Magic laws-Squibs-Imperius-Prepositions/GH

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 17533

Milz wrote:

> About the wands, I think Rowling addressed the wand issue in an 
> interview. IIRC, she said that her wizards CAN do magic without 
wands
> (such as the boa constrictor at the zoo in SS/PS) but it's an 
> uncontrolled magic and very dangerous.

Amber wrote:

><sigh> Well then, why couldn't she have mentioned that in one of her
>four books! Eh, well, I guess the focus of the books isn't on magic 
but
>on the ultimate battle between good and evil. But still...

I think she was just clarifying what some readers, including you, 
already speculated must be the case--that there are ways of 
doing what would normally be charms or transfigurations without a 
wand.

I wonder less about the uncontrolled magic of a scared kid (Harry's 
escape onto the school roof, etc.) than the cases like Voldemort's 
creating Peter's hand--and what about Lupin and Black de-rattifying 
Peter with wands but no words?  

                   **************************
  Black had already retrieved Snape's wand from the bed.  He 
approached Lupin and the struggling rat, and his wet eyes suddenly 
seemed to be burning in his face.
  "Together?" he said quietly.
  "I think so," said Lupin, holding Scabbers tightly in one hand and 
his wand in the other.  "On the count of three.  One - two - THREE!"
  A flash of blue-white light erupted from both wands . . . .  (PA 19)
                   **************************

...and Scabbers turns into Peter.  Did they say something and JKR just 
didn't bother to put it in (it must get hard, making up all those 
spell words)?  Or is intention + a wand sometimes enough?

I like Amanda's cooking analogy, and Jen's expansions thereon:  there 
is a talent in making Potions, and it's a magical talent.  Lupin says 
he doesn't have much of it; Snape clearly has it in abundance.  What 
we still don't know is whether it is possible to brew an effective 
potion if you have NO magical talent.  If you have the 
ingredients, will you get the results, even if you're a Muggle--the 
way an uncreative cook can follow a recipe and make a recognizable 
cake?  I think it is possible within JKR's universe that the answer is 
no.  Since we know there is =something= within witches and wizards 
that calls forth the magic in enchanted objects, e.g. brooms and 
wands, that something might also be necessary to make a potion a 
potion and not just an inert tea of herbs and newt parts.

>As for what makes a Charm, my hazy idea has been blown by Wingardium
>Leviosa (unless, although Flitwick the Charms teacher taught the 
class,
>it was an "intro to magic" class). But here goes. Charms seem to fall
>into the category of spells worked on others. When people get charmed 
or
>enchanted in stories, it's a viewpoint thing, like a love charm.

Maybe most stories talk about charms as spells worked on others 
because they're the most interesting--making people fall in love, etc. 
 But in HP, Charms clearly apply to objects also:  Summoning and 
Banishing charms, Wingardium Leviosa, lumos/nox (we don't know where 
they learned that, but it seems to be in the same category).

Squib thought:  I have been assuming that Filch has =some= magical 
ability (enough to use Mrs. Skower's!--also, there's that link with 
Mrs. Norris).  Magical talent comes on a continuum; he might consider 
himself a Squib, and be treated as a Squib, because he has =almost= 
none.  It's like someone in a musical family saying "I have no musical 
talent," when in fact he can learn to play the piano if he really puts 
a lot of effort into it; he just doesn't have much of a gift for it.

SNAPE and the IMPERIUS CURSE

I don't think we can reach any conclusions about who is capable of 
throwing off the I.C.  One powerful wizard (so described by Sirius), 
Crouch Sr., is kept under it for months by Voldemort; another, Moody, 
is kept under it for months by, one assumes, Crouch Jr.; this would 
seem to suggest that Crouch Jr. is very powerful himself, yet he was 
kept under it for 12 years!

Being powerful in one aspect doesn't mean having the kind of will that 
makes one resistant to the I.C.--it seems to be a kind of integrity, 
combined with sheer stubbornness ("I don't think I will, thanks," says 
the voice in Harry's head).  Whether Snape has that kind of will power 
is debatable; I'd say very possibly, but that we can't assume he 
does on the basis of his brilliance at Potions.  That's a different 
kind of talent.

MORE PREPOSITIONS

Doreen wrote:

>Before McGonagall's statement, we neither know the existence of 
Godric's Hollow is or that the Potters 
>lived there, be it village *or* a house. *If* it merely 
>said, "Voldemort turned up in Godric's Hollow", what would that tell 
>the reader? I believe both sentences are needed and not redundant.

Good point!  However, she is speaking to Dumbledore, who =does= know 
what Godric's Hollow is (hey, why don't we ask him?).  JKR has been 
known to put in blatant plot expo/backstory for the sake of the 
reader--I wish she wouldn't do that filling-in at the beginning of 
each book, ugh (how about a little note instead: "Those who really 
want to know what color Ron's hair is and how long his nose is are 
cordially referred to the first book.  Thank you")--but I like to 
think that she does it very seldom and that if McGonagall says 
something to Dumbledore, it's something she would actually say to him 
and not a stage whisper to the audience.

I do like your image of V showing up in the toilet, however...I'd 
rather face an ax-wielding Jack Nicholson any day.

Of course, one reason I find GH-as-house nonsensical is that I picture 
it, with no canon support whatsoever, as a very small house.  If it 
were a mansion, his showing up at one end of it and stalking through 
looking for them would make sense. 

Amy Z
who had no idea that there were 32 prepositions in the English 
language.  The things I learn from this list!