From Beth Priest, HogPro All-Pro, old school:
One question I’ve been puzzling over for ages: If the “wand chooses the wizard,” then why on earth did Voldemort’s wand choose him? since it’s got a tail feather from Fawkes! Apparently there have only ever been two such wands in existence. (Where they made at the same time? And on what occasion did Fawkes decide to donate two of his feathers for such a purpose? Did Dumbledore have anything to do with those wands being made? And why were there two?)
It’s just always seemed very odd to me that a wand, seemingly so connected to a bird of beauty, rightness, and power, a bird symbolic of resurrection, a bird connected so deeply to a powerful Gryffindor, would choose an orphan boy with a penchant for cruelty and a huge fear of death who also happens to be the last remaining ancestor of Salazar Slytherin. Decidedly strange. Remember when Harry first chooses his wand; or rather the wand chooses Harry? Red and gold sparks actually fly out of it! It’s hard to imagine that green and silver sparks would have flown out of Tom Riddle’s wand, made with the same core. Unless….
Here are my two ideas. One is a new idea for me, and the other is an old one I’ve played around with for a while.
My new idea is that perhaps Fawkes, who I suspect is quite ancient (we don’t know how many times a phoenix can die and rise from the ashes, but I don’t think there’s any time limit) originally had some connection to BOTH founders, Salazar Slytherin and Godric Gryffindor. What if Fawkes was originally a bird that was close to them both? A gift from one to the other? A mark of their friendship? Because the sorting hat tells us that they were very good friends until their falling out and ultimate separation. If Fawkes was part of some sort of connection between the founders originally, perhaps he gave two tail feathers in the hope that one day the wands would somehow re-forge a connection between the two houses and heal the enmity.
I know, I know…this doesn’t quite wash in one way. I’m not for one moment supposing that we’re going to see Voldemort repent. He’s gone too far down a destructive and dehumanizing path. But because of what he did with his wand, because of the strange bond that was forged between him and Harry, there is ultimately still the possibility that through Harry’s victory over Voldemort and the events that play out around it, we will see at least some Gryffindors and Slytherins united on the same side and some healing taking place. Snape is a big candidate for that; Draco another.
Which leads me to my second thought, and one I’ve been thinking of for a long time. Doesn’t it seem as though there MUST be some level of Providence functioning in these stories? It would appear that the particular wands choosing these particular wizards lends at least some credence to the idea that some force, some power, is at work in and through our good guys, even if that’s never completely named (beyond the “power of love”). A power with a purpose. That wand didn’t choose Harry accidentally. Did it only choose him because he bore the scar? Would it have chosen someone else (Neville) if circumstances had been different? (Harry himself wonders about questions similar to this in HBP, though not directly related to his wand.) Is it possible that the first wand chose Riddle precisely because the second wand would one day choose Harry? Or is that taking things too far and getting too convoluted?
At any rate, I find this one of the most fascinating puzzles in the entire series, and one I don’t think has been fully explored even after the priori incantatem scene in Goblet.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
I think it’s interesting that V’s wand is of yew while Harry’s is holly. Google “yew” and “symbolism” and you’ll see that the long-lived yew is also associated w/ immortality and resurrection and has sometimes been thought of as a Christ-symbol However, it seems to have become more strongly associated w/ death and sadness w/ the resurrection aspects less prominent. Yew trees are most commonly found in church graveyards. They are linked w/ immortality b/c they are very long lived and one reason for this is that their roots become new trunks. There is some similarity between how yew roots fx and TR’s horcruxes, at least to my mind.
Holly is also associated w/ Christ and resurrection it has been linked w/ more positive aspects–the Incarnation and the Cross. W/o going and copying bunches on yews, basically the “tone” of the symbolism of yews is very dark and gloomy, while holly has much more positive connotations.
The two wand woods are like the two characters….very similar in some respects, but turned to opposite sides of the core question. It’s as if the phoenix feather is the “question”–resurrection and immortality–and it’s “clothed” in two different answers. V has focused on death–its negative aspects, how to evade it, etc.–while Harry is focused on the incarnation of love and sacrificial love transcending death. All very alchemical! Now to see how the wands are involved in resolving this duality.
Brilliant! Absolutely wonderful exploration! I just love your first theory.
I believe Jo Rowling secured clues in some of the slightest of details and
your exploration of the wand story is fascinating. After reading your post, I had to revisit the scene in CoS, in the Heir of Slytherin chapter, when the Tom Riddle memory actually takes Harry’s wand. Interesting that Fawkes is in that scene as well. Interesting too, that Tom Riddle’s specter outlines the similarities between himself and Harry. I agree that Voldemort has factured himself far beyond restoration, but I think there
does exist an alliance of sorts between a Slytherin and a Gryffindore…
Snape has consistently provided assistance for Harry since year one.
Actually, I think we’ll lose pitiful, damaged Severus in Book Seven…but
perhaps not before at least a moment of reconciliation between he and Harry.
It takes a certain quality of person to become a saint or a monster. Interesting isn’t it that Stalin considered the priesthood before turning to politics! Tom and Harry have many similarities as well as one crucial difference, don’t they? If the wand chooses the wizard on the basis of greatness of soul only, it would not “know” how the greatness would be turned. So perhaps the phoenix wand core senses greatness of potential or soul. It is a bit much to expect wand cores to know the future when even Dumbledore does not!
The differences between yew and holly are wonderfully explicated by esoterica 1693 and I think her analysis correct. TR horcrux would not have known of the two wands, would he? So his handling of it while sapping the very life out of Ginny would argue against an inherent ability of the core to distinguish between good or ill in the handler. And we know that other witches and wizards may employ differing wands than their own (though less powerfullly, perhaps?).
I really appreciate the explication of the differences (and yet similarities) of the wand woods. I hadn’t gotten that far in my musings, and your great comment, esoterica, makes me want to look into that more. I have always connected holly with the cross, especially the bright red of the holly berries with shed blood. I don’t know much about yew, but the graveyard connection and the roots idea are both highly intriguing.
I also like the idea inked presents here that perhaps the wand core somehow senses “greatness” of soul, without “knowing” how that greatness will turn. That seems at least partially borne out by canon, when Olivander himself makes that comment (don’t have book handy, so this will be a loose paraphrase) that he didn’t know what Voldemort’s wand was going out in the world to do, and that the things done with it were “great” but also terrible.
I wasn’t exactly suggesting that the wand core itself would “know” the future, more that the wands and wand cores are objects in a bigger drama than might seem apparent to the eye immediately. (Who knew that ring Biblo found in a cave would turn out to be so important?) It’s interesting, is it not, that some sense of “personality” comes through here, when Olivander (perhaps speaking metaphorically or hyperbolically!) uses the phrase the “wand CHOOSES the wizard.” Given the importance of the choice theme in these books, that seems like a very carefully chosen line by JKR. And we do know that certain magical objects are vested with power or abilities (like the sorting hat) or somehow are already considered good conduits for magical power (some substances more magically powerful than others, which is why certain substances are chosen as cores). I guess what I am getting at is that this seems like a quiet, implicit way to get at the notion that there is some power, some power for good, moving behind the scenes, and perhaps directing and influencing events in a certain direction.
Beth, I meant the remark about the wand core “knowing” in a tongue-in-cheek manner supportive of your contention that a greater power is at work in the wand/wizard/witch matchup. I think the absence of an overarching Emperor-over-the-Sea motif fits more closely with Tolkien’s subcreational content as portrayed in LOTR – which is a mode in which I think JKR is writing. I think you are very perceptive to have noted the implications of the wand picks the wizard line. It is very like the Gandalf line to Frodo that “Bilbo was meant to find the ring and therefore for you to have it” which suggests but does not require God per se.
I think our atheist commentator (Lee Grossman) on the absence of God in HP is going to be surprised in the end by what he has missed. But it may require that JKR write the background of HP1-7 just as Tolkien subsequently published the Silmarillion et alia.
I do think that JKR will be finished with HP as she has promised. But that leaves much about the nature of Harry’s world to be explored without Harry or the cast we are familiar with to date. Something very like the History of Middle Earth may reveal the conundrums we now perceive in a glass darkly but later face-to-book see clearly.
A propos of nothing in particular, here is an excellent article from Christianity Today, speculating on events in “Deathly Hallows.” Many insightful comments, many of which have been aired on this blog.
http://www.christianitytoday.com/books/features/rumorsofglory/070625.html
Rowling herself points to the holly/yew dynamic….look at her website under “Extras” [hairbrush] then “Miscellaneous” then “Wands”
I do like the idea that Fawkes was somehow a part of the friendship between Godric and Salazaar. That is a good theory. The implication is that somehow the unfinished business between these two will be settled in the final book and we would see the return of Fawkes.
I always thought that perhaps phoenix feathers are meant to heal wizards with emotional issues. Spell-casting is very much involved with emotional control after all. Dumbledore, yanked out a Fawkes tail feather (I’m sure he asked permission!) and took it to Ollivander knowing that Little Mister Sociopath would be by on a shopping trip in the near future.
Nice try, but it didn’t work.
Since I go for there’s-a-horcrux-inside-of-Harry theory, again, the feather reached out to heal a portion of torn soul that showed up in Ollivander’s shop. This time, the feather empowered Harry’s pure soul, who actually can turn the tide.
I suppose when DD pulled out the one feather, a second came out. He gave both to Ollivander. They didn’t realize just how important that second feather would be.
You brought up Providence and perhaps that second feather becoming available would fall into that category.
I read somewhere that some Shamens use feathers to heal souls. They hold one and blow on it while another feather is put upon the person needing help and this frees the troubled person.
Harry, then, is the feather in the hands of the Shamen.
It is also interesting to note that the first spell is Wingaurdium Leviosa (spelled wrong!) using a feather.