>>256013>Harry Potter refuses to look deeply at its own system. The villain is BORN EVIL because his RAPIST MOTHER drugged a MUGGLE MAN with LOVE POTION, so due to the circumstances of his birth he's physically unable to feel love.
And LOVE POTIONS are sold on school grounds by "Good guys" like the Prankster Twins Fred and George.
Kek, I didn't know that about Voldemort. Wtf.
>It doesn't write its heroes as people who want to change things for the better.>nobody learns anything from Voldemort's existence or rise to power
Yeah, it is like the status quo that was before was perfect and didn't need to change. You think they would at least removed the slytherin house or different houses altogether since it is pretty clear, to them anyway, who becomes evil and who doesn't. I wouldn't really have liked that inclusion in the story but it would make since for these characters to do so.
If I was a wizard in that world I would actually be against house-elf liberation as well (but I agree that these wizards and witches should be
considering this based on theiir own values). Not because I'm too lazy to wave a wand to manage shores but because the elfs are just way stronger in magic so it would be a logical conclusion that they would take over the world if they were given a chance.
From what I know of the HP universe wands are used to direct ones magic for wizards and only the most talented wizards (I guess you might be able to train for it as well but I don't know), like Dumbledore really use magic without a wand. Wands are like a support item for people with lesser magic ability, it seems to imply.
But house elves? They don't point as I have seen Dumbledore do in the movies to direct their magic, they SNAP their fingers. I don't know how they direct their magic with snapping their fingers but they do.
I have head-canon theory for why this is. It is also intreting to note that ancient magic are the most powerfulest, for example the magic that saved Harry that his mother used. And we also know that the house-elves became servants/slaves to wizards, well I assume, far back in the past.
It seems to sugguest that Wizards were superior than elfs back in time but due to mixing with no magic people they have no become less powerful than the elves.
In fact, Dobby is a liabilty to the entire humanity. What if a free house elf would start going after other wizard families that has house-elves to free them. Torture them and say, "Free your house-elf or you die." Then there is two house-elves to worry about.
>What was retconned in at the last moment? A fundamental law about how wands work: If you disarm someone with Harry's signature move Expelliarmus, then you become the New Boss of that wand forever and it will kill its owner if its owner tries to use it against you. Yes even though harry used Expelliarmus all the time until that point and it never caused that until now.
Yeah, I have been trying to make sense of what happend there but there based on the movie alone. Nice explaination. Yeah, why did he die from expelliarmus?
However, I have thought about this stupid retcon that she did about wands. Through the series, people have been disarming eachother left and right. I mean they even have practice duals in Hogwarts. Are theyy not allowed to use disarming spell then or what?
I mean if a wizard disarms a witch then he now owns both of their wands. This means the witch cannot use either of that guys wand to attack him with since, as you pointed out, fucking expelliarmus can (or always will?) kill you if you cast that spell at the master of the wand you cast the spell with. Or is it in stream wands off that that happens? Idk.
What I really wanted to get to is that you can never get back to the original situation were the wizard had his wand and the witch had hers so practice is impossible with this rules.
I mean if the witch who lost her wand…
Oh, I forgot a puzzle piece in this. Right, the rule is: So long as you beat the master (disarms them) then all of his wands belong to you. This is ture because that is how Harry gains ownership of the Elderwand. He doesn't disarm the Elderwand from Draco because he doesn't posses iit, Voldemort does, but at that moment he is the master of it. This means that so long as you dis arm a person, you now own all of their wands or was that just the Elderwand?
It seems to imply that you can never return to the status quo because you can't win back just your wand, you win all the other person's wands.
This should make it impossible to train disarming spells with students.
Don't know what it means to use anothers wand either. Do they ever go through that in the books and explain what one can do with another wand and what one can't odwith anothers wand? Like in normal cases, a master can give their servant an order, is it similar here. Wouldn't it be kinda funny if all this time Voldemort used the Elderwand, Harry could have just ordered it to stop.
>doesn't get killed by a character-developed Neville on the way to killing Voldy's Snake. Instead Bellatrix LeShit is killed by the Weasley's mom
Yeah, it made me go like. Wait, was Voldemort's elites just a bunch of pussies or is Molly the secret chief director of aurors or what is happening here? It isn't satisfying I any remote way. Especially for me that kind of like her constant crazy behavoir. Yeah, she wasn't very deep but she stood out among the death eaters and had some form of personality.