Can't seem to quote but to JustBlaise. Magic as far as we know is pretty stagnant. The only advance I know bout for sure is the creation of the Wolfsbane potion. In fact aren't most of wizarding settlements we see villages? But I concede the point. However it still does not change the fact that it was pure retconning from JK. She failed, sometimes it works sometimes it doesn't but most authors have a clear view of what they want to do in advance.

I can easily believe that she thought of the Riddles diary is a Horcrux in advance compared to an uber-cloak with significant weaknesses. That said it is a bit hard to know what you're going to do many years into the future with a constantly maturing series like HP, I mean OotP almost trebled PS or CoS in terms of word count.

 

The fact that most of their settlements are villages has nothing to do with how advanced they are in magic. If anything, it gives further credence to their magical advances, as they don't have to change anything else to compensate. They can magically expand spaces and move materials, so no need for high rises, more advanced building materials, etc.

EDIT: read the canon fanboy's post below

I disagree with the idea that the Hallows are an afterthought, because you're probably injecting (no offense) a bit of fanfic-reader snobbery. You've read so many different pieces of fanfiction that included, among other things, Harry's Cloak getting constantly Summoned or Harry finding Merlin's/Gryffindor's/Jesus's wand, that when the "super" items make an appearance you automatically deem it a rush job. Nevermind that nowhere else in the series did anyone ever attempt to Summon the Cloak; nevermind that the only person besides Moody to surpass the enchantments of the Cloak was Dumbledore - who studied the thing for at least a decade. Nevermind that we don't know exactly what Moody can 'see' through that Eye - be it body heat, a "magical aura", whatever.

 

Magic is stagnant?

New brooms every year, Fred and George's creations, new spells being created all the time (Snape's spells for example, Lupin's comments about spells going in and out of fashion, the existence of the DoM and the Commitee for Experimental Charms), all the stuff we see in Diagon Alley like models of the entire galaxy, Dumbledore doing things which his NEWT examiners had never seen before, unaided flight having been discovered, new creatures being bred.

Hmmm.

Plus, wizards can already do pretty much anything they want to do with magic.

As for the wizarding population being spread out: this is more a symptom of the population size and the fact that the wizarding community is partially integrated with the Muggle world, rather than a signal of advance or lack thereof.

 

I already said that I concede the point, it wasn't really well thought out anyway, but to Justblaise : I started reading HP fanfiction after I read DH, I was a star wars buff at the time so no I'm not just some jaded fic veteran.

And you say that nowhere else in the series did anyone attempt to summon the cloak. JK used that to her advantage to prove her point. But it's all moot since the only person who knows isn't telling.

The Deathly Hallows and the Horcruxes painfully reminded me of JK's morality-centric writing, especially after GoF. And being someone who loves bad guys and cried in frustration when Luke refused to turn to the dark side, I have to say yeah, I have reason to hate them. Especially if they're used to craft some magnificently confusing end for one of my favorite villians, who dies of a fricking magical technicality. Bottomline the Hallows and Horcruxes are just JK's way of sending a message to the younger half of HP readers.

If you ask me she was destined to fail,just like Lucas. With ten years in between the first and last books she had to satisfy three groups of people eople who grew up with Harry Potter, people who joined the waggon later on, and the kids,a tough balancing act, and she choked and came up with some nonsense about uber-weapons that kill their weilders (rightful or no) , and worst of all: the-love-trumps-all bullshit thats everywhere. Christ.

Boiled down: Sheeither made it up or she didn't but she wouldn't be the first author to try to add some flavor to an old series.But she may be the first to fail so magnificently.

 

I know this was posted way back, but I second the Amerision Amendment.

 

Minor bumpage.

Anyway, I propose a new rule, and it's going to be controversial.

Rule #?

Harry shall never best Albus Dumbledore in a fair test/battle of magical skill, knowledge, and prowess.

Spawned by that "Collection of Harmonious..." crapfic in For Review right now, and really the entire indy!Harry genre.

 

I agree with you. By all accounts Dumbledore was a prodigy in his childhood. His use of magic only refined after 80 or more years of practice. He was unmatched in magical skill, knowledge, and prowess untill his death in Canon.

Voldemort with all his expertise on dark arts cannot defeat Dumbledore in a fair fight. Note that I said fair fight, not using underhanded tactics. Even in canon Dumbledore plans his own death, by allowing Snape to muder him. So the idea of Harry with five or seven years magical education can defeat Dumbledore in a fair fight is laughable. No amount of training, knockturn excursion, ritual, even downloading Voldemort's memories cannot help him. But no one is unbeatable, everyone has a weakness. Dumbledore's weakness is he believes in redemption. He's very old and ten years down the line Harry can defeat him handily.

I don't think it'll affect indy!Harry genre. It's for the stories in which Harry deviates from Dumbledore's manipulations by forging his own path. Nowhere it states that Harry must take down Dumbledore in a fair fight to prove his worth. He can always evade from Dumbledore's manipulation and interference. If he wants to remove Dumbledore, he can use poison or some other tactics or he can wait untill Dumbledore's old age take care of himself. If there will be a Potter's Law on this, I'll support it wholeheartedly.

 

Amendment: Harry is allowed to defeat Dumbledore in fair fight should author find reasonable and logical explanation for this. (i.e. Denarian Harry from Shezza's fics or Nuhuh's time.traveler!Harry)

Note: a month of training in a trunk bought in boring shopping trip does not count as neither reasonable nor logical explanation.

 

Amendment: Harry can't beat older-than-life Dumbledore. Harry can however, beat him in a time-travel fic.

 

So between Taure and KrzaQ, we've got... this illogical thing cannot happen unless a logical reason is found for it. Not the greatest gem of wisdom.

Dumbledore's old, and wizard's aren't immortal. There's countless reasons he wouldn't be at the top of his game, and if magical cures could trump them all, there'd be no reason for elixir of life. His memory could be failing, offering an alternative explanation for the pensieve. Stiff joints would make it tricky to nail wand movements. And so on.

Hell, the stress of Voldemort's return and the ministry being dicks could cause it all to flare up...

 

A logical reason: Dumbledore must have Alzheimer's for Harry to defeat him.

 

Oh ye of little faith.

KrzaQ, with regards to Denarian!Harry from Shezza's stories:

The fight between Harry and Dumbledore would not be fair, since Harry has Meciel and Dumbledore has a withered hand. Also, Harry has several physical advantages over Dumbledore (note my law only stated a magical test between the two) such as his youth in comparison to Dumbledore's old age, and his healing abilities/enhanced reflexes through Meciel which would aid him in a duel.

Thus Harry could beat Dumbledore in Denarian Lord without it breaking this law, with no need for an amendment.

Similar explanations allow Harry to best Dumbledore within the workings of the law for reasons of Dumbledore's failing health due to old age.

 

This made me giggle for a pretty solid fifteen minutes.
Then I re-read it and laughed all over again.

very amusing, thank you!!!

 

Didn't Harry get absolutely destroyed by Dumbledore in their practice duels?

Harry might be faster, perhaps magically more powerful, and younger, but Dumbledore has more tactics, obscure magic, and skill than Harry can dream of.

He consistently mentions that Dumbledore is the only person who can still kick his ass.

 

Which is why I said could. I have a feeling that Harry will beat Dumbledore by the end of the story.

 

And then kill him.

 

When was the last time Shezza's Harry beat a male character and didn't kill him? Excluding time he spent on the Hogwarts' grounds during which he wasn't allowed to hurt people for the hell of it. Women on the on other hand...

 

In DL, when he was going after Rosanna. He let the guard live because he had a family.

Verrine didn't.

 

Wow, these were great! Thanks for codifying them for us.

I have to say that 17 (No Sex with Snape ever) should be made to work into international law somehow. Talk about squicky. Then again, most fics where Snape has a large role is pretty squicky anyways.

It is amazing how violating any of these laws can often make a fic suck so bad. When one breaks more then one, I run away. Fast.

 

Through all of this, I have not seen one of the more egregious violations of common sense (or at least my page search button couldn't find it).

Potter Law #Whatever: Finite Incantatem is not a counter-curse for the Imperius Curse or any other spell requiring even the slightest modicum of power. Hell, canon Hermione had to look up a counter-curse for the Jelly-Legs Jinx, so it can't even deactivate crappy spells.