In Deathly Hallows we discover that Rowena Ravenclaw has a daughter of the same last name. Is the child a bastard, or is Rowena married. If so, who was her husband and how does he compare to her in brilliance?

 

From DH, Xenophilius Lovegood's tale of the three brothers:

Spoiler

So the oldest Brother, who was combative in nature, asked for a wand more powerful than any in existence: a wand that must always win duels for it's owner, a wand worthy of a wizard who had conquered death! So Death crossed to an elder tree on the banks of the river, fashioned a wand from a branch that hung there, and gave it to the eldest brother.

I don't know about the core, but the wood was most certainly Elder wood.

 

This logic is complete crap. I shall liken it to the argument about God.

Most people say: Prove to me God exists.

In response, an unintelligent person will often say: prove to me that he doesn't.

However, the burden of proof is not on the skeptic, but on the believer. If everything was about "prove x doesn't exist" then we would have to believe everything from intergalatic teapots to the toothfairy. No, the default assumption is non-existence until existence is proven.

Anyway, as for proof: we have seen, literally, hundreds of spells and bits of magic performed in the HP series. Not one of them has been tiring.

And I'm providing JK Rowling's answers: you just haven't been bothered to read up on Harry Potter enough to know that she has already answered them. And anyway, there is no way that JKR is going to be granting DLP an interview and answering these, so at the very least we can talk about them amongst ourselves.

When it comes to magic, knowledge is power.

I'm sorry, but I must have missed the part where it said that she was only brilliant at theory. The "Famous Wizard card" for Rowena Ravenclaw (the cards were written by JKR) says this:

Creativity. That shows a practical understanding of magic as well as theoretical.

Yes, it says "witch", but she is also under the catagory called "wizard of the month". Clealy witch is meant as "magic user" and it simply says witch because she was female. It would have been unweildy to say "most brilliant witch, or if she had been male, wizard, of her time".

 

Prisoner of Azkaban, U.S edition, Page 241-242.

 

A commonly used quote to back up the "magic tires people out" theory.

However, its also completely wrong.

The exhaustion Harry feels is a result of the Dementor, not the Patronus charm that he uses.

Later that year, Harry uses a Patronus charm that banishes many Dementors - people often quote it as 100, but I don't think that it says that in canon - and shows no sign of tiredness or exhaustion at all. In fact, over the whole Harry Potter series, Harry has used a Patronus many times, and it has never tired him out.

So in this situation it must be the presence of the Dementor - a creature that is known to run wizards down - that tires Harry.

 

@ Taure,

I understand what you are trying to say, but still all the knowledge and creativity doesn't make you powerful.

In OotP, it is said that Snape knew more hexes and curses than half the seventh years when he first arrived in Hogwarts. Still James used to wipe the floor with him.

Hermione is often praised as the brightest witch of her age, but she doesn't compare to Harry. He teaches her in DA and she struggles there like everyone else. Some students even learnt faster than her. So it disproves that brilliant=powerful theory.

Above all, consider Percy Weasley. He got 12 or so OWLs, so he was brilliant. Was he ever described powerful?

 

This is an assumption. We've seen them fight once, in which James won, but then he both ambushed Snape and it was a two-on-one fight (James and Sirius vs. Snape). For all we know, Snape could have beaten James just as many times.

She doesn't? I was of the impression that Hermione was capable of magic of much higher complexity than Harry.

Duelling isn't the be-all and end-all of magic. And anyway, Hermione is different from Rowena Ravenclaw in that she is highly intelligent, but she lacks the creative spark that RR had.

He certainly held his own in the Battle of Hogwarts, though no, not too powerful (though he is certainly a capable wizard). This would be down to the fact that he, like Hermione, didn't have creativity on his side.


************************


Anyway, a PM I recieved as a result of this thread:

1. Manatheron doesn't seem to realise that I have been one of the biggest proponents of the existence of God on this site in the past...I believe in God. I just don't believe in poor logic, which is what the "it exists unless you prove it doesn't" argument is.

2. Poor ad hominem with the whole parents thing.

3. I don't care about what you think about my parents. Your ad hominem might have worked a bit better had you chosen a subject I care more for than my family...

4. Concerning: "just because you don't believe doesn't give you the right to take jabs at those of us who do.". I advise you read The God Delusion by Dawkins. You'll find within an excellent section upon how religion should be able to be criticised. I mean, just because you believe something, why does that mean I'm not allowed to speak my mind on it?

5. I lol'd.

 

At what point during your writing of these children's books did you realize that you were going to be nitpicked by nerds all across the world?

 

JAMES said that, hardly an Unbiased opinion.

No, it just proves that there is a reason Hermoine studies so hard

No, But he was also never described as talented, Exceptional, or even creative. We also have no Idea what the average student gets for OWLs, Nor how they count the number of OWLs you recieve

{Shrugs}

1.) Opps, Mistaken Identity
2.) Probably, but I was tired and not thinking rationally
3.) If you don't care about family, what is there to care about?
4.) I've heard of it, I agree that it should be able to stand up to criticism, I'm sick of people taking potshots at it without research/reasoning.
5.) I probably would have too.

To sum it all up
'My Bad'