Wandless Magic

[Jim Ferer]

No: HPFGUIDX 96827

This has been an interesting thread.

In two examples of wandless magic we've seen, the item enchanted (the
fire in Lupin's hand, Vernon's hands) were in direct contact with the
caster.

Other examples - Quirrell's binding of Harry, for example - the close
contact idea doesn't work.  It seems though, that wandless magic
occurred mostly early in the series.  Did JKR's notions evolve?

What does a wand do?  I always thought about a wand as being like a
projector lens or a speaking trumpet, something that directs and
focuses magical energy.  Without one, the magic sort of dribbles out
all over.  The same amount of magical watts may have been expended,
but it wouldn't seem like it.

  If this is true, it could explain why magic worked in direct contact
with the magician but doesn't seem to work (at least work well) at any
kind of distance.  The problem with this hyposthesis is it doesn't
explain Quirrel's ability to bind Harry with a finger-snap.  That's an
anomaly.

Jim Ferer

The examples of kids doing magic when they're little seem to be of an
unfocused, uncontrolled kind.