From: brendaroguska@gmail.com   
      
   On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:54:01 -0500, Austin "The Geeker" Whitten  ©¿©¬   
   wrote:   
      
   > On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 15:44:13 -0500, Draco Malfoy wrote:   
   >   
   >> The Deathly Hallows all fall short of their "proper" titles.   
   >>   
   >> The Cloak of Invisibility fails to hide the user from death.   
   >>   
   >> The Resurrection Stone does not truly bring people back from the dead   
   >> but rather, projects a departed image of them, almost like Cedric   
   >> appearing out of Voldemort's wand in Goblet of Fire.   
   >>   
   >> In the same way then, that the Elder Wand is not an unbeatable   
   >> wand--an extremely powerful one yes, but as shown in Half Blood   
   >> Prince, can be disarmed like any other.   
   >>   
   >> Grindelwald and Dumbledore were on the same level of skill. As Jo   
   >> says, he was almost like his "Dark Twin", with the same   
   >> capabilities. Dumbledore admits though that he did have a shade   
   >> better then him in skill but this is mostly down to his kind   
   >> arrogance, and we can forgive him LOL because he's..well, Dumbledore.   
   >>   
   >> In my opinion, I think Dumbledore beat him and won the wand, out of a   
   >> mixture of good fortune and prestigious skill. If the places were   
   >> exchanged, and a similar thing happened--then it may have been   
   >> possible for Grindelwald to achieve the exact same results.   
   >   
   > The legends of all three of the Hallows where a bit exaggerated.   
   >   
   > The Cloak was perfect; no spell to break threw its invisibility, last   
   > forever, etc. The last forever part seems true enough but we see where   
   > Moody’s eye was able to see through the cloak.   
   >   
   > The Resurrection Stone was supposed to bring back the dead. It really   
   > only brought back an incomplete image / manifestation of the dead   
   > person.   
   >   
   > The Elder Wand was supposed to be unbeatable. But we are told its long   
   > history is filled with death as it was fought over and won.   
   >   
   > Each Hallow had some aspects of its legend that we see is true, but we   
   > also see where each Hallow as a certain amount of exaggeration as part   
   > of its legend. That exaggeration is what makes the Hallows story a   
   > Fairy Tail.   
      
   Well, in fairness, the elder wand clearly isn't unbeatable. Dumbledore   
   beat Grindelwald in a duel. The wand had been changing hands   
   consistently for centuries. So it is beatable.   
      
   Dumbledore expains that the legends that sprung up around the wand, as   
   well as the two other hallows, weren't really true. They were just   
   three objects created by three powerful wizards. The wand is just a   
   wand, like any other. More powerful than most, or any, others maybe,   
   but still just a wand, created by a wizard.   
      
   The duel, according to those who watched, was supposedly amazing.   
   Greater than any other duel. So I don't think it was a simple matter   
   of Grindelwald being caught off guard. He must have been very much on   
   his guard if he was in the middle of an epic duel.   
   --   
   I do not post from Giganews (unless I hide the posting host name)   
   I use many posting servers to keep ahead of being detected.   
   I might use astra. Sometimes I use aioe. I also like individual.   
   I rarely use plusnet.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)