Occlumency and Spies (Re: Mental Discipline in the WW: A Comparison...)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 130467

>>Nora: 
>My books are currently packed, so I'm not looking at anything 
either.  I just found it to be very...interesting that Snape is very 
much aware of when he is 'in', and when he has been pushed out. It 
seems to me that, of course, the ultimate goal is to not let someone 
in at all rather than evicting them noisily; this informs my idea of 
Occlumency as a state that one is in (solid as a rock, I cannot be 
pushed over) rather than a thing that one does (push out the 
invader!).<
<snip>

Betsy Hp:
I think part of the lesson was to recognize when you're being 
invaded -- hence Snape's obviousness at invading.  And the other part 
was learning how to most efficiently push someone out.  I would 
imagine that someone who practices Occlumency is not "on" all the 
time, but when they feel something tickling at their mind they can 
quickly throw up shields.  Of course for Harry the main goal *was* 
pushing out the invader.  And keeping him out.

>>Nora:
>Here's another thought; since one can use Occlumency against 
Veritaserum, that also could be read as putting oneself into a 
condition rather than actively engaging in pushing out a foreign 
invader.  It could have components of both, but they're not quite the 
same thing in how you generally go about it.<

Betsy Hp:
This raises another thought.  Did Barty Crouch, Jr. know Occlumency? 
One could see him needing such skills to so fully fool Dumbledore.  
And if he *did* know Occlumency it shows that it's something you have 
to call up.  It's not always on.  Otherwise, even dazed from 
Dumbledore's initial attack, I doubt he'd have folded so easily.  (Of 
course this entire argument is based on one whopper of an assumption, 
so take it as you will. <g>)

>>Betsy Hp:
<snip>
>That's part of the reason I think JKR's magic is more practical than 
spiritual; it's a tool not a character builder.<

>>Nora: 
>Spiritual was your word, not mine, IIRC.  I'm interested at present 
in the relationship of magic to psychological factors, which was 
illustrated with all the delightful material that you snipped 
out. :)  JKR's magic and her ethical judgement of characters is 
heavily intention-based, after all.<

Betsy Hp:
Well, you brought up A.S. Byatt and she complained that JKR's magic 
wasn't numinous enough, that it was too mundane. (I'm assuming you 
brought up her views because yours are in agreement?)  I'm just 
saying, yes JKR's magic is practical.  I kind of like that about it.  
And honestly, I think the connection of JKR's magic to psychology 
is... simple.  Or maybe heavy-handed is a better word?  It's so overt 
as to be symbolic rather than subtle.  But I think she makes good use 
of it.

Betsy Hp