Wandless magic -- is is Dark in here or is it me?

[Porphyria]

No: HPFGUIDX 43012

Since we've been discussing wandless magic on the list I thought I'd take 
this chance to bring up a few things on my mind about it. Just to make 
this clear, I'm using Grey Wolf's distinction and only discussing focused 
magic used on purpose by adult wizards; this post isn't about Harry's 
accidental, unfocused magic.

JKR stated in interview "You can do unfocused and uncontrolled magic 
without a wand (for instance when Harry blows up Aunt Marge) but to do 
really good spells, yes, you need a wand." However, as we've been 
observing, that isn't actually the case, and in fact it's contradicted 
early on in the first book. Was she just not thinking when she answered 
this question or was she being a bit misleading on purpose?

What I really want to do here is advance a theory that Wandless Magic is a 
Dark Art. I certainly can't prove this with canonical evidence, but what I 
will try to show you is that the purposeful wandless magic we have seen is 
very often problematic in one way or another, and is perhaps held in 
suspicion by the powers that be. So here are all the examples I can think 
of:

1. The broom-bucking jinx and it's counter-curse.

When Harry's broom starts trying to buck him off at the first Quidditch 
match in PS/SS, Hagrid remarks, "Can't nothing interfere with a broomstick 
except powerful Dark magic." This implies that there is something unusual 
about the spell being cast; it's not just an "Accio Broomstick" or 
anything commonly taught. Evidently the technique of jinxing is well-known;
  as Hermione insists, and Ron backs her up, a muttered incantation and 
unbroken eye contact are the signs of this type of spell. Presumably the 
mental focus or the incantation itself are more closely guarded secrets. 
So it's not much of a surprise that the two people involved in the broom 
jinx are both familiar with Dark magic. Quirrell is the DADA instructor 
who Hagrid describes as "brilliant" and Snape is famous for knowing a lot 
about the Dark Arts and, as we come to find out, probably practiced them 
quite a bit during his DE tenure. Presumably Snape's knowledge of curses 
also involves a knowledge of counter-curses.

I find it interesting that the first really obvious wandless spell we see 
is heavily associated with the Dark Arts and two powerful Dark Arts-using 
wizards. What is significant about the broom-bucking jinx is not just that 
it's potentially harmful but that it's also sneaky. It's much harder to 
notice who's casting this spell and impossible to trace by the usual legal 
methods such as a Prior Incantato. It makes me wonder if incantation-based 
spells are considered fishy and quite possibly only known to those who 
have sought out forbidden knowledge.

2. Miscellaneous little spells.

a) At the end of PS/SS, Quirrell snaps his fingers and ropes spring out; 
shortly after he released Harry from his bonds with a clap.

b) Also in PS/SS, Dumbledore claps his hands to change the banner colors.

c) At the beginning of PoA, Tim, the ancient innkeeper of the Leaky 
Cauldron, starts a fire with a snap.

d) In the Shrieking Shack scene in PoA, Snape clicks his fingers to summon 
Lupin's ropes to his hand.

Can anyone think of anything else? To my mind Dumbledore does usually use 
a wand when he's doing magic, but if I've left something out let me know.

It's possible that some wizard objects are charmed to respond to a gesture:
  the Great Hall banners and Tom's fireplace could have been charmed ahead 
of time to change states in response to a clap or snap. (Similarly, one 
doesn't need a wand to fly a broom or use other magical objects.) It's 
also quite probable that an older wizard (Tom is really old) can do simple 
spells without a wand, especially spells they do every day, like light a 
fire. And of course Dumbledore possesses powers that he doesn't even use, 
so banner-switching is probably a cinch for him.

Of course in the other two examples we are back to Snape and Quirrell, and 
I can't help but wonder if it's telling that the rope-trick wandless 
charms are practiced by wizards we know to be particularly familiar with 
Dark magic.

3. Animagus transformation.

We've seen over and over again that this powerful, advanced spell does not 
require a wand, neither in McGonagall, Sirius or Peter. And I'm not 
suggesting that Animagus magic is inherently Dark, but we do know that it'
s heavily controlled by the Ministry, and in fact four of the five Animagi 
we know about are technically criminal Animagi. Lupin says:

"Your father and Sirius here were the cleverest students in the school, 
and lucky they were, because the Animagus transformation can go horribly 
wrong -- one reason the Ministry keeps a close watch on those attempting 
to do it."

What are the other reasons? I doubt they're all altruistic. Clearly the 
Ministry wants to keep tabs on these people, especially given how easy it 
is to commit a crime or avoid punishment when an Animagus. The Ministry 
holds Animagi in suspicion. Plus, Lupin's phrasing makes it sound like the 
legal procedure is to obtain authorization from the Ministry prior to 
attempting to become an Animagi, so I wonder if the Ministry ever forbids 
it in certain wizards it doesn't trust.

4. Apparition

First, there is some doubt over whether or not Apparition requires a wand.
  I'm going to argue it doesn't: I can't find any description of anyone 
actually using a wand to Apparate and I found a few hints that it does not.
  Here are a couple of quotes from the QWC in GoF:

"[Bagman] waved, Barty Crouch nodded curtly, and both of them Disapparated.
"

"Salesmen were Apparating every few feet, carrying trays and pushing carts 
full of extraordinary merchandise."

In each of these examples wand use is conspicuous by its absence; Bagman 
is described as waving and Crouch as nodding, but no one waves a wand. 
Also if salesmen can Apparate carrying trays and so forth, it sounds 
hands-free to me.

Anyway, Apparition is the only other type of spell we know of besides 
Animagus transformation for which the Ministry requires prior 
authorization. Merely trying to Apparate without a license is illegal and 
subject to fines. While I do accept that part of the reason for this is 
that Apparition can harm the Apparating wizard and other people, this is 
true of lots of other magic. Wizards hex each other all the time without 
needing a permit. So I suspect the Ministry has other reasons for wanting 
to keep tabs on who can use this spell and who can't. I also wouldn't be 
surprised to learn that the Ministry has developed some method of tracking 
when someone Apparates and that's why Sirius can't do it.

5. Potions

Let's not forget the obvious. :-) Does one need magic to brew potions? 
Well, in Snape's words:

"As there is little foolish wand-waving here, many of you will hardly 
believe this is magic."

Now, this is Snape doing the talking, so surely he's being disdainful here.
  He can't possibly mean 'many of you will hardly believe this is magic -- 
and you'd be right!' Given his usual attitude, he means 'many of you will 
hardly believe this is magic -- because you're a bunch of idiots.' Between 
this and the evidence of Neville blowing up cauldrons with his own 
powerful, unfocused magic, I'd say Potions certainly does involve magic, 
and it's not just glorified cooking or chemistry with magical ingredients.

Well, since Hogwarts students take 7 years of required Potions courses, 
potion making can't possibly be Dark, can it? Then again, look who's 
teaching it.

Even if we assume that Snape would rather be teaching DADA (although I 
think there's plenty of evidence that he's quite fond of Potions), there 
is no explanation in canon for why a Dark Arts afficionado who didn't make 
the DADA cut would have to settle for teaching *Potions per se.* And of 
course Snape isn't simply settling for Potions; Lupin makes clear he's one 
of the best at it. Is there any relation between the two disciplines? Is 
there some reason why Snape, famous for his curses, would also gravitate 
toward and excel at Potions?

Well, Snape makes Potions sound like a Dark Art:

"I can teach you how to bottle fame, brew glory, even stopper death..."

Even if this is simply how Snape sees it, or as Marina once pointed out, 
Snape is addressing his comments to the Slytherin in the class who would 
be intrigued by this type of thing, there remains the fact that Snape is a 
little defensive about Potions and considers it misunderstood. It makes 
you wonder if he is merely reacting to the sluggishness of his past 
students or if there is some professional WW prejudice against potion 
making.

Here's more from his opening speech:

"You are here to learn the subtle science and exact art of potion 
making....I don't expect you will really understand the beauty of the 
softly simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate power of 
liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching the mind, ensnaring the 
senses"

As we know, Potions does not involve "foolish wand-waving" which Snape 
seems to be criticizing on account of it's obviousness. Potions are 
"subtle," they simmer "softly," their power is "delicate," they "creep" 
through veins, etc. Potions seem to share the same sneaky, underhanded 
status as wandless jinxes and transformations; they lack the honest, 
forthright, unconcealable visibility of wand use. This might indicate the 
aspect of Potions that appeals to Snape.

The Ministry has it's nose stuck in potions too; they strictly regulate 
Veritaserum use.

What I wonder is whether advanced Potions and certain Dark Arts require 
the same skill set; the same (presumably difficult) ability to channel 
magic without the help of a wand. Is it a similar skill used in Apparition 
and Animagus transformation? It would certainly be a scary talent if it 
could be fostered for other uses.

Well, while I can't prove wandless magic is Dark per se, there certainly 
seems enough evidence to say that, apart from the most trivial spells, it 
is considered problematic, possibly suspicious and worth tracking by the 
Ministry. I also wonder if it will be addressed explicitly in future books.
  JKR does skim over things in early books only to discuss them later; we 
see McGonagall transform into a cat early in Book One but Animagic isn't 
discussed until Book Three, so it's possible our wandless jinxes will 
return.

Today Phyllis said:

> And I then
> remembered yet another interview where JKR said that we might be
> seeing something in future books about a character being able to do
> magic with his/her eyes.

I don't remember this myself, but I'd certainly love to see the link if 
anyone can provide it. The only interview quote about eyes I can remember 
was when JKR said that Lily's green eyes would be important, but she didn'
t say why. It would certainly be interesting if eyes and wandless magic 
did become an issue later on, since we already have canonical evidence 
that eye contact is needed for certain wandless spells.

What do you think, sirs?

~Porphyria


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]