Dual-core wands? (was Elder Wand ownership (was Dual-core wands?))

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 181553

> Carol responds:
I agree that wands are sentient, and it may have been
> trying him out as its master. (I think it would ultimately find him
> unsuitable.)
> 
> In any case, he was using one wand of which he was the indisputable
> master (and which was reasonably compatible with him; he has no
> difficulty using it); one wand that may have been considering
> transferring its loyalty to him (but since it ultimately went to
> Hermione and she felt a distinct loathing for it, I think it remained
> loyal to Bellatrix); and one of which his friend Ron was the new
> master. 

Magpie:
In which I complain about my personal disappointment in the 
introduction of this idea into DH.

There was some writer once who talked about looking for the feelings 
driving a story when the author wasn't thinking about what s/he was 
saying rather than when they're consciously saying what they believe. 
I've said before that HP for me seems very split about what it feels 
like it should say and what it seems more naturally say. So that at 
times it will speak against something and have fun doing it at the 
same time. Or have certain ideas about what it should be saying 
without telling a story about proving those things. (In fact to me 
sometimes it seems to go ahead and show the opposite.)

This is one of those times. For all the associating Might Is Right 
with bad guys (with Magic meaning Might), might does make right. This 
is one more example. I *loved* the wand choosing the wizard. Wands 
were not, in the past, sentient at all imo--in fact, inanimate objects 
that were sentient were potentially dangerous (don't trust anything if 
you can't tell where it keeps its brain). The "choosing" didn't seem 
to be about the wand being sentient but about a natural affinity 
between the wand's wood and core with the person. A bit like a 
particular musician working well with a particular instrument, or a 
tennis player's swing conforming to a certain racket (only magic has 
an element of personality to it as well; it's not just physical). Plus 
wands were yet another of the fun personality-quiz type things in the 
book--where would you be sorted? What's your Patronus? What's your 
animagus form? Everyone has their own special wand that's uniquely 
their own. According to the website Harry, Ron, Hermione and Draco 
(and probably Hagrid) all had woods and cores that were "right" for 
them.

And then in DH it all went out the window. Wands, like everyone else, 
go weak at the knees for brute strength. No matter what kind of work 
you've done with your wand since you were 11, if somebody beats you in 
a duel, your wand will switch allegiences. You might hold other things 
more important than fighting, but no self-respecting wand does. Get 
beaten and the traitorous thing will be happy to AK you for someone 
else. Wands always choose the same Wizard--the one who kicks everyone 
else's butt. Wands are most importantly weapons in combat and your 
wand knows you're a loser. 

I know that ultimately she apparently needed this so that Voldemort 
could die on a technicality, but it still doesn't surprise me it went 
there. For all the talk of love being Harry's greatest strength, DH 
was more about the d***-swinging in the end.

Btw, I don't think that Harry's using Draco's wand had anything to do 
with how good his Crucio was (he seems to have a good personal feel 
for it himself), but do we know Draco was forced to specifically cast 
Crucio? Because we've got this information that you have to enjoy 
causing the person pain to do it, and Harry validates this idea. Yet 
if we're talking about the flash that Harry gets in DH Draco doesn't 
look like he's enjoying anything, much less the pain he's causing his 
victim. He seems to have lost what little taste he had for this sort 
of thing completely. The whole point is that Draco's being forced to 
do things, so it seems like it would be hard to get off a Crucio that 
way. Maybe his victim's smart enough to fake it.

-m