Memory Charms and why they bother me. (WAS: Is there anything in the HP world th

[Tom Wall]

No: HPFGUIDX 56613

Memory Charms, and their 
frequent use in the WW, 
bother me, I think, more 
than just about anything 
else that we've seen to 
date.

Thing is, being a muggle 
myself, I can't stand the 
notion that someone could 
wipe my memory (and possibly 
more) totally clean with the 
wave of a wand and the word 
'Obliviate.' There's something, 
I dunno, *unsettling* about it. 

And based on what we've seen thus far in canon, it seems likely to me 
that we'll be seeing more of the Memory Charm in the books to come.

The excellent resource, "The Harry Potter Lexicon," at URL:

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

defines the origin of the Memory Charm incantation, 'Obliviate!' as:
"oblivisci" L. forget

Memory Charms are used with an unsettling frequency in the WW, not 
only on Muggles, but also on witches and wizards themselves. They 
also seem to be fairly powerful, and result in the 'wiping clean' of 
a certain event or happening from a person's memory, or even far more 
than simply an event. to be technical, from what I can tell, the 
Memory Charm doesn't actually 'remove' the memory, as much as 
it 'buries' it somewhere else in the mind, under some kind of magical 
mental lock, or something like that.

I figure that this is the case from the way that Voldemort is able to 
break the Memory Charm on Barty Crouch Sr. placed on Bertha Jorkins 
when she discovered the truth about his son.

"My father [Barty Crouch Sr.] arrived home. She [Bertha Jorkins] 
confronted him. He put a very powerful Memory Charm on her to make 
her forget what she'd found out. Too powerful. He said it damaged her 
memory permanently." (GoF, US paperback, Ch.35, 685)

"He [Voldemort] tortured her until he broke through the Memory Charm 
my father had placed upon her." (GoF, US paperback, Ch.35, 688)

"...but the means I [Voldemort] used to break the Memory Charm upon 
her were powerful, and when I had extracted all useful information 
from her, her mind and body were both damaged upon repair. She had 
now served her purpose. I could not possess her. I disposed of her." 
(GoF, US paperback, Ch.33, 655)

What we see from these three quotes is quite disturbing, IMO. 

First off, Mr. Crouch believed that, when he placed the Memory Charm 
on Bertha in the first place, he damaged her memory permanently. 
Second, Voldemort tells us (well, actually, Voldemort tells us this 
first, but I'm trying to work with the chronology of the actual 
events, not the story's plot) that the means he used to break the 
charm resulted in permanent damage to both her mind, AND her body.

So, what we see with the case of Bertha Jorkins is that the Memory 
Charms can cause irreparable damage to the person upon whom they are 
placed, possibly both during the original casting, as well as during 
any subsequent attempts to break the charm. This gives me more reason 
to find this disturbing, particularly since I've noticed that Memory 
Charms seem to be used far more often on poor, non-magical Muggles 
than on denizens of the WW. 

And who knows how much tolerance Muggles have against magic compared 
to wizards? We don't know this for sure, but I think it's a safe bet 
to submit that witches and wizards might just have more magical 
resistance to magic than muggles do. In other words, I think that 
magic can possibly harm a muggle far more than it will a witch or 
wizard.

After a few references in the first two books (which I'll actually 
get to later on) in PoA, Memory Charms begin to be more important, as 
we hear twice in this story that they've been used on Muggles.

When Harry accidentally blows up Aunt Marge, Fudge dispatches the 
Accidental Magic Reversal Squad to Privet Drive. The encounter is 
described by him thusly:

"Ms. Dursley has been punctured and her memory has been modified. She 
has no recollection of the incident at all. So that's that, and no 
harm done."(PoA, US paperback, Ch.3, 44)

But in GoF, we later learn that a Memory Charm *can* cause 
irreparable damage to the recipient's memory. How do we *know* that 
Aunt Marge hasn't been hurt by this incident? We don't. She could 
have been seriously damaged by the Memory Charm that was used upon 
her. I guess we'll have to wait until later in the series to see if 
there was any real damage done.

Later in PoA, we hear about the muggles who witnessed the showdown 
between Sirius and Pettigrew after the Potters' murder:

"Eyewitnesses - Muggles, of course, we wiped their memories later - 
told us how Pettigrew cornered Black." (PoA, US paperback, Ch.10, 208)

In GoF, it just gets worse. We see, especially at the Quidditch World 
Cup, that Memory Charms are used quite often on Muggles who stumble 
upon magical occurrences.

In GoF, Ch.7, 77 (US paperback,) we see a wizard Apparate next to the 
Weasleys and the muggle (Mr. Roberts) who tends the campsite. Instead 
of just *not* apparating and walking or something, the wizard uses 
the magic, and then as soon as he appears, shouts: "Obliviate!" at 
poor Mr. Roberts. This is the description of his appearance after the 
Charm has been performed:

"Instantly, Mr. Roberts's eyes slid out of focus, his brows 
unknitted, and a look of dreamy unconcern fell over his face." (ibid)

This reminds me horribly of what Harry felt like the first time the 
Imperius Curse was used on him:

"It was the most wonderful feeling. Harry felt a floating sensation 
as every thought and worry in his head was wiped gently away, leaving 
nothing but a vague, untraceable happiness. He stood there feeling 
immensely relaxed, only dimly aware of everyone watching him." (GoF, 
US paperback, Ch.15, 231)

So, the descriptions aren't identical, but they are similar. The look 
of 'dreamy unconcern' vs. Harry's feeling that 'every thought and 
worry in his head was wiped gently away.' Imperius, of course, being 
one of the Unforgiveables, is illegal to cast. It's against Wizarding 
law to use this spell to control another person. But it's not against 
the law (at least, we haven't learned that it *is* yet in canon) to 
erase a person's memory. And that seems to me to be almost equally as 
grievous an offense.

We hear later at the QWC, from the same wizard who first casts the 
Memory Charm on Mr. Roberts, that they've: "Been having a lot of 
trouble with him. Needs a Memory Charm ten times a day to keep him 
happy." (GoF, US paperback, Ch.7, 78)

Ten times a day? That's a lot of Memory Charms. 

If one charm cast by Barty Crouch Sr. was enough to permanently 
damage Bertha Jorkins' memory (and she's a witch,) then what kind of 
damage are we talking about when a muggle has ten charms a *day* cast 
upon his mind?

I'd say it's likely that poor Mr. Roberts, even before the events in 
Ch.9, probably had some serious problems as a result of too many 
memory charms.

We learn later from Arthur that there are witches and wizards known 
as "Obliviators," who are a part of the Accidental Magic Reversal 
Squad. (GoF, US paperback, Ch.7, 86) Arnold Peasegood is one. I'm 
guessing that it was an Obliviator who erased Aunt Marge's memory 
after her unfortunate swelling incident in PoA. I'm also guessing 
that it's the *job* of these people to cast Memory Charms frequently. 
In other words, they probably specialize in it, as we learn later on 
that the Death Eater Mulciber specialized in the Imperius Curse. And 
of course, we know from CoS that Lockhart was quite good at 
performing powerful Memory Charms, despite being a dunderhead when it 
came to the Dark Arts. I'll get to Lockhart in a bit.

For now, I want to dwell a little: there's an entire group of wizards 
out there who *specialize* in erasing memories. This really, really 
bothers me.

The Obliviators are probably the ones who later officially 'modify' 
the memories of the Robertses after their unfortunate run-in with the 
Death Eaters at the QWC. "We caught the Robertses before they hit the 
ground, though. They're having their memories modified right now." 
(GoF, US paperback, Ch.9, 142) The Obliviators are probably also the 
ones who take care of muggles who have seen dragons: "Our kind have 
to keep putting spells on Muggles who've spotted them, to make them 
forget." (PS/SS, US paperback, Ch.14, 231) 

And you'd think that the Obliviators should modify the memories of 
those who have picked up enchanted items, as we learn from CoS, Ch.3, 
p31:

"The teapot went berserk and squirted boiling tea all over the place 
and one man ended up in the hospital with the sugar tongs clamped to 
his nose. Dad was going frantic - it's only him and an old warlock 
named Perkins in the office - and they had to do Memory Charms and 
all sorts of stuff to cover it up."

But in this case, it was Arthur Weasley who performed this particular 
Charm. Worse by far – it appears that even *non*-specialists are 
allowed to perform these charms. To be fair, Arthur could be a 
specialist in this, we just don't have it in canon yet.

As for the effects of a Memory Charm gone awry, we have the case of 
Bertha Jorkins, and far more terrifying, Lockhart's backfired attempt 
to cast a Memory Charm on Ron and Harry in CoS, Ch.16, p303 (US 
paperback.) We see from the descriptions and dialogue from Lockhart 
in Ch.17 & 18 some horrible results. 

As Ron recounts: "The Memory Charm backfired. Hit him instead of us. 
Hasn't got a clue who he is, or where he is, or who we are. I told 
him to come and wait here. He's a danger to himself."

Later on we learn that Lockhart doesn't realize that he's a wizard, 
or a professor either. And in an interview which I can't seem to find 
now, JKR tells us that Lockhart's memory is so gone that he's been 
locked up in St. Mungo's since CoS. That's some pretty powerful 
stuff, there. 

We learn that, if not done properly, the use of a Memory Charm on 
someone can actually make them insane, can actually make a person 
forget not just an event, but even his/her own *profession,* even 
his/her own *identity.*

So, when it comes to the WW using these powerful charms on others and 
on Muggles, I'm absolutely *horrified* that it's allowed. I'd think 
that a Memory Charm should be considered dangerous enough that there 
should be both severe restrictions on their use, as well as severe 
penalties for violation of the restrictions I wish were in effect.

But from what we can see of Wizarding law, this isn't apparently the 
case. Granted, it *could* be, since canon doesn't explicitly tell us 
that it's not, but it definitely isn't ostensibly the case, no matter 
how we look at it.

In fact, Wizarding law indicates, to me at least, that the use of 
Memory Charms on Muggles is not only *not* restricted, it's essential 
to maintain secrecy in the WW, and so, perhaps it's even...

<shudder> 

...encouraged. 

I'm guessing that it's allowed to use these Charms on Muggles in 
order to maintain the International Code of Wizarding Secrecy 
mentioned in GoF Ch.26, when HHR are debating on whether or not 
Harry's allowed to use a Summoning Charm to call an aqualung to him 
for the Second Task. They decide that he'd be breaking the law if he 
did, in fact, summon it.

Kind of makes one wonder what might have happened to the six or seven 
Muggles who saw the Flying Ford Anglia, as we learn in CoS, Ch.5, 79 
(US paperback.) Or whether or not anything was subsequently done to 
any of the the muggles who may have observed aspects of the 
celebrations that we learn of in PS/SS, Ch.1, after the death of You-
Know-Who.

And, as has been discussed previously (at great length) on the list, 
there are many more possibilities for the Memory Charm in our heroes' 
pasts. Please also see Elkins' excellent Memory Charm Symposium and 
relevant threads for a synopsis of how these Charms might vary in 
form and usage, and whether or not they could have been used on 
Neville Longbottom after his parents were tortured.

You can find the Symposium at the following links:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/38812
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/38813
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/38848

The thought of placing a Memory Charm on a baby, incidentally, 
really, really bothers me, because of the potential damage that could 
be done. And if a Memory Charm was placed on Neville, well, it's no 
wonder the boy's got a horrible Memory – we've already heard what can 
happen to a full grown adult like Bertha Jorkins, and seen it first 
hand with Lockhart. Imagine if it was used on a baby.

What we do see from canon is that the legality of casting Memory 
Charms is *not* restricted to the Obliviators alone. It would appear 
to me that one way or another, many different wizards are able to 
learn how to cast these Charms. Whether this is the result of 
independent research or sanctioned tutoring, we aren't told.

Barty Crouch Sr. is able to cast one, and he was head of the 
Departments of Magical Law Enforcement and International Magical 
Cooperation, respectively. I don't see Memory Charms as particularly 
relevant here. I mean, perhaps, but it would seem to be covered by 
the Accidental Magic Reversal Squad in almost all cases.

Arthur Weasley is able to cast one, and yet he works for the Misuse 
of Muggle Artifacts Office. Again, don't see why he'd be allowed to 
perform these. Again, to be fair, I can see how they might be 
relevant, but as with Crouch, it would seem to be covered by the 
Accidental Magic Reversal Squad.

And again, we have good ole Gilderoy Lockhart, who is somehow able to 
learn these Charms SO well that he's able to pull the wool over the 
eyes of a great many witches and wizards in order to write his books. 
I can't figure out how he learned these at all.

I can only guess that somehow it's not too difficult to learn about 
these spells. In fact, given the apparent simplicity, I'd bet that 
even the Trio could probably cast one of them, having heard the 
incantation several times already. Problem is, I'd wager that there's 
more nuance to the casting of Memory Charms than we know about, just 
yet, especially since they can be so very damaging to the victim's 
mind if not handled correctly. Clearly, although Barty Crouch Sr. was 
able to cast the Memory Charm on Bertha Jorkins, he wasn't able to do 
it carefully enough to not damage her memory permanently.

So, what gets me most about these is that, as each book progresses, 
we have more and more references to the Memory Charms, and we learn 
more and more about what they do, how they're cast, and what can go 
wrong with them. It seems to me to be an ominous case of 
foreshadowing, and I'm dreading with certainty the page in a future 
book when one of these spells is cast on a character we know and care 
about – who could cast the charm and why, what would our character 
feel like, and what could possibly be the results? Could this person 
be damaged permanently? Shuddering at the thought...

-Tom