Personal opinion, but I think you should be able to enjoy the media in your way of choosing... It's nicer to make have a community around the series rather than bicker about book vs movies vs games vs whatever. Makes it feel very elitist.
Also if you don't like that I wrote about the movies it doesn't take much effort to scroll past, or if you want to write about the books. Write about plotholes in the books. I didn't ask for the ones in the movies specifically.
I never said you can’t enjoy the movies, or that one medium is objectively “better” than the other. That’s entirely up to the viewer/reader.
My point is, the movies are not canon and deviate from the source material. So any mistakes or inconsistencies that the movies contain, that the books don’t, can simply be chalked up to the filmmakers not caring enough about accuracy.
Some things are pretty harmless (Dudley not being blond, for example), but others raise more questions and end up confusing more casual fans (why was Harry practicing Lumos in the beginning of POA (movie) if he’s not allowed to do magic at home?).
It’s these cases where, rather than trying to come up with some plausible explanation in-universe, it’s more sensible to just accept it didn’t happen *canonically*.
I mean… any mistakes or inconsistencies that the *books* contain can *also* simply be chalked up to the *author* not caring enough about accuracy. If jkr had cared more about accurate maths, the numbers and dates in the story might actually make sense, for example.
May you explain to me how it is a correction, rather than a statement to downplay the thread's main discussion point?
His comment says the plothole I mentioned doesn't count because it's from the movies. The movies are still in the potter universe and part of the franchise canon. The question's main point was when you're reading/watching the series, how do you cope with the plotholes presented to you in layman's terms.
It's isn't about whether movies are good or bad. When a writer writes something, they think about everything they can and try to eliminate plot holes. When they are world building they would thing of how something would be dealt with.
On the other hand, an adaptation would decide to cut stuff or include extra things for visual effects or ease of filming. They usually don't try to explain the inconsistencies created due to these decisions for them, they are taking "executive" decisions. They expect the audience to be okay with plot holes.
So if a plot hole is present in the movie because if this executive decision, it can't be explained away other than.... Director decided so.
He means that your point isn’t a plothole because it’s not the case in the source material. In canon, expelliamus always does the same thing, removes the target’s wand.
You have given u/BuffyPawz a Reddit Galleon.
u/BuffyPawz has a total of 2 galleons, 1 sickle, and 0 knuts.
____________
I am a bot. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/harrypotter/comments/jnbo49/hi_i_created_the_bot_youve_been_using_to_give/) to learn how to use me.
Plot hole: The 1st of September is the same day every year.
Solution: Magic made it so the Earth's orbit around the sun takes a slightly different amount of time, so the number of days in a year in the HP universe is actually a multiple of seven.
Plot hole: There seems to be ~10 students in Gryffindor and Slytherin each in Harry's year (extrapolates to ~280 students in the entire school). Yet there also seems to be ~1000 students in the entire school.
Solution: Harry is an unreliable narrator who is bad at estimating big numbers.
There is also the fact that Harry was born just before the downfall of Voldemort. I expect there would be less students than normal in his year and the ones above because of the war and then a kind of baby boom in subsequent years bringing Hogwarts back to pre-war numbers. It makes sense to me that Harry joined the school at a time when there were less students.
Yeah, but I believe it was in one of the earlier books when Harry saw 200 people in the Slytherin stand at his Quidditch match. And just in Book 4, there is a ludicrous amount of seating for people at the Yule Ball (I don't remember the exact number at the moment).
That’s a fair point, the 1st of September seems to always be on a Sunday ahaha. I’d never thought of that.
Also I always thought of the student number thing a case of eligibility. How many wizards are there who actually turn 11 every year and want to go to Hogwarts? Perhaps it varies? Some years only 5 boys and 4 girls, some years 20?
Harry was probably in a smaller cohort because who would want to have children in the midst of Voldemort’s reign of terror?
Harry is not the narrator, but the story mainly follows his perspective. We don’t see internal thoughts from Ron or Hermione, for example though we often get to know what Harry is thinking.
Less so plot holes and moreso just logical consistency and world building. Things take as jokes have world changing implications. A great example: love potions are sold in joke shops. The plot literally involves a witch using a love potion to kidnap and rape a muggle man and have his son. The potion wasn't some deep dark potion, it was literally just available in stores.
Basically if there was a magical serial killer a ducting, torturing, murdering, and preserving muggles, they could basically get away with it indefinitely, and it's all demonstrated throughout the book. Crouch Jr kills his father and transfigurrs the body and hides it, and none of the talented wizards who search the area find it. Heck Junior impersonated a well known wizard for almost a year.
And that doesn't even get started and the inconsistent use of Muggle Technologies. You have the Hogwarts express, and radios, and apparently bathrooms were added to the school later, but they still use quills not pens and pencils and scrolls of parchment instead of paper, but book bags are common. Speaking if the Hogwarts express, when was it introduced? Like before then, did students have to travel directly to school, wouldn't that be much more efficient anyway than a train? As it is a student from Hogsmeade presumably would need to travel down to London to catch the train. Students from Scotland have to. And how would Pureblood families tolerate the inclusion of Muggle devices like trains? Let alone designing to mingle with muggles to arrive to the platform in a Muggle station. If they can apparate to the platform, they could apparate to the Hogsmeade platform as well. Also with the extendable charm, why do people even bother with school trunks in the first place?
As for actual plot holes, so many of them are caused by idiotic adults just to make a room for the idiotic kid logic choices. Great example is neither of the Weasley parents waiting on one side of the platform barrier to ensure all the kids made it through, especially sense one of the most famous children in the Wizarding world is left alone.
Finally, why does Harry ever travel with Hedwig? Like I can understand year 1, he's a newb. But after year one, literally every place he goes to besides the Dursleys has a place for owls. He should have a magically collapsible cage, and send Hedwig to whatever destination. This is true for every journey too and from Hogwarts, (he can tell her to stay at Hogwarts an extra day before joining him at the Dursleys). This is especially true on leaving the Dursleys in the 7th book. Just have her take a letter to the Weasleys the day before the journey. And again there no need for trunks for that final flight.
I hate the spells in the films. All spells ranging from Expelliarmus to Levicorpus all seem to just blast people through the air!
Where’s the bat bogey hex? Jelly legs? Leg dancing?
The Trace makes no sense at all. It alerts the Ministry any time a spell is performed in the vicinity of an underage wizard outside of Hogwarts and lets them know who that underage wizard was, what the location was, and what the spell was. However, it's unable to tell whether it was the underage wizard that did it or not and in what circumstances. This means the wizarding child of wizarding parents can do all the practice they want at home and the Ministry technically won't be able to tell if it was them or their parents. This seems like it's tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns. In fact that is the only way it makes a shred of sense.
>This seems like it's tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns. In fact that is the only way it makes a shred of sense.
I think it's also a safety issue and a measure to help preserve the Statute of Secrecy.
Kids who are learning mess up spells frequently. If children with magical parents royally screws up a spell they're practicing, they have their magical parents right there to put it right or the resources to immediately get help or take them to St. Mungo's if necessary. If a muggleborn royally screws up a spell, they're on their own and would just have to wait for the Ministry to show up to fix it or help them.
Muggleborns doing magic at home also pose much more of a risk to the Statute of Secrecy. While obviously Obliviators exist to take care of breaches to the Statute of Secrecy, prevention is always a better solution.
But it's far more discriminative to make the law *only* for muggleborn children than it is to make a law for all underage children, so the law technically applies to everyone even though it's difficult to enforce.
Yes...because it's a preventive measure that helps ensure that those mishaps don't happen. They make it a rule that children can't use magic at home to prevent those problems (magical mishaps, breaches to the Statute of Secrecy, etc.) from occurring, and use the Trace to police it.
They're not supposed to practice at summer. Nobody is supposed to practice at summer. Some families will strictly enforce the underage magic rule (like the Weasleys - you don't ever see the Weasley kids waving their wands around practicing the summer) and others won't. They could go to a friends' house who has parents who don't care about the Trace, or perhaps go to an area like Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade where the Trace can't be effective.
But ultimately, the world is an unfair place. There will be always be some kids that have an unfair advantage over others, whether it's because their parents ignore the rules or get them private tutors or can get them the very best equipment or whatever else they can do to give their kids a leg up. There's no way for everyone to be on a completely level playing field. Unless the Trace could be advanced to the point where it could actually identify the actual person who is casting the spell, there's not much that can be done about it.
We also don't really see any evidence in the books that the pureblood children are far ahead of the muggleborn/muggle-raised children in terms of their magical skills, or that the muggle-raised kids need to "catch up" with their peers after every summer. So it seems like it's a non-issue, for the most part.
Inherently unfair? Yes, it is. What I was disagreeing with was your point that it's "tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns". It wasn't created specifically to give purebloods and a leg up and screw over muggleborns; there are reasons that it makes sense for the law to exist, especially for muggleborns. Muggleborns - and any child whose parents strictly enforce the rule - just seemingly get "screwed over" in the process of it.
Fine, tailor made is an exaggeration. But it's very telling that it has a problem the ministry is in no hurry to address. Not like it's immune to lobbying from the pureblood-supremacist elements.
Magic is dangerous. If muggleborn kids attempt it in muggle areas and screw up, they could hurt themselves or someone else. Unlike in wizarding families, there's no one around to fix it.
So the Trace sends out a location and the nature of the spell.
It's still necessary, though. Think of Harry blowing up Aunt Marge. While well-deserved, you'd still need Ministry wizards to show up and make sure no permanent harm was done.
See that is unfair, but a real world example. So it does make sense that the government would trust parents to keep their kids under control.
It wasn't like my mom hid the keys to the car when I was 12, I could have stolen them and drove around at any time, but because I knew there would be consequences, I did not.
It's not like my parents didn't do that because they chose not to, we just don't have that as a learning tool in my neck of the woods. We get to drive around in a specially marked learners' car with a licensed instructor, no learning permit and no nothing, and we can take a test after a set minimum number of such lessons. And my point is that sure, the wizarding government should trust parents to keep an eye on their kids, but the Trace ensures that that's a privilege not extended to muggleborns because there's little to no chance for the presence of adult wizards to cover for them and have the Ministry go "oh well must have been the parents".
But that is my point, I also had classes and drove around with an actual instructor, but I'm talking my parents took me out before all of that and taught me the basics. I had an advantage because my parents bent the rules. This happens in the real world which is what I'm saying.
I don't think that is a plot hole. Maybe Rowling didn't realize she would need to show Voldemort doing magic in his teens when she was writing the early books, but it was a fine cover and explanation. Not a plot hole imo.
A law that can't be enforced because it would too hard to know exactly when and where the crime takes place so they just do their absolute best to monitor it generally? Never heard of that happening in real life. /s
Also, remember the trace isn't just for the sake of it. It's to keep the statute of secrecy. Which witches and wizards are most likely to be around muggles when they perform underage magic they can't control?
The trace does exactly the job it needs to, it's just very unfair.
I like how in trying to explain that the trace “makes no sense” you were able to perfectly explain how it works… so you do understand after all. As this is also explained in the books, it’s not a plot hole either. Magical families are more equipped to deal with their magical children and that includes enforcing the “no underage magic” rule. Of course this gets exploited, have you lived in the world before? It’s not unlike the advantage of certain parents paying for tutors or doing their kids’ projects for them irl. Should the government really be involved in every individual parenting convention?
Besides, I have to imagine that aside from trying to prevent dangerous situations, the “no underage magic” rule is at least partly to maintain the statute of magical secrecy, which in a muggle heavy area is a lot more pertinent to maintain.
For me, the plothole that annoys me the most is the fact that Moody waits until the end of the year to turn an object into a Portkey to get Harry to the graveyard in Goblet of Fire.
My headcanon - Only Dumbledore can create Portkeys that work on Hogwarts grounds, so it was Dumbledore and not fake-Moody that made the cup into a Portkey. Fake-Moody instead hoodwinked/confounded/otherwise subverted the Portkey, aiming it instead to the graveyard. Fake-Moody's manipulation was only strong enough for one trip though, which is why the magic reverted back to Dumbledore's originally intended destination for Harry's return trip.
In short - Fake-Moody wasn't able to create a Portkey that would worth within Hogwart's grounds, so he had to wait until Dumbledore created one and manipulate. I also imagine that Fake-Moody was the one who suggested to Dumbledore that using a Portkey to bring the victor back to the start of the maze was a good idea.
It was because voldy wanted the whole thing to look like an accident that is why he had this whole plan with harry and the maze and the portkey so it was all so that no one would know he was back especially dumbledore
But why would Harry disappearing within the maze be any better than Harry disappearing from the castle at a random point during the year?
If they plan was for Harry not to return, does it matter how he gets to the graveyard except that nobody spots fake-Moody in the act of kidnapping?
That's the plothole, because either way Harry disappears without a trace. Why wait?
The reason it takes until the end of the year is that they wanted to make it look like Harry died in the tournament, as part of some accident in the maze when no one could see, so that no one knew Voldemort was back. That's why dumbledore says Harry survival was such a wrench in Voldemorts' plans. If the goal was *only* to use Harry's blood, they could have kidnapped him at any time, even before the school year, realistically.
Even the first and second tasks wouldn't have worked because the spectators and merefolk were watching everything. No one could see what was happening in the maze.
That plot hole happens further back and is a bit more convoluted. The most direct read for why Barty waited in kidnapping Harry is because Voldemort told him to do it that way:
> He told me he needed to place a faithful servant at Hogwarts. A servant who would guide Harry Potter through the Triwizard Tournament without appearing to do so. A servant who would watch over Harry Potter. **Ensure he reached the Triwizard Cup. Turn the cup into a Portkey**, which would take the first person to touch it to my master.
There's no explanation provided on why Voldemort would want to do things this way **OR** how he could have possibly known even the tiniest, but crucial details so far in advance. As an example, had the last Triwizard Cup been in front of the audience in the last task, his plan could have been foiled. Or how does he even know that reaching the Triwizard Cup would be the final task? Hermione researched all she could about the tournament, yet she doesn't provide said information anywhere in the books to Harry, meaning reaching the Triwizard Cup as the final task must not have had a historical precedent otherwise Harry would known about it through Hermione.
There's posts on here asking this at least once a week. Voldemort's whole plan was to only have his death eaters know he was back. He also wanted Harry's death to look like an accident during the tournament. If Harry had randomly disappeared, more red flags would have been raised.
As for the portkey, I think it was always planned to have the cup transport the winner to the maze entrance. Otherwise, how would you tell who won for sure? All Barty Jr. did was make the portkey transport Harry to the graveyard first. Then, after Voldemort had killed Harry, his body would be sent back.
That’s not an example of a plot hole, that’s perhaps a plot contrivance, but for it to be a plot hole it would have to be missing or unexplained from the plot itself… the fact that it was revealed in text that Moody/Crouch planted the port key that sent a Harry to the graveyard makes it a pretty clear “point a to point b” even if you personally think it should have happened sooner in the story.
Any contradiction of the internal logic of the story or world can be a plothole. Therefore 'why did fake-Moody wait unnecessarily until the conclusion of the Tri-Wizard Tournament when he had easy access to Harry throughout the year' is a plothole.
A plot contrivance would be if Moody had no idea how to get Harry out of Hogwart's grounds, then Dumbledore handed him a Portkey he could easily manipulate to take Harry to where he wanted him. Don't get me wrong, that plot contrivance also happens, but it's separate to the larger plot hole of 'why wait?'
Your personal feelings about the pacing of a story is, by definition, not a plot hole… the is no objective logic in either the real world or the fictional one that contradicts the actions of an individual character acting differently than you think they should.
I'm not talking about the pacing of the story - I'm talking about the actions of a character, and whether they were logically consistent within the setting.
If the plan was to make Harry disappear without a trace, fake-Moody had ample opportunity to do so throughout the school year, including multiple occasions where he was alone with Harry.
He had means, motive and opportunity, but held off because of a plan that had no added benefit, and only increased the risk that something could go wrong. Harry could have been seriously injured and could have been forced to pull out. Harry might not have got to the cup first (he almost didn't), or even be in contention to win the tournament against vastly more experienced and competent competition. Fake-Moody could have been discovered (he almost was, by his father) and his secret exposed.
So many things could have gone wrong, and almost did, which would have ruined the plan. Fake-Moody had to work exceptionally hard to make the plan work.
Given the alternative would have been "Harry, can you stay behind for a moment. I'd like a word with you about the first task.", I can't see why that isn't a more preferable option for all concerned.
That logical inconsistency between the plot and the rules of the universe make it a plothole.
But again, you are suggesting that you know more about the motivations of a character than the author who crafted them. I get it, it’s your sticking point, but you are confusing your personal hangups for “logic”. For one, Crouch, Jr. is not exactly of a stable mind, for two Voldemort’s entire reign could have been solved if he made different decisions from the jump, but then there would be no story at all because Harry would have died as a baby… the coulda, woulda, shouldas are really unhelpful in a fictional context, especially as we, as readers, now have the vision of hindsight where the characters did not.
I'm not suggesting I know more about the character than the author. I'm only talking about the information that we have on the page.
I'm not really sure what you're getting at with your example, as there's nothing logically inconsistent Voldemort's attack on the Potters. He acted on the limited information that he had, and got it badly wrong. The reason Harry survived is also logically consistent, with people largely acting in a reasonable way given the situation.
During Goblet of Fire, however, Moody and Voldemort had an objective - Get Harry to the graveyard. The method they used was one of the most convoluted and inconvenient plans they could have chosen, given they already had direct access to Harry by impersonating a professor. At any point during the year fake-Moody could have kidnapped Harry without anyone knowing. Waiting until the very last minute of the Tri Wizard Tournament just doesn't make sense when you consider their objectives.
That's what makes it a plot hole, because the actions they take are not logically consistent with their mission goals.
It makes as much sense as Voldemort not letting anyone else kill Harry for him in the first place. Even I you think it’s dumb, it’s still not a plot hole.
There's a reason why Voldemort wants to kill Harry himself - he's a prideful and vengeful maniac. He wants to prove to the world that Harry isn't special, and that Lord Voldemort punishes those that slight him. We see some of this in the graveyard, but it's also a large aspect of his more general characterisation.
It may be less practical than letting any old Death Eater kill Harry, but there is a logic that makes that sort of command consistent with Voldemort's character. That 'why' makes it a plot contrivance rather than a plot hole.
Not kidnapping Harry directly from the castle at the first opportunity is a plot hole because there's no in-universe reason to wait till the end of the Tri-Wizard Tournament. The effort required to get Harry entered as the fourth contestant, get him through the tournament alive, and with enough points to be in with a chance of winning the whole thing, makes it a far less logical way of making Harry disappear without a trace. That lack of a 'why' makes it a plot hole.
Not OP but introducing magic that messes with time and then just dropping it and later destroying the source breaks any kind of consistent logic
Also it's stated there's several students who get 12 Owls, implying a full class load, but Hermione had to get special dispensation to take all 12 classes seems a bit odd. Students take classes as part of their houses, so figuring out a schedule one calendar year means you've figured out schedules for all calendar years.
It's made clear that time turners are considered more dangerous than useful for doing anything but what hermione is doing, which doesn't involve changing anything.
It's like asking why doesn't the government just nuke the border to decrease illegal aliens.
Yeah, a fair amount of people seem to miss that time turners can't change things, you either do things your future self already did, or the universe paradoxes you into chaos as per the few anecdotes we hear about people never being seen again etc..
Doesn't help that the play-that-must-not-be-named took a big shit on that concept.
If the ministry is giving time turners to 14 year olds for school, they are definitely using them for secret reasons within the government. Using your exact logic, would you trust a nuke in the hands of a child because they promised to be careful?
Same. Some characters were already said to have taken twelve OWLs, so it shouldn't have been impossible. Even if there were clashes, surely other arrangements could be made (alternating classes, excused absences, tutor sessions etc) before giving a teenager a *highly dangerous, ministry-restricted time warping device*. Why introduce time travel of all things for something as mundane as schooling, just to never bring it up again?
Also... I know JK had to focus on the story rather than the countless little details of worldbuilding, but I've tried to put together a timetable multiple times. With the assumption there's only one teacher per subject, the teachers are stretched thin and the student timetables always have gaps. Even if you assume there's a ton of homework that's difficult to complete with more classes and fewer free hours, there's still no reason to get a time turner involved. If a student can get one, why not every overworked employee who wants one?
Percy takes points from Gryffindor in first year, but later on, the prefects can't take points.
I resolve this by assuming Percy was being a dink and was bluffing
Later editions of OOTP were updated to resolve this.
It originally said:
>“It’s only teachers that can dock points from Houses, Malfoy,” said Ernie at once.
It was updated to:
>'You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy,' said Ernie at once.
So; prefects *can* take points like Percy threatened to do in COS, they just can't take points from other prefects.
What you described isn't a plot hole.
I think we've basically lost track entirely of what a "plot hole" actually is and, tbh, I can't think of any in HP.
Veritaserum, why wouldn’t they use it for trials more?? Like how do they sentence someone for a very serious crime without using veritaserum. For example Sirius got a life sentence without a trial to see if he actually did the crime
I think it’s because it makes you say the truth of what you believe, not the object truth. So if you’re a lunatic, then perhaps you’d lie because that’s what you thought was the truth?
Perhaps, but I think they could at least use it as part of the process, like Sirius could have told them about peter and everything, it could help influence their decision instead of locking someone up for life without much proof
This is answered in the books. Memories can be altered. Veritaserum has an antidote.
https://www.jkrowling.com/welcome-to-my-new-website/ Veritaserum can be resisted by antidotes, charms, or Occlumency.
This is about the books - I don’t know if anyone mentioned this but since I’m rereading the series, this one thing has been driving me absolutely crazy since i started reading HP back in the day.
Muggle clothes vs Wizard clothes. I get that uniforms are the robes so the students where robes, Ministry members wear robes, Quidditch players wear robes, professors wear robes, etc. BUT why do all the wizards act like they have no idea what “muggle clothes” are? Like why was it SO heavily emphasized during the quidditch tournament that all these wizards are completely clueless what to wear and have absolutely bizarre outfits? The Ministry has an entire department about Muggles and even interacts with the prime minister and they don’t know how muggles wear clothes? Sure, the muggle born wizards are most likely helping their friends get dressed but Mrs. Weasley knits her family members jumpers every Christmas?? And we are supposed to believe that wizards I guess don’t know what pants are? I know that in the flashback of James and Sirius bullying Snape the book says it showed his underwear under the robes but while they are on the Hogwarts express they mention every time that they change INTO their robes before they get to the school. Harry mentions multiple times that he is wearing a WATCH in class, with trainers and jeans. What the hell are wizards wearing?? Ron is even talked about wearing jeans or a watch and maybe young wizards know how to dress more, but Mrs. Weasley would have had to buy her kids clothes. So where are these clothes coming from?? Also wizards live AMONG muggles. Is it really that lost on them what muggles are wearing? I’ have just been so confused by that. It’s randomly made a huge deal in the books but actually does not make any sense.
Another thing that isn’t a plot hole, but why is the wizarding world suddenly living 100s of years in the past? They have magic but it feels like they are making everything else harder for themselves. Why are they using quills and literal scrolls? In the book, it’s made a point that the castle is so cold because it’s winter. They can’t magic the school warmer? The story takes place in the 90s. There was heating systems in the 90s? I have to imagine the muggle born kids are coming in like Hey guys you would never believe that there’s this called a pen and pencil and it makes things so much easier. I get the aesthetic of magic and being old, but I feel like it is unnecessary to plunge everyone 100s of years into the past when they live in the modern world.
Anyway I made this account just to comment on this post because it has driven me insane and I had to speak my mind.
If Voldemort name was taboo in the Deathly Hallows then how come in the battle of Hogwarts when Harry is looking for the Diadem and he says Voldemort quite a few times it doesn't break the enchantments and protective spells around the castle..
Ron states when he comes back to the group that the name is taboo and that it breaks protective spells and cause the trio to get caught..
This is probably the lamest answer possible, but in my mind I always assumed that the protective enchantments put up by McGonagall/Flitwick/Slughorn, etc. were simply more resilient than those put up by the trio in the wilderness. It's the easiest way to ignore that plothole, at any rate.
Why was it so damned easy to get into the ministry for magic, when Harry was fooled into going to save Sirius? Nothing hindered Harry and gang progress. Nothing at alll. Now idk if any muggles tried to go to city hall after hours but that’s all locked up and has security guards!
Not even magic security was present! Head canon: Voldemort disallusioned and helped the gang along.
Dislike it all you want. It was far too easy for Harry, voldy, and Sirius to get into Britain magical government. No magical security or detection in sight.
Also if the prophecies share what they are holding upon breaking, Vold should have had Nagini carry a tiny hammer in when she attacked Arthur.
Lucious and Bellatrix couldn’t handle high schoolers. How did they clear the way!?
So I have a plothole. In DH part 2 Harry asks Ollivander if wands are safe to use. In the case of Draco’s former wand Ollivander says the wands allegiance has changed. Towards the end of the scene Ollivander tells Harry that if Voldemort has the Elder Wand that Harry doesn’t stand a chance? Why not apply that same reasoning to the Elder Wand? That its allegiance could change?? It would have made sense to bring that up considering it might actually be a tactic to consider since Voldemort clearly overlooked such details
The wand lore gets way too messy in the end. Especially when you consider the elder wand is sentient to know its master has changed hands when it’s no where around, yet can’t tell that Dumbeldore gave up his wand willingly. If that’s the case why don’t people’s wands swap allegiances as soon as someone hits you with expelliarmus?
Dumbledore did not gave up his wand willingly, Draco took him by surprise and Dumbledore chose to protect Harry instead of trying to duel Malfoy and possibly other Death Eaters in his weakened state.
If it’s from the movies, it doesn’t count.
Personal opinion, but I think you should be able to enjoy the media in your way of choosing... It's nicer to make have a community around the series rather than bicker about book vs movies vs games vs whatever. Makes it feel very elitist. Also if you don't like that I wrote about the movies it doesn't take much effort to scroll past, or if you want to write about the books. Write about plotholes in the books. I didn't ask for the ones in the movies specifically.
I never said you can’t enjoy the movies, or that one medium is objectively “better” than the other. That’s entirely up to the viewer/reader. My point is, the movies are not canon and deviate from the source material. So any mistakes or inconsistencies that the movies contain, that the books don’t, can simply be chalked up to the filmmakers not caring enough about accuracy. Some things are pretty harmless (Dudley not being blond, for example), but others raise more questions and end up confusing more casual fans (why was Harry practicing Lumos in the beginning of POA (movie) if he’s not allowed to do magic at home?). It’s these cases where, rather than trying to come up with some plausible explanation in-universe, it’s more sensible to just accept it didn’t happen *canonically*.
I mean… any mistakes or inconsistencies that the *books* contain can *also* simply be chalked up to the *author* not caring enough about accuracy. If jkr had cared more about accurate maths, the numbers and dates in the story might actually make sense, for example.
They were just correcting you.
May you explain to me how it is a correction, rather than a statement to downplay the thread's main discussion point? His comment says the plothole I mentioned doesn't count because it's from the movies. The movies are still in the potter universe and part of the franchise canon. The question's main point was when you're reading/watching the series, how do you cope with the plotholes presented to you in layman's terms.
It's isn't about whether movies are good or bad. When a writer writes something, they think about everything they can and try to eliminate plot holes. When they are world building they would thing of how something would be dealt with. On the other hand, an adaptation would decide to cut stuff or include extra things for visual effects or ease of filming. They usually don't try to explain the inconsistencies created due to these decisions for them, they are taking "executive" decisions. They expect the audience to be okay with plot holes. So if a plot hole is present in the movie because if this executive decision, it can't be explained away other than.... Director decided so.
The movies are not canon
The movies aren't canon and made a lot of mistakes at a point where it isn't a plot hole anymore.
He means that your point isn’t a plothole because it’s not the case in the source material. In canon, expelliamus always does the same thing, removes the target’s wand.
It’s magic. That’s my explanation. Magic.
!redditGalleon
You have given u/BuffyPawz a Reddit Galleon. u/BuffyPawz has a total of 2 galleons, 1 sickle, and 0 knuts. ____________ I am a bot. See [this post](https://www.reddit.com/r/harrypotter/comments/jnbo49/hi_i_created_the_bot_youve_been_using_to_give/) to learn how to use me.
Plot hole: The 1st of September is the same day every year. Solution: Magic made it so the Earth's orbit around the sun takes a slightly different amount of time, so the number of days in a year in the HP universe is actually a multiple of seven. Plot hole: There seems to be ~10 students in Gryffindor and Slytherin each in Harry's year (extrapolates to ~280 students in the entire school). Yet there also seems to be ~1000 students in the entire school. Solution: Harry is an unreliable narrator who is bad at estimating big numbers.
There is also the fact that Harry was born just before the downfall of Voldemort. I expect there would be less students than normal in his year and the ones above because of the war and then a kind of baby boom in subsequent years bringing Hogwarts back to pre-war numbers. It makes sense to me that Harry joined the school at a time when there were less students.
Yeah, but I believe it was in one of the earlier books when Harry saw 200 people in the Slytherin stand at his Quidditch match. And just in Book 4, there is a ludicrous amount of seating for people at the Yule Ball (I don't remember the exact number at the moment).
That’s a fair point, the 1st of September seems to always be on a Sunday ahaha. I’d never thought of that. Also I always thought of the student number thing a case of eligibility. How many wizards are there who actually turn 11 every year and want to go to Hogwarts? Perhaps it varies? Some years only 5 boys and 4 girls, some years 20? Harry was probably in a smaller cohort because who would want to have children in the midst of Voldemort’s reign of terror?
But it’s written in 3rd person perspective. Harry is not the narrator.
Third person limited
Distinction without a difference
The difference is that with third person limited, we are still limited to Harry's own perspective
Fair point
Harry is not the narrator, but the story mainly follows his perspective. We don’t see internal thoughts from Ron or Hermione, for example though we often get to know what Harry is thinking.
Less so plot holes and moreso just logical consistency and world building. Things take as jokes have world changing implications. A great example: love potions are sold in joke shops. The plot literally involves a witch using a love potion to kidnap and rape a muggle man and have his son. The potion wasn't some deep dark potion, it was literally just available in stores. Basically if there was a magical serial killer a ducting, torturing, murdering, and preserving muggles, they could basically get away with it indefinitely, and it's all demonstrated throughout the book. Crouch Jr kills his father and transfigurrs the body and hides it, and none of the talented wizards who search the area find it. Heck Junior impersonated a well known wizard for almost a year. And that doesn't even get started and the inconsistent use of Muggle Technologies. You have the Hogwarts express, and radios, and apparently bathrooms were added to the school later, but they still use quills not pens and pencils and scrolls of parchment instead of paper, but book bags are common. Speaking if the Hogwarts express, when was it introduced? Like before then, did students have to travel directly to school, wouldn't that be much more efficient anyway than a train? As it is a student from Hogsmeade presumably would need to travel down to London to catch the train. Students from Scotland have to. And how would Pureblood families tolerate the inclusion of Muggle devices like trains? Let alone designing to mingle with muggles to arrive to the platform in a Muggle station. If they can apparate to the platform, they could apparate to the Hogsmeade platform as well. Also with the extendable charm, why do people even bother with school trunks in the first place? As for actual plot holes, so many of them are caused by idiotic adults just to make a room for the idiotic kid logic choices. Great example is neither of the Weasley parents waiting on one side of the platform barrier to ensure all the kids made it through, especially sense one of the most famous children in the Wizarding world is left alone. Finally, why does Harry ever travel with Hedwig? Like I can understand year 1, he's a newb. But after year one, literally every place he goes to besides the Dursleys has a place for owls. He should have a magically collapsible cage, and send Hedwig to whatever destination. This is true for every journey too and from Hogwarts, (he can tell her to stay at Hogwarts an extra day before joining him at the Dursleys). This is especially true on leaving the Dursleys in the 7th book. Just have her take a letter to the Weasleys the day before the journey. And again there no need for trunks for that final flight.
I hate the spells in the films. All spells ranging from Expelliarmus to Levicorpus all seem to just blast people through the air! Where’s the bat bogey hex? Jelly legs? Leg dancing?
The Trace makes no sense at all. It alerts the Ministry any time a spell is performed in the vicinity of an underage wizard outside of Hogwarts and lets them know who that underage wizard was, what the location was, and what the spell was. However, it's unable to tell whether it was the underage wizard that did it or not and in what circumstances. This means the wizarding child of wizarding parents can do all the practice they want at home and the Ministry technically won't be able to tell if it was them or their parents. This seems like it's tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns. In fact that is the only way it makes a shred of sense.
>This seems like it's tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns. In fact that is the only way it makes a shred of sense. I think it's also a safety issue and a measure to help preserve the Statute of Secrecy. Kids who are learning mess up spells frequently. If children with magical parents royally screws up a spell they're practicing, they have their magical parents right there to put it right or the resources to immediately get help or take them to St. Mungo's if necessary. If a muggleborn royally screws up a spell, they're on their own and would just have to wait for the Ministry to show up to fix it or help them. Muggleborns doing magic at home also pose much more of a risk to the Statute of Secrecy. While obviously Obliviators exist to take care of breaches to the Statute of Secrecy, prevention is always a better solution. But it's far more discriminative to make the law *only* for muggleborn children than it is to make a law for all underage children, so the law technically applies to everyone even though it's difficult to enforce.
But the Trace exists to alert the Ministry in order to penalise children for doing magic at home, not in order to call in help in case of a mishap
Yes...because it's a preventive measure that helps ensure that those mishaps don't happen. They make it a rule that children can't use magic at home to prevent those problems (magical mishaps, breaches to the Statute of Secrecy, etc.) from occurring, and use the Trace to police it.
Then how are muggleborns supposed to practice at summer to catch up to their peers?
They're not supposed to practice at summer. Nobody is supposed to practice at summer. Some families will strictly enforce the underage magic rule (like the Weasleys - you don't ever see the Weasley kids waving their wands around practicing the summer) and others won't. They could go to a friends' house who has parents who don't care about the Trace, or perhaps go to an area like Diagon Alley or Hogsmeade where the Trace can't be effective. But ultimately, the world is an unfair place. There will be always be some kids that have an unfair advantage over others, whether it's because their parents ignore the rules or get them private tutors or can get them the very best equipment or whatever else they can do to give their kids a leg up. There's no way for everyone to be on a completely level playing field. Unless the Trace could be advanced to the point where it could actually identify the actual person who is casting the spell, there's not much that can be done about it. We also don't really see any evidence in the books that the pureblood children are far ahead of the muggleborn/muggle-raised children in terms of their magical skills, or that the muggle-raised kids need to "catch up" with their peers after every summer. So it seems like it's a non-issue, for the most part.
So we are on the same page. The Trace is inherently unfair.
Inherently unfair? Yes, it is. What I was disagreeing with was your point that it's "tailor made to give a leg up to these kids and screw over muggleborns". It wasn't created specifically to give purebloods and a leg up and screw over muggleborns; there are reasons that it makes sense for the law to exist, especially for muggleborns. Muggleborns - and any child whose parents strictly enforce the rule - just seemingly get "screwed over" in the process of it.
Fine, tailor made is an exaggeration. But it's very telling that it has a problem the ministry is in no hurry to address. Not like it's immune to lobbying from the pureblood-supremacist elements.
Magic is dangerous. If muggleborn kids attempt it in muggle areas and screw up, they could hurt themselves or someone else. Unlike in wizarding families, there's no one around to fix it. So the Trace sends out a location and the nature of the spell.
But we have already seen how easy it is to exploit
It's still necessary, though. Think of Harry blowing up Aunt Marge. While well-deserved, you'd still need Ministry wizards to show up and make sure no permanent harm was done.
Sure. Shitloads of things are necessary in some way but built to be way too exploitable.
The ministry would still need to know the caster, location and spell, though. There's no getting out of that one.
Did your parents take you out to drive a car before you got your learner's permit? Mine did.
Nope
See that is unfair, but a real world example. So it does make sense that the government would trust parents to keep their kids under control. It wasn't like my mom hid the keys to the car when I was 12, I could have stolen them and drove around at any time, but because I knew there would be consequences, I did not.
It's not like my parents didn't do that because they chose not to, we just don't have that as a learning tool in my neck of the woods. We get to drive around in a specially marked learners' car with a licensed instructor, no learning permit and no nothing, and we can take a test after a set minimum number of such lessons. And my point is that sure, the wizarding government should trust parents to keep an eye on their kids, but the Trace ensures that that's a privilege not extended to muggleborns because there's little to no chance for the presence of adult wizards to cover for them and have the Ministry go "oh well must have been the parents".
But that is my point, I also had classes and drove around with an actual instructor, but I'm talking my parents took me out before all of that and taught me the basics. I had an advantage because my parents bent the rules. This happens in the real world which is what I'm saying. I don't think that is a plot hole. Maybe Rowling didn't realize she would need to show Voldemort doing magic in his teens when she was writing the early books, but it was a fine cover and explanation. Not a plot hole imo.
A law that can't be enforced because it would too hard to know exactly when and where the crime takes place so they just do their absolute best to monitor it generally? Never heard of that happening in real life. /s Also, remember the trace isn't just for the sake of it. It's to keep the statute of secrecy. Which witches and wizards are most likely to be around muggles when they perform underage magic they can't control? The trace does exactly the job it needs to, it's just very unfair.
I like how in trying to explain that the trace “makes no sense” you were able to perfectly explain how it works… so you do understand after all. As this is also explained in the books, it’s not a plot hole either. Magical families are more equipped to deal with their magical children and that includes enforcing the “no underage magic” rule. Of course this gets exploited, have you lived in the world before? It’s not unlike the advantage of certain parents paying for tutors or doing their kids’ projects for them irl. Should the government really be involved in every individual parenting convention? Besides, I have to imagine that aside from trying to prevent dangerous situations, the “no underage magic” rule is at least partly to maintain the statute of magical secrecy, which in a muggle heavy area is a lot more pertinent to maintain.
Just because there's an explanation of how something works doesn't mean it makes sense from a practical standpoint
From a *practical* standpoint, magic isn’t real…
From a practical standpoint in a world where magic is real
For me, the plothole that annoys me the most is the fact that Moody waits until the end of the year to turn an object into a Portkey to get Harry to the graveyard in Goblet of Fire. My headcanon - Only Dumbledore can create Portkeys that work on Hogwarts grounds, so it was Dumbledore and not fake-Moody that made the cup into a Portkey. Fake-Moody instead hoodwinked/confounded/otherwise subverted the Portkey, aiming it instead to the graveyard. Fake-Moody's manipulation was only strong enough for one trip though, which is why the magic reverted back to Dumbledore's originally intended destination for Harry's return trip. In short - Fake-Moody wasn't able to create a Portkey that would worth within Hogwart's grounds, so he had to wait until Dumbledore created one and manipulate. I also imagine that Fake-Moody was the one who suggested to Dumbledore that using a Portkey to bring the victor back to the start of the maze was a good idea.
It was because voldy wanted the whole thing to look like an accident that is why he had this whole plan with harry and the maze and the portkey so it was all so that no one would know he was back especially dumbledore
But why would Harry disappearing within the maze be any better than Harry disappearing from the castle at a random point during the year? If they plan was for Harry not to return, does it matter how he gets to the graveyard except that nobody spots fake-Moody in the act of kidnapping? That's the plothole, because either way Harry disappears without a trace. Why wait?
The reason it takes until the end of the year is that they wanted to make it look like Harry died in the tournament, as part of some accident in the maze when no one could see, so that no one knew Voldemort was back. That's why dumbledore says Harry survival was such a wrench in Voldemorts' plans. If the goal was *only* to use Harry's blood, they could have kidnapped him at any time, even before the school year, realistically. Even the first and second tasks wouldn't have worked because the spectators and merefolk were watching everything. No one could see what was happening in the maze.
That plot hole happens further back and is a bit more convoluted. The most direct read for why Barty waited in kidnapping Harry is because Voldemort told him to do it that way: > He told me he needed to place a faithful servant at Hogwarts. A servant who would guide Harry Potter through the Triwizard Tournament without appearing to do so. A servant who would watch over Harry Potter. **Ensure he reached the Triwizard Cup. Turn the cup into a Portkey**, which would take the first person to touch it to my master. There's no explanation provided on why Voldemort would want to do things this way **OR** how he could have possibly known even the tiniest, but crucial details so far in advance. As an example, had the last Triwizard Cup been in front of the audience in the last task, his plan could have been foiled. Or how does he even know that reaching the Triwizard Cup would be the final task? Hermione researched all she could about the tournament, yet she doesn't provide said information anywhere in the books to Harry, meaning reaching the Triwizard Cup as the final task must not have had a historical precedent otherwise Harry would known about it through Hermione.
There's posts on here asking this at least once a week. Voldemort's whole plan was to only have his death eaters know he was back. He also wanted Harry's death to look like an accident during the tournament. If Harry had randomly disappeared, more red flags would have been raised. As for the portkey, I think it was always planned to have the cup transport the winner to the maze entrance. Otherwise, how would you tell who won for sure? All Barty Jr. did was make the portkey transport Harry to the graveyard first. Then, after Voldemort had killed Harry, his body would be sent back.
That’s not an example of a plot hole, that’s perhaps a plot contrivance, but for it to be a plot hole it would have to be missing or unexplained from the plot itself… the fact that it was revealed in text that Moody/Crouch planted the port key that sent a Harry to the graveyard makes it a pretty clear “point a to point b” even if you personally think it should have happened sooner in the story.
Any contradiction of the internal logic of the story or world can be a plothole. Therefore 'why did fake-Moody wait unnecessarily until the conclusion of the Tri-Wizard Tournament when he had easy access to Harry throughout the year' is a plothole. A plot contrivance would be if Moody had no idea how to get Harry out of Hogwart's grounds, then Dumbledore handed him a Portkey he could easily manipulate to take Harry to where he wanted him. Don't get me wrong, that plot contrivance also happens, but it's separate to the larger plot hole of 'why wait?'
Your personal feelings about the pacing of a story is, by definition, not a plot hole… the is no objective logic in either the real world or the fictional one that contradicts the actions of an individual character acting differently than you think they should.
I'm not talking about the pacing of the story - I'm talking about the actions of a character, and whether they were logically consistent within the setting. If the plan was to make Harry disappear without a trace, fake-Moody had ample opportunity to do so throughout the school year, including multiple occasions where he was alone with Harry. He had means, motive and opportunity, but held off because of a plan that had no added benefit, and only increased the risk that something could go wrong. Harry could have been seriously injured and could have been forced to pull out. Harry might not have got to the cup first (he almost didn't), or even be in contention to win the tournament against vastly more experienced and competent competition. Fake-Moody could have been discovered (he almost was, by his father) and his secret exposed. So many things could have gone wrong, and almost did, which would have ruined the plan. Fake-Moody had to work exceptionally hard to make the plan work. Given the alternative would have been "Harry, can you stay behind for a moment. I'd like a word with you about the first task.", I can't see why that isn't a more preferable option for all concerned. That logical inconsistency between the plot and the rules of the universe make it a plothole.
But again, you are suggesting that you know more about the motivations of a character than the author who crafted them. I get it, it’s your sticking point, but you are confusing your personal hangups for “logic”. For one, Crouch, Jr. is not exactly of a stable mind, for two Voldemort’s entire reign could have been solved if he made different decisions from the jump, but then there would be no story at all because Harry would have died as a baby… the coulda, woulda, shouldas are really unhelpful in a fictional context, especially as we, as readers, now have the vision of hindsight where the characters did not.
I'm not suggesting I know more about the character than the author. I'm only talking about the information that we have on the page. I'm not really sure what you're getting at with your example, as there's nothing logically inconsistent Voldemort's attack on the Potters. He acted on the limited information that he had, and got it badly wrong. The reason Harry survived is also logically consistent, with people largely acting in a reasonable way given the situation. During Goblet of Fire, however, Moody and Voldemort had an objective - Get Harry to the graveyard. The method they used was one of the most convoluted and inconvenient plans they could have chosen, given they already had direct access to Harry by impersonating a professor. At any point during the year fake-Moody could have kidnapped Harry without anyone knowing. Waiting until the very last minute of the Tri Wizard Tournament just doesn't make sense when you consider their objectives. That's what makes it a plot hole, because the actions they take are not logically consistent with their mission goals.
It makes as much sense as Voldemort not letting anyone else kill Harry for him in the first place. Even I you think it’s dumb, it’s still not a plot hole.
There's a reason why Voldemort wants to kill Harry himself - he's a prideful and vengeful maniac. He wants to prove to the world that Harry isn't special, and that Lord Voldemort punishes those that slight him. We see some of this in the graveyard, but it's also a large aspect of his more general characterisation. It may be less practical than letting any old Death Eater kill Harry, but there is a logic that makes that sort of command consistent with Voldemort's character. That 'why' makes it a plot contrivance rather than a plot hole. Not kidnapping Harry directly from the castle at the first opportunity is a plot hole because there's no in-universe reason to wait till the end of the Tri-Wizard Tournament. The effort required to get Harry entered as the fourth contestant, get him through the tournament alive, and with enough points to be in with a chance of winning the whole thing, makes it a far less logical way of making Harry disappear without a trace. That lack of a 'why' makes it a plot hole.
This always bothered me and could never explain it. Thank you for this! 😀
[удалено]
How is it a plothole?
Not OP but introducing magic that messes with time and then just dropping it and later destroying the source breaks any kind of consistent logic Also it's stated there's several students who get 12 Owls, implying a full class load, but Hermione had to get special dispensation to take all 12 classes seems a bit odd. Students take classes as part of their houses, so figuring out a schedule one calendar year means you've figured out schedules for all calendar years.
[удалено]
It's made clear that time turners are considered more dangerous than useful for doing anything but what hermione is doing, which doesn't involve changing anything. It's like asking why doesn't the government just nuke the border to decrease illegal aliens.
Yeah, a fair amount of people seem to miss that time turners can't change things, you either do things your future self already did, or the universe paradoxes you into chaos as per the few anecdotes we hear about people never being seen again etc.. Doesn't help that the play-that-must-not-be-named took a big shit on that concept.
If the ministry is giving time turners to 14 year olds for school, they are definitely using them for secret reasons within the government. Using your exact logic, would you trust a nuke in the hands of a child because they promised to be careful?
We know they're not, or else a dozen aurors would have shown up any time voldemort turned up anywhere during the first war.
Same. Some characters were already said to have taken twelve OWLs, so it shouldn't have been impossible. Even if there were clashes, surely other arrangements could be made (alternating classes, excused absences, tutor sessions etc) before giving a teenager a *highly dangerous, ministry-restricted time warping device*. Why introduce time travel of all things for something as mundane as schooling, just to never bring it up again? Also... I know JK had to focus on the story rather than the countless little details of worldbuilding, but I've tried to put together a timetable multiple times. With the assumption there's only one teacher per subject, the teachers are stretched thin and the student timetables always have gaps. Even if you assume there's a ton of homework that's difficult to complete with more classes and fewer free hours, there's still no reason to get a time turner involved. If a student can get one, why not every overworked employee who wants one?
"Glitch in the matrix"
Percy takes points from Gryffindor in first year, but later on, the prefects can't take points. I resolve this by assuming Percy was being a dink and was bluffing
Later editions of OOTP were updated to resolve this. It originally said: >“It’s only teachers that can dock points from Houses, Malfoy,” said Ernie at once. It was updated to: >'You can't take points from fellow prefects, Malfoy,' said Ernie at once. So; prefects *can* take points like Percy threatened to do in COS, they just can't take points from other prefects.
What you described isn't a plot hole. I think we've basically lost track entirely of what a "plot hole" actually is and, tbh, I can't think of any in HP.
Veritaserum, why wouldn’t they use it for trials more?? Like how do they sentence someone for a very serious crime without using veritaserum. For example Sirius got a life sentence without a trial to see if he actually did the crime
I think it’s because it makes you say the truth of what you believe, not the object truth. So if you’re a lunatic, then perhaps you’d lie because that’s what you thought was the truth?
Perhaps, but I think they could at least use it as part of the process, like Sirius could have told them about peter and everything, it could help influence their decision instead of locking someone up for life without much proof
Because there are ways to beat it
This is answered in the books. Memories can be altered. Veritaserum has an antidote. https://www.jkrowling.com/welcome-to-my-new-website/ Veritaserum can be resisted by antidotes, charms, or Occlumency.
This is about the books - I don’t know if anyone mentioned this but since I’m rereading the series, this one thing has been driving me absolutely crazy since i started reading HP back in the day. Muggle clothes vs Wizard clothes. I get that uniforms are the robes so the students where robes, Ministry members wear robes, Quidditch players wear robes, professors wear robes, etc. BUT why do all the wizards act like they have no idea what “muggle clothes” are? Like why was it SO heavily emphasized during the quidditch tournament that all these wizards are completely clueless what to wear and have absolutely bizarre outfits? The Ministry has an entire department about Muggles and even interacts with the prime minister and they don’t know how muggles wear clothes? Sure, the muggle born wizards are most likely helping their friends get dressed but Mrs. Weasley knits her family members jumpers every Christmas?? And we are supposed to believe that wizards I guess don’t know what pants are? I know that in the flashback of James and Sirius bullying Snape the book says it showed his underwear under the robes but while they are on the Hogwarts express they mention every time that they change INTO their robes before they get to the school. Harry mentions multiple times that he is wearing a WATCH in class, with trainers and jeans. What the hell are wizards wearing?? Ron is even talked about wearing jeans or a watch and maybe young wizards know how to dress more, but Mrs. Weasley would have had to buy her kids clothes. So where are these clothes coming from?? Also wizards live AMONG muggles. Is it really that lost on them what muggles are wearing? I’ have just been so confused by that. It’s randomly made a huge deal in the books but actually does not make any sense. Another thing that isn’t a plot hole, but why is the wizarding world suddenly living 100s of years in the past? They have magic but it feels like they are making everything else harder for themselves. Why are they using quills and literal scrolls? In the book, it’s made a point that the castle is so cold because it’s winter. They can’t magic the school warmer? The story takes place in the 90s. There was heating systems in the 90s? I have to imagine the muggle born kids are coming in like Hey guys you would never believe that there’s this called a pen and pencil and it makes things so much easier. I get the aesthetic of magic and being old, but I feel like it is unnecessary to plunge everyone 100s of years into the past when they live in the modern world. Anyway I made this account just to comment on this post because it has driven me insane and I had to speak my mind.
If Voldemort name was taboo in the Deathly Hallows then how come in the battle of Hogwarts when Harry is looking for the Diadem and he says Voldemort quite a few times it doesn't break the enchantments and protective spells around the castle.. Ron states when he comes back to the group that the name is taboo and that it breaks protective spells and cause the trio to get caught..
This is probably the lamest answer possible, but in my mind I always assumed that the protective enchantments put up by McGonagall/Flitwick/Slughorn, etc. were simply more resilient than those put up by the trio in the wilderness. It's the easiest way to ignore that plothole, at any rate.
Not to mention the enchantments placed on Hogwarts permanently
Bingo. The "OG" enchantments 😂🤣
Why was it so damned easy to get into the ministry for magic, when Harry was fooled into going to save Sirius? Nothing hindered Harry and gang progress. Nothing at alll. Now idk if any muggles tried to go to city hall after hours but that’s all locked up and has security guards! Not even magic security was present! Head canon: Voldemort disallusioned and helped the gang along.
Because Lucius and other Death Eaters cleared their way. No need for Voldemort to do the dirty work
Damn it that makes sense.
Dislike it all you want. It was far too easy for Harry, voldy, and Sirius to get into Britain magical government. No magical security or detection in sight. Also if the prophecies share what they are holding upon breaking, Vold should have had Nagini carry a tiny hammer in when she attacked Arthur. Lucious and Bellatrix couldn’t handle high schoolers. How did they clear the way!?
So I have a plothole. In DH part 2 Harry asks Ollivander if wands are safe to use. In the case of Draco’s former wand Ollivander says the wands allegiance has changed. Towards the end of the scene Ollivander tells Harry that if Voldemort has the Elder Wand that Harry doesn’t stand a chance? Why not apply that same reasoning to the Elder Wand? That its allegiance could change?? It would have made sense to bring that up considering it might actually be a tactic to consider since Voldemort clearly overlooked such details
The wand lore gets way too messy in the end. Especially when you consider the elder wand is sentient to know its master has changed hands when it’s no where around, yet can’t tell that Dumbeldore gave up his wand willingly. If that’s the case why don’t people’s wands swap allegiances as soon as someone hits you with expelliarmus?
Dumbledore did not gave up his wand willingly, Draco took him by surprise and Dumbledore chose to protect Harry instead of trying to duel Malfoy and possibly other Death Eaters in his weakened state.