Underage magic - Diary - Patils - GF title - Limitations of Magic

[Amy Z]

No: HPFGUIDX 29964

Cindy surmised:

> I am starting to think that there *is* no code for restriction of
> underage magic.  I think this is something that MoM is applying to
> Harry and only Harry, and that it has something to do with the
> protections surrounding the Dursley's house.

Emily wrote:

> So the rule definitely exists now, but I think from the evidence 
Mellie
> pointed out that it's fair to assume the rule is a recent 
development.

It's been in place since 1875, according to the owl Harry gets in CS 
2.  (The reminder slips line and Fred's response indicating that it 
predates Harry are in PS/SS 17, btw.)  I do think Harry might be more 
uptight about the code than is necessary.  He's only 12 and the worst 
thing he can imagine is being expelled from Hogwarts, so Mafalda 
Hopkirk's note has the desired chilling effect even if the MOM 
wouldn't actually enforce this law to the full extent. 

Katie asked:

> Who says Lucius gave it to her, perhaps it was someone else...

Rita answered:

> Harry said Lucius gave it to  her.

And he got the info from Dobby, who should know; it also fits with 
Ginny's finding the book in her textbook.

Heather M wrote:

>Do we have any idea whether the Patil twins are muggle-born, 
half-born, or purebloods?

Only in the most indirect way.  I would guess that their parents 
aren't both Muggles because in PA 6 Lavender and Dean are singled out 
(or doubled out <g>) as those who don't know what a Grim is; the 
strong implication is that Lavender, like Dean, is Muggle-born.  
Parvati would probably have been mentioned if she didn't know what it 
was either.  As I say, it's nothing that would stand up in court, but 
if I had to put money on it I'd say Parvati is familiar with the 
wizarding world.  

fourgom at ameritech.net wrote: 

>Why is the book called "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire?" The 
 >Goblet of Fire appears in all of ONE chapter, and the role it plays 
 >isn't that big, in the scheme of the book.

I think it's a better title than "HP and the Triwizard [or Doomspell] 
Tournament" because it's metaphorical.  It isn't the goblet itself 
that's so important, but what it stands for:  the tournament and 
Voldemort's plan.  It's a metonym: a word that stands in for something 
with which it is closely associated, like saying "the White House 
says" when what one means is "the Bush administration says."

fleurmellor at yahoo.com wrote: 

> What does everyone consider to be the main limitations to magic in
 the series?

FYI, there's a great essay by Caius Marcius on this precise topic in 
the Lexicon:

http://www.i2k.com/~svderark/lexicon/magic_theory1.html

Amy Z

------------------------------------------------
 "Flint nearly kills the Gryffindor Seeker,
 which could happen to anyone, I'm sure . . . "
	    -HP and the Philosopher's Stone 
------------------------------------------------