Follow-up to the previous Elder Wand question.

[amanuensis1]

Fascinating. When I read the words, "The master of the Elder Wand was Draco Malfoy," in DH, everything became plain as day to me: how the Elder Wand is not a fixed wand, but transfers its abilities to the wand which wins the duel. Which is why Voldemort's attempt to take the wand from Dumbledore's corpse was useless, because Dumbledore's wand was no longer the Elder Wand--the power had transferred to Draco's wand, and since Harry defeated Draco without a wand (Harry's was broken at the time, and he just physically overpowered and took the wand from Draco) the power of the Elder Wand simply stayed in that wand, and then acknowledged Harry as its master. I thought it was clever and satisfying.

Except it wasn't right. It works--it's a potential interpretation of the events, except for one bit in the text that counters it: the text identifies the wand that flies into the air in the very last Voldemort-Harry duel as "the Elder Wand" and from context that wand is the one which was in Voldemort's hand. If not for that it could have been valid, I think. Evidently JKR's interpretation of "The master of the Elder Wand was Draco Malfoy" was that Draco was the wand's master but he never actually took possession of it, and when Harry defeated Draco Harry became the wand's master but he didn't lay hands on it either until that final moment in the duel with Voldemort.

*yawns* I'm too tired to think of anything else except that I like my first version better.

Comments

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

I like my first version better.

I do too! But thank you SOOOO MUCH for getting everyone to sort this out, because the whole brain-aching unclarity of this had bothered me for however many months, days and minutes it's been since CarpetBook came out!

But I was so annoyed by the confusion of what was an unnecessary late-arriving gimmick in the first place, I refused to reread just to sort this murk. I hoped others, equally irritated by the confusion, would eventually do the work for me. :-)

And lo, you and the flist have! Much love and thanks to you. None, still, for that stupid wooden stick.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

God love the flist! (Now I'm still waiting for someone to tell me where SNAPE'S wand is, if Voldemort didn't take it thinking it had become the Elder Wand. Flist, do your work!)

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

OMG, yes! Snape's wand!

Blegh. Tell me again why a couple dozen intelligent adult *fans* are lovingly working through the "author query" list of DH's egregious flaws, gaps, holes, and inconsistencies?

(And that's only the "f, g, h and i" of the ABC's of DH headdesk. And only DH.)

I'm all the more mystified having gone to a good 6 sessions at a recent conference to hear HP papers. All of which were squeeingly adoring of HP in general, JKR in particular. Also, read the abstracts for Accio 2008 (http://www.accio.org.uk/Programme.shtml). Again, they're all like JKR IS TEH SHINY! Everyone seems to be following a sekrit code of unadulterated adoration, as though HP not only has consistent, clear ethics, they're ETHICS FOR OUR TIME! Also, Harry is a MODEL FOR LEADERSHIP! The characters are always BRILLIANTLY IC! Unless JKR didn't develop them, for EVEN BETTER reasons!

I find this OTL perplexing. I asked one senior faculty member at the conference, whose students were presenting their OMG JKR TEH GODDESS!1!! papers: Am I missing something here by not *worshipping* the perfection of these books, especially DH? Where's the critical analysis?

She and two others (note: also over 30) who suddenly apparated in to hear this convo looked over their shoulders (no kidding! for DE's? Or Aurors/Harmonians) and said she's disappointed herself... Not so much in the books, because hey - books! (a) never perfect; (b) all the more to study! But rather, that HP speakers don't seem to be working at quite the level of scholarly critique as others in popular culture, SFF, YA, fan studies, etc. The others agreed. We speculated why.

For me, one speaker's insistence - to many nods of agreement - that Snape is EWWW, no one could ever like him - spells out two parts of the problem: (A) MarySue scholars! Has this been defined? (B) No one was being open, in these sessions (like Accio's bios) as to whether they are speaking as scholars only, or scholar-fanficcers-shippers-whatever. Hidden agendas much?

Ironic that dozens of people with big-ass NAME tags on, F2F in SRO conference rooms, were in fact being completely, coyly, confusingly anonymous! Woah... fandom puts new twist on authorship as meaning academic-colleagues, open-to-criticism, here-to-trade-ideas. Instead, the speakers, audience, and discussants *hide* their real involvements, acting as though they aren't personally in fandom in any way. Yeah right, they just *happened* to see 27 schmoopy H/D artworks. While doing research. Snort.

To me, that one dogmatic anti-Snape comment and its rustlingly odd response - half vehement agreement, half uneasy no-comment - along with the oddly distanced and worshipful tone of the papers, signals either fearfulness on the part of the speakers to come out of the closet as fans, or a rabid shippiness that they're tactfully not letting off leash as they know it will provoke ship-wars right there in the Hilton's swanky conference rooms. (Which they know from online, hmm?)

Anyway: Senior Faculty Woman turns out to be a conference Chair who invites me with alacrity to help organize next year's streams to be engaged with more, er, *real* issues.

Me, I might do that and contribute some meta on why HP scholars are so biased *toward* JKR? B/c even if its a small minority of us who find her "logistical pyrotechnics" (as pir8fancier said) a case of "the emperor has no clothes," the failure of these public meta-writers to engage with the books separately from the author, and the flaws as well as the shiny, is a failure of scholarship. It's simply squee.

Or maybe a sort of MarySueing of the author. Like if they heap on enough praise, it shows they too are a;sldfakdsf sekrit brilliant wealthy golden-tressed beauties whom Harry and Draco both want to date? Or they will meet JKR and be BFF? Or is it overcompensation for losing their shipping war? Or just another venue for it, or another kind? (H/D vs H/Hr vs H/G, JKR vs SS, Ep vs OMGWTF)

So, Snape's wand. Yes. More WTF. No doubt there is some tortuously PERFICK explanation for how not-making-sense is just more JKR *deep* clevar.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

I will say that there is no critic harsher than a disappointed fan. They can reach a level of disgust and/or hate that the people who never liked the shit much in the first place can't even imagine.

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

Hee! But I am still a *major* fan, too! (I hope I don't sound like I'm all one-note wanky.) Really, with all the "texts" I love, it's the same as with my love for Snape - warts and all, in fact, the kinks and flaws and dark shadows are what give the character/series/ book the depth and dimension that inspire my fannish love. Without that yin+yang, bad+good, I wouldn't fan them at all.

What gets to me is fan "fundamentalism," the belief that it's all black OR white, that what you love you must blindly adore and defend to the death, whether it's your ship, author, show-runner, fave character, or most hated character.

Or else I'm just nerdy that way :D

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

No no, you don't sound one-note wanky at all, you sound like a true fan who's not afraid to be critical when they see something they've gotta call bulls**t. ^_^

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

*whew*

Goes back to enjoying treewishes' panel at Escapade. :-)

We are debating the definitions of AR/AU/Crack. Which in itself is quit difficult! And that's apparently just preparatory to the real question: What elements or qualities must be present to make AR/AU work?

Ahhh.... 3 days of total meta, broken by vid sessions, a couple of meals, and far too little sleep. Mostly discussion, with many insights and belly laughs and "OMG, I need that link!" and a willingness to leave many points anything but nailed down.

To me, the beauty of fandom is precisely that tolerance of a million different perspectives. Without shadows, there is no depth. (As your every story shows :-)

JKR yielded to the temptation to eliminate all shadows from Harry's character (and add teh gay one to Dumbledore only safely after the book, just as dd admits his 'flaws' to Harry only after he's dead), and cast nothing but shadows onto Voldemort and the Slytherin students.

As though YA readers -- children, even -- aren't huge consumers of nuance and ambiguity (*cough*Grimm's fairytales*cough).

...A woman just said: "Torchwood *is* crackfic! Hee!

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Oh, I would love to be there! And she's right about Torchwood! I just read an article on it in Entertainment Weekly and squeed muchly. EW has a Torchwood agenda; they mention it at least once every two weeks.

[florahart]

I read through the comments there a little bit ago and ...your interpretation had totally never occurred to me. I mean, Jo said quite some time ago that she had deliberately never identified the wood in Ddore's wand, so I thought it was totally clear that it was literally a wand made of elder, like maple or yew or willow; had it been the transferry thing, she totally would have said years ago that his wand was made of ask or something.

Also, I thought the wand allowed the AK because 1. Harry let it and 2. it was killing something else entirely.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Up until last night, if I'd asked, "What wood was Dumbledore's wand made of?" and you'd said, "Elder," I'd have said, "Elder what?" It never occurred to me that elder was a kind of wood. I assumed "Elder Wand" was a title like "Elder Brother."

[corpus-delecti.livejournal.com]

Your version is definitely more poetic, but I'm not sure that JKR has ever gone in for poetry.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

I have to disagree on that one! I thought The Tale of The Three Brothers was a beautiful bit of poetic storytelling. ^_^ I'd really like to read that Beedle the Bard text in its entirety.

[black-dog.livejournal.com]

I was going to weigh in on the Elder Wand: Object or Attribute? question, and then I saw your earlier thread so I think you have probably heard enough about the textual evidence. :) But it's still interesting to think about why it might make sense JKR's way.

I may be one of the few people who actually liked the idea of the Hallows -- these fixed objects, with their own tricky histories down the years, that represent the pitfalls and adverse temptations of questing and hero-hood. The Wand sort of has to be an independent thing, and not a transferrable trait, because it's a quest object. You've got to go after it, and decide what to do with it. You could sort of do a whole typology of quest patterns based on the hero's possible orientations to the three Hallows -- pro- and con- the quest for power (Elder Wand), the search for immortality (Resurrection Stone), the search for wisdom and quietude (Cloak). And Harry is a better hero than even DD in the end because he opts for door number 3 while DD was tempted to think he could master #1 and strike poses over #2.

Or something. I don't know. I could never muster the energy to write my DH meta thingie. But if your own wand just automatically converts when you beat the previous champion, then the possession of the EW becomes a mindless thing without the element of choice. The point in JKR's version is that you can refuse the temptation of wielding the Elder Wand even if you fulfill the conditions and become its master. And that kind of refusal seems like a key signal of Harry's development in DH, along with passing beyond ownership of the Gryffindor sword, accepting a specific and limited role in the war, being willing to give up his life. His triumph is, maybe, that he's gotten over the temptations and revenge fantasies that you'd naturally associate with being an abused child and a manipulated adolescent. That theme actually works for me, pulls the series together for me, though the exposition itself is a godawful mess.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

I didn't actively dislike the Hallows but I was startled that they were presented as such important objects--they were the book's title, for crying out loud--and they only showed up two-thirds of the way through the seventh book of the series. I don't think it's surprising that at that stage they felt McGuffen-y in execution, especially as Harry (and the reader) only knows of them for a short time and yet Harry's rejection of their power is seen as a key theme. I would have loved to have felt more of their significance to Harry's development, in the way that you describe it, because I agree, that's fascinating stuff!

[woman-ironing.livejournal.com]

I agree with the gist of your comment but I'm not sure I agree the exposition is that much of a mess. It's a spiritual story not a psychological one. It uses a different language and has a different meaning - well, a spiritual meaning not a psychological one, I guess :) The conundrums the reader meets along the way are part of the experience! I think, too, that Harry represents everyman (or everychild, really) not the abused individual.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Heh, I didn't think the exposition was messy at all--until just now, when I discovered I had the wrong interpretation. It's still confounding me that both explanations could almost lie side-by-side, correctly, as possible interpretations.

[persephone-blue.livejournal.com]

Am I the only one who thinks this sounds like the seed of a fanfic idea?

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

I dunno, 'cos I'm thinking it's just weird to me to be discovering that it wasn't this way. It's not the sort of fanfic I want to write--I want romance! Sex! :D

[persephone-blue.livejournal.com]

True, but see, in my world, every fanfic has sex in it. Even if there's only a bit.

Harry: You still have the essence of the Elder Wand in you, don't you?

Draco: I do not. You simply have what is rightfully mine.

Harry: Argh! Stop frustrating me! We must fight!

Draco: Potter, every time we try to fight, we just end up angrily fucking each other in a tube station bathroom stall, somewhere.

Harry: I thought you didn't have a problem with that?

Draco: Of course not. Just making an observation, is all.

Or perhaps there could be a plot about some sort of irresistible desire that forms between those who bear the wand after each other, i.e. Grindelwald and Dumbledore... Hm. *goes off to add another document to the HP FANFIC IDEAS folder on desktop*

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Heh, heh, you said "essence." *is twelve*

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

You know what? Would that she spent as much time actually editing the fucking book as on this utter bullshit. It is nothing more than logistical pyrotechnics. It's not writing. It's saying "Oooohhh, aren't I clever." Sorry, the more I ruminate on these machinations compared to the egregious characterization and pacing issues of the last book, the less I think of her.

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

Hee. I like everything about the way you say that. "Logistical pyrotechnics," FTW. (Or as it happens, for the massive flail.)

I'm suddenly reminded of our in-over-his-head local theater director. Whenever informed of yet another impending on-stage disaster brought about by his overdoing everything -- except planning -- he'd stretch a smile across his handsome face, wave his hands about, and say, "Props! Simple! Okay, then, let's get more props on this stage!"

Somehow he hoped that enough clutter and bling would cover all the seams that were showing, the gaps in characterization, the lack of a coherent vision -- which would, after all, have to have been forged months before.

Somehow I suspect JKR may have hoped the same thing? "When in doubt, rush about! And throw more Magick Stuff in!"

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

Yes, it *is* a rather excellent anaology. Truly one of those, "Ignore the man behind the green curtain" scenarios. You know, at this point I will never reread the other books because I've got this hinky feeling that the emperior has no clothes.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Eh, George Lucas thought the same thing. "Better special effects! That's all we need!"

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

Ha ha, you're right! Jar-Jar Binks, Ewok speeders, and ... well, I quit *that* series. *flails*

Now there's a meta I need to read: How does HP's use of "bling" -- special effects, neato magick, etc. -- reflect the pervasive influence of Star Wars and other mega-FX bestsellers on YA/ media/ SFF? Does the emperor have no clothes? Or is he Gilderoy Lockhart: nothing but the shiny, glittery, 13-colors-of-satin sequinned clothes?

Feel free to note differences between early "pre-world-sensation" HP and late, "must-top-all-sales" books and/or films. Is there a steady increase in the proportion of "shiny" to serious content, character development, careful plotting, narrative fiber, moral consistency?

Did HP jump the shark - if so, why and when? Did it simply become the victim of its own over-promoted, overly producer-controlled success? Was Season 5 the beginning of the end?

What other questions could be asked that would invite thoughtful, text-based, comment and comparison?

(Merlin's scrote, I think I'm writing the conference call for papers that Area Chair asked me to think about!)

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Far be it from me to defuse anyone's vitriol about this last book. (My vitriol was for book 6; for DH I'm just "meh"-ish.)

[lazy-neutrino.livejournal.com]

My interpretation was identical to yours - and I still think it is better than the one that turned out to be true. It makes power a much more abstract concept, rather than tying it to a concrete item, and that would have been a good way to wrongfoot so much of the wizarding world. More subtle and more clever.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

My interpretation was identical to yours

*clings* THANK YOU. God, I'm reeling that I'm just now finding out it wasn't this way. I remember everyone saying how confusing it was and me thinking, "Huh. I didn't find it confusing at all; I thought she revealed that aspect well, at least." Except that I was so confused I didn't even KNOW I was confused!

[lilka.livejournal.com]

I think your version's more interesting, but I don't think it's literal enough for JKR. She has this fascination with totemic items that wouldn't allow her to use a more fluid definition of what the Elder Wand really is.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

I don't mind a literal interpretation--or totemic items, for that matter--but I thought that if there were surprises and revelations to be made then they should be surprising and revelatory, not vaguely interpretive as to what "allegiance" means. If that made any sense.

[gospikey.livejournal.com]

Starting to get it, already? :-P

Voldy could never use AK against the Wand's Master, I think that's the main thing.

Spikey

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Except he did, the first time. In the forest. ^_^

[kieran-aisling.livejournal.com]

The way I saw it, he didn't AK Harry, he AK'd that piece of himself he'd left in Harry :) Harry's walk on the dead-side afterwards is probably more from getting caught in the wash than actually being killed and somehow coming back to life (kinda like getting the spiritual wind knocked out of you).

Of course, I was confused afterwards when Voldie crucio'd Harry and Harry was shaking, but didn't feel pain. It would seem that if Harry were dead, he'd just lay there like a brick. And since he was jerking about, I couldn't tell if it was because the Wand believed him to be its master and therefore wouldn't hurt him, or if it had something to do with Harry trying to sacrifice himself (replicating his mother's sacrifice before) that protected him.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

We don't have all the pieces of the puzzle--at least we don't have them revealed to us by Harry--when Voldemort casts crucio on Harry, so, yeah, the way Harry doesn't feel that spell as pain is a puzzler of a moment.

Of course it all comes down to the trickiness of making "rules" apply to impossible/imaginary physics. Magic isn't real, there is no way to die or "enter the realm of death" and then come back to life...so trying to create rules for them that satisfies all real physics just can't happen, can it.

[slashpine.livejournal.com]

Ooh. This makes sense. And that's another problem, then: if the Elder Wand couldn't kill Harry in the Forest, then Harry didn't really die.

... And that means, Harry wasn't making "the ultimate sacrifice." Ergo, not a christ-like hero. So much for the story's (JKR's) moral.

But if Harry really was killed by the Elder Wand, then he is still The Hero Making The Ultimate Sacrifice, but now the Hallows rules don't work!

Is there any way to have it both ways?

[stanharding.livejournal.com]

"Evidently JKR's interpretation of "The master of the Elder Wand was Draco Malfoy" was that Draco was the wand's master but he never actually took possession of it, and when Harry defeated Draco Harry became the wand's master but he didn't lay hands on it either until that final moment in the duel with Voldemort."

Yep, that's how I took it. But I thought it was poorly presented, especially since it's the hinge of the story. Ah well.

[amanuensis1.livejournal.com]

Well, it left me in the dark for eight months, not even knowing I was in the dark, that's all I've gotta say. (Actually I'm sure I'll say a lot more, but you know what I mean. ^_^ )