Regarding admittance to Hogwarts:

One of the solutions that I have come up with that makes sense (at least in my own mind) is the idea that day schools and in-home private tutors are as viable of an education option as Hogwarts is.

While every magical child might be eligible to attend Hogwarts, it seems that the decision comes down to the parents whether the child will actually attend Hogwarts or not (or it did until Voldemort took over the Ministry in 1997). Now, I would think, like Muggle parents, that not all Wizard parents are fond of sending their child away for ten months out of the year and some of those parents wouldn't be able to afford private tutors or have the time and education necessary to give their children a well rounded education themselves. This brings us to day schools, where, unlike Hogwarts, the students wouldn't be required to stay on the premises once they've finish classes for the day. Or, a few of the school might be setup so that the students stay at the school during the week and go home on the weekends. Either way, the parents have a greater access to their children.

As for Muggleborns, I believe that, idealistically, the Ministry (or maybe just Dumbledore) would desire for all Muggleborns to attend Hogwarts. It would create a stronger bond between Muggleborns and the Magical World, if they did. However, maybe some Muggleborns are offered the option of day school and private tutors, if the parents initially refuse to send their son or daughter to Hogwarts.

It's just a working theory, but smaller day schools would give credence to the prestige that Hogwarts holds. The elite of wizard society would either send their children to Hogwarts or they would higher in-home private tutors. Though, I imagine that most would choose Hogwarts, so that their children could begin to forge connections that could be exploited later on. The lower classes would have the option of Hogwarts or day schools, which some would choose day schools so that they could keep their children closer to home.

Then there is also the possibility of British born wizards attending an institution outside of Britain all together. I do believe that Draco mention that his father wanted him to attend Durmstrang.

 

Correspondence courses is also an option I think.

 

Your explanation for the Muggleborn education is certainly the most reasonable theory I have read but the explanation about pure-bloods or half-bloods is still up for debate. This problem I think is directly related to the population of the Wizarding world.

One flaw in your pure-blood theory is, if Hogwarts is the premier school then how the hell those talent-less Weasley kids(RW & GW) got into it. Weasley's most certainly didn't have the wealth or influence to get into Hogwarts. Moreover, if there are day schools where kids can stay in touch with their guardians then I can be certain that Molly would send her kids to these inexpensive day schools instead of Hogwarts.

(Though Weasleys may only be an exception.)

 

I wasn't saying that there was something special about certain pure-bloods or that only the elite have the option of attending Hogwarts. Hogwarts is open to everyone, or so it seems in canon. I was just explaining why the elite (pure-blood or half-blood) would actually send their children to Hogwarts instead of keeping them home with in-home tutors.

 

What makes you think GW had no talent and was Ron really that bad magicly? He lacked motivations but I've seen him with average skill. Goyle and Crabbe would make a better case here.

Who knows, maybe they spend all their money on the education of their kids, they could have got money from the Weasley clan or by working for the ministry their kids are guaranteed a place at Hogwarts. There are a lot possibilities here.

I agree with your argument about Molly and day schools unless obviously Hogwarts gives them a chance for better jobs in the future by prestige and networking.

 

I disagree with Molly sending the brood to day schools for one very obvious reason. Pride. The Weasleys are an old pureblood family. They've attended Hogwarts for generations upon generations. The family isn't about to change such a long standing tradition. Not to mention, the kids wouldn't have let her keep them home if she tried. Fred and George would have committed mutiny.

As for paying for Hogwarts, there are no tuition fees. At least, tuition fees are never mentioned in canon. I had half a notion to include this in my original post, but didn't feel it necessary. The way I see it, there is most likely an education tax and the Ministry puts funds into the schools (students do have to obtain their own supplies, which there is a scholarship fund for students who don't have the means to pay for the supplies themselves).

Now linking back to my original post, the reason that Hogwarts is considered the best is due to the fact that Hogwarts is where the elite would send their children, if they elect to send their children to school. This means that Hogwarts most likely receives large donations from the richer family on top of the Ministry funding. This makes it so that Hogwarts can supply the best teachers, the best furnishing, the best food, and so on and so forth.

Why I think the Ministry helps fund Hogwarts? I believe this due to the simple fact that the Ministry is capable of wielding a large amount of influence within the school, if it wants to (look no further than the whole of Harry's fifth year). If Hogwarts was a privately funded school, Umbridge never would have become High Inquisitor.

 

Then it is kind of confusing why only few would select Hogwarts, considering it is the best in Europe and is open to everybody(as you implied). Even if someone wants their kids to be close, they would not deny a chance of studying at Hogwarts.

But even with these flaws I think your theory is the most plausible considering we are forming an universe around a mere planet that JKR created.

 

Actually, there are some parents who would deny their children a Hogwarts education. Despite how it is depicted, I don't believe that everyone has an amazing experience at Hogwarts. With so many teenagers together, there are bound to be kids that feel bullied and feel out of place. Unlike the Weasleys and other pureblood families, some half-bloods and second generation muggleborns (Can there be second generation muggleborns? What would you call a kid born of two muggleborns?) don't have such a deep connection with Hogwarts. If they can send their kid to a day school instead of Hogwarts, they just might do it. Not to mention, there could be various other factors and reasons to keep their children home.

As for why purebloods might keep their children home, I believe some families to be very private and I believe some families to be so radical in their views that they wouldn't dare allow their children to associate with muggleborns in any way. Again, there could be many, many factors.

 

Taure, I have said it before, and I'll say it again now: I disagree with much of your theory of magic, and I feel that following these guidelines is not the only way to make an interesting story that is well above the dredge of average fanfiction, at least in terms of your Magic and World sections (which are, perhaps not coincidentally, the two areas I disagree with you on many aspects).

Your other two sections, however, I feel are solid and should be followed for the most part in order to make a decent fanfiction. I do, however, disagree to some extent with your very last point: a villainous point of view can be properly handled, even without revealing the villain's plans.

 

I don't think he ever said that it was the only way. Just that it was his way.

 

I wholeheartedly agree with you on that point. I've read several stories that are made all the better by villainous POVs. The key to success is to have your villain maintain an air of ambiguity. This can be achieved by plugging internal monolgue that hints at the dastardly plot, but never fully reveals it.

 

Granted, a capable author like Terry Pratchet can handle villain PoV well. JKR did a fairly good version of it in the GoF opening,

But I think for most fanfiction writers, it's something to be avoided for the exact reasons stated: ridiculous "bad guy monologues to an empty room all their plans and motivations" scenes.

 

For most fanfiction writers, writing in general is something to be avoided.

 

I wholeheartedly agree whit most of the document. Mainly what the plot points descrive, and a lot of fanfic authors would improve if they follow that simple rules. Maybe you could detail more how a dialogue, or character discurse, is done well but the rules by themselves are good.
I already posted in the document about a point of the magical part, and I don't agree with some paragraphs of said points, but it was in general well theorized.

Hogwarts is part of the magical education elite, you can't denay that. A school that invites you to join by selection fulfill what being "elite" means. You could hypothesize what educational purpose follows the selection, but economical income or social status doesn't exempt you from been elected to attend.

The villain POV in some parts of the novel is not a rule, but an exception. Like some colleagues mentioned, it makes the plot predictable. Now, start the history with a paring already formed or the culmination of the plot, doesn't make it bad. There are a couple of books and movies that follow that premise and are excellent. Only you have to be a very skilled writer to doing it well.

 

THANK YOU! I've had the urge to punch every person who reference that fic. Especially those who say "I would like to point you to Magical Theory by Aldalbert Waffling in their post here.

I won't deny that it's one of many valid interpretations of canon, but it is just that: an interpretation of canon.

That people here confuse it with canon pisses me off.

 

I'm going to take a break from studying macroeconomics and address the whole 'Villain POV' thing - yes, while it is only intended as a suggestion and while one might think that it can ruin surprises or plot twists or future plans, I'd argue that this particular case requires a far more nuanced approach.

For instance, take Goblet of Fire. You learn in the very first chapter from Frank Bryce overhearing Voldemort's plan that Bertha Jorkins is dead and that Voldemort has some master plan. Now, one could consider this an annoying reveal, but then as the story continues and you keep reading about characters pondering the whereabouts of Bertha Jorkins - when the reader already knows she's dead and that Voldemort was responsible - it builds significant tension throughout the story, as you know that Voldemort is lurking the background. It's a wonderful undercurrent of general unease, and it's masterfully executed as we know Bertha's dead, but the protagonists don't. It actually builds suspense and tension instead of lessening it.

Or let's talk about DH, where in the first chapter, Snape tells Voldemort about the Order's plan to move Harry to a different location, and Voldemort plans his attack. This is explicitly contrary to what is advised, but here's the interesting part - it raises tension in a much different way. As the reader, we know something's going to happen when it flips back to Harry's POV, and since we're invested in the protagonist, it builds suspense as we try to figure out how Harry's going to fight his way outside of the attack we know is coming.

Or even if I can refer to my own work for a second here, there were scenes in RC where Voldemort and/or other villains discusses their plans. One can consider that this sucks away mystery, but I think part of the difference is defining how the villains dictate their plans. From a 3rd-person limited POV where you don't see a lot of the villain's broader thoughts, or where he/she doesn't choose to vocalize said thoughts, you can actually build significant mystery. But even if the villain gives away everything to another character (Dmitri Kemester, depending on how you classify him as a protagonist or antagonist, certainly fits the bill here), it can do two things. Firstly, as with the Goblet of Fire example, it can heighten the tension in the reader, because we know something the main heroes don't about the villain's plan. Secondly, and more importantly to the story, if a villain's willing to confide that much in another character, it says a lot about the relationship between the characters, and about the villain himself. Perhaps he needs a subordinate to buoy his confidence and support his plan, or a confidant to troubleshoot a mission, or even telling a captive in order to crush hopes. If anything, said scenes can add a real flavour to villains you wouldn't otherwise expect (the biggest example, at least for me, was a certain scene regarding waffles that DLP really liked).

So yeah, I don't really have a problem with villain POV - what I think, Taure, you're more against is telegraphing, where a character outlines his plan and it might damage your suspense. But even in those cases, I'd argue it can increase suspense, if executed correctly. I think the key thing is that the villains need to have a legitimate reason for talking about or explaining their plans, and that if the plan executes in the story, the POV should stick with the protagonist as as he struggles to deal with whatever happens. Namely, the execution needs to bely the planning, and that's where I think most fanfiction authors slip up, because they can't build atmosphere for shit.

 

I loved most of these guidelines. Especially magic. I love how you theorized it. I just love magic being all about skill, and hate fanon concepts like magical core and whatever. I wish the list was more casual so you could put "Pepper-up Potion does not restore your magical power" somewhere =/.

At first, I was iffy regarding Magic 16, thinking incantations like Expecto Patronum and Wingardium Leviosa, but then I remembered Snape blocking Harry's spells mid-incantation.