Department of Queries: The Passages of Hogwarts

This DoQ is more focused on the setup of the passages, not so much the passages in Cannon themselves.

The question we started with for this week is: "How do earthen passages appear out of walls several stories up, like the passage that caved in on the fourth floor or the one that comes out of the second floor of the Hog’s Head in the seventh book?"

Calie and I began exploring this question by looking at the passage behind Ariana's portrait in the Hog's Head. This is one of the passages that are "earthen". We began discussing how the passage could be there in the first place. How could this huge tunnel just connect two places, and allow travel at the same time? I brought up the theory that it would semi-resemble the Floo network how it connects two places using an entry and exit. Another thing brought up was the possibility of an Undetectable Extension Charm on the passage to allow there to be an inside, like Arthur used on the car. We couldn't quite figure out how this extra dimension could be created and exist, rather than the explanation of "it's magic." We agreed that it is almost like a wormhole, and that it was probably "earthen" because it was literally underground, because maybe that was the only way to have this extra dimension. If you notice, all of the passages slope upward in some form before the exit.

Next, we discussed the creation of the passages. We know that there are at least two different kinds of passages-tunnels and slides- but why are they located where they are? We talked about who would've created them, and we came to a consensus that there were probably some that were established when the castle was built, made by the Founders, much like the Chamber of Secrets. I'd like to think that some at least, would be by the students, but I think that it would be very advanced magic, so there might not be many. We know that at least one teacher made one-Dumbledore with the Shrieking Shack for Lupin. Calie and I agree that it would've been awesome if Fred and George would've made one, because it seems like something they would do. If the students were able to make their own, they would have had to pass the secret on for them to become known, and since we don't know about very many other than the ones on the Marauder's Map, we expect that they are lost to the times, but I think that there would be tons of these passages everywhere in Hogwarts.

A great point brought up in our discussion was the protection of the Hogwarts grounds if there are more passages. Calie said that it would be a huge breach in security if there were all of these passages everywhere, but I argued that back in the day, security was probably not as big of an issue as it was during Harry's time, for obvious reasons. One thing that boggled us was how damage could be inflicted on one. We assumed that they would be protected magically, yet the one on the fourth floor was caved in. We couldn't think of what could damage it either.

Department of Queries: Portraits

Here is the question that we will explore for the DoQ: What dictates the actions of portraits?
Calie and I had a great discussion over this, including different aspects of portraits, including travelling, communication, purpose, and the 'portrait world'.
We began by talking about what we think the portraits would see on their side of the frame. Would it be like another world back there, where everything is three-dimesional? Would it be two-dimensional since they are painted? Do the same rules apply to the objects if they are present? I think that first off, the frame is like a window to real people; that even if all we see is the person from the waist up, they would still have a body, it's just not shown. Otherwise, how would they travel to their other portrait? I think that the 'world' behind the frame would be three-dimensional to them, and so would the objects. I think that this is proven when the Fat Lady and Violet drink all of the wine in the portrait of the monks.
Another thing to do with backgrounds was the space between the frames (or the walls their hung on) in their background. We both agreed that there would have to be some kind of space between them, but we were stuck on how they would actually move into other portraits. We see in many instances where the portraits visit others. Would there be something in the 'space' between them, like a ladder or stairs, to get to ones higher or lower than them? That's a question that Calie had. I had always imagined something like a hallway on the sides of their frame, where they could choose which way to go, and also a path to go to their other portrait. But as for traveling to their other portrait, it says that they just walk out the side of their frame to go to their other portrait, but when they do, they don't appear in their adjacent frame. We couldn't agree on whether or not the distance between frames on their side was the same as on our side, such as just the length of wall between them, or a simple threshold.
Something we found intriguing was Ariana's portrait. It seems to break a lot of portrait rules. Firstly, all of the portraits in the Headmaster's study that we see travel walk out of the side of their portrait to appear at their other portrait. When Ariana visits her other portrait, she "turned and walked away, not as people in portraits normally did, out of the sides of their frames, but along what seemed to be a long tunnel behind her." Another very odd thing is when Harry asks Phineas Nigellus to bring Dumbledore into his frame to talk to them, he says: "The portraits of Hogwarts may commune with each other, but they cannot travel outside the castle except to visit a painting of themselves hanging elsewhere. Dumbledore cannot come here with me." Maybe this only applies to Hogwarts portraits, but when Ariana goes along the path of her portrait, she is able to bring Neville through. He is also is seen in her portrait when they are travelling back. I don't think he actually travelled through it, since "the [portrait] swung forward on the wall like a little door, and the entrance to a real tunnel was revealed. And out...clambered the real Neville." We know that portraits can be guarding entrances, but how is it that Neville could be shown in the picture when he is inside the tunnel? We never see anyone in the fruit bowl or Fat Lady portraits when they travel.
That is it for this installment of Department of Queries. If you would like to add your opinion or critique, we encourage you to comment and let us know what you think about this query.

Another Update

So just an update...
As you all should know, early registration for Pottermore was completed yesterday after seven days of clues to gain access. Throughout the seven days, one million lucky people around the world got invitiations to 'beta' the site, gaining access about a month before it opens to the public. After staying up until 4 AM for the second clue, and 5 AM the next for the third, we both were able to get invitations; I got the clue the second night, and Calie the third. We are some of the lucky few that will be able to participate in this upcoming experience in October. We are very anxious and excited.
Another thing we would like to let you know is that we will begin working on another Department of Queries question over the next few days, this topic being Magical Portraits. We will begin working on it tomorrow, and it should be out sometime this week.
As always, we encourage you to explore the site and leave us comments. We could really use them so that we can improve the site and incorporate more things that you would like to see. It would help tremendously! Thanks.

Paige Cyrus

Department of Queries: Wand Allegiance

As I said in a post a few days ago, we are starting a new series here on SR. This series, Department of Queries, attempts to answer some of the conundrums within the series. Paige and I have compiled a long list of questions during our readings this summer, but this is also a chance for you to throw in a few of your own. So here is our first post:

Question: What influences the allegiance of wands?

        Well I suppose the best place to begin is how does a wand align with a person in the first place? What makes a wand choose its owner? How does Ollivander know what wands someone will need, and how does he know which he should make? So basically, that is what Paige and I used as our starting point (we will get to changes in allegiance in just a second). I have always been under the assumption that Ollivander just has some kind of inspiration. He makes a wand when he feels he has a good core and wood that will make a great match. There must be some kind of science behind it, as Griphook says that Wizards refuse to share the secrets of wandlore with the Goblins. I always figured that Ollivander has a shop full of wands because he makes a wand without any person in mind, then it is ready for whenever the right person comes along. On to how Ollivander figures out what kind of wand will be likely to choose a certain person. Well, we think that the cores and woods posses certain qualites (supple, unyeilding, good for charm work, etc.) that lend them to a certain kind of person. Ollivander understands wands better than anyone in the world, so we can assume that he understands these characteristics and uses them to make wands. We also found it interesting that he measures people before giving them wands to test. Does this indicate that size of person has an impact? I have wondered this ever since the books said that Hagrid had a wand that was very large, while Umbridge had a very short wand. Perhaps height has an impact on the length of wand that will be best for you.

        So for the most part, Paige and I saw eye to eye on this first question. But when it comes to allegiances changing, we not only found the questions harder to answer, but we also didn’t always agree. We started this part of the conversation off with the question, what would happen if a won wand was returned to its original owner? Paige sees wand alliances as a bit more black and white than I do. I think that the wand would probably return its allegiance to its owner, especially if returned (or won back) immediately. I kind of feel like wands and wizards form a bond between each other, and they sort of learn from each other. So a wand going back to its original owner, especially if it was hardly used by anyone else, wouldn’t change. Paige had problems with that; she thought that once a wand was won it would be a bit harder to regain its allegiance, because the new person was already in charge of it. She wondered how the wand would react if it realized that it was fighting its old master. Would there be some kind of defense to where it wouldn’t work properly against the old master, like the Elder Wand or Harry and Voldemort’s when faced against each other? We finally decided that neither of us knew nearly enough about wandlore to answer this question (hopefully Pottermore will help). Next, we talked about why Hermione’s wand worked so well for Harry, while almost none other did. We thought that the intention of the owner had an impact on how the wand would work for other people. So since Hermione lent him the wand and intended that the wand work for him, the wand would obey her wishes and work without much resistance. But in the instance of the Blackthorn wand, when it was taken by force but not won by Harry, the wand didn’t work properly. The Snatcher neither intended to hand over his wand nor let someone else use it, so it was resistant to all of the magic that Harry tried to do. Paige and I struggled with this a little, as with the next topic. What happens to a wand’s allegiance when the owner dies or becomes incapacitated? Paige and I both agreed that the allegiance would die with the owner, or perhaps be passed to a person who was similar to the owner, like a relative. The Elder Wand was able to change allegiance easily, because it was a particularly power thirsty wand, but we thought that a normal wand would most likely not function that way. We both found it interesting that some wands worked well with other members of the same family, like Ron with Charlie’s wand and Neville with his dad’s, and we think that it may be because of the similar characteristics of the people that have to do with why the wand suits them (as mentioned above).

        Our final topic that we discussed was the biggest head-scratcher of all. Could one person have more than one wand’s allegiance? Paige and I could not come to a consensus on this. I had this feeling that you couldn’t have more than one true wand at a time, as it would take away all the meaning of a loyal wand. But then you have the Harry/Draco Elder Wand conundrum. Both Harry and Draco had the allegiance of Draco’s wand at the same time as they had the allegiance of the Elder Wand. How is this possible, and how did the change in allegiance of Draco’s wand also change the allegiance of the elder wand? What was the allegiance of the Phoenix and Holly wand during this period? Did Harry possibly have three wands at his beck and call at once? Well, Paige and I never could figure this out, but we would (as always) love to hear what you think about this, or anything else in this post.

We Have Been Working, Honestly.

So you may have noticed that Paige and I have been a bit silent since last week's flood of posts. That is for two reasons: one, we have been relaxing a bit since most of our summer has been filled with deadlines and analyses; for Paige, relaxing has meant rereading the entire series and doing a little project with that, and for me, it has been doing some non-Potter related reading.

Second, we have been working on all the stuff that we are going to be doing for the next few months. We will include more of our independent (not part of a series) posts, as well as a new series. What is this new series you ask? Well in fact it is all about asking. It is a series based off of the questions we put at the bottom of each of our read throughs. This new series is similar to Pottercast's Cannon-Conundrums. Paige and I will discuss a question, and then write a post based on our discussion and revelations. This new series is, as of now, being called The Department of Queries. We have begun our first question, and it should be posted in the next few days. We, as always, welcome any questions, suggestions, or feedback you would like to add to this new venture.