregnancy entered the equation, Tonks became secondary to the fetus in her womb.
Of course, in the end, both Tonks and Lupin abandoned the kid, and went and got themselves killed, which is exactly the opposite of what Harry’s parents did– it’s quite clear from Book 7 that James and Lily were stuck mooching around the house, regardless of whether or not they would have preferred to be fighting.
Harry really seems to ignore Tonks in favor of Lupin throughout the book. But it is funny, during the battle, he doesn’t protest to either Lupin or Tonks for leaving the kid behind the way he did Lupin at Grimauld place. Maybe he was too busy telling Ginny to get thee back in the room of requirement at that point…
Also, since harry’s the godfather, doesn’t that make him legally responsible for the baby upon the death of Lupin and Tonks?
I love this thread. You all rock.
Anele, I think Harry would only the legally responsible in the absence of a willing close relative. Since Tonks’s mother is still alive at the end of the book (at least pre-epilogue, where she’s not mentioned) I think that’s where Teddy’s staying when he’s not having dinner with Harry’s family. (Though since he’s now graduated from Hogwarts he may be living on his own.)
anele wrote:
My take on the Elder Wand and who is its master when, and why, is this: the way the wand’s change of allegiance works, the wizard who is master of the wand is defeated by another wizard, who then takes physical possession of the Elder Wand. If a wizard is defeated in a magical duel, then the first thing the Elder Wand recognizes is the *wand* that just defeated it; once the victorious wizard takes physical possession of it, it then recognizes that particular wizard as its new master (some echo here of Snitch-like “flesh memory,” perhaps). This would be the normal transition of the EW from one master to another. But it didn’t happen that way in Draco’s case – he magically disarmed Dumbledore with a spell cast from his hawthorn wand, but he did not take physical possession of the Elder Wand after doing so. Consequently, the Elder Wand could recognize only the wand that had beat its previous master, but not the particular wizard who had used it against him. To the Elder Wand, its new master was “the holder of the wand that disarmed Dumbledore,” not “Draco Malfoy.”
Harry then took Draco’s wand away from him and proceeded to use it for the rest of the story. When he faced Voldemort for the final time, he was still using it. When they cast their spells/curses at each other, the one cast by the Elder Wand – Voldy’s AK – could not prevail because the Elder Wand recognized that the spell it had collided with – Harry’s Expelliarmus – had been cast by “the holder of the wand that disarmed Dumbledore,” i.e., its true master by the only criteria available to it. It wasn’t until Harry took physical possession of it after disarming Voldy that the Elder Wand finally recognized the one particular wizard known as “Harry Potter” as its true master.
That’s how I worked it out, anyway. So I’m not sure that Harry ever was “master” of all three Hallows simultaneously in the sense of possessing them, altho one could say that he retained mastery of the stone even after dropping it and had mastery-in-potential of the Elder Wand as soon as he availed himself of Draco’s wand even if it was pure blind luck that he did so. I think it was the “blood connection” that kept him from dying in the forest, along with the fact that the Elder Wand did not want to work that well for Voldy in the first place, since he was never its true master at all, altho he expected to be, once he killed Snape.
Not that it really matters, though. Someone pointed out in a discussion elsewhere that, as is so often the case in tales like this, the way the Deathly Hallows “Master of Death” thing works is actually backwards from what it appears to be on the surface. One does not become Master of Death by possessing the three Hallows; rather, one becomes worthy to possess them by first becoming Master of Death – that is, losing one’s fear of it and accepting that it is inevitable. It’s the fear of death that one masters, not death itself. Ultimately we’re all going to die, and we might not be able to choose when or why or how, but we can choose how we meet death or the prospect of it when it comes. (This idea had already come up in at least two previous HP books – GoF and, IIRC, OotP.) Harry’s decision to sacrifice himself if that’s what it took to bring Voldy down and save everyone else, and that long walk into the forest to what he firmly believed would be the end of life as he knew it – that’s what made him “Master of Death” IMO.
And it harks back to the first book, where it’s wanting to find the Sorceror’s Stone – immortality – to keep it from being used, but not *use* it himself as Voldy would, that makes him worthy of finding and possessing it at all.
Lyn, your take on the Elder wand is exactly how I saw it too– I don’t think Rowling could have done an exposition on it like that in the book because it would have bogged things down and confused too many readers, but I definitely had the sense that Harry possessing Draco’s wand was a crucial factor in the Elder wand refusing to do anything that was against Harry’s will. The AK worked the first time because Harry was willing to die– it was just his connection to Voldemort that allowed him to come back. Again, when Voldemort used crucio on what he believed was Harry’s corpse, Harry felt no pain because the wand was only performing the spell to the extent that Harry allowed it to (ie, it caused him to write, thus preserving the illusion of the spell working, but it didn’t cause him any pain). The second time Voldy AKed him, however, Harry didn’t want the spell to work at all, so the Wand revolted.
Thanks Lyn & Beppie!
Lyn, that’s an interesting insight about the books making another circle back to the themes in The Sorcerer’s Stone. The rhythms of the series were part of why I wasn’t bothered much by what JKR mentioned in the epilogue and what she didn’t, as well of the setting of the epilogue. (Sure, the conversations at the station could have said more about the now-adult characters’ occupations, what happened to characters who don’t have children at the station or at all, addressing questions I had. Then some people would have complained she was cramming too much exposition into the scene.) The annual trek to King’s Cross is a regular event for the community, full of variations important for the individuals going through the ritual, and as others have said, it shows part of how the community has recovered following Voldemort’s defeat.
I felt let down by the epilogue the first time through, but that might have been because it was such an abrupt change of pace after 11 hours spent devouring what came before it, especially the roller coaster ride of the last few chapters. I’m rereading DH at a much slower pace now, and that will probably make a difference… and of course I’m not expecting the epilogue to be anything other than what it is, this time around. I do think it was the one part of DH most likely to disappoint the largest number of people, if only because it’s “the end” and any question left unanswered or theory left hanging in canon may remain that way. And there was no way for her to address even a fraction of the stuff that was out there waiting to be resolved to this or that fan’s satisfaction.
I, for one, am still wondering exactly Aberforth did with those damn goats.
Whatever it was, it was probably as misunderstood as anything anybody in his family did.
Beppie, that certainly seemed the most “logical” way of looking at it… on the other hand, giving all the “mysteries” of wandlore and the not-completely-understood (even by experts like Ollivander) sentience of wands themselves, it’s also possible that the Elder Wand “knew” Harry from the moment that he overpowered Draco at Malfoy Manor and took possession of the wand that had disarmed Dumbledore. And that it recognized the wizard known as Harry Potter as its master in the forest, when the AK was cast, without Harry first using Draco’s wand against it. I’ve assumed that Harry survived the AK because of the blood/connection thing, not because the Elder Wand recognized him, specifically, as its master at that point. And/or because Voldemort wasn’t its master either, and so it wasn’t working that well in his hands for magic as extreme as an AK. Do we ever see Voldy AK *anyone* successfully with the EW? Hard not to notice that he doesn’t try to kill Snape that way but uses Nagini instead. And IIRC there’s more than a hint that Voldy is *not* taking part at all in the first stages of the battle of Hogwarts. Is this because he already knows the wand is not effective enough in his hands to be truly deadly, and not just limiting him to his “ordinary” powers as he tells Snape? Hmm…
I also assumed that the Crucio curses had no effect on NotEvenMostlyDead!Harry for the same reason – Voldy wasn’t master of the wand, it still didn’t work for him. He just thought he was, because he thought Harry was dead and didn’t expect the Crucios to do anything more than what they appeared to be doing to his “lifeless” body. Wouldn’t expect screams of agony from a corpse.
There does seem to be a question of what counts as “defeat” to the Elder Wand. Certainly magically overcoming another wizard and taking the EW from him counts. In the legends, it’s assumed that just killing a wizard by non-magical means and taking physical possession of the wand counts. In the case of Grindelwald, just sneaking into someone’s house and stealing the damn thing, and thumbing your nose at its previous owner as you run off with it, seems to count. But at least in each case, taking physical possession of it appears to be what cements and finalizes the transfer of its allegiance, whatever kind of “defeat” precedes it and makes it possible.
I’m still trying to figure out how, definitively, the “defeat” and transfer of mastery work, tho, because there’s the whole issue of how the wand is going to remain masterless if Harry puts it back in DD’s tomb, never uses it, and dies a natural death. My first thought after finishing DH was that Harry was going to go on to live a very quiet, out-of-the-public life and probably be a stay-at-home dad, lol, to avoid the possibility of ever being defeated in some way that would count to the EW. But apparently Rowling has since stated that he became an Auror, so that put a new wrinkle in things IMO.