= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
wedrifid comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 8 - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (653)
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.
(See third paragraph.)
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.
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.
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.
Personal preference and internal consistency. It's ok if the elder wand is just a stick but I don't have to like it.
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.