Vague Thoughts on Apparation - Conclusion Confusion

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 93500

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Steve" <bboy_mn at y...> wrote:
> I'm confused about apparation and how the students learn it. Curious
> about how other see the process.
> 
> ...edited... none the less, if we use all magic as an example, it 
> seems there would be an exception made while the students learn to 
> apparate at school.
> 
> It seems that both Percy and the Twins took there Apparation test at
> the beginning of the summer holiday, which implies to me that they
> learned the process during the previous school year.
> 
> So, does this sound reasonable to everyone, or am I way off base?
> 
> Just wondering.
> 
> bboy_mn

> Carol:
> We know that the Twins turned seventeen in April of their sixth 
> year. I had assumed that they practiced at home over the summer, 
> maybe under their father's supervision, before taking their tests.

bboy_mn:
OK, in GoF, we find out from Mr Weasley that Apparation is difficult
and dangerous. If that's true, and we have no reason to doubt him,
then why would the wizard world leave something this difficult and
dangerous up to the parents to teach their children?

To me that doesn't make sense, all other necessary magic it taught at
school, why would apparation be excluded from this?


> Carol:
> Of course, we don't know when his birthday is, but I think he must 
> not have turned seventeen until just before his seventh year or he 
> would have taken his test the previous summer.

> Annemehr:
> I got the idea that learning to apparate has nothing to do with 
> Hogwarts. That would mean that everyone turning seventeen during
> a given school year would go home for the summer and *then* learn 
> how to apparate.

bboy_mn:
One of the points I tried to make is that I don't understand why
everyone is so obsessed with the idea that you absolutely under no
circumstances can Apparate until you are 17 years old?

You can't do any kind of magic outside of school until you are 17
years old. Or as Carol pointed out, you can't do any 'cast' or wand
magic out side of school. Yet we see the kids doing all kinds of cast
wand magic inside of school; in class and out. 

Why do people see that in-school wand magic as OK, but for some reason
they have isolated Apparation as absolutely forbidden under any
circumstance? Why can't or why don't you see Apparation as just
another form of magic? 

The law that says students can't cast spells until they are of age, is
the same law that says you can't Apparate until you are of age (and
pass your Apparation test). 

Apparation is a difficult and dangerous form of magic, the teaching of
which is best left to professionals in my opinion.


> Annemehr:
> Percy is four years older than Ron; he was in his fifth year when 
> Ron was in his first. He was probably born in the summer of 1977, so
> that he didn't turn 17 until he left Hogwarts. He got his apparition
> license during the summer of 1995 and enjoyed Apparating here and
> there just to show off the fact that he could.

bboy_mn:
On the issue of Percy's age, if we are going to make him young in
order to account for his delayed Apparation test, then he has to start
 Hogwarts at age 10, which means his birthday has to be Sept, Oct,
Nov, or Dec. If it's earlier then that, then he would be 11 like
everyone else when he started school. 

So Percy starts 6th year at age 15 and is very quickly age 16 like
everyone else. People learn to Apparate at school in their 6th year,
but Percy doesn't turn 17 until after the start of 7th year. Since he
is tied up at school, he can't take his test until after the end of
the school year. Which seems to be how the story goes.

My next point, is that everyone seem to take their Apparation test
during the Summer. People seem to have taken that to indicate they
couldn't possibly learn Apparation at school. Sorry, I don't follow
that line of thought.

The students are in a boarding school, their freedom of movement is
tightly restricted. From what I can tell, they only get to leave the
castle for a Hogsmeade visit three times per school year; once per
term, and of course, holidays, but that seems like it would be
restricted to family time. 

So, you learn to Apparate at a boarding school, logically your first
opportunity to take the Apparation test would be when school quits for
the summer holiday. The summer Apparation test that many people seem
to think confirm Apparation not being taught at school, for me,
actually make me think that it is indeed taught at school as I pointed
out above. You learn at school, the school year ends, you go to the
Ministry, and take the test; a logocal sequence of events.

The last point is Hermione's continued insistance that you can't
Apparate at Hogwarts. But just outside the gate of Hogwarts, one must
assume, you can Apparate. Why is that a problem? Students go into
Hogmeade on Hogsmeade weekends and seem to survive the effort. Why
would it be such a terrible stuggle for them to walk into town for
Apparation lessons? Actually, why even bother to walk all the way into
town, when you can just step outside the gate?

Certainly, it seems that it could and would very logically be taught
during 6th year so that students would be ready to take the test as
soon as they turned 17 and had a break from school. More importantly,
I WANT it taught during 6th year and AT school because I want to find
out all the details on how it works and what it feels like. 

So the key points I need resolved are-

1.) Why do people feel that students can practice other magic at
school, but for some reason are forbidden to practice Apparation even
while under the supervision of teachers?

2.) Tied in with above, why are people so rigid about the age 17
restriction for Apparation, yet the school is not that rigid when it
comes to other magic?

3.) Why would something this difficult and dangerous NOT be taught at
school? The difficulty and danger would seem to imply that it MUST be
taught at school; taught by professionals.

4.) Why would summer tests rule out the course being taught at the school?


In conclusion, from previous discussion on this matter, most people
seem to take the same position that Annemehr and Carol are taking, but
frankly, the logic of it escapes me. My own logic tells me it must be
taught at school, and the very same evidence they are using to argue
against it, is the evidence I use to argue for it.

So, what's up with that?

bboy_mn