Out of curiosity, do people count things not in the books as canon? I ask because most of Taure's list were things JK said later. TBH I never consider that canon. I mean isnt the definition of canon originally differentiating the actual books of the bible from other writings/ideas shared outside of it? I would not count anything outside the books as canon. I think authors words can be weighted when its say.. clarifying what they meant maybe. Something like that. But i'd hardly for instance take JK in an interview saying something about wizards vanishing urine as making that canon to the universe.

 

All of these quotes come from J.K. Rowling's Twitter.

J.K. Rowling ?@jk_rowling 8 de mar
Yes, nearly all wizards use wands, which makes magic easier to channel. Wandless magic is sophisticated and takes more talent.


J.K. Rowling ? @jk_rowling
Wands and brooms (and flying cars) are tools that channel magic. The most gifted can dispense with them.


J.K. Rowling ?@jk_rowling 8 de mar
No, there's a cultural tradition of using wands and broomless flight is (as you might imagine) very risky!


Eganda Gh. ?@egaand 8 de mar
How about goblin? It'll be better or not if they use wands?

J.K. Rowling ?@jk_rowling 8 de mar
.@egaand Interesting question. The wizards deny the right to bear wands to other categories of magical being. Some think that unfair.


Bárbara Kultchek ?@lbarbarak 8 de mar
@jk_rowling are the wizards from NA more powerful than the other ones, due to their ancient ability of doing magic without a wand?

J.K. Rowling ?@jk_rowling 8 de mar
.@lbarbarak It depends entirely on the individual witch or wizard!

o0MRG0o ?@o0MRG0o 8 de mar
@jk_rowling Do the gifted still see benefits from wand usage, even though it isn't required?

J.K. Rowling ?@jk_rowling 8 de mar
.@o0MRG0o Yes, most wizards produce more precise magic by using the correct wand, which is why they've been widely adopted.

mauron fugiu d malet ?@mauironman 8 de mar
@jk_rowling who would win a battle, a wizard with a wand or a wizard wandless?

J.K. Rowling
?@jk_rowling
.@AlbuszSevero Again, depends on the individual. A Goyle with a wand will lose to a Dumbledore without one. Most would choose wands to duel.

I dislike the quotes above because she didn't make it clear that you need a wand to brew potions, so if you could make them without one, that would be considered wandless magic, and it's potion magic that non-Europeans used to perform before they adopted wands. I think that wizards who refuse to use wands are also limited in what they can do.

I also dislike Gamp's Law, I was happier without it. I would prefer it if were possible to transfigure random things into food or even gold, assuming you're powerful, knowledgeable, and skillful enough to do it.

 

Harry died a virgin.

 

Didn't Harry and Ginny spend a lot of time alone together at the end of HBP? She made tattoo designs for his chest and everything, surely she would have taken pity on him and introduced him to the ways of jackrabbiting for 10 seconds and then apologizing for not lasting longer

 

There was a scene in Deathly Hallows where Ginny was kissing him like he'd never been kissed before, before Ron proceeded to interrupt them. They next interracted at the wedding and I think(?) at Hogwarts after.

 

Yes you're right. I think I've interpreted that as she knew it was going to be the last time, but your reading makes a lot of sense!

 

I've never liked prophecies. One of the reasons why it took me so long to read the Harry Potter books in the first place was because I'd heard the main character had this whole deal with a prophecy.

 

The lack of any kind of coherent plan to deal with Voldemort in the last two books. Sure, the situation is difficult, but there's no excuse for Harry and co. to fight over lack of food in a forest when you can use magic and literally teleport at will.

 

Why? I'd like to see your reasoning.

 

I would have really liked it, if we had seen some actual full time consequence for all the danger the Students of Hogwarts were placed under in the 6 years that Harry was a student there.

I still find it ridiculous that none of the parents, especially purebloods, let their children continue going to that school.

I think it would have been really great to see the student population gradually decrease as the school years went by.


Also, Molly Weasley should never have killed Bellatrix.

 

Reasoning for no reason. Very well, no reason is provided except one I do not think is justifiable, that the muggles would expect them to solve problems. Muggles did not have this expectation before the statute was passed. Wizards could simply ignore their requests for help with their problems. Wizards could solve a few problems and throw up their hands at others.

 

A weak reason is still a reason.

 

If you look at materials outside the books it looks like the main reason for the Statute of Secrecy was the Witch Hunts.

We know that after wizards tried to appeal to muggle rulers they had a debate amongst themselves on how to proceed, while some argued to wage war against muggles, others argued for the Statute of Secrecy(we know a potter was a strong supporter), people like the Malfoys who were part of the muggle upper class were very opposed to it.

That is not to say that not wanting to help muggles was not also a reason, but according to Dumbledore's comments on a Tale of Beedle the Bard that encourages wizards to use magic to help muggles, wizards were opposed to it because of the witch hunts.

 

A couple of the biggest for me are the Imperius chaining thing, especially with how a weak little teenager like Draco is able to manage it-- that would suggest that Riddle should have had an easy time just mind controlling everyone-- and how the Patronus goes from very rare to commonplace as hell.

I also agree with Taure that Rowling seemed to change from Harry on typical hero's path to Harry as everyman in the middle of the series & I hate that. The way the Patronus is treated is emblematic of that change, and it badly weakens Harry's character arc.

 

The Unforgivable Curses never really jived with me.

 

In what way?

 

Albus. Severus.

Dear God, that poor child. Named after one unmitigated bastard and another mitigated bastard. Plus the name just sounds awful.

I didn't really like the whole redemption arc for the Malfoys either. They seemed to face no consequences for their actions, even though they spent years as Death Eaters and five minutes as non-combatants. Lucius nearly murdered the whole school, and Draco was guilty of unforgivables and attempted murder many times over.

 

I like the concept of "Unforgivable Acts", mind controlling someone is bad, murder is bad, and torture is bad. Having spells that are just "The Killing Spell" "The Torture Spell" "The Mind Control Spell" seems awfully boring to me.

 

I think the idea is that you can do all three of those things with other spells too, but these three can be used only for that.

 

You're right, and that is what I dislike about them. Although I understand the neccessity for Avada Kedavra to exist for "The-Boy-Who-Lived" to make any sense. I find myself at a lack of words to describe how I feel about them, though its not a STRONG distaste, more like they just dont sit particularly right with me.