Priori Incantatem/Incantato

[Jen Reese]

> Carolyn:
> My thought is that it is more of JKR's cod Latin - a sort of 
> declension on the lines of 'Amo, amas, amat' etc. Incantato could 
be 
> a first-person command - Mr Diggory initiated the spell with his 
own 
> wand, instructing it to reveal its last spell. Incantatem could be 
a 
> kind of third person, or neuter situation where the spell occurs 
> without the conscious wish of the protagonists, or as happened in 
the 
> graveyard, when the wands are made with the same core.
> 
> Or the difference in wording could simply be a mistake on JKR's 
part -
>  she has said she doesn't believe in magic and makes it up to suit 
> herself.
> 
> Question - is it useful to searchers to separate the two, or would 
> they prefer one section and see all such different views together? 
We 
> could call it Priori incantatem/incantato to make clear we know 
there 
> is a canon difference.


Jen: Ah, OK. I see why the hesitation. 

One thought I had while coding last night was having one category 
called Priori Incantato and name the other the Reverse Spell effect 
so there's no confusion. 

But, reading your thoughts, it's probably better just to combine the 
two. You know, if we get too complicated....*sigh* we'll just end up 
answering a bunch of questions.

About the whole wand order debate. I noticed you coded a few OT-ish 
posts in the chapter review section to round out the discussion on 
whether it was a mistake or not. I saw a couple of others rejected 
on OT grounds that I might include too. One very small thread was 
started by a guy who actually had e-mail access to JKR's 
assistant 'Fiddy' at the time and got 'offical' confirmation--those 
were the days, huh?!! At first I thought it was a joke but the 
thread is him, Penny and Amy Z. (I think) discussing his return e-
mail so I'm thinking it's legitimate. Anyone mind including just a 
couple more of these? It has historical value, I think ;).

Jen