Hey!
Why didn't anyone EVER try to track Harry? Consider the HIGH level of interest in Harry, including the Ministry, Rita (and every other reporter world-wide,) the DE, the DE children, and pretty much every member of the British magical world. Everyone who knew about the Boy Who Lived also knew that he could be found on Platform 9 3/4 at least twice a year.

Find someone who could throw the spell quietly, disillusion them, and have them hang around the station. Even if those blood wards would block tracking to Privet Drive, presumably they would give a general location.

 

The Bond of Blood Charm was placed upon Harry, not Privet Drive. He just needs to call his Aunt's home his home for a certain amount of time a year to "recharge" it.

 

Does this mean that NO long-term spells can be cast on Harry? Or that they fade quickly? What if you cast the spell on Harry's clothing? What if a cute little girl (polyjuiced) gave Harry a flower to pin on his shirt? Surely the Prophet or DE could get hold of a pickpocket - have someone plant a tracking device.

 

I have no idea what it means, I was just correcting you upon the idea that there are blood wards upon Privet Drive.

However, at the least I assume it means that Harry is protected against harm from Voldemort (until the events of the Graveyard at least).

The protection may carry over to all those marked by Voldemort also.

 

Okay, so I have permission from Tinn to necro this thread since it seems there are still some people with issues about the Trace.

As stated at the beginning of the thread:


In HBP, we're told that the Ministry of Magic cannot track individuals, and so only monitors households for magic. Thus children in magical households can get away with using magic in the holidays, if their parents allow them.

However, in DH, we're told of the Trace, which is applied to a person and does not break until they're 17.

This is in fact not a contradiction at all.

The Trace is applied to a person (or is something inherent about a person which lasts until they are 17), which monitors the magic performed around that person, but is unable to tell who is performing the magic.

This reconciles all we know about tracking underage magic. No contradiction at all. The apparent contradiction stemmed from an assumption with no foundation: that the Trace, as it is Tracing an individual, should be able to tell that it is the individual that uses magic. There is no reason to assume this.

So yeah. Where's the problem?

 

It is a contradiction. The sort known as a 'plot hole'. Just because you worship the exact word of canon doesn't mean that every other option is incorrect.

 

EDIT: I'm not going to get into the middle of this argument. tl;dr, this is a bloody plot hole, Taure, it isn't something you can just explain away. The Harry Potter books are riddles with them, get over it.

 

You all seem pretty keen to say its a plot hole without actually explaining the hole.

Where is it? Where's the contradiction?

 

The contradiction lies in the fact that they then proceed to press charges against the individuals based on the results of this Trace. I find it quite ridiculous that they press charges against an individual for spells used in the subjects vicinity. In fact, the sheer incompetence required to arrive at this decision should preclude one from government service.

 

That's not a contradiction, that's an objection to a way the wizarding world runs their government.

Notice that they don't prosecute all people based on the results of the Trace, only those who are in Muggle households. This is not unreasonable - if a Muggleborn is the only magical person in the area, then any magic recorded must be due to them. Magical households have to enforce it themselves.

Had Harry lived on Privet Drive with another wizard, the Ministry would have been unable to press charges. Also note that Dumbledore indicates that its extremely unusual for underage wizardry to face charges at all - it's only because of the political situation against Harry that it occurred.

 

It's pretty strongly implied that the Ministry and Wizarding World have a medieval view when it comes to burden of proof; from what we see of trials in the Wizarding World it seems pretty strongly indicated that the principle they operate under is guilty until proven innocent.

 

Not really. It's just the way you think it should work.

It's a spell that monitors the magic that is performed in its vicinity, but is unable (presumably because the Ministry hasn't figured out how) to tell who is casting the magic. That it is anchored to an individual doesn't factor into it.

Why is it that you think that the Ministry should be able to tell who is performing the magic?

The name "the Trace" doesn't appear until DH, but magical tracking has existed since PS.

 

JKR never adequately explains the fact that Harry has NEVER considered number 4 his home. One of the many reasons why Dumbledores intentions are questioned.

Oh, and as for the making someplace unplottable. My understanding (which I think was from canon) was that that simply took an area of land and removed it from maps particularly muggle maps. The most basic means of hiding areas from muggle observation. I don't remember it being used to hide things on a magical level since locations in the magical world all seem to have "addresses" of sorts. In Fanon it is often used nearly interchangeably with fidelius. Of course it all bleed together so I may be way off.

 

My only problem with Taure's theory is that of Muggleborns. How does the Ministry apply it to someone who's not on their records? Then again, there must be some way for Hogwarts to track Muggleborns to invite them, so theoretically there must be someway for the Ministry to track the spontaneous birth of Magic in Muggleborns too.

 

I too agree with Taure. There is no single event in cannon that contradicts fact of Track recognizing an individual. Moreover, I don't remeber any Obliviators intervention on accidental magic at all. I think that people get Trace when they are admitted into Hogwarts. Notice that when Hagrid asks Harry obut weird events, he doesn't ask about group of wizards repairing damage caused by his magic

 

I've always thought that accidental magic was for issues that cause distress. Harry has his hair grow overnight, and turns his teacher's hair blue. Considering the fact that the muggle born child doesn't know they have magic, and the person who sees such an act doesn't believe in magic, they would write it off as an unusual occurrence, dream, etc. Therefore there is no need for an Oblivators to get involved.

On the trace, if the Hogwarts registry (Hagrid in PS) can trace magical use, and the Hogwarts letters can identify an exact location and name of the recipient magic user, I don't understand how the trace can only identify a location from which the magic originates unless its some sort of privacy issue.

 

I wonder how Tom Riddle killed his parents in muggle neibourhood. He was still at Hogwarts after all. It points to a fact, that breaking the Trace is possible or that Trace is recent invention.

 

Or it points to a plot hole. Never eliminate the possibility that someone screwed up.