Why Harry would not use Elder Wand? WAS: Re: Wand allegiance.

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 187340

Pippin:
Nobody is suggesting that Harry go unarmed. It is just that if the EW has great
power for good, it has failed to show it in the last 1000 years or so. It isn't
neutral like a gun that has no mind of its own. It has a personality and not a
nice one, according to ToBtB. Why should Harry have to struggle with that? Can
he really do as much good with such a wand as with the one that chose him
freely?

Alla:
Wand has personality? Isn't it a bit of stretch?  Now sure if you want to argue that the wand is somewhat dark after being used in killings so many times, I can see that, but wand having personality and with which Harry will be struggling no less? What  part of ToBtB  are you basing this on?

Wands have subtle intelligence when they choose their master or see the winner,  but I do not remember canon telling us that wands have personalities like people do? It seems to me that their intelligence is limited to choosing their masters, or submitting to their masters and I especially do not see the evidence in canon that some wands are **inclined** to do murder more than other wands. I think that Voldemort's wand is dark too and Harry and Hermione did not like Bella's wand because it killed Sirius, right? But it seems to me that wand will do what the owner will tell it and as you said Harry does not want to do killings, he is opposed to them.

In short, I do see the argument that Harry may not want this wand as dark wand that killed people, but again this to me is a **symbolical** objection, something that Harry may decide on philosophical moral ground, which is totally fine by me, but just does not cut it in the practical magical way. IMO of course.

Pippin:

But the power is a myth! Harry's life was threatened at the MoM and Dumbledore
was not ready to lose him. If DD could have stunned Voldemort or turned him into
a newt, he would have. Dumbledore's greatest deed, according to canon, was
defeating Grindelwald. He didn't need the Elder Wand to do that.

Alla:

What power is the myth? That elder wand can be the most effective in the fight? I am not saying that the real elder wand can create miracles, I am saying that elder wand is more effective than any other wand. I don't know, maybe I will discover that I always imagined wandlore rules incorrectly, but I always viewed wand as extension of the wizard, not the human being in the form of wand, who can do stuff that the owner cannot. So yeah, sure Dumbledore could not cast the spell he needed to effectively stun Voldemort, that's to me is Dumbledore's problem, you know?

His mental magical power was not enough for that, regardless of the wand IMO. But the way I see IF Dumbledore was able to do it, the spell would have been much *stronger* than same spell done with any other wand

Pippin:
AFAWK, the Elder Wand is only super powerful at two things: killing, and mending
broken wands. Harry is philosophically opposed to the first and the second is
not going to help him much in a fight.

Alla:

Only at mending broken wands? Something that Ollivander was not able to do? I view this not as an example of a one thing, but as an example that wand can do extraordinary stuff, just that this was one isolated example of that.

And sure, who says that Harry has to do killings with that? I would guess that Harry's stupefy would have been stronger with it.
Alla:
>
> So what kind of the innate caution Harry does not have that Dumbledore did?
Would it be the same innate caution that made Dumbledore put the ring on his
finger the moment he had it?

Pippin:
Yup. How many times has somebody had to rescue Dumbledore? Once. Now, how many
times has somebody had to rescue Harry?

Alla:

Oh dear. We all know what Dumbledore had been doing when he was Harry's age and yes, I would say he certainly needed someone to deliver at least a good smack to him and rescue him from his idiocy.  We are not been given any indication that between ending the war and becoming the man he was in his middle thirties Harry needed rescuing *once*.  So again, I think Harry would have done no worse and maybe even better.

Alla earlier:
Without taking some time to restrain him and think that maybe, just maybe cloak
may come in handy to him and his family if the attack may happen?

Pippin:
If James thought his family needed the cloak for protection, he wouldn't have
left the house wearing it, much less lent it to Dumbledore.

Alla:

I really do not care what James' mindset  was when he lent cloak to Dumbledore. For all I know maybe he was feeling so guilty for refusing  Dumbledore's offer to be his secret keeper that he decided to indulge his old teacher even if at risk for himself and his family.

You were arguing that Dumbledore had inner discipline and well, I do not see any when he fails to restrain his desire to touch and research one of the hallows and failed to think ahead and maybe imagine that the true owner may need the Invisibility cloak, true Invisibility cloak more, because he and his wife and little one are in hiding. And maybe maybe Dumbledore's little research project can wait. I see it as Dumbledore seeing what he wants and going after it, discipline be d*mned.


Pippin:
Dumbledore was a good guardian until it was taken from him. If he couldn't hang
on to it, it's hardly reasonable for Harry to think he could do better.

Alla:

I am with Eggplant on that, if Dumbledore was saying that Harry is the better man, I can totally see that he could do better.

Pippin:
Considering all the sacrifices Harry and his friends made to save the wizarding
world from tyranny, I can't imagine him doing anything he thinks would make it
more likely that tyranny will raise again. If he did such a thing just to make
his own life a little longer, he'd be no better than Peter Pettigrew. He'd have
no business being an auror, much less guardian of the wand. <SNIP>

Alla:

That's a different issue and as I said upthread, I totally see Harry doing it to make sure, just in case somebody would take it from him and make sure that new tyrant does not appear. This however to me has nothing to do with how good elder wand can help Harry defend himself.

Pippin:
No, I don't think they'd constantly press him to use the wand. But that's not to
say they'd never do so.

Ron still hates losing at anything so much that he cheated on his driver's test,
with nothing more at stake than the embarrassment of having to take it again.
Hermione seems to be as bossy as ever. Harry didn't like the way they were
looking at the wand as teenagers, but there's nothing in canon to show that
growth and maturity makes you incapable of abusing power later in life.

Alla:

Well, we just disagree then on that and there is no way to prove that any of us is right or wrong I think. I think this type of thing is just too dire, too idiotic and just too childish. I think they are way past it, but of course it is speculation. I am saying that they are past acting like this in life or death situations. Ron may still hate losing, but I doubt that in war situation Harry can think of him any less than 100 reliable. And I somehow doubt that for all her bossiness Hermione will for example refuse to comply with the order of her superiors if need occurs in the time of war.


JMO,

Alla