Nature of Dark Magic - Imperius & Well of Darkness

[Steve]

No: HPFGUIDX 141318

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "ellecain" <ellecain at y...> wrote:
>
> > > 
> > > bboyminn:
> > ><snip>> 
> > > I think it is the ability to draw on your own internal well of 
> > > evil which then in turn 'fuels' the Killing Curse. The Darkness 
> > > is in being able to draw that much evil intent/fuel from within 
> > > yourself. It is this well of fuel that powers the spell and 
> > > creates the /darkenss/, and not an outward intent to do harm.


> Elyse: 
> 
> ...edited...
> 
> So my question is, when anybody under Imperius is forced to commit 
> murder, what happens? We have canon implications that an AK can be 
> cast succesfully by someone who has been Imperiused and has no idea 
> of what he/she is doing. 
>
> Karkaroff says Mulciber specialised in the Imperius curse 
> and "forced countless people to do horrific things".
> Sirius says " Avery wormed his way out of trouble by saying hed been 
> acting under the Imperius curse" ; something Malfoy did as well.
> My point is, if you do need a certain degree of intention involved 
> to cast an AK, if you really have to draw a large amount of fuel 
> from the well of evil within, how come people under Imperius are 
> able to do so? 
> 
> If it is the intention that counts, logically the AK should not 
> work, as the caster has no control over his or her own will. 
> ...edited...
> 

bboyminn:

Well, first, my intent in the post I made was to see if I could may my
original hypothesis fit with Neri's 'Intention' hypothesis which I see
as flawed. So, I tried to switch the idea from an outward projection
of intent, to drawing on an inner well of 'intent'. My use of the term
'well of evil' was somewhat metaphorical. I'm sure I used 'well of...'
with other terms too.

Regarding the Imperius Curse, as an illustration, I would like you to
think back to our best example of this, when fake!Moody put the curse
on Harry and we got to see it from Harry's perspective. It was very
much like being drugged; state of euphoria, lack of inhibitions, etc....

Next, we all have a Well of Darkness within us. We all have the
capability to think of and commit dark, dangerous, and deadly acts
...but we don't. So why don't we? Well, we have a internal mechanism
that stops us; call it inhabitions, conscience, common sense, or
whatever. The inhibition acts as a barrier between us and the Well of
Darkness that is in us all. We all have murderous impulses, but we are
able to resist them. A sociopath, has those same impulses, but has no
inhibiting mechanism to put things in perspective, so he/she doesn't
realize that he/she shouldn't act on them. 

Now the Imperius curse short circuits this inhibiting mechanism, and
in a state of extremely relaxed euphoria, we are unable to resist the
impulse that is forced on us, and we are unable to maintain that
barrier between our conscious selves and the Well of Darkness within.
When this intoxicating effect of the Curse is taken into
consideration, I think it is probably /easier/ to commit Dark and
deadly acts. 

So, that explains how a person is able to dip into that well of
intenal murderous intent. To project that intent outwardly, I think
can also be explained. With no inhibitions and with the surrendering
of your own free will, I think other people can project their
murderous intent through you. In a sense, the Imperiused person
becomes an instrument for the actions and intent of another. Again, to
some extent, it comes back to inhibitions; without them, you are
unable to resist any impulse that is forced on you. 

> Elyse:
>
> ... Malfoy says Dark Arts are actually taught at Durmstrang. Does 
> this mean that the students are taught to harness the evil within? 
> Are they actively encouraged to choose evil and do they practise the
> intention to harm as homework? I think a definitive piece of canon 
> is reqired to define Dark Magic and what the creation requires.
> 
> Just me wondering here
> Elyse

bboyminn:

Keep in mind that my original response to Neri wasn't all inclusive.
It was an attempt to bring together her idea of 'intention' and my
idea of 'destructive in its creation'. I switch the projection of
external intent into drawing on an internal well of 'intent' which I
also feel is destructive, so that with slight adjustments, Neri's idea
would fit into my original hypothesis. 

So, while I'm including the 'well of evil' as part of my theory, I'm
not limiting it to that. I also propose that this 'destructive in its
creation' element include drawing on the life force of other living
things (plant, animal, human) and using 'other' things to which the
dark wizard has no right (such as blood-flesh-bone). The nature of the
destruction can be physical destruction to some aspect of the world,
or spiritual destruction of the dark wizard, and also, using worldly
elements to which a dark wizard has no right, plus other destructive
'things'.

So, I can't answer your question in the limited context of
internal/external intent. I believe if we expand that back to my
original idea of 'destructive creation', then we can explain a full
range of magic that can be taught at Drumstrang, and that in one way
or another is destructive in the creation of the magic. 

If a few plants or animals have to die to perform a dark spell, is a
dark wizard really going to care when he is probably going to have
steak and potatoes for dinner anyway? Yet, while 'light' wizards may
eat steak and potatoes, they do not accept as their right the concept
of stealing the life force of other living things simply to perform
certain spells that an be performed by alternate means; by using
nondestructive 'light' magic. 

So, again, in the context of 'Well of Darkness' or external projection
of intent, I can't give a satisfactory answer to your question on Dark
Magic. But, if we go back to my original idea of 'dark by destructive
creation', then I think we have a reasonable explanation.

For what it's worth.

Steve/bboyminn