Neville Has A Memory Charm? Not! (WAS Neville)

[ftah3]

No: HPFGUIDX 31825

Cindy wrote:
> Maybe it is time for another enthusiastic recuitment drive for 
> the "Neville Does Not Have A Traditional Memory Charm" support 
> group.  At present, we have one member (me) and two sickels 
clunking 
> around in the collecting tin.  Amy Z expressed some interest in 
> joining, but has not come forth with any cash, so I think she was 
> just looking.  :-)

I'll join, but be warned: I may start a splinter group 
called "Neville Does Not Have A Traditional /Nor/ Reverse Memory 
Charm." ;-)
  
> 2.  Depending on how you do the math, Neville was 1 or possibly as 
> old as 2 when his parents were tortured.  Children that young can't 
> remember things that happen to them.  So why would anyone put a 
> memory charm on a toddler knowing that the charm will damage the 
> child's memory if the child can't remember the events anyway?  And 
if 
> Neville gets a memory charm, why does no one put a charm on Harry 
to 
> spare him the trauma he remembers, as Neville and Harry were both 
> born in 1981.  (The date calculation is complicated, so I won't 
> repeat it, but it is in Message 26,847.  The thread started on 
> Message 26,826).

This is why I don't think he has had either kind of charm performed 
on him.  Toddler, no need nor reason for any kinds of memory-related 
charms.

As for his apparent "damage," I would think that the simple and 
frightening fact of his parents' mental states, in effect for as long 
as he can remember, coupled with his grandmother's probable over-
protection plus good-intentioned bullying would reasonably create a 
child who is nervous, quiet, uncertain, forgetful, easily thrown for 
a loop ~ but who has an internal strength and courage that shows 
itself with a little bit of positive reinforcement.

> 3.  How did the Lestranges and Crouch Jr. get caught?  Neville's 
> parents couldn't provide evidence, yet the perpetrators were 
> apprehended, possibly fairly quickly.  Recall that we are in the 
days 
> when Crouch Sr. was running Magical Law Enforcement, and he was 
quite 
> willing to use harsh measures to catch DEs.  There is only one 
> witness to the crime -- Neville.  So Crouch Sr. orders the aurors 
to 
> put a "reverse memory charm" on Neville to enhance his memory and 
> communication skills so that he can identify the Lestranges and 
> Crouch Jr.  

Somehow, I don't think they'd perform such a thing on a toddler just 
to fudge up a bit of usable evidence.  If they'd accept such flimsy 
and arguably coerced evidence, I would bet they'd also accept the 
simple fact of Moody/other auror and Crouch Sr. saying "We 
caught 'em! They did it!"  Besides, we don't know the circumstances 
of their capture; there may have been another witness; they may have 
left evidence at the crime scene; the victims may have been driven 
nuts and mentally damaged, but still capable of fingering their 
torturers; they may have been caught in the act.

> 4.  OK.  If a benevolent relative didn't put a memory charm on 
> Neville, perhaps the Lestranges did it to evade capture.  Nope, I 
> don't think so.  The Lestranges wouldn't fear identification by a 
> toddler enough to bother.  

Right, which is along the lines of why I think there would be no 
reason and no desire on anybody's behalf to place a reverse memory 
charm, either.

> Anyway, I'll just sit here in my chilly cubicle, waiting to see if 
> anyone would like to join the Neville-Reverse-Memory-Charm camp.  I 
> won't even ask Tabouli for an acronym until we have some actual 
> members.

Erm, I'm with ya on the "no conventional memory charm," but I 
respectfully decline the "reverse memory charm" membership.  :-P

Mahoney