Yay, my first post! I solemnly swear to post an Intro sometime, unless I forget.

Forgoing the convoluted plot mess of GoF (and that's not an easy thing), I have to guess that the whole Portkeys-into-or-out-of-Hogwarts deal is tied to the Headmaster. Unless I'm much mistaken, Dumbledore creates a Portkey OUT of H'warts in OotP, to take Harry and the Weasley kids to see Arthur at St. Mungo's. After the DoM fiasco, he creates another Portkey INTO H'warts from the Ministry. It seems to me that only the Headmaster can create a Portkey through the "wards" - or whatever the protections are - for the school.

I had rationalized that the Triwizard Cup was always a Portkey, to take the winner of the Third Task to the maze entrance as proof of victory or some such nonsense, and that Crouch-Moody simply added an extra Portkey spell to an already-Headmaster-made Portkey. This was never spelled out, but it's how I see it.

And the whole idea of Voldemort sending Harry's dead body back, with no explanation of how the kid died, would serve Voldemort's lie-low-but-sow-terror methods perfectly.

I've posted elsewhere that I believe JKR meant for Harry to die in the end (and to stay dead), with the message of the series being that some things are worth giving everything for. However, in light of the series being a juggernaut by OotP, she copped out and spent all of Books Six and Seven trying to tie up loose ends for the OBHWF bullshit we ended up with from canon.

As for plot holes? Ye gods, take any of the books and you can make a list. The whole Deathly Hallows premise, having never been mentioned before but uber-important to the resolution, is a perfect example. Moody being able to see through the supposedly-infallible Cloak - and he DOES see through it, because he sees Harry shaking his head 'no.' The whole where-was-Voldemort's-wand head-shaker. The list could literally go on and on.

But that's why we have fan fiction, right? To take a very entertaining premise and attempt to go one step further while filling in some of the glaring inconsistencies?

 

I'm sure Hagrid would not have roared into DD office riding a flying bike. In the most likely case, he parked it by his hut and brought Harry up to DD by hand.

DD was probably asking how Hagrid got the bike because he was wondering how Hargid got the bike from a hardcore supporter of Voldemort. By all rights, Sirius should have blasted Hagrid to bits when he refused to give up Harry.

 

seems to me that the actual plot hole in this is that the wizarding world is hidden from muggles, not the other way around. How the hell do they (wizards) not notice cars, skyscrapers, planes, helicopters and on and on. Surely an adventurous broom pilot has run afoul of some hightension lines and learned how to pronounce electricity for gods sake. And there have been years of muggleborn that moved into the wizarding world, surely not all of them have forgotten about telephones and tv's. Personally I think there must be a whole other wizarding community of muggleborn back ground that hides from both the pureblood community and the muggles.

 

Nah. If that were the case, then they would've helped out muggles: crime, disease, etc. Breaking the Old Secrecy laws is one thing, but if I knew I had a whole society of wizards who had my back, why not help the muggles?

 

Actually that makes sense to me. They'd still get crucified, the reasons for staying hidden from muggles overall are quite valid. They would either demoralize the masses or get persecuted. But it sure as hell wouldn't be hard to start a magical community that functioned better than the mess Harry gets dragged into and with a bit of finesse keeping it more or less unknown (read underground) to the 'pureblood' government wouldn't take much work as long as you weren't breaking the secrecy act to the point of drawing notice.

Anyway back on target. I think the Goblet in GoF is without a doubt the biggest plot hole in the series given that it drives one whole book and makes no sense. To be blunt if the damn thing is so weak that a confundus charm was all it took to manipulate a 4th school out of it then I can't imagine the theoretical creme of wizard crop entrusting it with the ability to effectively create blood contracts. Anything that powerful would almost have to be activated via a ritual that included the details of the contract or at least included a blood signed contract with said rules as part of the ritual. Magic (in any reasonable sense) would require blood or verbal oath in order to enforce a contract that cost life or magic. Not be available for just anyone to write/sign someone elses name and subject them to said penalty. (ie name signed by bloodquill (willingly) etc to confirm identity of submitter). Hell thats one of the basics of any magic system.

 

It doesn't form blood contracts. Its only an "unbreakable" contract where by which all entrants drawn are bound to compete in the Triwizard Tournament. There is no blood contract, as the entrants submit their candidacy by writing their names on paper and submitting it.

Obviously not in the Harry Potter universe, most things that are powerful don't need blood. Time turners, The Veil, etc. The Goblet is activated by the schools agreeing to run the tournament.

Yours obviously not arguing in Harry Potter canon. Blood Quills are a form of punishment (Umbridge) not an acceptance of contracts, that's a fanon idea (Harry signing for his gigantic inheritance).

Blood again is not used to sign contracts, unbreakable vows may be used or other methods, like the threat of punishment ie. Hermione's DA contracts.

Even with times that blood is used, the love of Lily for Harry, and the regeneration of Voldemort ritual and the blood sacrifice, it does not amount to a blood contract. There is no proof in the Harry Potter universe that blood is some mystical substance, just a liquid that can be used in potions (Dragon's blood, and the Voldemort ritual).


There is no fetish for blood in the Harry Potter universe and neither can the Goblet be considered a plot hole.

 

Am I the only one who wonders why the Ministry doesn't put some sort of magical governer on muggleborn family members to keep them from talking about the Magical world?

 

Why would they need to? The good old 'who would believe you?' argument works wonderfully. Seriously, how would you react if one of your friends or co-workers just came up to you one day and whispered to you that magic exists, he has a wizard/witch child and that there's an entire culture that's been magically hidden from the rest of the world for hundreds of years.

I would smile, nod, and then call the police once I was sure I was safe.

 

I suspect that enough "random" stories would eventually gain *someone's* attention. That is the only real support I have for the Pureblood agenda - that every outsider "in the know" is a security leak and a major risk. What happens when a member of Parliament is asked questions about the location of his daughter, or a squib SAS officer has to take a polygraph about possible threats to national security?

 

I'm guessing they take care of the people asking the questions.

 

Who says they don't? I'm sure when MM went to Hermione to explain the Hogwarts letter, she was bound to cast some sort of charm that would keep the Granger parents from spilling the magical beans.

I can't see how the Pureblooded members of the Wizengamot, who hate and fear muggles enough to make it legal to hunt them, would allow such a breach of security to occur.

Of course, the Hogwarts letters could be charmed with a discretion charm that doesn't allow the families of muggleborns to speak about it. Kinda like those repelling charms on the Quidditch World Cup. Try to speak about it and find yourself wanting to do something else.

 

Don't know if it's been said already, but how was it that Kreacher avoided Sirius' summons when they were looking for him over Christmas break? He came immediately when Harry called him to watch Malfoy during HBP.

Just randomly came to me; I don't have the books nearby, so I could be wrong about Sirius trying to summon him at all.

 

@Blaise:
I figure Kreacher used an excuse: too busy performing standard tasks, appeared (invisible or hidden) but wasn't seen, distracted by a crisis in the kitchen, drowned out by portrait...

 

Yeah, I get that feeling too, to an extent. But it still doesn't mesh with the fact that he appeared immediately when Harry called, both at the Dursley house and while at school.

Wait, he didn't appear when Harry was leaving the Dursleys - Dumbledore Summoned him. That's another plot hole: knowing that Kreacher was a liability to the Order, why didn't Dumbledore immediately make Kreacher appear front and center?

 

@Blaise:
Would YOU delay/ignore a direct and unmistakable summons by Dumbledore?

 

I don't know this counts as a plot hole, but Lily and James knew that they were being targeted by Voldemort well enough to cast a Fideleus (sp?) charm on their house. So wouldn't they have made up a will as well, or at least known who they would have wanted to raise their only son if they died? And yet, Harry was still placed with the Dursley's, when it is quite obvious that the Dursley's hate the Potter's and vice versa.

This could be explained away by saying that Dumbledore is a manipulating old bastard who, for some reason, wanted Harry to live in an abusive home. But, I'm also pretty sure that taking a child and having him live with someone NOT specified in his parents' will is illegal. And no matter how manipulating Dear Old Dumbles is, would he really do something illegal?

Or, and this is what could have hpened: Harry should have been raised by Sirius, but since Sirius was in jail, Harry would have needed a new home. But, the timing on this theory doesn't work, because Harry was left at the Dursley's door about the same time that Sirius shold have been off getting arested.

And that is all have to say. What does everyone think?

 

I think you're a little fag that needs to go out into Southeast DC more often. Seeya on J street bitch.

 

If that was supposed to offend me it failed miserably. Fag? Bitch? I'm in highschool, not Pre-K. People call everyone that all the time. Get some better insults, then get back to me.

 

GothOddity, it wasn't the insult that failed miserably, it was your understanding of the hidden irony and subtle meaning of General Custer's remarks. What you need here is a lesson in old-fashioned CTA.

Analysis of the First Sentence, First Half.

In this phrase, the emphasis is clearly on 'little fag'. The word 'fag' itself is associated with homosexuality, but General Custer is actually not labelling you a homosexual, for another word associated with homosexuality is 'gay'. Once you understand this connection, the hidden irony of this phrase comes into focus. You see, the archaic and rarely used meaning of 'gay' is 'happy,' but - and this is the crucial part - your name is GothOddity, and everyone knows that goths are not be happy. Therefore, Custer is labelling you not a homosexual, but an oxymoron, a paradox - a happy goth. And, as the learned Doc Brown says, the "results [of paradoxes] could cause a chain reaction that would unravel the very fabric of the space time continuum, and destroy the entire universe! Granted, that's a worse case scenario. The destruction might in fact be very localized, limited to merely our own galaxy."

Moving on.

Analysis of the First Sentence, Second Half.

An emphasis is also clear here; it is on "into Southeast DC." The Distric of Columbia happens to be the seat of government of the United States of America. Thus, Custer would seem to be suggesting you need to enter 'into' - into meaning begin a career in - government. However, givin the galaxy-destroying qualities of your 'happy gothhood' established above, along with the certainty that occupying high office would certainly allow you to magnify the effects of your awful perversion of logic, this suggestion would seem to go against Custer's best interests, as unless he is a space alien he would be unlikely to be able to survive the destruction of the galaxy. Hence we must look at the key part of "into Southwest DC" - the Southwest.

To do this I must teach little history. General George Armstrong Custer, from whom General Custer certainly derived his name, was finally defeated at the Battle of Little Bighorn in - can you guess? - the southeastern part of the Montana Territory! The real General Custer lost five of his seven companies of cavalry at this battle, along with two of his brothers, a nephew, a brother-in-law, and of course his own life. Therefore, you can see that what General Custer (of DLP) is really saying here is that he wants you to die only after watching you friends, your family, and all your comrades die as a result of you arrogance. The "into...DC" is explained finally by the fact that General Custer (the dead one) was, in fact, an officer, and hence in a position of governing authority.

Analysis of the Second Sentence, First Half.

'Seeya' is a contracted slang form of the phrase 'will see you' with the 'I' subject left out. If we assume the understood 'I' refers to General Custer (likely, as he is the one saying it) then it becomes clear that this phrase signifies that General Custer expects the next part of his sentence to happen to you.

Analysis of Second Sentence, Second Half.

The key to understanding this section is an analysis of the phrase's grammar structure. At first, it appears that 'J street' is one word and 'bitch' refers to you. However, given that no comma separates 'street' and 'bitch,' it opens the intruiguing possibility that 'J' is actually its own object and 'street bitch' is actually the complete object referring to you. 'Bitch' as we all know as Harry Potter fans, refers to a female dog. Modified as it is by the word 'street,' clearly General Custer is labelling you as a dog rejected for uncertain reasons, probably of your own making, from the comforts of society and culture, and forced to eke out a bare substistence existence from the cold and dismal streets of <Insert large city nearest to you>. Finally, the construction "on J" refers to the author Robert Jordan, famous for inserting long descriptions of the clothing of even minor characters in his novels. However, he only does this for human or vaguely hominid characters, further emphasizing the fact that you (as a dog) would be forgotten.

And there you have it. I hope now you will appreciate the full depths of Custer's disdain for you and your idea. Please remember that the above analysis is not actually my own words, but merely what General Custer himself has said.

Way Tl;Dr: Your attempt at originality was pre-empted long ago - probably before you were born.

 

@GothOddity: No way could anyone predict the kind of treatment the Dursleys heaped on Harry. If anything, one would've thought that they would go out of their way to act like he was a part of a normal, happy family; the real plot holes was the Dursleys believing that no one would notice how poorly they treated Harry, and the neighborhood being completely ignorant of said treatment. As for the Potters, I'm guessing that they didn't expect to die once they put up the Fidelius, given the nature of the charm. I wouldn't have either.

I dunno - what you see as a plot hole is just an imbalance of knowledge: knowledge of what actually happened and who was/wasn't loyal (hindsight), and a lack of knowledge about what made each of the important characters do what they did. We don't know how Dumbledore got custody over Harry's placement; we don't know what Peter did to possibly convince the Potters he was trustworthy, or how Sirius possibly convinced them to switch Secret Keepers. We don't even know if the Potters' Will was simply lost, or if it did infact entrust the next of kin (Dursleys) to custody; we don't know if there were other relatives that would have been next on the list between Sirius and the Dursleys that were killed off.

TL;DR - Not a plot hole.