Plot holes in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows
I finished reading Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows a couple of days back. In my view, the book is much more tightly written than the last two books. And that itself is a relief. Harry Potter, Hermione Granger and Ron Weasley are much better etched out in Deathly Hallows, and there are quite a bit of surprises, disappointments, revelations.
But when someone asked me today what I thought about it, I replied, “Decent.”
Why just decent?
Several reasons.
Update: The Elder Wand Concentrate. Click to read Elder Wand matters only.
The book is fantasy, and just like in the case of science fiction books, fantasy books attempt to create a separate universe – which is very similar to ours, but with certain critical elements that operate differently. And these worlds have their their own logic, which should be consistent. The fantasy, or sci-fi, itself is an exception – and their cannot be exceptions within exceptions. Rowling sometimes fails in creating a consistent fantasy universe and the rules by which the universe works are often ad-hoc.
For example, there is the spell Accio - it brings the object you demand to you. Accio broom brings you your broom. But this spell has been such a problem – if it works as advertised, you should be able to grab anything from anywhere. So Rowling had to introduce counter-spells, which would negate the effect of this one. So there are things that cannot be accio-ed.
Expelliarmus – One of the first spells taught to the novice wizard and witch. Almost everyone in the Harry Potter series makes liberal use of this. Unlike Accio, this always works. So even a Draco Malfoy can disarm Dumbledore – the only wizard who even Lord Voldemort fears. Is this really likely? It is a spell a kid can do – any serious wizard worth his spells should be automatically protected against this even in his sleep. With such a handy spell around, and in the middle of a massive fight like in the Central Hall of Hogwarts, there would be wizards expelliarmusing left, right and center – and no one manages to get strip Lord Voldemort of his wand! Why? In the book, there is no mention of a counter-spell against Expelliarmus. A man can operate only in 360 degrees where he is standing, and someone is bound to hit you with an Expelliarmus or an Avada Kedavra. However, no one manages to do this, even in the heat of the battle. Not even when their lives are in danger of Voldemort Avada-ing you. Why? Don’t tell me everyone wants to be a saint even when fighting Voldemort for their lives.
And then the curious direction-specificity of the spells. Often, people jump out of the way of a spell. Come on, we have read magical books before – and we have read Mandrake the magician too. There was never any mention, anywhere, that when a curse comes towards you in its red-or-green coloured glory (why are curses / spells coloured?) you just had to dance your way out of its way. Spells were never like that! But Mandrake andhis enemies used to hit people in the face with a mental punch – and that was direction-specific. Point your hand at the enemy, and Pow! And sometimes the enemy would save himself by jumping out of the way. So Rowling’s spells are like Mandrake’s powers.
Then, there are the idiocies of the You Know Who. Arrogance or not, no evil man worth his dark soul would confirm, doubly, that the enemy you have been tracking is indeed dead. You know, really, really check. Send a couple more spells for good measure. Yea, sure, James Bond villains used to be quite careless about leaving Bond to his death. Voldemort seems to be in the same class.
And then in jubilation, when Harry is pretending to be dead, Voldemort uses the Cruciatus curse on him and Harry rises in the air like a rag doll. Then Voldemort drops him on the ground. Curiously, the evil wizard drops him on the ground gently – he doesn’t make Harry fall on his head and break his neck for good measure, break an arm or a leg – nothing! Have you ever fallen on your back from a height of 6 feet? Harry manages to keep his dead-body act so easily – it happens only in Bollywood movies.
And there is the whole monologue by Harry about how he is the true master of the Elder Wand and all that. True, Harry has a point. Because he disarmed Draco, the Elder Wand, which Voldemort now possesses actually considers harry its master. Assume that this is true. How can Harry be so sure? Dumbledore did not tell him that. Olliwander did not tell him that. Harry is no expert in wandlore. How did he figure it out? How did this clueless nitwit suddenly work it all out by himself?
Okay, say he worked it out. How can he be so sure? He can’t be. It is a theory. It may be wrong. Harry’s confidence may be bravado, but nothing indicates that. It is just another theory – and Rowling wants it to be true to she can make Voldemort lose. Sorry, not convincing enough!
There is more. The Elder Wand belongs to whoever defeats its current master. So, it was Draco who is the real owner of the Elder wand the moment he disarms Dumbledore. Fine. But when Harry takes Draco’s wand, that is Draco’s normal wand which he takes. He has just taken a regular wand. So if a wizard takes any wand that belongs to the owner of the Elder wand, the wizard is considered defeated, and Elder Wand switches loyalties? Sorry, Rowling has not thought this through well enough.
And then there is the curious case of Grendelwald. Seems he did not defeat or disarm Gregorovich. He stole it first, waited at the window, and then hit Gregorovich with a stunning spell. That will do? Steal and attack, not attack and own?
And the Deathly Hallows themselves. Rowling has, again and again, established that Voldemort’s knowledge of the history of wizardry is astounding. His skill is super-super, and so is his knowledge. But he has never heard about the Deathly Hallows. Seems it is a story which every boy knows, but not poor Tom Riddle! Okay, poor unfortunate orphan that he was, no one may have taught him that. But it is still quite an unlikely chance.
So you have spells that hit you only if you are in their way, you have Accio that doesn’t work sometimes, you have Expelliarmus that works every time, you have dumbo Harry suddenly turning into Harry Potter Poirot and Harry Potter 007, you have Voldemort who does not even now how to confirm if his enemy is truly dead and crucios him nice and gentle…
Sure we can all come up with ways in which it all might make sense. But a book SHOULD make sense by itself. The world should work. The world created by Rowling is ad-hoc.
But yea, suspend your disbelief and enjoy reading it. It is definitely an entertaining read. Just don’t go around saying “Rowling is King” and all that.
Hi
I whole-heartedly agree with you about the plot being loose in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. In fact the elder wand stuff confused me so much that I had to refer to web pundits to make sense. Rowling has gone a bit haywire on the parallel universe thing no doubt.
But I will continue considering Rowling a genius because of the Harry Potter series displaying all the characters of a true classic. Consider this for Eg. Snape , Harry and Voldemort are three sides of some magical coin, they were all unwanted abandoned boys who found a home at Hogwarts. They shaped up so differently. Neville is again that shadow of Harry that never emerged in sunlight, his parents too were tortured and killed by Voldemort when he was a baby. Harry’s friendship with Ron and Hermione symbolises loyalty, love and faith. The most admired qualities of an epic hero. Lord Voldemort is like the fallen angel Lucifer who wanted to break loose from the shackles of goodness and be the immortal king of this world. These are just some things I can remember offhand, there is plenty more and added to the sheer brilliance of Rowling’s writing, Harry Potter series is nothing less than classic to me and Rowling a contemporary epic writer.
1. How did Neville Longbottom find the sword of Gryffindor at the end, when Griphook the Goblin took it away when Gringotts was robbed?
2. Harry was a Horcrux? But surely Voldemort should have known that? At least when he split his soul and found only six pieces, he must have wondered what happened to the seventh piece?
Plus,
I HP2 (Chamber of Secrets), Harry asks Dobby to promise him that he’ll never say his (Harry’s) life again.
Yet, Dobby does that in HP7.
Thanks, Aditi and Nitin. Important points all.
After I wrote this post, I had a discussion with a friend. She pretty well easily shut me up by saying, “but it’s a children’s book, which adults happened to adopt. Do you expect such detailed logical stuff in a children’s book?”
I think there is a point there. Unlike the Bartimaeus trilogy, or LOTR, Rowling is clearly targeting the tweens and teens. The interactions are all that snogging makes us think it is an adult book, but it is not. And teens seem not to question such stuff. We people approach it like an adult book, and feel disappointed that it doesn’t create a consistent world.
I think this explains the Potter plot holes somewhat.
I agree with most of the things, but the biggest cock up for me was when Neville killed the snake. Where did he get that sword from for heavens sake?? yeah of course he pulled it out of the sorting hat like it was a rabbit…. I can see Rowling was thinking hard on this one, the book was already at 600 pages and she needed a quick solution. so Voldemort takes protection of the snake, gets a sorting hat, puts it on Neville and sets it on fire, great! it’s even sillier than the idea of Harry (just a mediocre student) defeating the Dark Lord in a duel. It was obvious from the start that he will need some sort of a dirty trick but his death in due course would be way more convincing…
I guess it was a mistake not to write all the books in one go. She was just not able to correct the mistakes made in the first ones as they were already printed…
and one question why couldn’t they disapparate of the back of the blind dragon?
Ah Robinho, I found some explanations on the Net for that. The thing is, the Gryffindor’s sword always goes to the ones in need of it! Which meant that somehow the sorting hat gave it to Neville when he needed it!
Yea I know, very convenient, right?
Because without the sword at that moment, Neville would be dead and nagini would be alive, and Harry would not be able to take on Voldemort with a horcrux still existing. And the entire thing would collapse!
Disapparating from on top of the dragon. I think everyone missed this. Very good point.
There is an explanation I can come up with, but its quite nonsensical. You know, you disapparate from on top of a flying dragon, and when you apparate at your destination, maybe the inertia of the flight would stay with you and you would fly and crash very, very hard into stuff nearby!
Didn’t anyone read the Chamber of Secrets?????
Come on guys when Harry goes down into the Chamber he needs a miricle to defeat the Basilisk and Falks brings him the sorting hat from which he is able to get Griffyndor’s sword, and Dumbledore explains later that only a true Griffyndore could pull it out of there hat. Neville was being truely brave and selfless when he confronted Voldemort and so proved himself as a true Griffyndore. It was not just a conviniet plot tool created for the Deathly Hallows!
A plot hole that occured to me, is that the elf in Sirius old place isnt set free when given the old locket. Or is he?
I am not sure i understood it correctly, but if he was free it seems odd to me, that he stayed with them?
Lots of plot holes or at least inconsistencies in Deathly Hallows and the entire series. There is no order to the magic. They can have a tent that has a kitchen in it and a sitting room and there are constant examples of tents, rooms, etc. that are much larger than they look on the outside. Yet, Harry has to sleep on an old cot in Ron’s room because the Weasley’s have no room in their house. Yet, they create a gigantic chair for Hagrid to sit on at the wedding and have a tent that holds hundreds of people. Huh? They can’t create a bed or a little more room in the house? Harry is forced to sleep on a dirty old cot in a crammed-packed room? He would have been better off setting up the tent. Near the end of Deathly Hallows they can’t Disapparate out of Hogsmeade because of spells there that trap them. Yet, later on he tells Aberforth that the kids from Hogwarts will be Disapparating from his pub. Aberforth also tells him there are patrols of Death Eaters in Hogwarts, yet there are only the two teachers, the Carrows, in there. The invisibility cloak supposedly gives constant and impenetrable concealment, so why doesn’t Harry just use it and kill all the Death Eaters and then sneak up and kill Voldemort? According to legend no spells can even get through it. Yet, Dumbledore could see through it (I guess he was above Death itself). As mentioned, Dumbledore also defeated the guy with the Elder Wand in a duel. What’s up with that? Did he get Death’s backup Wand to make it equal? There is also no cost of doing magic. Why even cast anything but the killing curse if you’re a Death Eater? They shoot to kill anyway, so what’s with all the dueling? They might as well just shoot Avada Kedavra constantly. Why do they even cast any other type of spell? It seems like the killing spell should at least weaken you or something so you can’t just keep using it. It’s like having an unlimited supply of bullets. When they are in Gringotts Herminone uses a “cushioning” spell to break their fall. Why didn’t she do that so they could jump off the stupid Dragon? Why didn’t they use that spell when hundreds of people watched Harry fall to the ground during the Quidditch match when he fell and broke his arm? It is too numerous to list them all, but it is a big part of the frustration of the books. Plus, the copout that they are children’s books doesn’t work. Just as many fans will argue that they AREN’t children’s books if you question them about the language or the violence.
The comment of Harry being a mediocre student isn’t 100% correct, he has always been excellent at Defense against the Dark Arts, getting an OWL in it and everything. Besides that, he is mediocre compared to Hermione who is top of her year.
Martin, the setting-house-elves free thing only works with clothes. Remember the old sock that set Dobby free.
I’ve never thought the ducking spell things is weird. From the very first book it has been stated that most of the time spells have to be directed. I think it’s a non argument to say that it doesn’t work that way in other stories!
I have to agree on the problem with the expelliarmus spell, although it has been said that it was a difficult spell to master. I don’t remember Ron ever using it for example. It’s a bit of a stretch but I’ve always thought that using “protego” would block it if used fast enough (just as protego worked for harry against accio spells)
Last week I posted a comment to Mugglenet (no response from them yet) regarding the question of how Dumbledore could have defeated Grindelwald in their historic duel (specifically mentioned at least three times in “Deathly Hallows”), given that Grindelwald possessed and was master of the Elder Wand. It is a key point that the remaining plot relies on, and TR did well to spot what many readers have not. Matt and TR’s comments reveal what happens when the author, facing deadlines while keeping seven books consistent, resorts to the easy ways versus the right ways of maintaining the integrity of the plot structure, as well as character development and theme. Even within the structure of the make-believe world of the Harry Potter series, the author owes it to her readers to either explain or correct inconsistencies. My 3 kids love Harry Potter and my wife and I are avid Harry Potter readers. We admire how JK Rowling’s protagonists have grown while learning life’s lessons, for the courage, perseverance, tolerance and hope that her characters learn to value in the face of seemingly insurmountable odds. What great role models for her millions of readers, both young and adult. Those careful readers among them will eventually discover or hear about the several plot holes and continuity problems within these books, especially the last. I hope that JK Rowling takes the opportunity to choose, as she had Dumbledore explain to Harry, to pursue the right path instead of the easy path when facing challenges. To correct or reasonably explain away these inconsistencies and so help keep her readers from being eventually disappointed should now be one of the author’s highest priorities. Perhaps JK Rowling could incorporate explanations in the encyclopedia she has mentioned – going back and doing what is right may well ensure a continuing win, win, win situation for readers, publishers and author.
Oh dear, I can see why half of you aren’t writing multi-million pound books.
This is, yes, a childrens book. Call that a cop-out or whatever, it’s true.
Some of your ‘plot holes’ explained:
The story of how the Elder wand was undefeatable was only legend/myth/story – not meant to be taken literally. Its a very powerful wand but the fact that Dumbledore beat Grindelwald and the wand – is merely an implication of Dumbledore’s amazing skill. The Elder wand can be beaten – its just very difficult.
—same applies to the invisibility cloak – you’re referring to how it is described in legend and stories passed down by generations – the truth may be different.
If you defeat the owner of the Elder wand, you become the righful owner of the Elder wand. It doesn’t matter if he’s using the deathstick, his old wand or a stick of wood he just found on the floor, if you defeat him, you become the rightful owner of the Elder wand – its magic!
Harry did say to Dobby ‘promise you’ll never save my life again’ but as a free house elf, not under Harry’s control – he was not bound to the laws of his kind, and therefore free to save Harry’s life in book seven.
Neville and the sword of Gryffindor ? i think sash explained that one – read all the books before you criticize please.
Voldemort did not split his soul into seven pretty pieces and then think ‘hmm what shall i do with them’. Each one he created individually through an act of great evil. However, he unknowingly created 8 horcruxes – as when he tried to kill baby Harry he didnt realise he had created one. As he nearly died and lost all his power – i think we can forgive him for not noticing.
To perform the Avada-Kedavra curse it takes a lot of concentration and genuine hatred from the wizard/witch. Therefore sometimes the Death Eaters during lengthy and intense duels, may have decided to use other means to hurt or weaken there opponents – perhaps to perform the killing curse when they were not receiving such heavy fire back.
For those wondering the 8 horcruxes were:
1. Tom Riddle’s diary
2. Slytherin’s Locket
3. Hufflepuff’s cup
4. Ravenclaw’s diadem
5. The snake Nagini
6. Gaunt’s ring
7. Harry Potter
8. The part that resided in Voldemort’s own body
Just because you don’t quite have the mental capacity to understand what’s actually happening in the book, does not mean that the book doesn’t make sense.
and last of all
ROWLING IS KING
The question with the Griffyndor’s sword is why on Earth did Voldemort summon that hat?!? I mean you would probably be a bit unpredictable if you were a Chief Death Eater but thinking of burning an old hat in such a moment is just plain silly.
On the other hand Voldemort must have had a really bad day, because when it comes to duelling business, Potter actually !explains! how he intends to kill him!!! and even though Voldy just fires another Adava – what was he thinking?!? third time lucky?!? Tie him up Voldy, starve him to death, put hat on him, if he really is the master of that wand then accio a different wand from the floor – surely with that many dead there’s got to be lots, just don’t use Adava! It doesn’t #!@$ing work!
Which brings me to a different questions, why did he survive using a killing curse on Potter in the forest – it was the same wand wasn’t it? and what about crucios? Weren’t they supposed to be very painful and even make you loose your mind? and Potter pretends to be dead while crucioed just like that… and shouldn’t crucio backfire at least slightly when used against wand owner?
One thing that I can’t understand… The cloack is supposed to protect from spells. Still, in book 6, Dumbledore stupyfies Harry while he’s under the cloack, just before Draco disarms Dumbledore that is….
Voldemort survived using a killing curse on Harry in the forest, as Harry did not perform ‘Expelliarmus’. He allowed himself to be struck by the curse. However there was some damage – the horcrux inside Harry was killed by the curse.
Voldemort was so arrogant about his own skill he believed that he could kill Harry using Avada-Kedavra even after Harry’s explanation.
Crucio did not work on Harry for two reasons
1. Harry was the rightful owner of the Elder wand
2. In sacrificing himself , Harry put the same protection on himself and the others, as Lily gave to him – therefore Voldemorts curses were not binding.
The combination of these two things meant that Harry was not effected by the Cruciatus curse. The curse did not backfire on Voldemort, as Harry did not perform any spell on which it could have rebounded ie – Expelliarmus.
Ignor all the other posts, this guy doesn’t seem to be well read in potter-vers. I havn’t read one decent argument in this, It’s you see someof the problems but point out everthing surronding it rather then it right there. Expelliarmus is countered by the sheild jynx. harry didn’t know when he walked upto voldemort that he would live, it wasn’t untill after that it occured to him. The most important that should be pointed out is Harry getting damaged at all, it says in the book only an object purely designed for destroying could damage a Hor- thing, and apparently harry is one so how, how does he lose all the bones from his right arm how does he get his head cracked open in quidditch. how is he ever hurt at all? truth is when Voldemort kills him in DH it doesn’t work because the wand is harry’s even if he doesn’t know it, only voldemorts soul fragment dies so harry gets a glimps of his limbo and anything voldemort did after that would have no effect, couldn’t hurt again. Theres a dosen other flaws throught out the series that could be called to attention, but I’m a potter fan so all I can say is wow, the planning she went thought to get everything in before this came out, She did wonderfully. And now its done, people can complain all they like, she wrote a book she loved and she did a pretty damn good job and now she doesn’t have to worry about fixing those eirksome flaws.
Will – You just jump to lots of conclusions to try and “justify” everything. If the Elder Wand is not undefeatable, what’s so powerful about it? Catch someone off guard and simply disarm them like Draco did and guess what, you’ve got the most powerful wand in the world! Ridiculous. The cloak is supposed to be invincible. Dumbledore even said so near the end of the book. What’s the use of having the Deathly Hallows if they are just so-so, pretty good stuff. I’ll even jump to a conclusion here. They had to be created by death or The Resurrection Stone wouldn’t work. One of Rowling’s laws is that plain Wizards can resurrect the dead. So the wand must be undefeatable (even though it isn’t), the stone must resurrect the dead and the cloak must be totally invisible and inpenetrable. If its not, she should have said so. You just are a sheep and will jump through hoops to find a way for it to work even if you just force a square peg in a round hole. The books are rife with it. Why didn’t Dumbledore use the Time Turner after he put the ring on? It’s right there in his study. There are whole chapters about how people go on after death and you can’t communicate with them (Sirrius Black) and yet Harry has a pleasant conversation with Dumbledore’s portrait at the end of the book. Be careful of those that offer you cool-aid. It might have come from Snape!
typo – plain Wizards CAN’T ressurect the dead.
Also, Harry said Dumbledore planned to to to his grave undefeated and yet Draco defeated him (even though he had an undefeatable wand). What’s the purpose of the Elder Wand being such a powerful and “Hallowed” thing if a sixth-year student can knock it out of your hands simple as pie? And you slipped up saying if you beat the Elder Wand you become the master of it. See, just like Rowling that put you in a corner. Grindelwald didn’t defeat anyone to get it, so he was never the rightful owner. The old wand maker is. Pitiful sheep is why Rowling has made so much money. And I didn’t hate the books by any means. I just think she got lazy and could’nt keep it straight so wrote herself into a lot of corners.
Last thing. The whole thing where Harry and his friends are “protected” just like Harry was by Lily is yet another plot hole (do you know the definition of the term). Harry wasn’t totally immune to Voldemort because of the protection from Lily even if you want to stretch it that far. If he was, what was the point of all the books? In fact, Voldemort used the Cruciatus curse on Harry in an earlier book (I don’t read them every day so I’m not sure which one) and it worked pretty well, even with Lily’s protection. You need to take a writing course and learn exactly what plot holes are. It doesn’t mean that JK wasn’t a good writer at times. I read all the books. They were entertaining. But not great works of literature, or worthy of unabashed praise.
What is said about the cloak is that is doesn’t wear out, and no spell can stop it from working. That’s why “accio cloak” does not work in the village when the death eaters suspect potter is there. I don’t recall that it is stated somewhere that the cloak protects the one under it from spells targeted at that person.
Draco beating Dumbledore was a set-up, haven’t you read book 7?
By the way I agree with TR, no literature and no unabashed praise. However still a very good debute!
There are a lot of good posts here but quite a lot of the ‘flaws’ can be explained. Sure there are still quite a few but mostly very minor flaws.
First the hallows. You have to remember that the tale is a distorted truth something that Rowling wanted to include. Like Dumbledore said the hallows weren’t given to them by death they probably made them themselves. So the cloak is not going to hide you from death or protect you from spells or even hide you from other methods (eg the marauders map) it’s just supposed to hide you from sight and remain completely unaffected by anything (ie it cannot be torn or affected by spells such as accio). I don’t think Dumbledore ever saw through the cloak, there are plenty of ways of detecting someone’s presence however I think that he didn’t have to detect Harry as he most likely planned for him to find it. The stone doesn’t really bring back the dead, nor even bring back their mind it just performs similar thing to what happened with prior incantem. I assume also that the wand doesn’t duel for you it is just a very powerful wand and when two spells collide or interact it always overrides the other spell. So Dumbledore could have won it from Gregorovich.
As for direction specific spells you cannot compare this magic with magic from another book. Anyway the spell is supposed to come from the wand to where you direct it so that’s where the directionality comes from.
When Voldemort kills harry it’s not that he doesn’t check. He performs the Cruciatus curse which he would never have thought would not affect him, this is also after asking a death eater to confirm he is dead. Why would the death eater lie to him after faithful service for many years, knowing that if they betrayed him he would kill them to spare their enemy? As for Cruciatus curse affecting him before not now, that’s could be due to the wand belonging to Harry but I think it more likely that it won’t affect him due to his sacrifice protecting him. The reason it worked before was because Voldemort had Harry’s blood in him so bypassing the protection his mother gave to him.
“So if a wizard takes any wand that belongs to the owner of the Elder wand, the wizard is considered defeated, and Elder Wand switches loyalties? Sorry, Rowling has not thought this through well enough.” – I’m sorry but that’s your opinion, there is no flaw in this.
“But he has never heard about the Deathly Hallows. Seems it is a story which every boy knows, but not poor Tom Riddle!” – Well as he never spent his childhood around wizards, secondly being arrogant he would not have though a children’s story was worthy of his attention. Finally even if he had heard it was he immediately supposed to recognise that it is based on truth?
“Sure we can all come up with ways in which it all might make sense.” It sounds more like you’re trying to find ways in which it doesn’t make sense. Of course a universe with magic is not going to obey our laws of science and logic (the time turner being an excellent example because it allows you to act on the future which is a paradox in itself) but Rowling is the only author I’ve ever read to make it so plausible and with so few loop holes and I think it is very unfair to say she just hasn’t tried or taken the easy way out.
The flaws however that I cannot make sense of are:
-In the forth book Barty Crouch goes to all the trouble of getting Harry through the tournament only to touch a portkey. Sure there are easier things to make portkeys like maybe his bed?
-Shouldn’t one of the horcruxes have been used when Voldemort died the first time. I mean surely the part of his soul in his body when he tried to killed Harry would have been destroyed and so he would have had to use another part of his soul from a horcrux?
TR – remember when dumbledore was knocked off guard? he’d just drank the potion and was incredibly weakened – not to mention close to death anyway due to his cursed arm that he contracted from putting on gaunt’s ring. And he was also expecting an attack from Snape so he may have been willing to let himself be expelliarmus-ed.
The stone was not made by death! none of the hallows were! It cannot resurrect the dead! It brings them back to a semi human state – much like priori-incantatem. The stone drove Cadmus Peverell to suicide – as it allowed his wife to be back but not allow him to be truly with her. NONE OF THE HALLOWS WERE MADE BY DEATH! DONT CONFUSE THEIR LEGENDS/STORIES WITH THERE ACTUAL CAPABILITIES! ok?
Dumbledore hints that perhaps the Hallows were created by the Peverell brothers and he stresses that it is legend that they were made by death – and almost laugh at this idea. A part of the book that you seem to have missed.
Voldemort’s cruciatus curse did not work on Harry because Voldemort was using the Elder want ,which as I said, was owned rightfully by Harry. I’ll admit i made a mistake before – the protection did not contribute to why cruciatus didnt work on Harry, the fact that he was the rightful owner of the Elder wand was enough.
Neville was not bound by Voldemort’s petrificus totalus as Harry had protected Neville and the others by sacrificing himself. The book does not say that Harry’s protection of the others, protects them from absolutely everything – and neither did I. Voldemort’s spells just stop from being totally binding. Eg- petrificus totalus stops holding Neville after Voldemort loses concentration.
About the time-turner thing – Dumbledore would have had to see his past self to stop him from putting on the ring which is against time travel rules- the consequences could have been more severe than the benefits! i We cant assume that using time travel you can change anything and everything! Otherwise someone would have just gone back in time and killed little baby Tom Riddle! Its a pointless concept to think about, so Rowling must have introduced time travel to the books on her terms and not yours! But lets not get into a debate about time travel, space the universe with its infinite possibilities and paradoxes! Its one that neither of us will win!
ive re-read the whole Elder wand thing, and it appears that i have an answer to your ‘plot hole’ (and yes i do know the meaning of the term). Grindelwald was never the rightful owner of the wand, as he captured it. I’ll agree with you there, perhaps thats why Dumbledore could defeat him. But by defeating him Dumbledore won the allegiance of the wand and became its rightful owner! convenient i’ll admit, but remember it’s a book!
I appreciate that what im saying varies from before, but alas, i am not omniscient on the subject of Harry Potter, and i am learning about it as much as ,i hope, you are!
Bit unfair saying that ‘pitiful sheep’ are the reason why Rowling made so much money! I think the fact that she has a considerably larger imagination than you, probably played a role in it as well.
Okay, I apologize for the sheep comment. And like I said I’m a fan. I’ve read all seven books. I do think there was more deus ex machina in this book than all the others combined. For instance, Dobby showing up out of nowhere to save them at the Malfoys. He wasn’t even Harry’s house elf. He was free. That was a pretty big deal that he could just pop in there and save everyone. Too bad someone from the Order didn’t know House Elves could do that, could have saved a lot of lives over the years. There were mistakes galore. Harry being able to see Bill’s house when they Apparated there when it had a Fidelius charm on it and he wasn’t a secret keeper. Oh come on, the Resurrection Stone is like Prior Incantato. That’s a stretch. They weren’t a shadow image, but they weren’t totally alive either. Even in the children’s tale it tells you that. So why would Dumbledore even look for it if it didn’t do more than just a shadow image? That’s a stretch. Harry talked to Lupin about his kid. About him just dying and how sorry Harry was about it. And Lupin talked back to him about it. That’s an echo or a shadow image??? That’s a stretch. Dumbledore even said himself he would have used the stone to “drag back those who are at peace”. He says of Voldemort, “whom would he want to bring back from the dead”. Sounds like raising the dead to me. He also said of the cloak it “never would have worked for me as it works for you” If the cloak isn’t special in more ways than concealment, what good is it? Again Dumbledore said he didn’t think of its great power because he could already conceal himself. But it did more than that for Harry. In fact I think Dumbledore said something about it protecting those under it but I can’t find the passage.
So yes, Dumbledore said he didn’t think that Death created the Deathly Hallows, but again that is a plot hole. The resurrection stone was much more than something a normal wizard could create because it raised the dead which is against one of JK’s rules. The cloak was like nothing anyone had ever seen, ever. The wand was just all over the place and who knows what the deal was with that. Harry not feeling the Crucio curse was also a plot hole. His spells wouldn’t bind, but they worked. To say he didn’t feel it because Voldemort was using the Elder Wand doesn’t work either. He felt the death curse. It hit him like an iron fist I believe he said. For him to just sit there and lift Harry up and drop him and Harry to still act dead – sorry, but quite a stretch. Voldemort also says that he can’t be lied to. So how is it Narcissa lies to him and he believes it? I already know what you are going to say. Well, Snape did it! She was never shown to be some expert at Occlumency and what did she have to gain by lying to Voldemort??? If he caught her, you think that would have helped her son? Again, she can write a compelling story. You’re right, she has 100 times the imagination I do and a million times the money. But her last book was just a stretch at times and had a lot of things that have to be explained by jumping through some serious hoops. But again, like you said, just a book.
I found the Deathly Hallows to be one of Rowling’s best books yet. There are “Plot holes” but Rowling purposefuly made them so that the reader could figure them out. For example you have to understand that the deathly hallows are not directly from death, that is just a legend that, when you think about it, makes perfect sense.It is a legend so obviously people are going to exaggurate the story! However I will admit that it was quite stupid of voldermort to summon the sorting hat to Neville. Does anybody have an explanation?
I think Rowling has done very well in cleverly hiding certain parts for us to figure out and understand, and sure there are going to be a few that we can’t figure out. These are very small however and, considering there are seven books in the series, they are easily excused. Rowling you are one of my litirature role-models, a modern Tolkein!
Last thing again. Did I like the series. Very much. She has quite an imagination and some parts of the books are absolutely fabulous. I just think at times she got in so deep she had to throw a whole chapter out there just to cover her tracks. Because that’s what the King’s Cross chapter did.
I will agree that there are some weaker points, some grey areas in the stories. Parts which do require some careful thought, stretching and ‘hoop jumping’ to explain. But these are all incredibly minor (and explainable) and to call these plot holes and have revelations of criticism, claiming that Rowling’s book is merely ‘decent’ because of these – is what annoys me! I guess that we will have to disagree on what bringing people back from the dead means. I dont think that in JK’s world just being able to talk to someone means that they are TRULY back from the dead. That’s why Cadmus Peverell committed suicide! So just because you have different ideas about what resurrection would mean doesn’t mean that Rowling has created ‘yet another plot hole’. But anyway i don’t think that we really care! The books are are a great read and i (and i think most people) find them believable enough! I personally think that the King’s Cross chapter was perfectly acceptable and necessary to tie together a lot of the loose ends of the seven books.
I too think it’s a great book, perhaps even best of the series. It’s just the ending that’s disappointing. Potter was a weak student compared to Snape, Dumbledore, Riddle or even Hermione – ie Snape was inventing new spells while still at school, Harry never did anything like that… but somehow he manages to defeat Voldemort who in turn behaves like he’s suffered a severe brain haemorrhage – doesn’t check if Potter’s dead nor feeds him to Nagini, summons a sorting hat in the middle of the battle, and tries to kill Harry with another Avada Kedavra even though it almost killed him on two occasions and he was explained why it’s not going to work…
I’ve got two more questions though…
1. the Taboo thingy… how come they didn’t know about it?? I mean surely You-Know-Who was called He Who Must Not Be Named because it was the same Taboo the first time he was around.
2. in one of his memories Snape discusses using fake Potters with Dumbledore’s portrait… wel but he’s not a headmaster yet, is he?
robinho – I don’t think that Taboo was the reason that Voldemort was referred to as ‘He Who Must Not Be Named’ first time round. . . For one the ministry hadn’t been infiltrated to such a level, I don’t think anyone tabooed it first time so Harry, Hermione Ron wouldn’t have known. It was only tabooed this second time, because they realised that those who were serious about opposing Voldemort like Dumbledore, Harry etc, referred to him by his name the first time around and after the first war. As for the weak student thing, i think you’re missing the point. What’s so special about Harry is his pure heart, complete soul and his genuine goodness – not his technical ability. I think rowling intended for Harry not to be particularly spectacular, she wanted him to be as ordinary as possible – proving that a good heart counts for something. (I just wish that was true in the real world!) There were a number of factors which resulted in Harry being able to defeat Voldemort – many of which were ignored by Riddle because of his unimaginable arrogance. There was only one time in history in which somoene had survived the avada-kedavra curse – and Voldemort thought he had solved that problem the second time round. He also had the Elder wand, and didn’t know about its alternate allegiance so he had every reason to believe that Harry was dead, especially when his wishful thought was reinforced by a death-eater. He didn’t feed him to Nagini as he wanted to show everyone his dead + recognisable body! The summoning of the sorting hat does seem a bit out of the blue, but Voldemort wanted to make point about how all new students of Hogwarts would bear the emblem of Slytherin and he was also insane – lets not forget. I’m not sure what you’re getting at with the Snape thing. . . Snape took over post of headmaster after Dumbledore died and must have had access to the office during the summer holidays. Even if he was not headmaster at that time, he probably still could have found a way to get in there. i didn’t find the end disappointing but the book will no doubt do different things for different people.
Some problems i have with the final book;
When Harry is in Snape’s memories, in Sirius’ bedroom, he manages to take the picture of his mother of the wall. How is this possible? Does this mean that any memory and therefore the future be tampered with?
Also, why is Harry unable to talk to Dumbledore about what he is supposed to do, when it seems the Headmaster lives on in the portrait on the wall of his office? Are these portraits a means by which wizards can continue living? Doesn’t make sense to me.
if grindewald wasnt the true master of the wand, then how could dumbledore who defeatd him, become the master?..doesnt make sense
he’d have to defeat gorgion ..cant spell his name properly
About the Snape thing: say he had access to Dumbledore’s portrait even if he wasn’t named headmaster yet. But why would Dumbledore order Snape to tell Voldemort about the correct date of Harry’s removal from Privet Drive? Voldemort does not know that Dumbledore had ordered Snape to kill him. Snape is no longer a member of the Order. How can Voldemort expect Snape to know inside information, in fact, would Voldemort not be suspicious if Snape still had inside info after he killed the leader of the Order?
Also, can someone explain why the search for the horcruxes had to be such a big secret, keeping it from the members of the Order after Dumbledore died? Did Dumbledore ever tell Harry to keep it a secret in book 6? There is a passage when Dumbledore asks Harry not to tell anyone except Ron and Hermione about what they are doing during the “private lessons,” but he says it’s because it would not be good if people found out how much he knew about Voldemort and his past. But in book 7 Dumbledore is dead and Harry still keeps the mission a secret. No trust?
nevilles parents were not killed just tortured contrary to what aditi said
Why not use time turner to go back in time and kill harry first and then kill Lily! Plus dumbledore couldve used time travel and just left a note on his desk or something, “Do Not use ring, you will die….” lol wouldn’t need to see his future self and all that bs.
James, In Snape’s memory, Harry does not take the picture of his mother… he watched Snape take it. Why would Harry tear the picture, and take only the part with his mother?!
Dumbledore talking and giving them advice through his portrait is a serious stretch though.
Re the sword being pulled out of the sorting hat; it was done in the second book, so my guess is Rowling was appealing to the same notion. That works fine, since Neville is a Gryffindor, and of course, we know how the sword comes out of the hat thanks to book two. But the problem for me is I wonder why Goblins are considered powerful, if it was so easy to recall the sword by wizard magic. You’d think that since the goblin expected Harry to double cross him regarding the sword, that he’d take precautions to not let it get away from him easily. Of course, I suppose we dont know what kind of trouble the hat went through to be able to procure the sword from the goblin.
Re why Voldemort calls the sorting hat… I guess, you just have to accept its a book, and convenient things happen. I mean, consider that Ron found Harry and Hermione the exact night when Snape arranges for Harry to find the sword, and Ron is exactly in time to save Harry. Its a story; I suppose I have to accept that its allowed to have convenient coincidences.
Re all the members of the Order jumping in and out of the houses with all the Felicius Charm (forgive my spellings), but only the one secret keeper… not sure I understood the role of the charm and the secret keeper: its been a while since I read the prev. books… so until someone explains it to me, I’m not going to complain.
Re the Taboo, if you can pretty much Taboo any word, how difficult is it to Taboo “Harry Potter” and other names and terms and investigate people who use his name, if you are trying to catch the Order? I mean, I get the whole deal that Voldemort is the name that the Order (or rather Harry and Dumbledore) used to show defiance. But the aim at this stage of the story was to catch the Order. And since its not like the ministry was pretending to be fair and just anymore, it could have done a lot more to find members of the Order.
Well, we can be nitpicky and keep finding lots of loopholes; but I guess at the end of the day, it was an entertaining read and the fact that its generating as much discussion as this is proof that it was worth the effort.
I decided to read all the books again, when I came across this quite intresting piece of info while I was re-reading the philospopher’s Stone.. in Page 77 while harry was reading the Famous Wizards Card that comes with the choclate frog, the one about Dumbledore mentions that “he is particularly famous for his defeat of the dark wizard Grindelwald in 1945″ which I did not remember at all while I was reading book 7..so it was all thoroughly though of after all.. I just wanted to share this with all of you. I really enjoyed reading your posts and the whole debate. thanks to all of ya..
I couldn’t understand some parts of this article les in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, errors, mistakes and inconsistencies by JK Rowling, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100% regarding les in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, errors, mistakes and inconsistencies by JK Rowling, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong
the one thing i don’t get is after Harry came out of Snape’s Pensive he knew he had to die, he knew he was the seventh horcrux. so he knew voldemort had to kill him. yet at that time, the snake (Nagini the horcrux) was still alive, and Voldemort too. So after Harry died, who did he expect to kill Voldemort, there was NO WAY he could have forseen that he wouldn’t die.
On top of that why couldnt they just have disapparated out of the tent when the snatchers surrounded them? They just had to be caught so they could go to the Malfoy Mannor.
The most frustrating point is WHY did Voldemort suddenly became so dumb? He knew the HOrcuxes, yet why didn’t he find out about the Deathly hallows, I mean such idiot like Xenophilius Lovegood had figured it all out. Voldemort had gone further than anyone in the path of immortality, he said it himself.
When Dumbledore destroyed the Ring there was a terrible curse, and when they went to the cave in the lake, it was all very difficult too. many obstacles. Yet when destroying the Locket, the Cup and the Diadem, everything seemed so easy. They could just grad it~
JKROWLING definitely made the Hallows stuff out, just so Harry Could finish Voldemort. I wouldn’t say this is a satisfactory ending to such a great series book. Up till Book 6, it was all like OMG this is great…Book 7 really ruined it all.
this is da best book dont complain about it everything makes sense if you think about it carefully and refer to the other books.
I can attempt to explain this Sorting Hat issue everyone thinks is convenient.
Okay, so as we all know, Voldemort thinks he is the best darned wizard that ever lived and he does not just want to kill in the same mundane fashion every time. He wants to play with his food before eating it. He wants to humiliate his prey and set an example to anyone else who dares to defy him in the future. In fact, when he summoned the Sorting Hat, the battle had ceased momentarily, remember. Voldemort called out all the students and teachers of Hogwarts and was telling them to give up their fruitless attempts at fighting him and come out of the castle and kneel before him. At that time Neville charged at Voldemort heroically to show his defiance, but Voldemort disarmed him. When Neville refused to join Voldemort of course Voldemort was angry and his pure-blood mania took over again. Since Neville acted as a blood traitor he wanted to show everybody what happened to such a person and it fits for him to say something like “There will be no more sorting at Hogwarts School. There will be no more houses. The emblem, shield and colors of my noble ancestor, Salazar Slytherin, will suffice for everyone”. Was that not what the Chamber of Secrets was built for, to purge out all those undesirable, muggle borns and stuff. So by burning the sorting hat, he would sort of eliminate entry of Muggle borns, and blood traitors into different houses. It was totally in his character to do something like that, but as Dumbledore said he never fully knew about other forms of magic and did not know what the Sorting Hat was capable of. I know you must be saying that he watched Harry take the sword out of the Hat in Chamber of Secrets, but that part of Voldemort’s soul was destroyed and so this Voldemort had no idea of the sorting hat’s capabilities. It also fits that he never knew about the Deathly Hallows, because Dumbledore said he always underestimated the power of other forms of magic, of children’s tales, and of love. So, while we have been shown how invincible Voldemort is in the other books and what a powerful wizard he is, of course in this book Rowling shows the weaknesses of Voldemort that are discovered by Harry and that brings about his downfall. Still, there are some flaws in the book and some explanations of earlier happenings are missing. It seems to me that she finished this last book in a hurry. I just wish she would have written 50-100 pages more and explained some other things like was Barty Crouch Jr. actually a Death Eater when he was caught? What was it the Dementors made Dudley see and how did it change him? What happens when you fall behind that veil in the department of mysteries? How do you die? What did Harry’s mother and father do for a living? What did Harry himself do for a living 19 years later?
What about Mundungus Disapparating off the broom at the start? This was supposedly blocked around Harry’s house by the Ministry which is why they had to fly. But then why didn’t all the rest of our heroes just Disapparate too instead of fighting a half-hour duelling sky battle? Even if you need to be near the ground, they could dive down and do it, or Disapparate and cast cushion fall like Hermione uses later to land safely even if it would make you appear up in the air.
Hey, Dumbledore clearly says that Tom wasn’t the person who would read story books. How come even Ollivander hasn’t heard of them… Ha! There’s a mistake on page 187 and 188. Harry says he’s been out for six hours and watched the Ministry entrance for seven
He says on page 19 he’s four days for his b’day.. he says that even in “The Ghoul in the Pyjamas” after a few days… on the cover page they show Griphook with the sword… but does he have while on Harry’s shoulder really? Youre an idiot, and Rowling’s Queen… not King, ha!
Yeah, I agree with you, this book was quite a disappointment. The battle at the end was OK, but the middle was too rushed. Also, therea re two plot holes you have failed to point out.
Firstly, if the Elder Wand is undefeatable, how on EARTH did Dumbledore get it from Grindelwald? And we know they had a battle of epic proportions. Enough said for that first one.
Secondly: The TRACE. If there IS a trace that detects magic around under seventeens, you would have thought that TMR would have gotten caught when he visited his uncle, cause he was only sixteen. but NO, the Ministry definitely didn’t detect it. ALSO, in the 6th book, it was mentioned they could detect MAGIC but NOT the perpertrator, so how could they have a trace on under seventeens?
HOWEVER. I feel that you have made a few errors in your analysis, and some of the things you written I don’t consider correct (though you might have an explanation.)
Firstly: ACCIO.
“But this spell has been such a problem – if it works as advertised, you should be able to grab anything from anywhere.”
Well, there are enchantments that can prevent stuff from being accio-ed, and it would certainly kill off most of the plot if everything could be accio-ed. Also there was a counter to this in the Department of Mysteries, Book 5. When bellatrix tried to take the prophecy from Harry, Harry used a Shield Charm and it worked. (This isn’t so much of an error, I’m just trying to point something out.)
Secondly:
“Don’t tell me everyone wants to be a saint even when fighting Voldemort for their lives.”
About the Avada Kedavra: The only time it was covered was in Book 4 by impostor Moody, who DID NOT go through the specifications on how to cast the spell, he only mentioned that he doubted that he would get more than a nosebleed. So it should be safe to assume no one knows how to truly cast it (exception being Harry when Bellatrix told him how to cast Unforgivables while running through the Ministry in Book 5.)
Thirdly:
It’s been mentioned many times that Harry will have to be the one to kill Voldemort (or vice versa), and it can’t happen anyway else. No one else can kill either one of them.
Fouthly:
About the direction specificity, I don’t really get you, but there is no reason why you shouldn’t be able to get out of it’s way, and you really shouldn’t compare it to another novel based on magic because the only common thing is magic. (Note, guns are direction specific too, the thing is that bullets are infinitely faster than spells appear to be.)
Fifthly:
“Curiously, the evil wizard drops him on the ground gently – he doesn’t make Harry fall on his head and break his neck for good measure, break an arm or a leg – nothing!”
I thinkg it can be said that because he wanted Harry’s body intact as a prize, but more importantly, because he wrongly believed that Harry was already dead, so there was no point.
Sixthly:
“Because he disarmed Draco, the Elder Wand, which Voldemort now possesses actually considers harry its master. Assume that this is true. How can Harry be so sure? Dumbledore did not tell him that. Ollivander did not tell him that. Harry is no expert in wandlore. How did he figure it out? How did this clueless nitwit suddenly work it all out by himself?”
Ollivander told him that when a wand is taken from a person by means of “defeating” the other person, the wand will realize and shift allegiance. This should hold true for all wands belonging to that person. PLUS, technically, Draco was “defeated” by Harry, so the Elder Wand WOULD have changed allegiance. (Note, Dumbledore was defeated by Draco when Dumbledore got expelliarmus-ed. About Grindelwald taking wand from Gregorovitch: “defeated”, again, buy stunning.)
But I think the true question here is that the idea of wands changing allegiances is too complicated, if not Harry’s DA classes would end up in only one person having wands. Unless it switches again when the wand is given back.
Seventhly:
“But he has never heard about the Deathly Hallows. Seems it is a story which every boy knows, but not poor Tom Riddle!”
Harry didn’t either. And it seems unlikely that Voldy would like to know about children’s tales. He only knew about the Elder Wand after Voldy confronted Ollivander about it.
—————————-
Other notes:
To TR on the 1st of August:
“According to legend no spells can even get through it. Yet, Dumbledore could see through it (I guess he was above Death itself). ”
Read the part in Xeno’s house CAREFULLY… it stays INVISIBLE when hit by spells… it doesn’t not allow spells to go through it…
Jackson, 2nd of August:
“Expelliarmus is countered by the sheild jynx.”
This is wrong. It was Accio.
TR, 2nd of August:
“Why didn’t Dumbledore use the Time Turner after he put the ring on? It’s right there in his study.”
YOU CANNOT BE SEEN.
“There are whole chapters about how people go on after death and you can’t communicate with them (Sirrius Black) and yet Harry has a pleasant conversation with Dumbledore’s portrait at the end of the book. ”
Siruis DOES NOT have a portrait. And Harry is comminicating with a PORTRAIT, and NOT with the the Dumbledore that went on “the next great adventure”.
“Harry wasn’t totally immune to Voldemort because of the protection from Lily even if you want to stretch it that far. If he was, what was the point of all the books? In fact, Voldemort used the Cruciatus curse on Harry in an earlier book (I don’t read them every day so I’m not sure which one) and it worked pretty well, even with Lily’s protection.”
He wasn’t using the Elder Wand then.
“Too bad someone from the Order didn’t know House Elves could do that, could have saved a lot of lives over the years.”
There’s a simple explanation, really… They believed House Elves to be under them, probably didn’t care enough to find out.
“Why didn’t they use that spell when hundreds of people watched Harry fall to the ground during the Quidditch match when he fell and broke his arm?”
Second Year, they probably wouldn’t have learned it yet.
Shawn, 2nd of August:
“In the forth book Barty Crouch goes to all the trouble of getting Harry through the tournament only to touch a portkey. Sure there are easier things to make portkeys like maybe his bed?”
No password.
“Shouldn’t one of the horcruxes have been used when Voldemort died the first time. I mean surely the part of his soul in his body when he tried to killed Harry would have been destroyed and so he would have had to use another part of his soul from a horcrux?”
Horcruxes don’t get used up. They stay there, and anchor a person to life. “The seventh piece of his soul that resides in him must be the last one to be targetted” (or something like that).
Recalling what happened when Voldemort took him to the cave, Kreacher says: “…he [Voldemort] made Kreacher drink all the potion… he dropped a locket into the empty basin… he filled it with more potion. And then the Dark Lord sailed away…”
Then Regulus Black visits the cave. According to Kreatcher, Regulus drank all the potion so that the house elf could swap the lockets and then he “was dragged beneath the water”.
So, if Regulus Black drank all the potion, and Voldemort knew nothing about this and about his Horcrux having being stolen, WHO refilled the basin with potion, so that Dumbledore had to drink it once he got there with Harry? The fake locket was the only “thing” Dumbledore and Harry were supposed to find in the basin.
I’ m afraid this is a serious plot hole, because it affects the whole story line of books 6 & 7.
^ To answer your comments above (and in general):
1) You missed the part where Harry told Neville to kill Nagini. After that Voldemort would be mortal and could be killed by anyone. DUH!!!!!!!!!!!!
2) One Voldemort’s biggest weaknesses is his arrogance. He didn’t bother finding out more about the Death Hallows because:
A) They are only talked about inchildren’s novel which was beneath him.
B) Dumbledore’s ghost or whatever says that the True Master of the Deathly Hallows is NOT immortal. In fact the true master accepts the fact that he or she must die eventually. Voldemort could have never accepted that fact, and thus never bothered looking up anything that might be interesting in the “willingness to die” category.
C) Voldemort’s arrogance has proven to make him blind to even the obvious. Voldemort believed that only he had discovered the Room of Requirements for hiding stuff, when in fact hundreds of students used in later on in life. He also believed that Kreacher, a House Elf, would be unable to escape the cave, when in fact Kreacher’s own magic was powerful enough to override the anti-disaprating enchantments.
3) The Ring DIDN’T curse the person who destroyed it. It cursed Dumbledore because HE PUT THE FREAKIN’ THING ON!!! Also, Voldemort believed
4) The Snatchers probably put some sort of anti-Desparating enchantment in the area when they first arrived. They’d be tacitcally retarded not to do that.
5) About the whole Elder Wand business: I don’t think the Elder Wand is REALLY unbeatable. It’s a VERY powerful wand that gives its owner a huge advantage in open combat, BUT a skilled enough opponent could still beat the Elder Wand’s master. Dumbledore was the most powerful wizard in the world, and probably had enough skill to beat Grindlewald in a duel, DESPITE the fact that Grindlewald had the Elder Wand.
It’s like a pistol duel between a guy with an antique flintlock pistol and a guy with a Desert Eagle. It is possible, however unlikely, that the guy with the antique gun could kill the guy with Desert Eagle.
ON point 3, it should read:
Also Voldemort believed that no one knew about his connection with the Guants so it was safe there and didn’t need any really really fancy defenses.
Hey Visitor,
Dumbledore didn’t get cursed when he destroyed the ring. He got cursed when he put it on.
And Harry told Neville to kill the snake which would leave Voldemort vulnerable to any attack.
I would also like to add that in the chapter Magic is Might, when the trio are arguing about who should go to the Ministry, Harry says “Voldemort”, and the taboo on his name, which is already in effect, does nothing.
hey, why does it take so long for comments to appear on this thread?
How about the fact that the Elder wand was supposed to be unbeatable in a duel…yet Dumbledore won it in a …duel?
“How about the fact that the Elder wand was supposed to be unbeatable in a duel…yet Dumbledore won it in a …duel?”
This question has been asked several times. And the answer is: It’s NOT unbeatable. It’s just very powerful.
And about who refilled the potion, I’d say that either Regulus refilled it just before he died, or the basin refilled itself.
And as for why Harry could say Voldemort’s name inside Serius’s house was because the house’s magical defenses were so powerful that not even the Taboo magic could detect it. It was the HQ for the Order after all.
“A plot hole that occured to me, is that the elf in Sirius old place isnt set free when given the old locket. Or is he?”
A locket does not equal “clothes,” obviously.
ok dude, u know it’s a book, right? let’s see u write something better. ok? get over it, it makes sense if u want it to, but if u want to find a flaw in it for what ever reason, pick one’s that work. spells are colored because they are. it’s j.k’s world. not yours. it’s magic. simple as that. no one needs to explain it. it just is.
neville has the fake sword from snape’s office
Guys it is all very interesting read, especially the plausible explanations given about the Elderwand, Voldemort’s arrogance ( i tend to agree with other folks that he underestimated other kinds (elves, goblins) to do magic).
I was looking to post an “apparent plot hole” myself, which I hoped others would have noticed, but it was a surprise that it has not come up yet..In the chaper “Bathilda’a Secret” of Book 7, did any one of you guys read carefully that thrilling nerve tingling part when Harry and Hermione were standing in front of Harry’s partly demolished house, and Nagini creeps up dressed and disguised as Bathilda?
Harry and Hermione were ployjuiced up and were under the protection of the cloak (a supposed hallow). But how come, Bathilda (read Nagini) could see through the cloak at them (to Hermione’s surprise and mine as well), wag a finger, and lead them to their potential death trap? Also, if the cloak is supposedly a hallow, passed on by generations of Wizards, designed to give complete and absolute protection (even from death itself if you go by the legend), I would’ve expected it to serve Harry n Hermoine well that night and not give away their presence to Nagini (an 1/8th of a soul which was easily sliced-off by Neville in the end), what with all the virtues we learn of the cloak in the later chapters..even in the very end, when Voldemort was about to kill Snape, and Harry n co just hiding yards away without their cloak on, neither Voldemort nor Nagini could sense their presence ..but in this chapter though it was quite the contrary..
that said, it was a truly enjoyable experience all the way and i am looking for someone to come up with a convincing story for this one.
Malfoy was able to disarm dumbledore beacuse dumbledore had already planned his death and let malfoy disarm him
there are NO mistakes in harry potter,some people are just too thick to figure out some slightly complex things
You don’t know what your talking about. You try reading the books again yes!? There is agruments to almost every one of your ‘plot holes’ ROWLING IS KING. You need to stop bullshitting on websites and telling us what to do. We belive in Potter. He won. ROWLING IS KING
I’ve read all the books, and I agree that although there are a few plot-holes here and there, people love it first and foremost for the story. You can write a book that has zero plot-holes, but if the story sucked, then it wouldn’t sell. You need to appreciate the imagination of the series, and give credit where it is due. Rowling wrote an awesome story, and if the few plot holes ruined it for you, then you should deal with it in your own way. But don’t go and try and ruin it for others who enjoyed it. It may have had plot-holes, but it certainly wasn’t just “decent”.
Okay… Now that I’ve got that off my chest, I would like a few viewpoints as well:
Firstly, Ram made a good point about Bathilda’s Secret. Can anyone explain it?
Secondly, in the Pensieve, Dumbledore’s portrait tells Snape to reveal to Voldemort the details of how The Order was intending to move Harry away from the Dursley’s house. How did Dumbledore know about these plans? These plans couldn’t have been made while he was still alive, and no member of the order has been in touch with either Snape or the portrait since Dumbledore’s death. Or have I missed something?
NOTICE TO ALL WHO COMMENT:
This comment thread is moderated. So your comments will not appear immediately. But all legitimate comments will be published – sometimes in a few minutes, sometimes in a few hours.
Don’t let that discourage you. That is necessary for keeping spammers out of this great discussion.
Hey, this doesn’t relate much to the deathly hallows, but i’ve always had this question…. Why does everybody say Harry is a half-blood? I mean Voldemort is because his father was a muggle, and Snape’s also… but both Harry’s parents were wizards…. i don’t get it… the only “reasonable” explanation i’ve found for this is that he is a half-blood because both Lily’s parents were muggles… but it doesn’t convince me. It’d be great if someone could shed some light on this… thanks!
Cristina: Harry is technically not a half-blood, but however, Death Eaters and other wizards with pure-blood mania considered Lily Potter to be a mud-blood, and did not see her as a real witch. Therefore Harry was considered to be a half-blood.
And the reason to why Dumbledore could “see” Harry under the invisibility cloak is because he used the same charm as Hermione used in Deathly Hallows, the one to reveal human presence (which he could produce without saying it, since he was so good at non-verbal spells). He couldn’t see Harry, but when he knew there was human presence he could put two together and guess that Harry was around. After all Dumbledore gave Harry the cloak and knew that Harry used it, not that many others knew about it in the earlier books.
I think Bagshoot/Nagini could see Harry and Hermione under the cloak because she is a snake and not a human. You know how you always say that animals sees and hears stuff us humans don’t. The cloak probably only made the wearer invisible from human eyes.
You really need to spend some time understanding the book before you make such articles.
At least look at wikipedia if you dont get it
Dumbledore let Draco disarm him with expellarumus… it was set up.
Dumbledore is able to do magic without a wand, of course draco would not be able to disarm dumbledore had he not wanted to be disarmed.
The only thing im confused with is how did Dumbledore beat Grindewald in a duel, if it supposedly is an undefeatable wand. The only explanation is that Dumbledore must have killed Grindewald “muggle style” ie. killed him while he was sleeping
Good book though … one hell of an emotional rollercoaster ride.
If Dumbledore let Draco disarm him, and that is set up, then its no defeat. In that case why did the wand switch loyalties?
I’m guessing it still counts as a defeat even if it is planned. All of this was supposed to be Dumbledore master plan but how could he possibly know that Harry is going to disarm Malfoy, it is purely accident that they ended up in Malfoy mansion and that he happened to disarm him, so how was Harry supposed to get the elder wand?
LKC the bed was just an example he could have made anything a porkey. He could have made a letter a porkey and handed it to Harry. As for the horcruxes I would have thought they are just objects to hold a part of your soul so that you can retrive it later if you have lost the part of your soul that resides in your body and after you have retrived it it then resides in your body and not the horcrux.
Lily’s protection: The only reason Voldemort was able to affect Harry with the crucio was because he had Harry’s blood in his veins to and and therefore (somehow) Lily’s protection did not work. I’m a little curious as to why having Harry’s blood in him didn’t affect the protection everyone got when Harry died to save them though.
The basin of potion I would imagine would refill itself. I think it said Voldemort had to look through the potion when he is checking his horcruxes.
Bathida: Harry and Hermoine take off the cloak as it’s snowing and their footprints would be seen so the snake doesn’t see through the cloak. As for how it know it’s Harry I’m assuming Voldemort told it to expect any wizards going to the graveyard and Harry’s parent’s house and the fact they could see the house shows that they were wizards. It wasn’t as if the snake knew for certain as it asks Harry whether it is really him.
Mojo, Dumbledore knew they were going to move Harry as they had to as he couldn’t stay at his house after he was 17.
Did nobody else notice that in Deathly Hallows on page 100, Mrs. Weasley threatens to give CHARLIE a proper haircut when in book four it clearly states that it is in fact Bill whose hair is too long?
How did the elderwand end up back in Dumbledore’s crypt (to be later stolen by Voldemort) to begin with?
Sean, yes I know about Harry’s coming of age. But how did Dumbledore know exactly on which day they would be moving Harry, because they moved him away a few days before his 17th birthday, which he celebrated in the Burrow. He told Snape the plans to tell to Voldemort, meaning that he knew about the plans already. If he was alive, he would have moved Harry himself, as he did in Half-Blood Prince. None of the order members knew that he was gonna die at Snape’s hand, therefore he could not have discussed this plan with them. So how did he know about Moody’s plan to move Harry a few days early using decoys? How did he know the exact day?
Also, Hermoine made sure their footprints were erased in Godric Hollow. And Nagini could not have sensed their presence, because she didn’t sense it in Hogwarts when Voldemort killed Snape.
Well it wasn’t Moody’s plan it was Mundungus. Dumbledore told Snape to make Mundungus think it was his own plan so effectively it was Dumbledore’s plan.
Also Hermoine didn’t erase their steps she thought about it but Harry said to just take off the cloak as the were already disguised by the polyjuice potion, so at no point did the snake see through the cloak.
I think you are talking absolute rubbish! To be honest if you went round thinking up mistakes like that for everything you would have a pretty long list. expellarumus works as well as the wizard produces it so you can’t go round disarming anyone obviously and you can use shield charms. Also the killing curse Avada Kedara is stated to only work when you really mean it. You have no imagination if you go and pick tiny holes like that in a children’s book, it is a magical, amazing book and i’m sure millions of fans would tell you to give it a rest because the series in my opinion is flawless. The sorting hat is pulled out the hat by a true griffindor, she explains this so MANY times! Why does no one get that!! Neville is able to kill the snake because of that! Honestly…i do agree that this is Rowling’s world so how can you possibly comment? The books are amazing and to be honest i have and will carry on going round saying that she is the KING/QUEEN!! I love these books.
Rite,
well to be honest i think that this bloke finding holes in a childs book is rather sad.. and for another point, you all know all these different spells and reasons for everything in the books is also sad
basically, Emily (above) is right
so vote her for president!
love you all xxxxxxxxxxx
Thanks, Sean. I understand now. I remember it being said that it was Mundungus’s idea. I forgot all about that.
I was sure that they kept the cloak on in Godric Hollow when “Bathilda” approached them and stared at them. I’ll have to check that again. I suppose I may have been wrong.
Áine on August 14th, 2007 at 7:22 pm
there are NO mistakes in harry potter,some people are just too thick to figure out some slightly complex things
ROWLING IS KING on August 14th, 2007 at 7:44 pm
You don’t know what your talking about. You try reading the books again yes!? There is agruments to almost every one of your ‘plot holes’ ROWLING IS KING. You need to stop bullshitting on websites and telling us what to do. We belive in Potter. He won. ROWLING IS KING
Firstly, that should be “Rowling is QUEEN.” Talk about gender confusion.
There are arguments to what we call plot holes – then, it’s down to which argument is better, whether there are or aren’t plot holes, doesn’t it? And while at it please highlight the “agruments to almost every one of your ‘plot holes’”. If you can specify it, you should be able to locate counterexamples to each and every one of the points we have mentioned. To me you sound like someone who just backs JK Rowling because you love Harry Potter. So do I, but a mistake is a mistake and it exists, no point pretending that there aren’t any.
Emily I think you’re totally out of point…
“Honestly…i do agree that this is Rowling’s world so how can you possibly comment? ”
Well, there are breaks in her world, so why can’t we identify them?
i fully agree with all of you, but mostly robinho:
‘I can see Rowling was thinking hard on this one, the book was already at 600 pages and she needed a quick solution.’
AND ALSO,WHO STARTED THIS SITE?
BECAUSE, GOOD THINKING
Just to comment on a question made a while back- on why Hermione could not use a cushioning spell/charm when she was on the dragon is because for god’s sake, the three of them were holding on for dear life! I’d imagine it’s pretty hard to cast such a spell in such a situation. Also, I’m pretty sure to apperate, you need to be standing on a surface, to turn on the spot. I believe this is why the crew could not apperate from the dragon to any other place.
And to further comment on J.K Rowling, I would just like to say ROWLING IS THE QUEEN OF LITERATURE, well queen of all childrens books and novels that I’ve read so far in my entire life. The last book was an absolute stunner and shocker.
I agree with Sunil,
and to LCK, why identify them? If you have a problem with her book why do you think people want to know? The majority love her, if you don’t like the book then why read it and moan about it after?
It’s HER world, HER story and HER imagination so how can you possibly say that’s wrong?? To someone else who said that the ending was quick and rushed and probably thought up on the last minute….you are so wrong. Apparently she had planned how Hagrid was going to be the one to take Harry from the forest and mostly the whole of the end chapters, eg Neville being the one to kill the snake before she even published book 1!!! So she had more than 17 years dwelling on, what you believe to be, a rushed ending….
ROWLING IS QUEEN!!!
[...] I write my initial post about the Plot Holes in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, I never expected the kind of response it [...]
It’s HER world, HER story and HER imagination so how can you possibly say that’s wrong?? To someone else who said that the ending was quick and rushed and probably thought up on the last minute….you are so wrong.
Did I ever say it was a rushed ending?
Go read my reply, I never said that. I think the ending is good. It’s the plotholes that are jarring, and when they are legitimate errors, I don’t see why we shouldn’t point them out. And to your point – why do you think some people even bother identifying errors on this site? Go read the replies, it’s full of people who identify different plotholes. Plus, if you’ve read my first reply I actually DID defend Book 7 on a few different points as well. And I know i’m not the only one left surprised at some of those holes.
Look, I create a story that makes no sense at all and has 1001 errors and claim that it’s perfectly flawless.
It’s MY world, MY story and MY imagination so how can you possibly say that’s wrong?? But it IS.
Now, I know J.K. Rowling is definitely not that bad, but the thing is, errors are errors no matter how much effort was put into the story those errors are in. I DO love Harry Potter AND agree that Rowling is one of the best (perhaps the best) writer out there but as I said, Book 7… surprised me.
J.K. Rowling the Queen!
What you wrote doesn’t make much sense…
When you tell everyone the accio spell doesn’t always work, I suggest you refers to the missed accio a death eater casted on the invisibility cloak. Let me remind you that the cloak resist to spells! you just can’t cast a spell on the invisibility cloak. (See chapter about Lovergood). Moreover, after he casted a avada-kedavra, voldemort thought harry was dead. Then he casted a crucio, and to his relief harry did not move: it meant he had won… he meant so much for Voldemort who had falled to the ground more than once … so, maybe his crucio wasn’t that great, but, it’s only because he needn’t to cast a more powerful and assure that harry was dead by breaking his neck.
Last but not least, at the end, harry was more or less sure that he was the master of the elder’s wand. How come? Well, maybe you missed something there, but it all makes sense at the end. The pieces were put back together! Harry knew it because he had known about the hallows, he had seen Snape’s thoughts, even Dumbledore’s, that’s it mate!
Please stop criticizing Rowling’s last work! She did a wonderful job. And if it was so easy to write books like that, everyone would write… even people like you.
She did a tremendous job, you can’t deny it!
Pol (whose mothertongue is french by the way)
Re Voldemort’s crucio: apparently Harry felt no pain, and as you point out he landed gently – perhaps this was the clue which let Harry know that the Elder Wand was not Voldemort’s – hence leading him to think through who was its master. After all, he already had the Wand on his mind when he was talking to dead Dumbledore – “you meant Snape to get it, right? And that didn’t work out…”
However, I cannot fathom why Dumbledore thought it would be a good idea to give the wand to Snape, since Voldemort was so hot on its trail. What chain of events was D expecting to happen? Good thing it didn’t work.
Another issue I had was: V used the Elder Wand to kill Harry in the forest. Supposedly it didn’t work because of the blood tie, blah blah…but also, it shouldn’t have worked because Harry was the master of the Elder Wand. But dead Dumbledore doesn’t bother to tell him this??
And, it seems she abandoned the idea of silent spells…even the advanced wizards are yelling spells out loud in book 7.
And, I don’t understand about Snape in book 6, when he’s trying to teach Harry occlumency: why is it he doesn’t put in the Pensieve these memories of Lily and D’s instructions to Harry about self-sacrifice? (unless the instructions came after the time when Harry looked in the Pensieve)
Accio – This spell works on any object, except those that have been magically protected, this makes perfect sense, if Accio always worked then you could steal anything, anytime.
Expelliarmus – This doesn’t always work, it depends upon the skill, speed and talen of the wizard or witch casting it and their
opponents.
Most spells can be blocked using the shield charm, but Avada Kedavra can not, it can only be dodged. In JK’s fictional world, directional spells are the norm. There are many instances in the series where spells miss their intended target and hit others instead.
The Fidilius Charm was put on Shell Cottage after Harry had arrived.
When Voldemort summoned the Sorting Hat, he was talking about changes at Hogwarts, he was saying there would be no houses just Slytherin and he summoned the Hat so he could destroy it and Neville with it, hence he put it on Neville’s head and set it on fire.
Voldemort does not detect Narcissa’s lie for various reasons, because he was shaken by what happened to him when he tried to kill Harry, he had no reason to expect that Narcissa would lie, he was also not making eye contact which is usually required for Legilimency.
As for Harry remaining ‘dead’ while being Crucio’d, I thought this was a genuine mistake and it should have said Levicorpus, because Crucio doesn’t generally lift people from the ground, but it then occured to me that Levicorpus is a non verbal spell anyway. However I would say that there is nothing that contradicts Harry’s sacrifice, to prevent Voldemort from hurting anyone else, applying to himself if he survived, this is magic we are talking about, and as Dumbledore says the Harry/Voldemort connection took magic to a hitherto unexplored area.
It is made perfectly clear in OOTP that Harry had a magic that Lord Voldemort did not. Yes Harry was an average student for the most part, but don’t forget his exceptional skill in DADA and his ability to produce magic that most adult wizards could not (patronus). But his selflessness, bravery, humility and ability to love are what is most exceptional about Harry and the fact that Voldemort could not understand these things is what gave Harry the advantage.
I suppose it’s possible that Snape knew how to get past the enchantments that protect Hogwarts so he could speak to Dumbledore’s portrate and with it being the summer holidays the castle would be empty, although I have to say this is purely guesswork and there is nothing to indicate this in the book.
Snape had to give Voldemort just enough information so as to keep him in Voldemort’s inner circle (in order to protect Hogwarts students when Voldemort infiltrated the Ministry, as he promised Dumbledore) so Dumbledore and Snape gave Voldemort the right date, but not tell him about the decoys. I don’t think it would be strange for Snape to be able to continue to pass on information regarding The Order, he is a powerful wizard and knows each member of The Order and their habits, Voldemort would expect him to exploit this knowledge to gain information.
In book 6 Dumbledore specifically tells Harry that he should tell no one but Ron and Hermione about the Horcruxes, he does say that he doesn’t want anyone to find out how much he knows about Voldemort, but his concern is Voldemort himself finding out, he would have certainly moved them or strengthen there protection, making the job of destroying them even harder. For this reason also Dumbledore doesn’t tell Snape about them in in Book 7. Harry doesn’t tell anyone else for the same reason, he could not risk Voldemort finding out.
The Sword of Gryffindor never belonged to any Goblin, Griphook lied, it was made by Goblins for Gryffindor and as such returned to it’s rightfull place when required. It’s magic!!
The Trace, okay this is a confusing one, it follows an underage wizard, can distinguish the exact spell cast, but not who cast it. Therefore if there are adult wizards present the ministry has no evidence that the underage wizard cast the spell and relies upon the adult to enforce the rules. However if the Ministry detects magic in the abscence of an adult wizard, they have evidence and (as they would see it) a duty to enforce.
The Taboo is IMO the reason so many Death Eaters are watching Grimauld Place but because the house is protected by the Fidilius Charm and no Secret Keeper has told them the address they can’t get to the house itself.
Dumbledore may have several other portraits he can visit maybe in the home of another member of the Order from which he could gather information and give advice, also i doubt very much that McGonagal left the school immediately after Dumbledores funeral, she could have spoken to him then regarding Harry’s transportation arrangements.
Guys, I think a lot of you missed a critical point: Dumbledore DID NOT plan for Malfoy to Disarm him. Harry actually said that because Malfoy did that, Dumbledore’s original plan went wrong. Dumbledore’s original plan was for Snape to kill him and take PHYSICAL control of the Elder Wand while the Wand’s mastership would have died leaving nothing but an empty shell of the Wand. HOWEVER, because Malfoy Disarmed Dumbledore – which was NOT part of the plan – the wand’s mastership transfered BEFORE Snape could kill Dumbledore.
And to the guy who posted: “Did nobody else notice that in Deathly Hallows on page 100, Mrs. Weasley threatens to give CHARLIE a proper haircut when in book four it clearly states that it is in fact Bill whose hair is too long?”
Ummmm… Nobody about something THAT insignificant.
I think you’re all missing a very important point. This is FICTION. It is a BOOK. It’s not even that good of a book. Why spend your lives worrying about this sort of thing? Go outside and play, for gods sake. It’s NOT IMPORTANT.
For the Cloak discussion:
So I buy the whole “Dumbledore sensing human presence and not physically seeing Harry with the Cloak on” thing. As far as the Bathilda (Nagini) thing goes, I would still argue that he and Hermione were not actually spotted. While they were in the graveyard, the cloak was off. This is when Hermione noticed that someone was in the bushes watching them. Obviously they put the cloak back on at that point. But Nagini KNEW they would eventually take a stroll by Harry’s old house, so the snake-woman probably just staked the place out until she saw the touch-activated sign rise out of the ground. Then she approached them. The point is, the story of the cloak giving “inpenetrable concealment, no matter what spells are cast at it” remains solid…until now:
How was Mad-Eye Moody able to see Harry under the cloak in book 4?!
“why wasn’t the horcrux inside voldemort destroyed when he tried to kill harry for the first time?”
It’s because it isn’t a horcrux, it’s his “original” soul. Voldemort created those horcruxes to keep himself alive meaning the “original” can’t be destroyed until after all the “copies” have been destroyed.
just on the topic of accio-ing stuff, i agree it was a really stupid idea of rowling to introduce this spell and especially stupid to feature it so dominantly, it is the “feature spell” of book4, [the one that they learn in class that proves useful later in the book, like book3 had patronuses, book two had duelling skills and book one had wingardium leviosa.]
well any way, i think accio was a really detrimental to the plot. when harry needed to retrieve the golden egg from the dragon he summoned his broom, instead of simply summoning the egg. i thought this was insanely stupid and i hope im not the only one to pick up on this. and again in the maze[which i thought was a very dissapointing finale to the triwizard tournament] hedoesn’t accio the cup again! and then rowling [apparently teasing us] allows harry to accio the cup in the grave yard proving that the cup can infact be summoned.
also dont you think that portkeys sort of changed in the way they worked from book4 to book7? just a thought
more stuff that i just thought of .all those wizards try to kill ppl by pointing their wand and saying “avada kedavra”
personly i think a kalishnikov would have done the job much more effectivly, espicially i congestion. and also about grindelwald, the only thing you hear of grindelwald before book7 is a fleeting mention on a chocolate wrapper. Surely such a feared powerful wizard deserves more publicity!
Ok, what i don’t get is if Harry IS a horcurx, that only can be killed by, the basilisk (snakes poision0, phionix tears or somthing as powerful. Then why in the chamber of secrets when he is both bitten by the basilisk snake and healed with the (fawkes) phonix tears, is’nt the horcurx killed then ????
I agree with all this stuff aout the Elder Wand, but a glaring plot hole I see is how Dumbledore managaged to take it off Grindelwald in the first place. This Elder wand is meant to be UNBEATABLE, the reason for it shifting owners in the past is coz people killed the previous owner to get it, but Dumbledore didnt kill Grindelwald, he won it in the duel, but how did he beat the unbeatable wand?!
i have a question, at the start of deathly hallows snape is shown telling voldemort harry’s date of departure from privet drive. also stating that it came from his source.was it ever revealed in the book who this source was? i don’t think i could have missed it and i cant think of anyone who would give snape this information, so this may be a plot hole.
Personally, I was disappointed in Deathly Hallows because it seemed that Rowling had run out of ideas. She had Harry, Hermione and Ron camping out for nearly a year, and it felt that long reading through it because nothing much was happening during those chapters. Then she raced through having the heroes find out about situations that had happened while they were out of touch with society, like Luna’s abduction. That way Mr. Lovegood’s attempted treachery could come as a surprise to the reader, as well as the Trio. But it felt terribly rushed, especially after slogging through the woods for so long. Then too, having Nagini masquerade as Bathilda just seemed bizarre to me. And the deaths at the end seemed arbitrary and contrived. Plot holes? Meh. I could live with those. It was the general level of the writing that disappointed me; I was expecting much better, based on her previous work.
All the flaws you people are pointing out are just ridiculous. This is JK’s story, a world she alone created so how can you say what can and cannot happen within it. If she tried to make sure that everything that happened was explained down to the very magical law that allows things to work, she would have a pretty long and boring book. I think she probably imagines that the reader will have some sort of imagination of their own which would allow them to fill in the blanks… As someone else says, this is primarily a children’s/young adults book and is a world of complete fantasy, not something that needs to be scrutinised so diligently!!
PS. JK never said that portkeys HAD to leave at a prearranged time and this was the only way they could work. Moody/Crouch Jr says in GoF that the triwizard cup portkey was set so that it would leave with the first person who touched it… Therefore if we all use just a little imagination we could work out that a portkey can be used in more than one way… simple
I’m going to read again all the harry potter books to make sense to all of your comments. I’m really a big fan of J.K Rowling. Her books make me start to be really interested in reading. Before I just read magazine. So stop saying she not brilliant. She is! The reason why your all so affected on this, is your just fascinated on how well J.K make your imagination go wild. She is amazing for every single detail of anything in her books. I know some things don’t makes sense to me but the thats my opinion and thats your. Maybe we’re right or wrong. Just don’t say J.K Rowling is brilliant because in the first place she the reason why we all so affected and amazed on the wizarding world.
take care and God bless! you all makes sense somehow. I enjoy reading all your post!
I’m sorry i meant “Just don’t say J.K Rowling is not brilliant because in the first place she the reason why we all so affected and amazed on the wizarding world.”
Also, what is all that about magic never coming in straight lines in other books. Magic is not REAL. There are no actual laws on how magic works as it is not REAL! Other books have no effect on JK’s Harry Potter books, they are simply not the same world so to imply that JK has inconsistencies in HP because of how magic is portrayed in other books is ludicrous… Do you not get that these are completely different worlds created in completely different books by completely different authors. I am rerering to the comment
“Come on, we have read magical books before – and we have read Mandrake the magician too. There was never any mention, anywhere, that when a curse comes towards you in its red-or-green coloured glory (why are curses / spells coloured?)”
Are you trying to say that all magical books must have the same underlying laws of magic??? That has to be the most ridiculous statement I have heard all year… No scrap that… heard in my life!!
Why doesn’t harry just use a gun to quickly finish off everyone under his invisible cloak? It’s much faster then saying “Avada Kedavra”. And anyone could have just went back in time and killed baby voldermort.
Other than that, what source can snape be getting his information from that voldermort knows about, near the beginning of the book, it cant be just because snape can guess good due to him being smart, “from the source we discussed.” Who was that?
And what a bad reason for Dumbledore giving Harry such a difficult journey, “to try his strenghts”, he could have died, and if he did Britan would be under evil wizards! Dumbledore’s crazy!!
DUmbledore couldn’t block malfoy’s spell because he was putting a spell on harry when draco curses him. It is explained explicitly in the book.
There are many plot holes in Harry potter, so you have demonstrated pretty lazy reading in identifying a false one.
In the chapter “Gringotts”, it clearly states that Hermione has bellatrix’s wand, however, in the chapter “The Flaw In The Plan”, Bellatrix seems to be fighting pretty well with a wand when it doesn’t say if she (Bellatrix) gets the wand back…
Please reply quickly!
Explaining Dumbledore’s plan: He intended Snape to kill him, it doesn’t mean he was to be defeated, because since it was planned, and he would let himself to be hit by the killing curse, there would be no defeat, just death. With his death, the power of the elder wand would be broken, because anyone wanting to be the true master of the wand would have no one to defeat. But since he hadn’t planned Draco to do it (i suspect he thought it was Severus running towards them when he froze Harry, and didn’t defend himself) then Draco actually defeated him, because he took the wand against Dumbledore’s will. We see that you do not earn the allegiance of the wand if you just take it with the permise of its master, since Voldemort borrowed Lucious’ wand, and it did not work properly for him.
In the chapter “Gringotts”, it clearly states that Hermione has Bellatrix’s wand, however, in the chapter “The Flaw In The Plan”, Bellatrix seems to be fighting pretty well with a wand when it doesn’t say if she (Bellatrix) gets the wand back…
If you know the solution behind this Plot-Hole, please reply quickly!!!!
“And to the guy who posted: ‘Did nobody else notice that in Deathly Hallows on page 100, Mrs. Weasley threatens to give CHARLIE a proper haircut when in book four it clearly states that it is in fact Bill whose hair is too long?’
Ummmm… Nobody about something THAT insignificant.”
Heyy it was just bothering me….
That was stupid!!! Tom Riddle wouldn’t have heard the story because he was raised by Muggles (if you know what those are)!!! You should really stop being a dumbass!!!! None of those are mistakes!! Once you didn’t capitalize Harry and in “and their cannot be exceptions within exceptions” you used the wrong there! How old are you!?
What i don’t get is why the poison of the basilisk didn’t kill the Horcrux within Harry when he was bitten? Explanation?
and about charlie and bill, why can’t both of them have long hair? or badly cut? why the effort in trying to see mistakes out of nowhere? I agree there ARE plotholes, but that is plain silly…
I have to agree with the original poster, the book was decent, admittedly better than the earlier books, but they were honestly no great works of literature. Rowling’s complete lack of consistency and blatantly ignoring things she’d established in earlier books does indeed drag this work down. The question that Will posted still stands, why was the impostor Moody able to see Potter in the fourth book if the cloak was a hallow? The magical eye shouldn’t have been able to see him through the cloak. To paraphrase the fake moody, “Getting it right requires constant consistency!”
In the chapter “Gringotts”, it clearly states that Hermione has Bellatrix’s wand, however, in the chapter “The Flaw In The Plan”, Bellatrix seems to be fighting pretty well with a wand when it doesn’t say if she (Bellatrix) gets the wand back… I have posted this Plot-hole many times, but no one seems to be replying… please tell me the explanation of this Plot-hole!!! I NEED TO KNOW SO PLEASE ANSWER MY QUESTION!!!
ehh i haven’t read half of these so i’m sorry if they’ve already been answered or..whatever
but..the elder wand.
harry says it’s his because he defeated draco. okay, i don’t argue with that. but voldemort kiiiinda sorta killed harry. sorry, isn’t that technically defeating him? ygh.
BellaFan, is it not perfectly pausable that Bellatrix is using someone elses wand? Perhaps that of one whom she or another death eater has killed during the battle of Hogwarts or prior to this??
Like the perfectly plausable possibility that both Bill and Charlie have long hair, it is tiring when people insist on focusing on these so called plot holes!
Thanks Blazer, but you were too late, as I posted a comment on J.K Rowling’s website about my plot hole and she replied to my e-mail that she was sorry she did not make it clear: During the part of the book when Voldemort is about to kill a goblin in Malfoy Manor, he gets in a rage and kills some Death Eaters too (as stated). When Voldemort and the Death Eaters are leaving for Hogwarts, Bellatrix takes one of the dead Death Eater’s wands and leaves for battle.
P.S – Balzer, your spelling was incorrect: it is “possible”, not “pausable” or “plausable”.
Gee, thanks for that little spelling lesson, I was not aware that this site was so formally run that spelling had to be checked and mistakes during typing not allowed. I will try better next time, I guess my pointing out that your “plot hole” was something so trivial it shouldn’t even be refered to as a plot hole has some what hit a nerve
I have been reading some of these comments and agree that although some of the plot holes mentioned are quite significant, others are being ridiculously picky. It appears Blazer was right in assuming that Bellatrix got her wand from another casualty.
PS BellaFan, if you insist of giving someone a lesson in language at least get it correct yourself! Pausable is not infact a word, plausible however is so although there is a slight spelling mistake, Blazer’s use of the word makes perfect sense. And while we’re on the subject – shouldn’t it have been Blazer not as you put “Balzer”, if we’re going to be pedantic…
would you all stop ganging up on bellafan! she/he is only pointing out what she/he thought was a simple spelling mistake! for gods sake!
p.s, this is a hp chat site, not a fighting ground, but, if it were a fighting ground, id be on bellafan’s side…
Thanks hpfanatic for your comment. I would like to apologize to blazer though for snapping at him/her, I was just angry because the way you had written your comment it sounded as though you were being all smart and writing it as if I was stupid. I was just pointing out something that I thought was a plot-hole. So I apologize blazer. can we settle it and be plot-hole friends??
I would like to apologize to blazer though for snapping at him/her, I was just angry because the way you had written your comment it sounded as though you were being all smart and writing it as if I was stupid. I was just pointing out something that I thought was a plot-hole. So I apologize blazer. can we settle it and be plot-hole friends??
Thanks Bellafan! I too would like to apologise, I did not mean it in any condesending way I was just up for a debate on Harry Potter plot holes – as sad as that may seem!! Anyways, heres to our new found plot hole friendship!!
awesome blazer!! anyway, i got really bored last week so i decided to read my 2 fave harry potter books: chamber of secrets and deathly hallows. while i was reading i noticed something; if basilisk venom is one of the ways to kill a horcrux why did the horcrux inside harry not die when he was pierced by the basilisk’s fang?
P.S. Blazer, if i have made any spelling mistakes, please forgive me! lol!
Two mistakes I noticed, which, in my skimming, no one else seemed to pick up.
In J.K. Rowlings FAQ on her own site (jkrowling.com), she says that when a secret keeper dies, the secret dies whith him/her, and only the people who know the secret already will ever know it, but non one else ever will. That was NOT what happened in DH, instead all those in on the secret became secret keepers.
Also, Collin Creevy was killed in the final battle. He shouldn’t have been there at all because he wouldn’t have been allowed in Hogwarts because he was Muggleborn. He was not mentioned among the peoplfrom the DA who came back to the school, but instead was listed among the students gathered in the Great Hall. In reality he would have been arrested as soon as he boarded the Hogwarts Express.
It’s interesting how people are more focused on spelling mistakes than on the actual issues presented in the comments…
19 years later chapter… Wouldnt Teddy Lupin be done with Hogwarts “19 years later”–He would be at least 19 years old!! Why would he be on the train to Hogwarts with Harry’s/Ron’s kids??
This is quite confusing but here goes…
In the chapter 19 years later someone says wouldnt it be nice is teddy and victorie (bill and fleurs daughter) got married, they could not because: (this is the family tree)
lupin…tonks…..sirius…..harry…ginny…bill…fleur
. . .
. . .
teddy 3 kids victorie
. .
……………………………………….
they are related
that did not turn out good but they are related through harry and ginny.
on harry’s side of the family there is teddy because tonks is his sorta cousin.
on ginny’s side there is victorie because bill is her big brother.
so they are related
wow bellafan! that was some way of explaining it but i get you… in some way! i see your point!
why is no one commenting any more?
Also, Cho Chang is meant to be in the year above Harry at school, but when he returns to hogwarts Cho is there! Surely she would have left by now because it would be her eigth year!
There are only 2 ‘holes’ on here tht are not easily explained!
but still can be explained…….colin being at the battle and why use the maze for the portkey!
Visit http://www.thefinalhorcrux.com for an adult forum on harry potter where ALL your questions will be quickly and more efficiently answered.
First and formost you have a point. The spells are so inconsitant and seem to contridict themselves.
What makes me annoyed about this novel (which i did enjoy until I noticed plot holes…) is JK kills characters brutally, which happens in wars but these charcters (FRED FRED FRED FRED FRED) are very close to the central character and to the central characters “family”. So my point is why didn’t we get more about the impact of his death? Sure Ron wanted to kill people and so did dear Percy but he had a twin. Whats the point of having a story that goes on about twin cores, being binded by love, having connections that make you speak snake dribble when the impact of the most simple “twin” situation is not explained? George should of had his day. Every other “twin” did.
Also JK has another plot hole I want to focus on is her the fact that she did not explain to us solidly what ahppened the night Harry died. Now they are meant to be wizards, all fancy wand work and stuff. Instead of doing some guess work and not answering everything (such as who helped Voldemort out of the house) why didn’t anyone think to just have Harry jump into a pensive. Even though we do not remeber big chunks of infancy, they are still there and Harry should have been able to access the night his parents died. Would of saved all the angstness in book 5.
Lastly Harry Potter is made for all ages. Kids enjoy it nowadays because of the movies. Young adults enjoy it because they were the kids buying the first books. Adults enjoy it because it explains what their kids mean when the say “muggle” or “accio”
and so on and so on.
I LOVE THE 7TH HARRY POTTER IT WAS GREAT poor Fred he was awsome oh and Dobby and Remus and Tonks died as soon as they had a baby thats sad YAY RON AND HERMIONE FINNALLY KISSED anyone as happy as I ma with that ?? they have 2 kids thats awsome and NO Bill s kid isnt related to Lupins kid !! if they were it would be by marrige not blood cuz Bill isnt related to Lupin and Tonks isnt related to fleur or bill see? inless I got it all wrong but that doent matter anyways BYE
I just realized I didnt do a plt hole all well
if basilisk venom is one of the ways to kill a horcrux, why didn’t the one inside harry die when he was bit by the basilisk?
p.s this isn’t really a plot hole but is everyone her american, because i’m scottish!
i meant here sorry
Wasn’t Harry Potter stunned by Draco Malfoy on the Hogwart’s Express ? He was wearing his invisibility cloak, right ?
Wasn’t this cloak supposed to protect the one wearing it from any spells ?
I sometimes asked myself why you couldn’t simply consult a picture in Dumbledore’s office. Mmh …
ALRIGHT. It doesn’t matter how many HOLES there are in the plots. I have enjoyed EVERY BOOK and it’s by far the best read I have EVER had in my life.
Harry Potter … it’s a shame that it’s all over. We will miss you Harry
by the way, I am from GERMANY !
One plot hole not mentioned.
IN HP 5 (Order of Phoenix) We are advised that Podmore had lost Moody’s Spare Invisibility Cloak.
That makes 3 invisibility cloaks – although not 10 a Knut – and the Order, although concerned are not panicking.
So howcome X Lovehood states that the only possible one that could makeone truly invisble is a Hallow?
Thx Fly Swatter! Lol
I Just Realised I Neva Did A Plot Hole…
The Deathly Hallows was great book. I liked it very much.
But I still think that there was so much luck for Harry in his 17th year. What if Hermione hadn’t carried that beeded bag in Bill’s wedding; Harry would straight away be captured by death eaters. What if voldemort would have killed him when Harry was returning to Tonks’. Would there still be Dumbledore in his head? Or he would die completely by falling from that much hight?????
And what if he did not follow snape in Shrieking shack?? How would he get those memories about his mother, Snape and truth about himself i.e. he was the 7th or 8th(as Will said) horcrux…….
Without that he would have messed all the flaw that was needed.
I am also disappointed by death of Sevrus Snape. He was my favorite character like Harry, Hermione, Dumbledore etc. right from the very first book.
The main plot hole in this book is- the elder wand, the death stick, the wand of destiny; in short the wand which is unbeatable can be defeated!!!!!
How is that possible in first place????
Dumbledore won it by defeating Grindelwald; but how has he made that? I am not denying that Dumbledore was a great wizard. Many of you would say that with excellent skills, spells and by magical power that hardly anyone dream help him to defeat Grindelwald. But it contradicts the theory or tale of Elder Wand. The wand was unbeatable, so the thing that it could be won or defeated is itself a ridiculous to say. Forget about dumbledore or Grindelwald…..
The thing the wand has left its first ever master- Peverell brother is shocking.
The tale says that it cannot be won, so it is impossible to defeat the master of Elder Wand by any means…….
What you people think about it? Please reply if you want to say something about it. I will be glad if someone contradicts me and keep their thoughts in front of me……..!!!!!
Okay – The Elder Wand (most likely created by a Peverell brother!) was won by Grindelwald. He took the wand from Gregorovitch and stupefied him, thus winning it. The full details of how Albus Dumbledore beat Gellert Grindelwald are unknown, but Grindelwald was defeated. The wand passed to Dumbledore. When he drank the potion in the sea-cave he was weakened. Draco Malfoy disarmed him, winning it. Then Snape killed Dumbledore. Voldemort Kills Snape. Harry defeated Draco, so now he owned the wand. the cruciatus curse does not affect Harry because the wand wont hurt him! Same reason the Avada Kedavra rebounded on Voldemort.
Now, for why the Avada Kedavra in the Forbidden Forest didn’t kill Harry. The wand won’t hurt him. He sacrificed himself willingly (so it didn’t rebound) and it destroyed the part of Voldemort’s soul in Harry.
The Resurrection Stone does not bring back the dead! The effects were similar to the Priori Incantatem- slightly solid ghosts, like “shadows” of the person.
The cloak DOES NOT SHIELD THE WEARER! it is merely protected itself from being summoned and such. proof – 1. it never says directly that it shields the wearer, thus Albus Dumbledore petrifying Harry at the end of Half-Blood Prince.
And on the issue of everyone using “expelliarmus” not everyone does for example: Ron never does
And also, it is the most basic duelling charm! it is the easiest to use for any experienced duellist! and i’m sure that the reason death eaters don’t always use avada kedavra is that it probably takes physical energy as well as mental and magical
That should cover it, methinks.
Thanks for your comment sevrusLives. I know that already what you said, but my question was “How in first place Elder wand left Peverell brother???”
ISN’T THAT A PLOT HOLE????
Dumbledore let Draco Malfoy disarm him. It was planned.
J.K. Rowling created her own world. If she decides the you can jump out of the way of a curse then you can. I don’t see what’s so weird about that.
He was arrogant and had to much faith in what he could do. He also trusted Narcissa to tell the truth. He might have read her mind but it has said in the books that she’s an occlumens she would have blocked her mind from Voldemort, so he thought Harry was really dead.
Harry isn’t stupid. It isn’t that hard to figure out he’s the owner of the Elder wand. If you think about it than you can figure it out. It doesn’t matter that he took a different wand from Draco. He defeated Draco no matter what want he took. The Elder Wand wants power and Harry disarming Draco, no matter what wand, makes him seem more powerful.
Most people didn’t know that the Deathly Hallows were real. They thought they were just a fairy tale. Voldemort wouldn’t learn about a fairy tale, and he grew up in a muggle orphanage so he wouldn’t have grown up listening to the story.
Neville got the sword because it was Gryffindor’s. It was magically linked to the hat. That’s why the books are in a magical world!
His soul was in eight peices. Seven horcruxes (Harry, diary, ring, locket, cup, diadem, Nagini) and Voldemort himself. There’s no way to count how many peices is soul was in. He couldn’t just go, “I’m going to count my soul today.” No peice of soul disappeared, another piece of soul was left in Harry.
I think a lot of you need to read the book again because you have no clue what happened!
Very interesting. Many of the questions seemed to be asked by people who’ve only skimmed the stories. Been guilty of that myself, on occasion. Maybe someone here can prove I have missed something that has great importance to the plot: True, Tom Riddle was an arrogant snot. I can easily see him thinking he was the only Hogwarts wizard smart enough to not only find the Room of Requirement but get into it as well. However, once he had entered the room to stash the tiara, he’d have to have seen the huge piles of ‘trash’ already in the room. After all, it was stated quite plainly that the room as a hidey-hole for contraband had been in use for centuries. How did Riddle miss this? And yes, I LOVE the Harry Potter stories.
Come on guys. the hallows was a bit long but other than that there was absolutely nothing wrong. having fallen one floor onto grass, (forbidden forest you #@$#!) nothing happened to me!
And plot holes are there, you jus don’t know how or where to look.
Just in case I missed it in this forum. When Harry was hit by the Avada Kadavra and ‘killed’, the killing curse destroyed the horcrux within Harry and damaged him-he could have ‘gone on’ if he so chose. As for the cruciartus curse not affecting him very much. When Voldemort used Harry’s blood to resurrect himself, he damaged his own ability to harm Harry. Thus, the painful effects of the curse were greatly reduced. By the way, this ’soul-swapping’ allowed for Voldemort’s possible redemption…obviously, he did not take it when offered. All this comes from JK Rowling herself, unless my mind’s memory was taking a walk while typing this. Always possible… And now for some thoughts of my own. I find Voldemort to be a realistic character psychologically, never mind his powers. Known some egotists quite a bit like him…always right, never wrong, and very very elitist.
To the best of my recollection, the Deathly Hallows were made by the Peverell brothers…hope that spelling is right…as hypothesized by Albus Dumbledore. Thus, they would not be perfect, allowing for skill to overcome the wielder of the Elder Wand and feet to stick out and betray the wearer of the cloak and so on. Legend pasted on a plethora of hopes and fears to the facts concerning the Hallows and got passed on through the ages in the Beedle children’s tales. However, I am in agreement with those who claimed there had to be more than wizards, however skilled, involved. Maybe the Peverells were ultra-skilled wand makers and cloak weavers. No reason why not. The cloak is an ultra-fine example of its kind, and the Elder Wand was extraordinary. It allowed Harry to repair his original wand and that’s nothing to sneeze at. However, there is the fact that the Resurrection Stone called back the spirits of the dead. Very, very interesting. It does seem that there is a moral authority above and beyond Life…and thus a power above and beyond wizards exists. Voldemort’s soul becomes that stunted raw mewling baby-like thing, JK Rowling says, because his crimes were too great to allow him to become a ghost. Considering what the ghost of Ravenclaw’s daughter did and the Bloody Baron…! A lot of moral leeway exists, obviously, and remorse plays a big role in how one ends up. Either that ‘Higher Authority’ or Death played a role in making the Resurrection Stone is my theory.
And Da Dragon King wonders…how DID the Elder Wand get back in Dumbledore’s Tomb? I have a theory or two, but it would be less lonely to hear somebody else’s opinion.
Haha.
You people are really nitwits eh?
Narrow-minded people who can’t simply accept the fact that NOTHING IS PERFECT. haha.
no wonder the world has many unsolved problems.
and you keep adding things up.
trying to make big deal out of small things.
SHEESH.
GROW-UP or GROW UP PEOPLE!
the book’s a FANTASY one.
what else do you expect?
i doubt whether the HISTORY BOOKS are accurate and precise.
check check check.
xD
I think all the “plot holes” listed can be answered satisfactorily. I personally believe it amazing how J. K. Rowling wrote seven books over such a long period of time with least possible contradictions! I can’t answer all of your questions because they have been answered at some point or the other. However, I will try to answer those that were brought up frequently or that caught my eye.
Firstly, the Elder Wand was not unbeatable. It was a wand of extraordinary power but at the end of the wand, it was a wand like any other. A person could have the Elder Wand but if he was hopeless at dueling, you couldn’t expect the wand to perform extraordinary magic on its own accord. After all, as Arthur Weasley says, no wand is self spelling. So thats how the Elder Wand passed from wizard to wizard for centuries.
Secondly, as to how the Elder Wand changes loyalties, we have to get a general idea of why the wand changes loyalties. As Olivander says, each wand has a core of Phoenix feather, Unicorn hair, Dragon heartstring or some part of any other magical creature. This is what gives the wand to cast spells and charms. In my opinion, this is also what makes wand have “feelings” and thus make it switch its loyalties. The Elder Wand, therefore was also like any other wand, and therefore bound to switch loyalties.
Thirdly, the cloak’s protection was not impenetrable. The cloak promises to give impenetrable concealment which it provides. Dumbledore stuns Harry when he was under the cloak and Draco Malfoy puts the Body Bind Curse in the same way. According to my theory, any other invisibility cloak would have sustained damage and would have thus stopped working. However, Ignotus’s cloak survives all this damage and continues to give its wearer impenetrable concealment.
There have also been many confusing comments which have led people to believe that the Disarmament spell was pre-planned between Draco and Dumbledore. This is not true. If the disarmament had been planned between Dumbledore and Draco, the wand would have never switched loyalties. So how did Draco disarm Dumbledore? Simple, if you can perform a spell correctly, it will work no matter how powerful the wizard is. When Dumbledore wordlessly stunned Harry under the cloak, he lost his chance to defend himself. He could have as easily blocked or deflected the spell but not having any wish to do so, he let himself being disarmed. However, it still cannot be called planned and thus Draco rightly became the master of the wand.
As for the resurrection stone, it did not resurrect people at all. It just created echoes of the people the owner of the stone wanted to; an effect similar to “Priori Incantatem”. How the stone works, I have no idea but I have some theories. The stone when turned three times, brings up echoes of the dead and gives them the appearance and character of the person as the owner of the stone remembers him. That is why the echoes of Sirius, Remus, Nymphadora, James and Lily were a part of Harry. The echoes retained their character as Harry remembered them and thus he conversed with them. A similar thing happened when Harry was knocked of by the Avada Kedavra curse. The limbo in which he entered was in his mind and yet Dumbledore came there and explained its secrets. The Dumbledore in Harry’s mind answered Harry’s questions in a more acceptable way.
As to why the Cruciatus curse did not hurt Harry, I have a ridiculous theory. Bellatrix explained that to perform the Cruciatus curse, you must want to cause pain. When Voldemort hit Harry with the killing curse, he entered the limbo which is described in “King’s Cross”. To the Death Eaters watching, he was still fir quite some time and they assumed him dead. When Voldemort regained consciousness, he told Narcissa to verify if Harry was dead. A part of him was already hoping that this was right and sure enough when Narcissa answered yes, his very best very hopes had gone true. So, he lifted him into the air and threw him down again. Again Harry did not react to this and he was sure that the “Boy Who Lived” was indeed dead. So, when he performed the Cruciatus curse, it was without any real conviction and therefore it didn’t affect him.
This are my theories on the various “plot holes” spotted in the book. One more thing that intrigues me, though unrelated is that at the end of “Goblet Of Fire”, when Harry is going back, the carriages still appear Horseless. However, at the beginning of the fifth part, he is suddenly able to see the Thestrals. This does not mean that I am criticizing J. K. or I count it as a plot hole but I just find it strange. J. K. Rowling is still the best author I have ever read. I will be glad for amendments, feedback, comments or contradictions. Cheers!
– Goku
Sorry, typing error. Its:
“It was a wand of extraordinary power but at the end of the day, it was a wand like any other.”
None of my questions answered in all this time. My-oh-MY, what is this world coming to? Ah, well, onward, ever onward. The “Why would Tom Riddle think a room full of multiple stories of students’ unwanted trash is known only to him?” question has been ignored, yet it’s one of the necessary plot points that allows the Hallows novel to work, since the nascent Lord Voldemort hid the tiara there. Yes, I can see him thinking that he alone has garnered the knowledge of the Room of Requirement. However, once he entered, he has two working Mark One eyeballs. It is clearly stated in Half-Blood Prince that the Room of Hidden Things had been in use for centuries. Far and away, most of the stuff that was in there was put in there before Tom Riddle’s dad was even a dirty thought in his own father’s mind, never mind Tom Riddle himself. How could he have missed a room full to the rafters with enough weird stuff to stock ten Walmart Supercenters?
Nothing that I’ve thought of works. IF Tom Riddle had asked for a room in which he alone hid something, then the tiara would never have been available in the Room of Hidden Things. Who would have thought to ask the Room of Requirement to give them the room where TR hid an object? If one has read The HBP, then one knows that will not work. JK had written an entire chapter on Harry’s abortive efforts to get into the room when Draco was in there.
Was the room dark when he hid Ravenclaw’s tiara? That would be a reasonable hypothesis if anyone can explain why the R-of-R would give Riddle a pitch black room and nobody else. We know, from reading HBP that the room does NOT first reveal itself as a pitch-black closet, with nothing in it.
As for how the Elder wand got into the White Tomb…it flew off the astronomy tower when Draco expelliarmused Dumbledore. The Malfoy boy never had it, though he’d won its loyalties by defeating Dumbledore.
Goku! JK herself said the depths of Cedric’s death had not sunk in at the end of Goblet of Fire, so he did not see the thestrals. Seems to be a reasonable explanation to me.
Thanks for the explanation DaDragonKing. It explains my doubt satisfactorily enough so that I can overlook it too.
For your doubt, I think that when Tom Riddle entered the room, he thought that the room was pre-provided with all the stuff so that the hider could conceal the object more effectively. He would be arrogant enough to believe this and to test his theory, he would just ask them. As Harry said, not most people knew about it and therefore, for all the answers he would have got, he would have thought that he alone had discovered the ‘Room of Requirement’.
As for your second doubt, its completely hypothetical and can never be explained satisfactorily. This is because we don’t have to look at what could have happened but what happens. We can always think that what would happen if Harry had taken the Tri-Wizard cup alone? What would have happened if Harry’s mother couldn’t come in between and her protection had failed Harry? You just have to rid yourself of such thoughts if you can and read what actually happened. I hope this answers your doubt a little if not completely. Cheers!
–Goku
Very good hypothesis, Goku, and it seems reasonable to me. At least, it will help keep that plot hole from destroying my enjoyment of the story. I wonder what JK thinks herself? Ain’t seen anything on her own site that addresses the question. Have you?
i really didn’t notice the one with the Elder Wand…I always considered Dumbledore to be the exception, the one whom the rules do not apply to. I always saw him as the old man who knows almostt everything and knows a way of getting out of everything…I mean the who’s got it all planned…So i never actually asked myself how he simply won the duel with Grindewald, if Grindewald had the “imposible-to-defeat-in-a-duel” wand…oh well
…Even though Ron, Hermione, George, Fred, Tonks and Mundungus all drank (at the same time) Polyjuice Potion in order to look like Harry , in chapter 5, “The Fallen Warrior”, when George and Lupin arrived by portkey at the Weasley’s, George wasn’t in his Harry form no more…he was in his George Weasley form, missing an ear by the time he arrived…but by the time Hermione arrived (whice was after the arival of George and Lupin) she was changing back to her normal form…So, in conclusion…does the Polyjuice Potion have different effects on people? And wasn’t it supposed to last for an hour or so?…well ,maybe i didn’t notice (or maybe Harry was unconscious in Tonks’s house for a pretty long time…), but there was no HOUR there…
But what i did notice is one other little thing
The book was good, though. I liked it a lot. I really don’t care if there are these little gaps, cause the plot does still make sence, and the Potter universe is just mor misterious
Cheers
Not yet DaDragonKing but I guess these will be explained in the encyclopedia she has planned to release. And if she chooses to answer them, then we are in for a treat.
– Goku
Oh my some of you people are just way to critical! You try writing seven AMAZINGLY successful books with that amount of detail and see if you can close up every SINGLE plot hole all nice and neat. I mean, give the woman a break. You know she had to be under some serious pressure from publishers, editors, and fans alike to get the books done. That sort of time crunch doesn’t really allow for much close examination of every little detail. I mean, there may be some holes…but sheesh. Just enjoy the books for what they are, pure entertainment! Stop disecting them. Just accept that it is her work and therefore she can create her own magical world anyway she pleases, with all the flaws, loopholes, and unanswered questions she wants!
As for Dumbledore defeating Grindelwald–Dumbledore himself hypothesized that the Elder Wand was made by a great wizard, and while it was extraordinarily powerful, it did not have Death’s power behind it. That would make it defeatable by a great wizard, and old Albus certainly fits that description. If memory serves, nowhere in the omniscient exposition did the author claim perfection in the Deathly Hallows. It was Xenophilius Lovegood and Beedle the Bard and legend that claimed those honors for the Hallows. Certainly, they were remarkably potent wizard artifacts, but JK herself never claimed they were really Death’s Hallows. Thus, there is no contradiction in Dumbledore defeating his former friend in that famous duel. Nor would the cloak be absolutely perfect, but it was the best of its kind ever made, if Dumbledore is right. As for the stone–it was actually the most remarkable Hallow, and just might have had Death’s power behind it. It really was able to call back the spirits of the dead and what being’s power could enable that?
And then there’s that possible gaffe with the polyjuice potion. I’ve no problem with what happened. Many explanations occur to me. Maybe they didn’t all get exactly the same dose? And it was established later in the story that there are spells to remove polyjuice’s effects–remember the waterfall in Gringotts? Maybe Snape’s misjudged sectumsempra spell affected the polyjuice? I doubt if magical spells work exactly the same from wizard to wizard and from witch to witch. JK implies extremely strongly that they do not. If they did, then why have Hogwarts and Durmstrang and Beaubatons and whatever other wizarding schools that exist in Harry’s world? It’s excruciatingly obvious from her writing that different wizards usually have different skill sets, just as muggles do. If that were not so, then how could one explain Grindlewald’s power? And Tom Riddle? And Dumbledore himself? Seems to me, the author is following reality in setting Harry’s world up that way and I think it’s superb. At any rate, it’s been nice talking to you all. DaDragonKing signing off…well, sort of!
I think Ted and Victoire are at the closest only cousins, hence could legally marry under UK law (muggle law at least). And it’s been pointed out at least once that there are so few wizards that they’re all interrelated anyway.
Nobody uses a gun to swiftly kill anyone because guns are high technology, hence don’t work in the presence of too much magic. And no Death Eater would rely on a muggle artifact anyway.
I think the Horcrux within Harry wasn’t destroyed by the basilisk attack because Harry was cured by Fawkes before he could “die” (he wouldn’t have died but the Horcrux would have).
And I agree that some of the comments on this blog are just nitpicking or (worse) invention; if I wanted to do that sort of thing, I could point out that the correct (by long tradition) plural of “phoenix” is not “phoenixes” as used in the series, but “phoenices” (hence the Phoenician people, for instance)…
Still, at least I haven’t made any speling errurs.
Does being on the Hogwarts train still count as being outside of Hogwarts? Because if so, when Hermione repaired Harry’s glasses in the first book, she should have been expelled …
Also, the biggest problem for me are the portraits. When you die you “go on” to the next stage or you remain as a ghost, as we found out in OOTP. So what exactly are the paintings? Are they just a copy of the person? And if so, how do they retain memories of what they’ve done in the past?
The fact is, that while there are the headmasters paintings in the office, the death of Dumbledore is insignificant. He was never going to kill Voldemort, he was just informing Harry, which he could still do.
Ok so it would have been hard to reach him once Snape was in charge, but before he knew that would happen, Harry was always whining about how he’d “never get to talk to Dumbledore again” and “How could he leave him such an impossible task and tell him so little?” and “So many things I should have asked but didn’t…” etc.
The fact is Harry, you could have still asked him all those things, but you were just lazy and couldn’t be bothered to walk to his office. Forget the Horcruxes, Voldemort should have just sketched a picture of himself for true immortality.
The whole series is shaky storytelling at best, and there are so many plotholes in the last book I had to accio-broom my way through it. Deus ex machina was Rowling’s Cloak, Wand and Stone all the way. No- it is not a work of great literature, not even for a childrens book, but it was a FUN read nonetheless. Rowlings greatest achievement though, imho, is the fact that she managed to get youngsters reading again instead of zombie into silly computergames all the time. Even if the series reads like a silly computergame (which it does).
I dont mind. I enjoyed it.
hey everyone there is one question burning in my mind. on the gravestone if in godrics hollow it says that the potters died in 1981? that means harry who was a year old when they died should be what 26? and since he was exactly one year old when his parents dies, which means his birthday was on oct 31st.. why were the trio reminising about being on the hogwarts train because such must have started long before they left the weasleys
Here’s what I think:
1) The Basilisk poisen didn’t destroy the hoarcrux in Harry because it didn’t kill him. You can’t expect a hoarcrux in an inanimate object to obey by the same laws as one that is inside a living creature, particularly a human, who is already a vessel to carry a soul. If that were the case, than the living thing could not die of old age or be destroyed except by Basilisk poisen, Gryfendore’s sword, etc… making that person immortal and VM would have just had someone put part of their soul in him if that were the case. The fact that Nagini was killed by Gryfendore’s sword is either coincidence or an illustration of the author’s opinion concerning the difference between a living thing without a soul and a human.
2) The DH were almost certainly created by the Peverell brothers. Some question how they could pull that off, but that is just silly. Who created the mirror that let Harry see his parents? Who created the veil in the MofM? Who created the TimeTurners or the Sorcerer’s Stone? Obviously, on occassion, there exists some wizards that are just that exceptional at one thing or another. Look at DD, VM, etc. You all gladly except the existence of many very powerfull objects but fail to see that sometime in the past, someone had to have created those objects.
3) I have read many of the explanations to the plot holes and agree with many of them including why VM summoned the sorting hat and how it worked for Nevell, how DD won the Elder Wand – although I believe that it will always ensure it has a living owner – DD was wrong on that one, how the invisibility cloak works, why their were objects in the RofR when VM left the hoarcrux there, and that the ressurection stone didn’t really bring the person back. It was like the mirror for Harry except that the manifestations were tangible and 3 dimensional. They still were not that person, but more of a manifestation from the user’s memory of that person. Hence why the Peverell brother committed suicide so that he could REALLY be with his lover.
4) The paintings of the HeadMasters in my opinion are a portion of their souls much like VM’s diary. In this case, there is no evil, just a portion painlessly left behind to guide future HeadMasters. Remember that VM’s diary person had all the memory, characteristics, and personality of the real VM. Why should the portraits be any different.
5) The only significant mistake that I think the author made was not setting explicit limitations on the time turners other than not allowing yourself to be seen (and one wonders how Granger pulled that off while attending all those classes… did she hide in the closet). The time turners were too powerful and open up a huge can of worms. If the author intended their power to be too restricted to allow for abuse, she should have been more explicit in their limitations.
Even if it all makes sense and there are no plot holes, Deathly Hallows was not near as engaging or as entertaining of a read as HBP.
I’m appalled that they’re going to actually try and squeeze 2 movies out of it. Almost as much of a clear cut case of milking the cash cow as the new animated Star Wars movie.
DH was OK, but I was so unsatisfied with the way everything ended up I could die. All Rowling had to do was look at the Mugglenet forums and she could have gotten better ideas than what she came up with.
DH Movie 1: Sit in tent for 2 hours
DH Movie 2: Sit in tent for 1 hour 50 min and watch Voldemort slump over and die.
BO-ring.
These debates are amazing. I love reading them.
Anyways, people keep asking why Voldemort summoned the Sorting Hat upon Neville and then burned it. Here’s why:
-Neville, being a “true Gryffindor” stood up to Voldemort. Voldemort wanted to make an example of him.
-In making an “example” of Neville, Voldemort summons the Sorting Hat. This hat is special in the ways that it sorts the children, but it also offers them the power to input their own ideas about being sorted (such as how Harry was sorted into Gryffindor, as was Sirius, who I believe was put into Gryffindor and not Slytherin because he wanted to be different from the rest of his family).
Voldemort puts this on Neville’s head and burns it. The Sorting Hat is a symbol of being able to choose where you are in Hogwarts, and a symbol of the diversity of the houses. Voldemort is burning this because he wants everyone to by a Slytherin. He does not want diversity–he wants sheep to follow him.
So that’s why it makes sense for him to summon the hat–summoning the hat is like burning a country’s flag or taking down a statue in a show of disrespect and power over the old regime.
Also, people saying that the invisibility cloak protects you from spells? No, it does not. Draco uses Petrificus Totalus on Harry in HBP while Harry is underneath the invisibility cloak. Not to mention the cloak does not conceal the sounds of breathing or movement–it’s not entirely foolproof if a wizard would be paying close attention.
DumbledoresEarWax and DaDragonKing, yours are very reasoned arguments I have seen here. I will try to answer a few questions that I have read since my last visit.
1. DaDragonKing, the Resurrection Stone never really brought back dead persons in the living world. This is what I said in my first reply though DumbledoresEarWax has put it much better than I did a few posts further.
2. Timmy, performing magic out of Hogwarts when underage might result in expulsion of the violator but it is understood that even underage magicians can perform magic if they are in a magical environment. How could the ministry expel Hermione or even find out it was she when literally hundreds of other underage wizards were around her? Besides, she wasn’t surrounded by Muggles and therefore there was no breach upon the Internation Statute of Secrecy. For your second question, I am doubtful. I think that there must be some sort of magic inside Hogwarts to automatically create a portrait when a headmaster died. The magic would also imbibe certain qualities of the person in the portrait to make it more believable but surely it would not make it as the person itself. Of course, DumbledoresEarWax puts it much better than I do but integrating some thought and imagination, it is pretty acceptable seeing its a magical world and there are certain things that even wizards do not know. I hope that answers your questions satisfactorily.
3. Passing through on, if you read more carefully, Rowling is precise enough to mention that Harry was little older than a year on the night Lily and James died. I am sorry but I couldn’t understand the second half of your question so I am helpless there.
4. Excellent arguments and exceptionally valid. However, the “plot hole” you mention can be covered easily if not by explicit instructions then by the observations of the previous actions. In part three when Dumbledore tells Hermione to rotate the dial three times, they are transported three hours back. Imagine, if you would have to kill the youth Tom Riddle, how many turns would it take to go that far. It was virtually impossible. Thus, though there is no definite explanation about it, the Time Turner can only effectively used if the task that needs to be undone is a few hours or at most a few days old. Also, it must be noted that to change the past, we need to put our present selves in the past and as our presence must not be felt there, so must our absence go unnoticed in the present. I know this is confusing, but if you stop and think about it, you begin to understand how it works. You might argue that the Time Turner after a task is done can be used to forward the time again to return to the present, but Rowling has been careful and wise enough not to mention that the Time Turner is capable of doing so. And the simple reason behind this is that once you return to the past, you cannot forward into future because the future then is still unknown and undivined. The future will depend next on the course of actions you perform and might take you to a present that might be startlingly different from which you belonged. It means that you have to live your life through the time you have moved back through …. again.
Now, if all here agree, that it was an enjoyable read overall, then there is no point to moan why it was worthless. Though, I still welcome any such arguments or questions as even in fantasies, Harry Potter, lives on somewhere.
– Goku
Why couldn’t someone go back in time and kill baby Riddle ? Because time fits together like a jigsaw. In the 3rd book, Buckbeak is never killed, nothing is truly altered. If Voldemort exists ‘now’, he will always exist until his PRESENT self is killed.
(I did not mean to have ‘robinhoI’ in that
) sorry I’m not fully sure I understand why everyone is saying the sorting hat, Neville and the sword was such a flaw, the way I interpreted it was: “Only a true Gryffindor could pull the sword out of the hat.” Voldemort was in Slytherin, how would he have known the Neville (or anyone) would pull a sword out of a hat? He said the only house that would be used from then on would be Slytherin he conjured the hat and lit it on fire to prove a point 1) the sorting hat would no longer be needed as every student would belong in Slytherin and 2) he lit the hat on fire on top of Neville head to show what would happen to anyone else that dared to stand up to him. :
I have one doubt regarding the chapter ‘Bathilda’s secret’.. on page 274, it’s written that Bathilda called “come!”. She was keepig mum in front of Hermione so that she dint want hermione to know that she was talking in Parseltongue. Then why does she call out loud and why does Hermione get that it is Parsletongue?
oops!! i mean why DOESN’T Hermione get that it’s Parseltongue??
and one more doubt – why is LV knocked unconsious when he uses avada kedavra on Harry in forest. I mean he remains oblivious each time when a Horcrux is destroyed and nothing happens to him when diadem, locket or ring is destroyed….or even Nagini…
I would like to add my view on Dumbledore’s plan regarding alligience of Elder Wand. He never wanted Snape to gain it’s alligience. His death was PLANNED, so if fact he was not DEFEATED by Snape. If everything would have gone as planned by Dumbledore, the power of Elder Wand would have died with Dumbledore himself as he would have remained UNDEFEATED throughout his life.
but his plan failed because before Snape could kill him, Draco turned up and disarmed him. Dumbledore was not expecting this attack nor did he thought that this would give Elder Wand’s alligience to Draco.
Something I just realised:
Harry’s wand breaks from Hermione’s curse when they escape Godric’s Hollow, the wand doesn’t even snap but is badly broken and as a result, harry can’t use it.
BUT
In the first book when Harry and Hagrid visit Olivander, Olivander talks to Hagrid about how he was disappointed that Hagrid’s wand was snapped after his expulsion, to which Hagrid replies ‘I still have the pieces’….Olivander then says: ‘but you don’t use them…?’, implying that with only the pieces of a wand, one can perfom magic. Hagrid never has any difficulty using the pieces of his wand (which would have been destroyed by magic) to conduct spells but in Harry’s case, his wand is rendered useless and irrepairable
I think people are taking this whole “plot hole” thing too far.
JK Rowling obviously spent a lot of time on this book, so you should enjoy it! Not point out its faults!
:|
And as for the whole “spelling mistakes” thing, some people just like to have things nice and perfect (like me;)) and there’s nothing wrong with that!
[...] left and right. So. I’m gonna be tackling all the complaints which can be found here that people have about Harry Potter. I find hat nearly all of them are EASILY explainable. The [...]
hi, all you bright young things. I have considered myself an expert on all things Potter for years now, only because i am attentive to detail, but you truly give me a lot of things to think about. may i suggest listening to the audiobooks-i do, almost every day.
Ok, since I have not read the WHOLE thread, let me present what i find to be some big plot holes, not in any particular order, book 7 most particularly. Help me out with them if you can?
Spells break when wizards die. RIGHT?
(usually? protective spell cast when harry’s mother died.)
and why did not James Potter dying for his wife and son protect lily form the same curse? do people not shield one another from death spells, ever? why was harry the first to survive it?
Harry knew Dumbledore was dead because the body-bind on him lifted, fidelius charm on potter home lifted because they were dead or because pettigrew betrayed them?
HOW did Moody’s tongue-tying and Dumbledore dust-figure last after his death? WHY did Grimmauld place continue to have all the protective enchantments on it after the death of Sirius, his parents, and Dumbledore?
It was however, mentioned that the Fidelius charm was transferred to all those who were TOLD the location.
having now gone back to take a look at more of the thread- and, WOW, I have a couple more points.
firstly, yes, teddy and victoire would be second? cousins, but, forgive me, brits don’t really seem to have much of a problem with that. add to it the pure-blood intermingling aspect, and it ’s acceptable. royal family? anyone? ok. And Teddy Lupin was just jumping onto the train to snog someone underaged, not to go back to school. You get the idea that he is a scruffy, mooching, couch surfer from harry’s comment about his coming over for meals too often.
In response to the original idea of voldemort’s idiocy, “why didn’t he check that Harry was really dead”, well, you are forgetting a key point about Voldemort.
Death, dead bodies, blood or even injury reeeeaaaallllly freak him out. he wouldn’t even want to go near a probable corpse, let alone touch it. Plus he was in a little bit of denial about his horcruxes being rumbled.
.
Infallibility of the Elder Wand, well how could anyone win it, ever? it’s the wand that’s unbeatable, not the wizard who wields it, y’know. there are no absolutes and it has to pass on somehow. leaving a bloody trail across the pages of history and all that.
Good point about Colin Creevey! busted.
ooh! and one more thing- can’t help it! Dumbledore was pretty sure the sword, “the only known relic of godric gryffindor, remains safe”. paraphrased. Well, maybe it was news to him when the sorting hat sang, “Twas gryffindor who found the way-he whipped me from his head. (the founders put some brains in me so i could choose instead.”) a thousand year old hat, belonging to a founder! i’d call that a relic of gryffindor.
Regarding Neville and the sword, I was under the impression that he was using the sword he and Luna stole from the headmaster’s office earlier in the semester. This doesn’t explain how a fake sword was able to destroy the horcrux Nagini, but I like this explanation better than the hat just handing Neville a badass sword.
why did voldemorts snake see through the invisibility clok? its supposeee to be the one of the 3 DH
I hated this book !!! It didnt explaine anything, and all that crap about the wand changing masters that sucked even moree–And I there was a part in my opinion of the book where it got BORING..this was when they were kamping.
Just a quick note that I noticed while reading Book 7… pertaining to Harry’s escape. There’s a few flaws in the logic of his escape from Privet Lane.
1) There’s 13 people plus Harry, making 14 total. Only 6 doses of the polyjuice potion are given out. Wouldn’t it make more sense for all 13 to drink polyjuice potion? Moody clearly states that Harry is to be captured and killed only by Voldemont. However, if all 14 were Harry Potter, nobody should be killed in the melee because any of them could have been the real Harry.
2) What about Ligimens? Only some of the people were competent in occlemency, himself Harry not being one of them. Get a few half-competent occlement Death Eaters and they should be able to figure out who’s a real Harry and who’s a fake Harry…
3) What’s the point of so different transportation? If everyone rode very similar thestrals and the “guardians” were either taking the form of Harry or some other competent person, it’d make it VERY difficult to plan who’s who and and which Death Eater should go where.
J.K. Putting in the time turner was a BIG mistake!
Surely a group of aurors (or just Dumbledore himself ) went back in time to when voldemort attacked Harry’s parents and at least hid behind a door and attacked voldemort. Or even better get a group of highly skilled wizards and then all wait for him there, and then just Take out voldemort, And before you say it, as they were not there in the first place it would not conflict with their own personal time line.
Also they could do this any time as apparently the time turners have no limit to how far you can go back but even if they did you could what get a group of aurors together in what half an hour?!?!
Another point even if “you cannot be seen” by anyone a sniper rifle on the door from a hidden place close by would finish voldemort off for sure as he has no protection against bullets (as far as we know).
And beautifully even if voldemort used his horcruxes as some time someone would know where he is at some time just go back in time again and kill him again! No Problem.
Me personally i would make him die of old age then that might cancel out the horcruxes but who knows. Obviously a very secure prison and but magical barriers all across the place but i don’t dwell on the Security
Theres my points find an answer to why that couldn’t work rather than using Harry’s method. Of course it would be very difficult for a teenager nowadays to get his hands on a gun :-p
P.S. I do like the books this is just something i thought about
The thing i don’t understand is; how was Colin Creevey killed, because according to previous books he and his brother deninis were muggleborns and according to the start of DH Muggleborns could no longer go to hogwarts.
When LV mocks Draco’s mother and her sister of her niece marrying Lupos. ( HBP) She responds that Tonks mother isn’t her sister anymore since she married that muggle.
In the seventh book Ted Tonks clearly states he’s a wizzard.
hey all,
firstly this is a FANTASTIC site, which I have spent the last hour reading instead of doing my homework
just a ramdom pondering…………………aren’t teddy and victoire really really distantly related? Teddy is Andromeda’s grandson, Andromeda is Sirius’ cousin, and Sirius is distantly related to the Weasleys? This is bugging me now so if I have totally missed something obvious please tell me! Thanks 
Another plot hole! But first, I have a question. What happens if you use “Avada Kedavra” on a horcrux? If you say “nothing”, then why the horcrux inside Harry destroyed when Voldy used it? And if avada- can destroy horcruxes, why didn’t harry, ron and hermione used it to destroy all those horcruxes? Like locket, cup and snake. After all, AVADA KEDAVRA is an unblokable curse……….
The reason that they can’t use time turners is because you need to get permission from the ministry and in the fifth book they are all destroyed by harry and his friends. And Grindelwald does win the wands allegiance because in the memory of him stealing it he shoots spells back at Gregorovitch. The wand is not unbeatable it is just extremely powerful and an extremely powerful wizard could win it from whoever had it. Avada Kedavra only destroys horcruxes that are inside living things which is riskier than putting a horcrux in an inanimate object. That is why Voldemort only put one horcrux in a living thing. Now about Hagrids wand. Ollivander said that wizards can use any objects to channel their magic through but that wands worked the best. The umbrella is what hagrid cheannels his magic through and having the wand pieces in it just makes it easier. Neville was being a true Gryffindor and pulled the sword from the hat.