Apparate or Die Trying

[ssk7882]

No: HPFGUIDX 39816

I suggested that the reason that we never see wizards apparate in or 
out of houses might be because all wizarding residences are protected 
against that mode of entry, as Hogwarts is.

David pointed out that actually, we *do* see Arthur Weasley apparate 
into his own home, and Meg thoughtfully provided the canon:

> But we do see Arthur Weasley apparating into his house. "Before any 
> of them could say anything else, there was a faint popping noise, 
> and Mr. Weasley appeared out of thin air at George's shoulder." 
>(GoF 52)

Quite right, Meg and David!  Sorry.  I had completely forgotten about 
that.

Meg:

> So it must therefore be possible to apparate into a house since 
> everyone was in the kitchen at the time. I think even Harry would 
> have noticed had Arthur walked into the room from outside rather 
> than just apparating in. 

Agreed.  It does seem quite a security risk, though, doesn't it?  How 
does one protect oneself against burglars?  I wonder if, as Eloise 
suggested, household protections can be keyed to exempt certain 
individuals.


Ali wrote:

> The message that these *ordinary* wizards can apparate together 
> with the fact that wizards take their apparation test at the age of 
> 17, suggests to me that Apparation is a readily acquirable skill 
> (similar to our driving test which British muggles can also take 
> from the age of 17). 

That was certainly the way I interpreted it.  Honestly, it was not 
until I joined this list that it even occurred to me that apparating 
might be an unusually difficult skill.  I had assumed it to be 
something that nearly every adult wizard knew how to do, much like 
driving here in the US (we also get our driver's licenses at around 
the age of 17, BTW, Ali, although this can vary from state to 
state).  

Mentions of people failing their apparation tests the first time 
around and so forth I had also interpreted as a direct analogue to 
driving.  Many people have difficulty passing their driver's test the 
first time out.  And as for Percy showing off by apparating up and 
down the stairs, I had always imagined that this was "showing off" 
not because it is really all that difficult a skill for normal adult 
wizards who have been doing it for years, but because Percy is only 
*seventeen.*  It's a new skill for him, and it's one that his younger 
siblings aren't allowed to do yet, so he's having a bit of fun with 
it, and indulging in a bit of gloating as well.  I went out driving 
my parents' car just for the fun of it when *I* first got my driver's 
license.  I even volunteered to do the shopping, just so that I could 
get to drive the car.  And when I saw friends who hadn't passed their 
tests yet, I waved at them and gloated merrily.  In fact, if I could 
have driven the car up and down the stairs, then I probably would 
have done that, too. ;-)

Of course, these days I take the bus to work, and whenever somebody 
asks me for a ride to the airport, I roll my eyes and sigh and wonder 
out loud in a long-suffering sort of way why on earth *I* should 
always have to be the one to drive everybody to the airport.  

Ah, the joys of getting old and cranky.


Still Ali:

> Perhaps JKR invented "splinching" and other apparation mistakes 
> (Charlie landing 5 miles from his destination during his test) to 
> explain why apparation is not the only mode of transport - so that 
> broomsticks, the Knight Bus and Ministry cars could be convincingly 
> used.

Well, driving is really quite dangerous as well, isn't it?  

Primarily, I think that splinching is just furthering along the 
driving analogue: it's a car accident.  I also agree with you, 
though, that it also serves quite handily to explain the existence of 
other modes of transport, as well as to explain why apparating is 
reserved for licenced adults.  

I also suspect that it may be there to provide JKR with an out to 
explain away just the sort of objections that have come up in the 
course of this discussion: why wizards in combat situations don't 
simply disapparate out of trouble, for example, or why we won't be 
seeing too many brutally efficient assassinations conducted by 
rapidly apparating and disapparating hit wizards in future canon.  

I don't really think that JKR wants such events happening too often, 
because while once it could be so shocking as to be extremely 
emotionally effective, too much of it would quickly become under-
dramatic.  The perils of splinching give JKR a very handy excuse for 
not allowing her fictive reality to become overrun with the kind of 
plot resolutions which, while they may indeed be logical, pragmatic, 
efficient and utterly in-character, would also offer her a very 
limited scope for the kind of dramatic confrontation that she as a 
writer prefers.



-- Elkins