Magic Laws

[Andrea]

No: HPFGUIDX 17540

--- Amanda Lewanski <editor at texas.net> wrote:
> So for Potions, yes, I think you must have a talent
> for it, and given
> the nature of the beast, it must be a magical
> talent. Harry and Ron can
> "cook." Hermione's a good cook. Snape's a chef.

A truly excellent analogy, Amanda.  I have discovered
the great divide between cooking and being a chef
since starting to live on my own, and my greatest
desire is to one day reach the level of a decent cook.
 Chef is *totally* out of my range. <g>  This could be
why even Hermione isn't considered a "worthy pupil"
(as was discussed in another thread) by Snape.  She
may have a bit of talent in pulling things together,
but she's not a chef yet.

> Well, this is going to sound loopy. [I'm certain you
> all thought I was a
> paragon of sanity and stability up to this point.] I
> think part of what
> makes a spell difficult is the degree to which it
> imposes your will on
> the world.

Makes perfect sense.  Moody says, after all, that the
killing curse requires "a fair bit of magic behind
it", just knowing the spell itself wasn't enough.  I
read that as it required quite a bit of willpower to
execute.  This would also be why the Imperius curse
can be thrown off, if your will is stronger than the
one casting the spell.

> 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. 

I was thinking more than "charms" was mostly spells
worked on objects rather than people. (The only
exception I've noted would be cheering charms.) 
Wingardium Leviosa, Summoning, Banishing, Flitwick
training the doors to recognize Sirius, etc.  But I
think the best explanation so far is that "charms"
refers to general spells.  (ie, "English" class
doesn't just teach the English language - it teaches
grammar, literature, writing, etc.)

> However, most of the wandless magic we've seen has
> to do with the person
> casting it. Animagus spells and apparation are cast
> on oneself. Most of
> the things Harry did were to himself--growing his
> hair back, putting
> himself on the roof, etc. And the things he did to
> others were in
> self-defense.

Turning the teacher's hair blue?  I'm not sure what
his "self-defense" for that one was! <g>  Shrinking
the sweater wasn't *quite* doing a spell on himself,
but it was close, I guess.  An interesting theory,
though.  
I've always thought that the requirement for doing
wandless magic was having some kind of strong emotion
behind it, sort of like the emotion doing the
amplification factor of the wand, but without the
added focus a wand would give.  He flew onto the roof
when he was afraid of Dudley's gang, he shrunk the
sweater and grew back his hair when he was embarrassed
and afraid of getting teased at school, he made the
glass on the boa's cage vanish when Piers called the
Dursleys attention to the "weird" thing he was doing
with the snake (which would lead to punishment).  



Andrea

=====
"Reality is for people who lack imagination."

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices
http://auctions.yahoo.com/