Hey would anybody agree with me that Harry Potter is holey?

which I had guessed! 😱

Originally posted by willRules
Ok I apologise if this thread has already been created but I couldn't find it in the search.......

Ok we know in book 4 when Harry tells Dumbledore that Voldermort got over the problem of his Mum's sacrifice by returning by using Harry's blood. When Harry tells Dumbledore this he has a gleam of triumph in his eyes for a split second. What's this all about? Rowling said it would be important to book 7. This thread is for your theories on the gleam of triumph and to ask you guys what you think of my theory.

My Theory.

Dumbledore seems happy that Voldermort overcame this barrier, but why? If Dumbledore was one of the Order why would he be happy about this barrier being broken down? Unless it did the exact opposite........

My theory is that Lily Potter's Sacrifice is a deep magic (Dumbledore says in book 1 some people call it love) which is in Harry's blood. When Voldemort was returned to power Harry's blood was used so it also resides in Voldemort. But what if it didn't break down the barrier, just create a new one?

Think about it, the very spell that was in Harry, protecting him from Voldemort is now also in Voldemort. The only thing that was stopping voldemort from killing Harry was that spell which is now inside Voldemort. [B]Voldemort can't kill Harry because his blood is full of the very thing protecting Harry, Lily Potter's love 😱 That's why I think Dumbledore was so happy ✅ It's a long stretch but it makes sense ✅

Any thoughts or opinions? [/B]

Yeah I'm sure there are plot holes. I mean, if Harry could have shot 3 stunning spells at Fenrir using 3 wands, then why couldn't he just taken like 3 wands in each hand and shot 6 stunning spells at the same time O_o I mean anyone could've done that and that would amplify the power of the spell by alot. Why didn't Voldemort do that? Seriously, make like 5 killing curses at the same time, sounds cool.

Originally posted by willRules
which I had guessed! 😱

You know what I think is the stupidest thing about all of that?

The number of people I've seen complaining that "Dumbledore's 'gleam of triumph' was never explained!".

Yes it was you twits, you just actually have to have some reading comprehension.

Originally posted by Spidervlad
Yeah I'm sure there are plot holes. I mean, if Harry could have shot 3 stunning spells at Fenrir using 3 wands, then why couldn't he just taken like 3 wands in each hand and shot 6 stunning spells at the same time O_o I mean anyone could've done that and that would amplify the power of the spell by alot. Why didn't Voldemort do that? Seriously, make like 5 killing curses at the same time, sounds cool.

*sigh*

Because, as was a explained as a fairly large plot point in the book, a wand will not work properly for the one using it unless the wand has chosent that person - either if it belongs to them originally, or they have 'won' it from the previous owner.

He used three of the goddamn wands to shoot 3 stunning spells. That means they work for him. So he just uses the wands at the same time.

Voldemort killed ALOT of people, therefore he "defeats" the user and is now the master of the wand. Added to that, before he became the master of the Elder Wand, he could still use it like a normal wand. So he could've just used his older wand and this wand for double the power.

Originally posted by Lana
You know what I think is the stupidest thing about all of that?

The number of people I've seen complaining that "Dumbledore's 'gleam of triumph' was never explained!".

Yes it was you twits, you just actually have to have some reading comprehension.

lol ✅

Originally posted by Spidervlad
He used three of the goddamn wands to shoot 3 stunning spells. That means they work for him. So he just uses the wands at the same time.

Voldemort killed ALOT of people, therefore he "defeats" the user and is now the master of the wand. Added to that, before he became the master of the Elder Wand, he could still use it like a normal wand. So he could've just used his older wand and this wand for double the power.

Voldemort never became the master of the Elder Wand. Another plot point you apparently missed.

Originally posted by Lana
Voldemort never became the master of the Elder Wand. Another plot point you apparently missed.

And you failed to answer my question, instead rather trying to cover it up by pointing at my 'mistakes.'

Voldemort was close to mastering it, but his arrogance overlooked the very thing that was most important, which is that Draco was the true master of the hallows, and since Harry had 'won' Draco's wand, Harry was now the true owner of the Elder Wand.
Happy?

Originally posted by Spidervlad
And you failed to answer my question, instead rather trying to cover it up by pointing at my 'mistakes.'

Voldemort was close to mastering it, but his arrogance overlooked the very thing that was most important, which is that Draco was the true master of the hallows, and since Harry had 'won' Draco's wand, Harry was now the true owner of the Elder Wand.
Happy?

Right, okay, so if you're in the middle of a fight for your life, are you going to go around wasting time picking up the wands of people you've defeated, or are you just going to keep fighting as long as you possibly can?

Come on now.

Not just Harry Potter, anyone really. Why can't they use 2 wands instead of one? It's double the power, isn't it?

My point still stands. It's a frenetic, dangerous battle. No one in their right mind would bother wasting time grabbing an extra wand that may or may not work for them.

And I don't think spells work that way. A lot of the power comes from the person themselves. Like, Neville could have a dozen wands at once but it's not going to make him any better at Transfiguration...

Yeah, but back at the time when people get their wands. Why not ask for two O_o

If you know how to cast a stunning spells then you'll cast 12 stunning spells with 12 wands. I mean thats what Harry did with 3 wands.

Originally posted by Dresta
No, Voldemort couldn't kill harry not due to the protecion given to him by his mother's sacrifice, but because Voldemort had the same blood as Harry's running through his body, therefore there was something tieing Harry to the living world. So as long as Voldemort was still alvie Harry could not die.

His mother's sacrifice wore off when Harry turned 17. Therefore, Voldemort should have been able to kill him.

Originally posted by tooa/presence
His mother's sacrifice wore off when Harry turned 17. Therefore, Voldemort should have been able to kill him.

Did you actually read his reply? Or the book, for that matter?

It had nothing to do with Lily's sacrifice.

Voldemort had, in GoF, taken Harry's blood. This originally broke part of the charm of Lily's sacrifice, in that Voldemort could touch Harry now.

But because Voldemort did this, as long as Voldemort was alive Harry couldn't die. Harry's blood being in Voldemort's body tied him to life.

It's really NOT that hard to understand. I don't know why people can't get it.

Originally posted by Lana
Did you actually read his reply? Or the book, for that matter?

It had nothing to do with Lily's sacrifice.

Voldemort had, in GoF, taken Harry's blood. This originally broke part of the charm of Lily's sacrifice, in that Voldemort could touch Harry now.

But because Voldemort did this, as long as Voldemort was alive Harry couldn't die. Harry's blood being in Voldemort's body tied him to life.

It's really NOT that hard to understand. I don't know why people can't get it.

Then because Harry didn't die then the horcrux shouldn't have because it said you had to destroy the outer part in order to destroy the horcrux.

Originally posted by Lana
Did you actually read his reply? Or the book, for that matter?

It had nothing to do with Lily's sacrifice.

Voldemort had, in GoF, taken Harry's blood. This originally broke part of the charm of Lily's sacrifice, in that Voldemort could touch Harry now.

But because Voldemort did this, as long as Voldemort was alive Harry couldn't die. Harry's blood being in Voldemort's body tied him to life.

It's really NOT that hard to understand. I don't know why people can't get it.

😛

Originally posted by Spidervlad
Not just Harry Potter, anyone really. Why can't they use 2 wands instead of one? It's double the power, isn't it?

Considering Rowling wrote with the medieval language of spiritual alchemy, taking excerpts from age old portrayals of wizards, why should they use two wands? What mythical wizard or witch used two wands? It's not Star Wars y'know.

Originally posted by exanda kane
Considering Rowling wrote with the medieval language of spiritual alchemy, taking excerpts from age old portrayals of wizards, why should they use two wands? What mythical wizard or witch used two wands? It's not Star Wars y'know.

But she clearly stated that it was possible. And someone like Voldemort, who clearly wanted more and more power, could've used two wands instead of one since it's possible. She shouldn't have made it possible to use more than one wand, because it doesn't really make sense.

Put it into the dramatic context and it does make sense. Take it out there and you will find many such problems, but those problems simply undermine the spirit of the books.

Originally posted by tooa/presence
Then because Harry didn't die then the horcrux shouldn't have because it said you had to destroy the outer part in order to destroy the horcrux.

When Harry was killed, his body did actually die. But his soul survived fine, due to Voldemort tying him to life, and the part of Voldemort's soul that was in Harry's body was destroyed.

Thus, he wasn't truly dead and was able to survive. A big point of the last two books is that the soul is more important than the body, so it works.

Originally posted by §P0oONY
I get it.. 😱

😛

I'd hope so ermm

Originally posted by Spidervlad
But she clearly stated that it was possible. And someone like Voldemort, who clearly wanted more and more power, could've used two wands instead of one since it's possible. She shouldn't have made it possible to use more than one wand, because it doesn't really make sense.