5

In the first book of Harry Potter it is said that Ron had to use his brother's wand.

  • Why and how was that possible?
  • Doesn't the "wand choose the wizard"?
  • Isn't Charlie without a proper wand now?

Here is a quote from wikipedia-

The first wand of Ronald Weasley was 12" ash with a core of unicorn hair that stuck out at the end of the wand. It originally belonged to his older brother Charlie.

Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873
Pobrecita
  • 8,019
  • 8
  • 42
  • 75
  • 3
    If we haven't already passed it, I think we're fast approaching the point where every wandlore question has already been answered. – Anthony Grist Jun 17 '14 at 17:07
  • I suspect it is as simple as Charlie not originally having brand new wand in the first place... Perhaps Charlie's first wand was a second-hand, or low-quality wand (not from Ollivander). Then he upgraded to a proper wand-chooses-wizard wand. Giving the spare wand to to Ron. Also, Ron was never really good with his original wand. – Zoredache Jun 17 '14 at 17:10
  • @AnthonyGrist - I suspect we are about at that point for just about ANY Potter related question. – JohnP Jun 17 '14 at 19:00
  • Maybe dupe here? http://scifi.stackexchange.com/a/55046/21267 – Möoz Jun 17 '14 at 22:28
  • Related: https://scifi.stackexchange.com/questions/120793/why-would-charlie-weasley-give-up-his-old-wand-and-give-it-to-ron – Alex Apr 23 '19 at 05:17

2 Answers2

10

JKR has spoken to this issue on a number of occasions;

The most instructive quote is probably this one regarding wands and family allegiance:

Stephanie: If the wand chooses the wizard, then why do wands work when passed down from father to son eg neville had his fathers wand

J.K. Rowling: As established by Ollivander, a wizard can use almost any wand, it is simply that a wand that chooses him/her will work best. Where there is a family connection, a wand will work a little better than a wand chosen at random, I think.

It follows that not only would Ron be able to perform magic with any wand, but that Charlie's old wand would also probably be slightly more effective than another wand.

As to what happened to Charlie, the clear implication is that he has a new wand and that Ron, as the youngest wizard in the family now has to accepted his hand-me-down.

Ollivander repeatedly reminisces over people’s first wands, suggesting that replacing them (presumably when they wear out or become broken) is at least a semi-regular occurrence in the lifetime of a wizard.

Valorum
  • 689,072
  • 162
  • 4,636
  • 4,873
  • 3
    I'd imagine it's a bit like a keyboard. When you first get any keyboard, you're clumsy with it, but eventually you learn to touch-type just fine. If you're used to using one for a long time, and someone else hands you their keyboard, you struggle a bit because things don't quite match up with your muscle memory. You can still type on it, but just not with the same accuracy or efficiency. – Polynomial Jun 17 '14 at 18:33
  • But that's like Harry getting a new wand and giving his old one to his son. That's like removing your finger, the wand chooses the wizard didn't the wand already choose Charlie. – Pobrecita Jun 17 '14 at 22:52
  • 1
    @iliveunderawesomerock A wizard isn't limited to beeing chosen by a single wand: By the end of the last book, Harry was 'chosen' by three wand: his old wand, the elder wand, and Draco's (former) wand. – Andreas Jun 18 '14 at 13:06
4

Answer of WHY : Because the family was poor

Answer of HOW : Yes, the wand was not having % allegiance to Ron.He has to use it.

Wands will have better response when inherited from the family members

But there is a lot more difference when wand actually chooses a wizard.

Charlie would buy a second wand for him.

Rajan
  • 1,876
  • 4
  • 18
  • 28