CronoDAS comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 8 - Less Wrong

8 Post author: Unnamed 25 August 2011 02:17AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (653)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: CronoDAS 29 August 2011 08:12:53AM 1 point [-]

Well, if the final movie is anything to go by, then it shouldn't be. Harry breaks the Elder Wand into pieces at the end of the film, which shows that the Deathly Hallows clearly aren't indestructible. (In the book, Harry returns the wand to Dumbledore's grave instead of destroying it, which doesn't tell us anything about whether he could have destroyed the wand.)

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 29 August 2011 10:25:59AM 7 points [-]

HP:MoR does imply however that one needs extra-special power to destroy artifacts -- e.g. the FiendFyre which in canon is one of the few things that can destroy a Horcrux, is also mentioned (not by name, but implicitly as a type of cursed fire) in HP:MOR by Quirrel as what would be used to destroy an artifact like the Sorting Hat.

So I don't think Harry just snapping the Elder Wand in two could happen in the 'verse of HP:MoR.

Comment author: TobyBartels 29 August 2011 08:21:07PM *  6 points [-]

It really shouldn't have been allowed even in the movie. (NB: I haven't seen the movie; I'm only relying on CronoDAS's description.)

Comment author: FiftyTwo 04 September 2011 01:06:05PM 4 points [-]

Possibly the reason he could destroy the wand was that he was its 'master,' (for those who don't know a large plot point in the final canon book and movie was that wands have particular masters that they are bonded too, and so can only be wielded fully by them or someone who defeats them. Hence why Voldemort couldn't use the elder wand properly. )

Presumably having access to all the wands power as harry did at the end would allow one to override the safeguards against destroying it?

Comment author: wedrifid 04 September 2011 01:48:42PM *  2 points [-]

Harry breaks the Elder Wand into pieces at the end of the film

Gah? Seriously? WTF did they change that? That's arbitrary.

I somehow lost interest in the movies after about 3 or so. Not sure why. Possibly because Ginny wasn't nearly as cute or as sane as in the books and possibly because I just didn't want to see Ron's face or hear him say stupid, stupid things.

Well I suppose destroying it is possibly less insane than leaving it with Dumbledore where anyone would look. Just not as sane as keeping it, being badass and cough "optimising" the world.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 04 September 2011 02:24:27PM 4 points [-]

Gah? Seriously? WTF did they change that? That's arbitrary.

Because he wanted nobody else to have it, and frankly the book solution of "I'll hide it, and hope nobody finds it again" was extremely inadequate; especially after dozens of people had heard Voldemort and Harry discuss its existence.

The movie version of snapping it in two and throwing it away made the point much louder and much more finally.

Comment author: wedrifid 04 September 2011 02:31:56PM 0 points [-]

Because he wanted nobody else to have it

They, not he. The changes to the magical world regarding the casual destruction of magical artifacts are far more significant to changes to irrational!Harry's decision making.

"I'll hide it, and hope nobody finds it again" was extremely inadequate; especially after dozens of people had heard Voldemort and Harry discuss its existence.

(See third paragraph.)

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 04 September 2011 02:42:30PM *  4 points [-]

The changes to the magical world regarding the casual destruction of magical artifacts are far more significant to changes to irrational!Harry's decision making.

The concept of "artifact" isn't nearly as neatly delineated in Harry Potter canon as in the MoR!Verse.

In canon, it's Horcruxes that are very hard to destroy -- other magical objects not necessarily so. I don't believe there's anything even in canon that would have prevented Harry from snapping the Elder Wand in two.

Comment author: wedrifid 04 September 2011 03:10:26PM *  1 point [-]

While never being explicitly discussed either way casual destruction of artifacts as powerful as the deathly hallows doesn't happen in Harry Potter. It occurring in the movies is something new and I am comfortable with my initial reaction of surprise and disappointment. I hope MoR doesn't base its own magical reality on the one evidently depicted in the movies because it just wouldn't be either as appealing or as coherent.

Comment author: Eugine_Nier 04 September 2011 03:56:50PM 2 points [-]

What's wrong with having powerful objects that are easy to destroy? I mean most advanced pieces of technology in our world aren't that hard to destroy, or at least render inoperable.

Comment author: wedrifid 04 September 2011 04:06:59PM *  0 points [-]

Personal preference and internal consistency. It's ok if the elder wand is just a stick but I don't have to like it.

Comment author: ArisKatsaris 04 September 2011 03:16:35PM 2 points [-]

I hope MoR doesn't base its own magical reality on the one evidently depicted in the movies because it just wouldn't be either as appealing or as coherent.

As I mentioned in another comment, in the MoRVerse it's strongly implied that all artifacts (which as I said are more clearly categorized as such in MoR than in canon) have some extra durability in them (as Quirrel says the FiendFyre would be used to destroy an artifact like the Sorting Hat) -- so I don't think you need worry about this.