Allegiant Pet: Fill & Download for Free

We can understand this better by how wild dogs, and wolves, behave together in the wild. They go almost crazy with playfulness, I’m going to call it joy, when they meet each other after a separation. They love living in packs.When a dog is raised by humans, the humans are its pack. They love their humans.Wild dogs also make it very clear to each other who are the pack leaders. They call the shots, and the rest of the pack learns to respect that.It’s important that all humans in the family outrank the dog. If you let the dog think it needs to lead, it will be stressed and inappropriate around strangers, and even around the family. Be in charge - lovingly - and your dog will be happy.This 100% does not apply to all animals!! Few animals have the pack instinct as strongly as dogs, and fewer still will transfer their allegiance to a human family. Cats love their people, but it is not the same relationship. Some traditionally wild animals, like raccoons, can be tamed - but never trusted to the extent you can trust your dog.

Fawkes isn’t a possession or a belonging. He’s not a pet to be owned, he chose to stay with Dumbledore as a companion, after Dumbledore died he set off on his own journey.”Phoenix feather wands are always the pickiest when it comes to potential owners, for the creature from which they are taken is one of the most independent and detached in the world. These wands are the hardest to tame and to personalise, and their allegiance is usually hard won.” Pottermore.They don’t need humans, they’re quite capable of looking after themselves. Given their immortality they need to be.

When the whole wand-allegiance thing came up in the Harry Potter series, I found it confusing. Honestly, it felt a little shoe-horned in. It was only after I did some research into Rowling’s supplemental material (Pottermore, wikis, etc.) that it started to make more sense. I now have genuine affection for wandlore.In the Harry Potter universe, a wand isn’t just a tool. It’s a pseudo-sentient partner with whom a wizard forms and builds a relationship.Because of this, wand allegiance operates on about as much cause-and-effect logic as human relationships do. That is to say, it varies a lot, and can be unpredictable.The wand chooses the wizard. That much has always been clear to those of us who have studied wandlore... If you are any wizard at all you will be able to channel your magic through almost any instrument. The best results, however, must always come where there is the strongest affinity between wizard and wand. These connections are complex. An initial attraction, and then a mutual quest for experience, the wand learning from the wizard, the wizard from the wand. — Garrick Ollivander, wandmakerI want to unpack this quote from The Deathly Hallows a little.Ollivander confirms here that most wands can function at a basic level if they’re in the hands of a wizard. But if you want to go beyond that baseline and explore a wand’s higher potential, you cannot ignore two interrelated factors: the wand’s voluntary selection of its wizarding partner, and the compatibility between them.When I say compatibility, I mean that like humans, wands have personalities and preferences.You know how people who believe in astrology can be like, “My Venus is in Libra so the last thing I’m looking for is a romantic relationship with a Capricorn who has their Mars in Aries, just no.”? Or how people who really resonate with their Myers-Briggs personality type can be like “I know it’s kind of a cliché as an ISTJ, but I can’t be around ENTPs for long without retreating to the bathroom and taking long, cleansing breaths.”? etc., etc.Well, wands have personality types. And those personality types influence how they interact with wizards, and which wizards they prefer to work with.Luckily, a wand’s personality type is fairly predictable if you know what wood it’s made of.For instance, applewood wands insist on owners with pure intentions and high ideals. They are utterly incompatible with the Dark Arts. Walnut wands respect brilliance, and prefer inventive and highly intelligent partners. Maple wands look for ambitious wizards, ideally those with a bit of wanderlust, who constantly seek out new challenges.The magical substance at the wand’s core (e.g. unicorn hair, phoenix feather, etc.) can also influence how the wand’s preferences work, but seems to especially impact its power levels, loyalty, and reliability.Length and flexibility are other factors that can affect compatibility. For instance, longer wands work best with big, dramatic personalities.A new, never-partnered wand will usually select a wizard who “feels right” based on compatibility of personality and abilities/potential. The two will bond, and their magical relationship will develop.Once an initial bond— or allegiance— is formed, there are a few scenarios that can potentially cause a wand to break that bond, and choose another person as their partner. (Notice I say “potentially”, because some wands are not able to do this, full stop. They’re the prairie voles of the wand world. They mate for life.)How wands change hands:Wands can be passed on voluntarily or inherited from friends or family members. There’s reason to believe it’s easier for wands to bond with loved ones of people they’ve already committed to than with strangers. Some wands, though, will “wilt” (stop working or lose considerable power) if their wizard partners die, or if they’re otherwise separated. Hazel wands, for instance, develop a strong emotional bond with their first masters. Hazel wands are notorious for wilting when their wizards die, and the only way to salvage them for further use is to replace the magical core. If the original core is a unicorn hair, which tends to make very loyal and tender-hearted wands, you’re out of luck. That dog won’t hunt.Wands can be stolen without regard to their allegiance or preferences. It is vanishingly rare for wands to form a close bond with the wizard who possesses them under these circumstances. I’m not sure it can happen at all.In certain instances, a wand’s allegiance can be won away from its original owner. From the Harry Potter wiki: “When a wand's master is disarmed, stunned, or killed, the wand may accept the old master's attacker as its new master, swaying its allegiance over to the wizard who won it from its preceding owner.” (emphasis mine)The mechanics behind this phenomenon aren’t well explained, but I have some personal thoughts on how it might work:Wands, in a sense, are partners in and extensions of a wizard’s will. When a challenger comes along and lands a significant blow to a wizard’s personal power, it can disrupt the natural flow of will between wizard and wand. This can damage the existing bond. If the wand feels drawn for some reason to the wizard whose will seemed dominant in that moment, its allegiance may change. This doesn’t happen every time a wizard is defeated (and it’s never been known to occur in the context of practice or friendly competition). Some wands are more loyal than others, and I suspect that allegiance switches often have a lot to do with compatibility. If a wand’s inherent nature is drawn to the victor because their personalities and magical styles are compatible, I imagine it’s much more likely to switch teams.Let’s look at an example that illustrates a few of these wandlore points very elegantly, from early on in the series.When Ron Weasley first entered Hogwart’s he had a hand-me-down wand from his brother Charlie.We never get a clear idea of why Charlie gave up his wand. My pet theory is that when you’re working regularly with dragons it’s best to have a certain kind of wand— using a wood that’s somehow resistant to flame, or maybe one with a core of dragon heartstring (you know, homeopathy). So perhaps Charlie switched to a more specialized one that better fit his career path.But for whatever reason, Ron had Charlie’s first wand, which was made of ash wood with a unicorn hair core.The transfer might have worked out okay for Ron if the wand had been made of different materials. In some cases, a wand changing hands between family members works out fine. Ron, being a picked-on younger brother, had probably never had a significant and serious triumph of will against his older brother. Some wands would have demanded that in order to give him their full allegiance.But under the circumstances, Ron was set up for failure using this wand. It didn’t matter how he got it or what he did. There was no way he could explore his full potential with it.Why? Because an ash wand is very loyal to its first master. They don’t really enjoy bonding with other partners. This is compounded by the use of unicorn hair as the core. Unicorn hairs tend to ramp up the faithfulness factor of a wand even higher. An ash wand with a unicorn hair core is one of the worst second-hand wands you can possibly get. Ron had little-to-no chance of winning Charlie’s wand’s allegiance, no matter what he did.Since not everyone studies wandlore, it’s possible that none of the Weasleys realized this. Or maybe they felt that ickle Ronnie could wait a year or two to properly spread his wings. Either way, Ron was stuck with one of the worst possible candidates for a hand-me-down wand as his hand-me-down wand.After that wand breaks, and Ron gets a chance to bond with a wand that properly chose him, his wizarding skills blossom. His new wand has a unicorn hair core as well, but it’s made of willow wood. Willow tends to bond with partners who have insecurities but lots of potential, and maybe some catching up to do. That second wand was a great match for Ron. More importantly, it chose him, so they were able to fully bond.The Elder Wand is a unique case. Its allegiance is determined 0% by loyalty and 100% by triumph of will. That is, it respects power, and prefers not to work with anyone who’s been overpowered since it met them, whether it was present when the defeat occurred or not. J.K. Rowling has described the Elder Wand as “completely unsentimental”.This is why the Elder Wand ended up considering Harry its true master. Other wands wouldn’t have done that, but the Elder Wand is as faithless and ruthless as it is powerful, and it dispassionately calculated that the guy who disarmed the guy who disarmed Albus Dumbledore, its most recent long-term owner, was its current master. It behaved accordingly.Most wands have a much more emotional nature than that, but hey, the Elder Wand was explicitly created to manufacture defeat. According to legend, it is first and foremost a murder machine. You can’t expect it to want to cuddle.So wands are essentially silent characters in the Potterverse, and their personalities and choices drive the story in identifiable ways. The fact that the books only hint at this can make wand-driven variables look like plot holes. But going deeper into the wandlore that Rowling has shared has made me realize that even though it’s subtle, the rich complexity of wand logic is woven into the story from book one.