The wand's next owner may well obtain it by the peaceful, shopping route!
The wands we see sold are ones that have never been owned. Once a wand's been owned by somebody you can't sell it and have somebody be the master. It would always truly belong to the person who lost it unless the master himself was selling it, which doesn't really seem to happen.
Perhaps I am re-writing to get a fine story, but on the other hand, it may be that you're not giving enough weight to the subtle and complex as mentioned by Ollivander.
Because the "subtle and complex" comment is just imo hand-waving--wiggle room that's there not to support some other way that Harry will defeat Voldemort, but patching over the disconnect between PS's version of wands and this one. The book didn't use this grey area to explain what happened in the end, it followed the simple, direct line that went through the rest of the book--it was even set up earlier in HBP by getting Draco to disarm Dumbledore. When a character in HP says something is "subtle and complex" it means "I can't explain how it works but just go with it."
And I'm really not entirely clear on how Harry taking one wand from Draco made him master of a completely different wand. I'm impressed, but not convinced. Nice try, Harry!
I don't see why it's not convincing--it's the only explanation we have and everyone agrees to it. Draco was the master of the Elder Wand because he beat the last master. When Harry disarmed the current master of the Elder Wand it passed to him. Events bore this out--Harry was the wand's master because of exactly what he said. Voldemort was not the master because he beat the wrong Wizard. The explanation might seem lame but it's what I got in the book. It's actually fits together better than the torturous stuff with the Fidelius Charm.
What is the point of Harry's and Voldemort's stand-off? It seems to me that Voldemort is trying to belittle Harry and frighten him into submission, and Harry is trying to undermine Voldemort and infuriate him into attacking. It's a battle of wills. Harry succeeds, Voldemort attacks, his spell - wand working fine here! - turns back on him when it meets Harry's 'Expelliamus!', and the wand - er, well it jumps into Harry's hand, actually! ;)
The point of their standoff imo is the same as always. Voldemort always tries to belittle and frighten Harry into submission and Harry always stands up to him. Iirc, Harry tells Voldemort to repent, he's not just trying to goad him into attacking. He's explaining the story to us--they both are. He tells us, the readers, as well as Voldemort what's happened. Voldemort doesn't believe him and tries to use the wand against its master so it backfires. I don't see any mystery to it.
Re: Late again (part 2)
The wands we see sold are ones that have never been owned. Once a wand's been owned by somebody you can't sell it and have somebody be the master. It would always truly belong to the person who lost it unless the master himself was selling it, which doesn't really seem to happen.
Perhaps I am re-writing to get a fine story, but on the other hand, it may be that you're not giving enough weight to the subtle and complex as mentioned by Ollivander.
Because the "subtle and complex" comment is just imo hand-waving--wiggle room that's there not to support some other way that Harry will defeat Voldemort, but patching over the disconnect between PS's version of wands and this one. The book didn't use this grey area to explain what happened in the end, it followed the simple, direct line that went through the rest of the book--it was even set up earlier in HBP by getting Draco to disarm Dumbledore. When a character in HP says something is "subtle and complex" it means "I can't explain how it works but just go with it."
And I'm really not entirely clear on how Harry taking one wand from Draco made him master of a completely different wand. I'm impressed, but not convinced. Nice try, Harry!
I don't see why it's not convincing--it's the only explanation we have and everyone agrees to it. Draco was the master of the Elder Wand because he beat the last master. When Harry disarmed the current master of the Elder Wand it passed to him. Events bore this out--Harry was the wand's master because of exactly what he said. Voldemort was not the master because he beat the wrong Wizard. The explanation might seem lame but it's what I got in the book. It's actually fits together better than the torturous stuff with the Fidelius Charm.
What is the point of Harry's and Voldemort's stand-off? It seems to me that Voldemort is trying to belittle Harry and frighten him into submission, and Harry is trying to undermine Voldemort and infuriate him into attacking. It's a battle of wills. Harry succeeds, Voldemort attacks, his spell - wand working fine here! - turns back on him when it meets Harry's 'Expelliamus!', and the wand - er, well it jumps into Harry's hand, actually! ;)
The point of their standoff imo is the same as always. Voldemort always tries to belittle and frighten Harry into submission and Harry always stands up to him. Iirc, Harry tells Voldemort to repent, he's not just trying to goad him into attacking. He's explaining the story to us--they both are. He tells us, the readers, as well as Voldemort what's happened. Voldemort doesn't believe him and tries to use the wand against its master so it backfires. I don't see any mystery to it.