sistermagpie (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
sistermagpie) wrote2008-02-15 02:36 pm
sistermagpie) wrote2008-02-15 02:36 pm
Inconsistent Magic in HP Part 23: How Wands Work Now
OMG, I'm writing about Deathly Hallows. Because I was having this conversation about something in it that really bugged me. So this is about something I didn't like in DH. If you are bummed out by the negative, don't irritate yourself by clicking this
By the end of the series, we have two different and contradictory explanations for how Wands work with Wizards--and now I think about it, those explanations reflect an ambivalence already present in the series.
The very first book establishes the substitution of magic for school. Harry will go to school just like the reader, but he learns magic instead of other subjects. Which is fine, but sometimes leads to a little canonical confusion between "smart" and "magically adept." When Hermione does Transfiguration on the first day of class we understand she's a good student even though wand movement is more physical than mental. In OotP, iirc, there's a conversation with a Ravenclaw in the DA where he asks why Hermione isn't in that house when she's doing NEWT level magic--again, we've never seen that being a primarily mental process. Although there are some vague references to theory or esoteric knowledge that Dumbledore has but can't explain, and things to memorize, Harry never really encounters anything beyond magic as a physical skill.
This question of brains vs. skills carries over to Wands. Which one eventually dominates? In the end, are they tools of learning or tools of battle? The answer: tools of battle. Are they like a violin or like a sword? They are like a sword.
We got the first explanation of how wands work back in PS/SS. That's where Harry's wand chooses him and we hear its particulars: It is made of holly and has a phoenix feather core. The affinity for Harry comes from the qualities of the wood and core, and the folklore and fictional connections with each one. We hear James' wand was good at Transfiguration, a clue to his being an Animagus. Lily's was good at Charms--her protection of Harry was presumably a Charm. It was another one of those built-in personality tests. Who can say if holly is a nicer wood than maple? Nobody, really, it's personal taste. Everyone is different but everyone has a wand meant for them.
Unfortunately, this goes out the window in DH when Ollivander introducers the startling idea that in fact a wand becomes "yours" if you win it from someone else in a duel, either by yanking it from them or blasting it away from them or just beating them up and taking it. Iow, whatever hints we've gotten about love or learning, it's about power. Wands instinctively "bend their wills" to the person who's the most dominating physically and magically. If someone has beaten you, your wand--that thing that's been like an extention of yourself--is no longer yours!
These two ideas are contradictory and can't both be true, and in DH it's made clear that it's the domination idea that is the true one, otherwise the story wouldn't work. (So much for that Muggleborn's tearful, "But it's my wand! It chose me!" line--it's chosen Umbridge now, lady, if she took it from you.) It's a shame, actually, because with just a little tweaking JKR could have saved the original idea. She could have said that only the *Elder Wand* (the one already uniquely created to dominate others) bent to the will of he who won it. It could have been done with little changes to the story, saved the former ideas about Wands, and avoided questions like why Ollivander thinks he knows who any Wand belongs to after it leaves his store.
But that's not what happened. Instead we have all these careful scenes showing us how Harry can't work with the blackthorn wand (does he even struggle a little with Hermione's freely lent one?), but can work with Draco's because he yanked it out of his hand and thereby won it by physically besting him. Wood and core ultimately mean nothing at all. If they did, then in the scene where Harry shows Ollivander the Wands he's brought from Malfoy Manor Ollivander wouldn't have been going on about how the wand no longer belongs to Draco because Harry won it.
If we stayed with the original idea he should have been talking about wood and core and things like that--Harry's wand was made of holly; Draco's is hawthorn; Harry's has a phoenix feather core; Draco's has a unicorn hair core. How, if as we were originally told, the wood and core are in sympathy with the Wizard, could Harry be expected to use this one easily? Well, he could if Ollivander had just said something like "This wand will never be right for you, but it could be a lot worse. The Wand might feel more cold or detached than your regular one because of the unicorn tail, and you'll probably have to cast spells with more force than your used to in order to compensate for the hawthorn wood. To someone with an affinity for holly, that wood may feel contradictory and less focused. It will feel "lighter" in general, so be careful you don't overdo it."
Or whatever. Had that happened Harry probably still could have used it to win the battle. Draco would still be the Master of the Elder wand because *that* Wand only recognizes that kind of brute force, and Harry would still be the one who defeated him no matter what Wand he was using. He just would have beat Voldemort while struggling to work with a wand that would never truly be his or feel as good as his own for him. (Of course, I can't help but already worry that's getting into dangerous territory, as if Harry is somehow learning to work with Malfoy rather than more satisfyingly dominating him and having his wand like him better.)
It would have been preferable to me personally, though. I far prefer the original idea that Wands are tools of learning that reflect each person's personal experience and the wisdom they gained through it to the one where Wands are phallic weapons turned on by the best fighter, who then just gets to choose which one to use based on whether they prefer kicking ass with a .44 Magnum or a .38 special. Certainly I think this is a hell of a thing to toss in as if it's something only somebody well-versed in Wand-lore would know, when this is the kind of information Wizards would consider hugely important and have noticed immediately.
By the end of the series, we have two different and contradictory explanations for how Wands work with Wizards--and now I think about it, those explanations reflect an ambivalence already present in the series.
The very first book establishes the substitution of magic for school. Harry will go to school just like the reader, but he learns magic instead of other subjects. Which is fine, but sometimes leads to a little canonical confusion between "smart" and "magically adept." When Hermione does Transfiguration on the first day of class we understand she's a good student even though wand movement is more physical than mental. In OotP, iirc, there's a conversation with a Ravenclaw in the DA where he asks why Hermione isn't in that house when she's doing NEWT level magic--again, we've never seen that being a primarily mental process. Although there are some vague references to theory or esoteric knowledge that Dumbledore has but can't explain, and things to memorize, Harry never really encounters anything beyond magic as a physical skill.
This question of brains vs. skills carries over to Wands. Which one eventually dominates? In the end, are they tools of learning or tools of battle? The answer: tools of battle. Are they like a violin or like a sword? They are like a sword.
We got the first explanation of how wands work back in PS/SS. That's where Harry's wand chooses him and we hear its particulars: It is made of holly and has a phoenix feather core. The affinity for Harry comes from the qualities of the wood and core, and the folklore and fictional connections with each one. We hear James' wand was good at Transfiguration, a clue to his being an Animagus. Lily's was good at Charms--her protection of Harry was presumably a Charm. It was another one of those built-in personality tests. Who can say if holly is a nicer wood than maple? Nobody, really, it's personal taste. Everyone is different but everyone has a wand meant for them.
Unfortunately, this goes out the window in DH when Ollivander introducers the startling idea that in fact a wand becomes "yours" if you win it from someone else in a duel, either by yanking it from them or blasting it away from them or just beating them up and taking it. Iow, whatever hints we've gotten about love or learning, it's about power. Wands instinctively "bend their wills" to the person who's the most dominating physically and magically. If someone has beaten you, your wand--that thing that's been like an extention of yourself--is no longer yours!
These two ideas are contradictory and can't both be true, and in DH it's made clear that it's the domination idea that is the true one, otherwise the story wouldn't work. (So much for that Muggleborn's tearful, "But it's my wand! It chose me!" line--it's chosen Umbridge now, lady, if she took it from you.) It's a shame, actually, because with just a little tweaking JKR could have saved the original idea. She could have said that only the *Elder Wand* (the one already uniquely created to dominate others) bent to the will of he who won it. It could have been done with little changes to the story, saved the former ideas about Wands, and avoided questions like why Ollivander thinks he knows who any Wand belongs to after it leaves his store.
But that's not what happened. Instead we have all these careful scenes showing us how Harry can't work with the blackthorn wand (does he even struggle a little with Hermione's freely lent one?), but can work with Draco's because he yanked it out of his hand and thereby won it by physically besting him. Wood and core ultimately mean nothing at all. If they did, then in the scene where Harry shows Ollivander the Wands he's brought from Malfoy Manor Ollivander wouldn't have been going on about how the wand no longer belongs to Draco because Harry won it.
If we stayed with the original idea he should have been talking about wood and core and things like that--Harry's wand was made of holly; Draco's is hawthorn; Harry's has a phoenix feather core; Draco's has a unicorn hair core. How, if as we were originally told, the wood and core are in sympathy with the Wizard, could Harry be expected to use this one easily? Well, he could if Ollivander had just said something like "This wand will never be right for you, but it could be a lot worse. The Wand might feel more cold or detached than your regular one because of the unicorn tail, and you'll probably have to cast spells with more force than your used to in order to compensate for the hawthorn wood. To someone with an affinity for holly, that wood may feel contradictory and less focused. It will feel "lighter" in general, so be careful you don't overdo it."
Or whatever. Had that happened Harry probably still could have used it to win the battle. Draco would still be the Master of the Elder wand because *that* Wand only recognizes that kind of brute force, and Harry would still be the one who defeated him no matter what Wand he was using. He just would have beat Voldemort while struggling to work with a wand that would never truly be his or feel as good as his own for him. (Of course, I can't help but already worry that's getting into dangerous territory, as if Harry is somehow learning to work with Malfoy rather than more satisfyingly dominating him and having his wand like him better.)
It would have been preferable to me personally, though. I far prefer the original idea that Wands are tools of learning that reflect each person's personal experience and the wisdom they gained through it to the one where Wands are phallic weapons turned on by the best fighter, who then just gets to choose which one to use based on whether they prefer kicking ass with a .44 Magnum or a .38 special. Certainly I think this is a hell of a thing to toss in as if it's something only somebody well-versed in Wand-lore would know, when this is the kind of information Wizards would consider hugely important and have noticed immediately.
no subject
The other problem is that as much as I personally wish the Draco storyline in HBP went somewhere else, in the end it really does seem to only be there to perform this very wand switch-off.
Late again (part 1)
I can see that it would have been nice – or more straightforward - for Ollivander to have described the relationship between a wizard and a wand taken by force in the way you say. He did tell us a lot, though, and I think that the way he did describe it reflects his character and in particular his leaning towards power. But he did talk about the relationship, and he made a good point that any decent wizard should be able to use any old stick at a pinch.
You say about the wand choosing the wizard and the wizard taking a wand, These two ideas are contradictory and can't both be true. I’d argue that they may be contradictory, but they can both be true! Simply, there’s a difference between shopping and fighting. But whether you buy your wand in a shop or take it in a fight, a relationship between wand and wizard is begun and needs to develop. In the case of a taken wand, its bending to the wizard's will is the beginning of the relationship, I guess. Perhaps one would say that in the shop the wand has the upper hand and in the fight the wizard does, but there is room for variation in each. (I should imagine that Voldemort shopping for a wand would be a different kettle of fish from Neville doing so!) As we know, a wand doesn’t automatically go to the victor of a fight; it’s clear that the victor has to take the wand and want it.
As Ollivander says, "Subtle laws govern wand ownership". Harry had no problems with Hermione’s wand, although it wasn’t his and he hadn’t taken it by force, he was only borrowing it. He chose Draco’s wand as the ‘friendlier’ of the two in his pocket. The other wand belonged to Bellatrix, and Draco was certainly friendlier to Harry than she was: he’d just backed down from identifying Harry, while Bellatrix had just sent for Voldemort with a cry of "Harry Potter! Your death approaches!" Of course, Harry’d also taken Draco’s wand from Draco’s hand, while it was Ron’s spell that sent Bellatrix’s wand flying. Both are true. (Mind you - I've just remembered - Harry caught the wand. And used it.)
...
Late again (part 2)
I’m sure that wandmakers the wizarding world over will enjoy debating Harry’s story about Draco and his wand(s)! Draco knocked the elder wand from Dumbledore’s hand. He didn’t pick it up, he didn’t use it, he didn’t even know it was the elder wand. Months later Harry takes Draco’s hawthorn wand. Not the elder wand, which is safely tucked up with Dumbledore in his tomb, but Draco’s wand. Er…? The important thing about Harry’s story is that Voldemort believed it, and Harry knew he would - Harry was talking to Voldemort about what impressed him: power. But the elder wand didn’t fling itself into Harry’s arms the moment he took off the invisibility cloak. Harry had to win it.
Harry may have won the elder wand from Draco, or Voldemort may have won it from Dumbledore, it didn’t really matter. What mattered was that Voldemort had it and he and Harry were contesting for it and the most powerful of the two would win it. Harry was the most powerful. Voldemort was afraid of Harry, which was why he’d spent the last six months trying to find the elder wand. Harry had already vanquished Voldemort in the forest when he’d put himself in Voldemort’s hands to protect his friends. Voldemort’s spells no longer had any power against others. Harry was the most powerful, so he won the elder wand.
whatever hints we've gotten about love or learning, it's about power
It’s interesting that you should say this because (I seem always to be saying this these days!) the whole series is about the conflict between love and power.
If you've managed to plough through all this, then thanks!
Re: Late again (part 2)
He didn’t pick it up, he didn’t use it, he didn’t even know it was the elder wand. Months later Harry takes Draco’s hawthorn wand. Not the elder wand, which is safely tucked up with Dumbledore in his tomb, but Draco’s wand. Er…? The important thing about Harry’s story is that Voldemort believed it, and Harry knew he would - Harry was talking to Voldemort about what impressed him: power.
It's not "Er...?" It's perfectly clear. Draco became the Master of the Elder Wand when he disarmed Dumbledore--maybe it doesn't seem like that's the way it should work to a reader, but that's the way it worked. It didn't matter that Draco never picked it up, just as Harry said. Then Harry became the master of it. It doesn't matter when Voldemort believes--Voldemort believed himself truly to be the Master of the Wand when he got it himself, yet it didn't work. Harry didn't psych Voldemort out of the power, he took away his power literally by the magic of almost-dying and then being the true master of the wand through stealing Draco's wand. Harry won the wand the minute he took Draco's wand from his hand--no, the wand didn't jump into his hand, but that's not what wands do when they choose a new master. They just work for him once he picks it up. Harry's original wand didn't jump into his hand at Ollivander's either.
Harry getting the Elder wand through the way you're describing would have been a fine story to me. It would certainly make sense and most importantly it would be about something unique to the Elder Wand. But imo it's still a complete re-write to get rid of what's really there. What I read was a very clear throughline saying that Wands--all Wands--switch masters when their first masters give them up either willfully or through force. Harry can use Hermione's because her giving it to him is relinquishing it, just as Draco can use Narcissa's and Voldemort can use Lucius'. Wizards have more trouble with wands that have not been relinquished by their master, whether willfully or not. If you win the wand through force it's yours best of all--like Harry with the Elder Wand, and the Hawthorne Wand.
It’s interesting that you should say this because (I seem always to be saying this these days!) the whole series is about the conflict between love and power.
I agree. But power tends to get shown while love is talked about. In the case of wands, power simply was the thing that saved the day. Wands didn't have to love the wizard, they had to be mastered by them.
Re: Late again (part 2)
I don't have a problem with wands changing allegiance, so to speak, when needed. It seems sensible. It's not that taking a wand has precedence over shopping for it, it's a question of the situation. Taking a wand in a fight isn't the end of the story. The wand's next owner may well obtain it by the peaceful, shopping route!
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. I think that the nature of the elder wand is made apparent when Hermione reads "The Tale of the Three Brothers". 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!
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! ;)
At least we agree on the series being about the conflict between love and power. I think there's plenty of love shown in the story, but it tends to get ignored or grumbled over as not good enough. I'm not sure that wands love anyone, they're just sticks of wood, really!
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.
Re: Late again (part 2)
I was going to respond, "But if that's what you believe then you should go with all of it, not just with half of it!" but perhaps I should take my own advice here. It doesn’t add up but if it did it wouldn’t be magic. ;) Maybe the most magical thing about it is that Harry worked it out!
Well, Harry has vanquished Voldemort through love and now he’s doing it again in a way Voldemort can appreciate, through power. The elder wand remains a tricky object and a wicked joke. The Harry/Voldemort stand-off is good and tense, and with the whole Draco thing leading to "... I am the true master of the Elder Wand" also very funny.