Harry and wandless magic

[corinthum]

No: HPFGUIDX 96796

Earendil wrote:

> Somehow I had always associated incantation and wand as two 
> necessary parts of a spell, and as long as there's an incantation I 
> really can't think of it as wandless magic. So I'd like to know 
what 
> you guys think about it. Since there's an incantation involved, is 
> it really wandless magic? Or was Harry's wand close enough to his 
> hand for him to interact with it and cast the spell successfully?

I've always thought of a wand as a simple tool to control magic.  The 
wand itself doesn't produce magic; it only focuses it.  I picture it 
something like a laser.  Naturally, magic is produced in all 
directions, with many frequencies, and deteriorates as it travels.  A 
wand, like a laser, focuses the intent of the magic, allowing to 
travel further and remain as precise and accurate as it was when it 
was produced.

Most of the wandless magic we've seen has been uncontrolled.  Harry, 
for example, never planned the exact effect of his childhood magic, 
and he was never been able to reverse the magic he did even when he 
wanted to.  Hagrid's statement about making unexpected things happen 
when angry seems to imply that this is a common phenomenon.  When a 
wizard loses control of his or her emotions, magic is "released", but 
it is uncontrolled and unfocused, and therefore the effects are 
unpredictable.

However, these uncontrolled results always seem to come from complex 
thoughts, which, in order to be transformed into productive spells, 
probably need quite a bit of focusing.  Hence the necessity of a 
wand.  Simple spells, on the other hand, may be able to be focused by 
the wizard himself, via thought process.  With practice, a witch or 
wizard could become more proficient at this focusing process.  This 
could explain Quirrel's broomstick curse and Snape's countercurse, 
Quirell's snap-conjured ropes, and Dumbledore's clap-changing banners 
(although the last could also be explained by a magical property of 
the decorations, as potioncat suggested).  The snapping, clapping, 
and eye contact may all be methods of helping to concentrate one's 
thought.

This also explains Harry's successful use of Lumos without his wand.  
I agree that Harry's proximity of the wand helped him here.  In a 
crude sense, when Harry thought the spell, magic was released from 
him into the general vicinity.  This magic contained the 
command  "light the tip of the wand".  Because this is a pretty 
simple command, and because it didn't travel far, it was focused 
enough when it reached Harry's wand to be effective.  The fact that 
Lumos is a spell that acts directly on a wizard's wand is a bit 
misleading; the wand didn't do the magic in this case; it merely 
received it.  

I also think that incantations are merely focusing tools.  Saying a 
word forces the witch or wizard to concentrate on a certain outcome, 
thereby controlling the magic they produce even before it reaches the 
wand.  Or alternatively, perhaps it helps the wand decided how to 
focus the magical energy more quickly?  

All of this is theoretical, of course, but I think it covers all the 
instances we have in canon of wandless magic.

- Corinth