TBAY: ToadKeeper Meets Reverse Memory Charm Neville/Ghosts & Poltergeist

[Núria Obradors Pi]

No: HPFGUIDX 38709

Raven quoted cindysphynx:

<<Ah, but what about a *Reverse* Memory Charm?  See,
Mrs. Lestrange's gang was caught and convicted based
on *something.*  It certainly
wasn't based on testimony of the insane Longbottoms.
MoM was under intense pressure to catch the culprits,
so Crouch Sr. might have ordered a Reverse Memory
Charm on Neville to *enhance* his memory of the events
to identify the Lestranges and their gang.

<<The result, the theory goes, is that Neville
constantly re-lives the torture of his parents because
of his enhanced memory. This causes him to freak out
in the presence of dementors and in the presence of
Moody, who, according to the theory, might have been
the one to put the Reverse Memory Charm on Neville. >>

I do like this theory. In fact, IIRC there's no evidence in canon that
Neville has a memory charm cast on him. However, given that he was
indeed a toddler when his parents were crucio'd, it is more likely a
Reverse Memory Charm had been used on him (this is what we Muggles call
Regressive Hypnosis!)

Then Raven wrote:
>>>I just couldn't help wondering, if Harry can relive
the deaths of his parents that occurred when he was 15
months old, isn't it quite possible Neville could have
similar memories even without magical assistance?
Granted, it could be that Harry is extra-special in
this regard as in others, but OTOH it could be common
in the wizarding world for memories, especially
traumatic ones, to persist from infancy.<<<<

Not only in the wizarding world. My oldest memory (I'm 27y.o.) is a
nightmare I had when I was about 18 months old, and it's a vivid memory.
I can tell the time because I remember waking up and my dad giving me my
pacifyer- which I stopped using before I was 2. So yes, you can recall
things that happened to you at a very early age, specially if they're
traumatic.
Perhaps Neville's forgetfulness comes from fear to remember - cause what
he does remember is ever so painful.
****

Cindy Sphynx wrote:

> Now, ghosts aren't my specialty, so forgive me if I mess this up. I
> get the sense, however, that ghosts and poltergeists can act on
> their surroundings. Throwing water balloons and such. Stealing the
> egg of a champion (no, Peeves didn't do this, but Filch thought he
> could).
And Cat Lady added:
>>>>Peeves the poltergeist can act on his surroundings as you mention --
<snip> The ghosts have very limited ability to act on their surroundings
<snip> This is another evidence that
poltergeists are not ghosts, besides the bit in the first appearance
of the ghosts at the Arrival Feast in SS: "My dear Friar, haven't we
given Peeves all the chances he deserves? He gives us all a bad name
and you know, he's not really even a ghost -- I say, what are you all
doing here?"<<<<
I'd like to add my two knuts. please note that I'm no expert either!
Ghosts are the spirits of dead people who can't pass to whatever other
side that is (please note that I don't intend to create any debate in
how much the same thing "spirit" and "soul" are - I just had to use a
word for naming it somehow). When a ghost appears, it's usually because
the person it once was died in a violent or distressful way, leaving
things pendant in his or her life (The movie "Casper" explained this
pretty well if you ask me). Ghosts can manifest themselves in many ways,
from a presence one can only infer to so very realistically they even
look and feel solid.
Poltergeist, OTOH, are spirits who behave as Peeves does: causing havoc
and wrecking things around them. As far as I know, they can be ghosts or
not. Some other invisible form, maybe?


Nuri


I