Was Dumbledore utterly incompetent?

[Tribble]

The destruction of the wand in the movie-verse does makes sense, given that Voldemort seriously damaged it when he used it to break through the Hogwart's shield. Between the damage and the fact that Harry was the owner I can see it being vulnerable to being broken.

As to why it was damaged in the film, it was never stated but it likely had something to do with Voldemort using a particularly powerful spell while the Elder Wand was not directly under his control... so it wasn't working properly.

[JLTucker]

That said, do we have evidence that anyone ever tried to willingly give up the Elder Wand?

It can be argued that Grindy purposefully lost to Dumby, which could be seen as willingly giving it up.

[Crazedwraith]

I was under the impression that the Elder Wand's powers were concentrated on the allegiance of the wand instead of its physicality. So if you break it, you still have it's allegiance and thus is power.

If you break it (ala Ron's wand in book 2 and Harry's in book 7), it's broken and has no power. Otherwise you could continually gain power by getting loyal wands and breaking them and moving on. (Or just by gaining the loyalty of lots of wands)

That said, do we have evidence that anyone ever tried to willingly give up the Elder Wand?

It can be argued that Grindy purposefully lost to Dumby, which could be seen as willingly giving it up.

On what evidence? There's nothing yet to suggest it wasn't a properly fought duel other than Rita Skeeter's insinuations.

[JLTucker]

I was under the impression that the Elder Wand's powers were concentrated on the allegiance of the wand instead of its physicality. So if you break it, you still have it's allegiance and thus is power.

If you break it (ala Ron's wand in book 2 and Harry's in book 7), it's broken and has no power. Otherwise you could continually gain power by getting loyal wands and breaking them and moving on. (Or just by gaining the loyalty of lots of wands)

But isn't the Elder Wand a weapon fashioned by Death and makes it far superior in every regard from conventional wands? A simple snap can end its allegiance?

[Crazedwraith]

I was under the impression that the Elder Wand's powers were concentrated on the allegiance of the wand instead of its physicality. So if you break it, you still have it's allegiance and thus is power.

If you break it (ala Ron's wand in book 2 and Harry's in book 7), it's broken and has no power. Otherwise you could continually gain power by getting loyal wands and breaking them and moving on. (Or just by gaining the loyalty of lots of wands)

But isn't the Elder Wand a weapon fashioned by Death and makes it far superior in every regard from conventional wands? A simple snap can end its allegiance?

According the movie yes. I see no reason it's construction should make it's power last substantially beyond it's being broken.

ETA: If Captain Seafort's theory about the wand is correct. I'd expect it to be impossible to snap. It would have to have a one ring like ability to influence it's owner not to kill it, or elsewise be preternaturally durable or perhaps able to reform itself, but it's power can't just last separate from the wand itself. At least to me, given the example of the other wands.

[JLTucker]

But isn't the Elder Wand a weapon fashioned by Death and makes it far superior in every regard from conventional wands? A simple snap can end its allegiance?

According the movie yes. I see no reason it's construction should make it's power last substantially beyond it's being broken.

Well, the movies aren't canon, so I disregard what's there. In the final book, Harry simply puts the Elder Wand back in Dumby's tomb and hopes that the allegiance would die after he himself died. If its power can be broken by a snap, why do that? It increases the odds that Harry, a wholly mediocre wizard, would be bested in the future and lose its allegiance.

[Crazedwraith]

But isn't the Elder Wand a weapon fashioned by Death and makes it far superior in every regard from conventional wands? A simple snap can end its allegiance?

According the movie yes. I see no reason it's construction should make it's power last substantially beyond it's being broken.

Well, the movies aren't canon, so I disregard what's there. In the final book, Harry simply puts the Elder Wand back in Dumby's tomb and hopes that the allegiance would die after he himself died. If its power can be broken by a snap, why do that? It increases the odds that Harry, a wholly mediocre wizard, would be bested in the future and lose its allegiance.

That's exactly why I said I preferred the movie version! Harry's an idiot who someone's going to shank and take the Elder wand again.

However, saying it can't be easily destroyed for some reason is different from saying 'it's power will somehow live on after you break it.' I agree it'd logical for the former to be true and not the later.

(Eta: I added an edit to my last post to explain this a bit more, you may not have seen as you didn't quote it. My bad, my bad that I'm repeating that here with this edit)

[Tribble]

But isn't the Elder Wand a weapon fashioned by Death and makes it far superior in every regard from conventional wands? A simple snap can end its allegiance?

According the movie yes. I see no reason it's construction should make it's power last substantially beyond it's being broken.

Well, the movies aren't canon, so I disregard what's there. In the final book, Harry simply puts the Elder Wand back in Dumby's tomb and hopes that the allegiance would die after he himself died. If its power can be broken by a snap, why do that? It increases the odds that Harry, a wholly mediocre wizard, would be bested in the future and lose its allegiance.

I wasn't aware of there being any official canon policy, though I may be mistaken.

[Crazedwraith]

I think that's probably code for 'I don't like the movies' Not that I blame him. If there was a canon policy he wouldn't have asked about the interviews.

[JLTucker]

That's exactly why I said I preferred the movie version! Harry's an idiot who someone's going to shank and take the Elder wand again.

However, saying it can't be easily destroyed for some reason is different from saying 'it's power will somehow live on after you break it.' I agree it'd logical for the former to be true and not the later.

(Eta: I added an edit to my last post to explain this a bit more, you may not have seen as you didn't quote it. My bad, my bad that I'm repeating that here with this edit)

Gotcha. That makes sense. Thanks for the clarification. No need to apologize, my friend.

I think that's probably code for 'I don't like the movies' Not that I blame him. If there was a canon policy he wouldn't have asked about the interviews.

I actually love the movies, sometimes more than the books. I just consider canon to be something Rowling has put on page. That would disqualify the dreadful Cursed Child as well because it's "based on" a story by Rowling but not published using her words.

[Tribble]

I think that's probably code for 'I don't like the movies' Not that I blame him. If there was a canon policy he wouldn't have asked about the interviews.

Well, in my "head-canon" I follow along the usual lines - original material is highest level canon, other material is valid except where it directly contradicts the main canon"

Harry breaking the Elder Wand was one of the things I did like about the movies more than the books, though again it begged the question of why Dumbledore didn't think of it. To be fair, he is susceptible to desiring the Hallows though - remember that he immediately put on the ring to use the Resurrection Stone despite knowing full well that it was also a Horcrux and would have a terrible spell on it, which is what directly lead to his death. I can buy that for all his speeches, part of Dumbledore was pleased at having the Elder Wand in his possession, which is why he didn't destroy it.

[JLTucker]

My biggest issue with Dumbledore is that he had ample opportunity to help Harry and Company beat Voldemort but decided to give them hints. It's like he wanted Harry to figure it out all by himself. To be honest, this is why I consider him partly responsible for every death at the Battle of Hogwarts.

[Tribble]

My biggest issue with Dumbledore is that he had ample opportunity to help Harry and Company beat Voldemort but decided to give them hints. It's like he wanted Harry to figure it out all by himself. To be honest, this is why I consider him partly responsible for every death at the Battle of Hogwarts.

Hmmmm, well Dumbeldore didn't know about the Horcruxes until the end of book 2, by the end of book 5 he had figured out the ring's location and the locker by book 6, as well as the other objects that were likely to be Horcruxes. Not much he could have added to that really, apart from telling Harry and Co. all the ways to destroy them, which would have been very useful (though Hermione figured it out anyways).

And in Harry's case there wasn't much of a choice - the more Harry knew, the more likely he'd be in the right mindset for the final confrontation and would have been killed.

[Crazedwraith]

I think that's probably code for 'I don't like the movies' Not that I blame him. If there was a canon policy he wouldn't have asked about the interviews.

I actually love the movies, sometimes more than the books. I just consider canon to be something Rowling has put on page. That would disqualify the dreadful Cursed Child as well because it's "based on" a story by Rowling but not published using her words.

Heh. Everything I hear about that indicates it sounds awful on paper but works on stage. Not that I'm likely to see it.

I think that's probably code for 'I don't like the movies' Not that I blame him. If there was a canon policy he wouldn't have asked about the interviews.

Well, in my "head-canon" I follow along the usual lines - original material is highest level canon, other material is valid except where it directly contradicts the main canon"

Harry breaking the Elder Wand was one of the things I did like about the movies more than the books, though again it begged the question of why Dumbledore didn't think of it. To be fair, he is susceptible to desiring the Hallows though - remember that he immediately put on the ring to use the Resurrection Stone despite knowing full well that it was also a Horcrux and would have a terrible spell on it, which is what directly lead to his death. I can buy that for all his speeches, part of Dumbledore was pleased at having the Elder Wand in his possession, which is why he didn't destroy it.

Pretty much my views in a nutshell. Though you do have to sort of handwave that the wand never fell into the hands of someone like Harry before.

My biggest issue with Dumbledore is that he had ample opportunity to help Harry and Company beat Voldemort but decided to give them hints. It's like he wanted Harry to figure it out all by himself. To be honest, this is why I consider him partly responsible for every death at the Battle of Hogwarts.

The final book does an okayish job of explaining this.Dumbledore does his utmost to rally the wizarding world when Voldemort returns, spends the sixth book searching and destroying as many Horcruxes as he can, to destroy the root of Voldemort's power. TBH the only thing he could have done differently asides directly duelling and killing as many DEs as possible, is be more honest with Harry. And he didn't think telling Harry 'you're a horcrux who has to die too' was going to be productive.

Dumbledore's far from perfect (and we're supposed to think as he says Harry is better than him) but his flaws are sort of explained. He swears off direct use of power and instead is over reliant on it's soft forms and manipulation.

[JLTucker]

I actually love the movies, sometimes more than the books. I just consider canon to be something Rowling has put on page. That would disqualify the dreadful Cursed Child as well because it's "based on" a story by Rowling but not published using her words.

Heh. Everything I hear about that indicates it sounds awful on paper but works on stage. Not that I'm likely to see it.

It's pretty bad and the stage production can't make up for it being a lazy fanfic.

[The Romulan Republic]

It has some good moments but some stuff that very much reads like bad fan fic cliches, and the author editorializing. Not too happy with the time travel plot either- those are hard to do well.

But it is also a fair point that plays are meant to be performed, and something can suck on paper and work on stage.

Anyway, back to the question of Dumbledore's biggest mistake, since I forgot it before and someone else brought it up- picking up and trying to use the Resurrection Stone when he knew it was a horcrux. This lead to his death, and to the fall of the Ministry, and a year of terror and ethnic cleansing for Wizarding Britain.

[JLTucker]

I actually like that he did that because it humanized his character even more after you read about his complicity in his sister's death. He desperately wanted to see her again. I can forgive that, but not leaving Harry out to dry when he could have easily mentioned the Basilisk venom's effects on the horcruxes.

[Zixinus]

So don't even bother trying to come up with a solution other than "feed people to them to be tortured into madness and death, until the next Dark Lord comes along and they go turncoat again"? Because that worked so well the last two times.

I didn't say that was a good solution (using them at all is such a typically stupid bureaucrat/politician decision), just that yours wasn't that good either.

Edits: For that matter, if they don't have a way of killing them (and let's be honest, the old Ministry didn't seem like they'd be terribly eager to try to find one), then they should have the Department of Mysteries researching that. A species of malevolent creature that feeds on humans, reproduces, and cannot die is an apocalypse in the making. Their numbers will never get less. Only more.

And one of the main rules of Potterverse magic seems to be that death can't truly be defeated. Why should Dementors be the one thing immune to that?

I am in full agreement with you here. Dementors are the kind of thing that need to go away permanently. If they really can't be destroyed, they need to be put to sleep and put away until they find a way to destroy them. Or put in a place where they can't do anyone harm.

[The Romulan Republic]

Hence my "shoot them into space" hypothesis.

Hell, if Portkeys are too limited in range... cooperate with a Muggle government and get your Dementor box (remember, wizards have bigger on the inside capability) installed on the next interstellar probe.

[Solauren]

Hence my "shoot them into space" hypothesis.

Hell, if Portkeys are too limited in range... cooperate with a Muggle government and get your Dementor box (remember, wizards have bigger on the inside capability) installed on the next interstellar probe.

We don't know enough about Dementors to know if that will work (or even if that's a good idea).

[The Romulan Republic]

If their's lack of information, then they should be kept penned up somewhere where the Department of Mysteries can study them (with close supervision from the Auror Office).

[The Romulan Republic]

Or, here's an idea- Dementors can't be killed, you say?

I rather doubt any wizard has ever tried giving them an all expenses paid visit to a nuclear testing ground.

[Solauren]

Now, run with that when it comes to killing Dementers.

They probably got lose in WW2. Lots of death and suffering, and lots of bombing.
Do we know if the bombing efforts hurt them at all?

[The Romulan Republic]

It would presumably have to be a bomb with effects more powerful than what can be matched by magic- more even than Fiendfyre, in other words.

[Tribble]

Well, IMO "cannot be destroyed" doesn't equal "cannot die." If that were the case and they can multiply, wouldn't they have overwhelmed the planet by now? To me it just means that there are no known ways for a wizard to kill one. Perhaps starvation might work (otherwise what is the purpose of them having evolved to eat?). Or maybe they evenutally die of old age?

Also, seeing as the Dementors were prevented from returning to Azkaben at the end of the war, doesn't that mean they'd just continue to go about the world preying on people?