Harry's emotions his strength or his weakness? ( LONG)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 141589

> Finwitch:
> 
> Harry has been able to apparate before he even knew he was a 
wizard - 
> at least I believe that he apparated onto the school roof when 
Dudley 
> was chasing him. Just as when he apparated with Dumbledore - he 
> NEEDED to do it, just as badly as when he was being chased by 
Dudley. 
> I don't know if Harry's realised that yet, but once he does, he'll 
> pass his apparition exam without effort. (You know, like his 
corporal 
> patronus. Knowing he really CAN do it was what got it trough...) I 
> think Harry can master any spell, verbally or non-verbally - even 
> without a wand - just as long as he doesn't think about whether or 
> not he CAN do it, only about doing it. (I think that's really the 
> trouble that most Muggle-raised wizards/witches have, which is why 
> Slughorn is so surprised that a Muggleborn could do so well...).

Ceridwen:
I think you're onto something here.  Harry, and other Wizarding 
children, can do spells without wands or speech.  TR figured it out 
fairly early, and also learned how to control these powers.  TR is 
noted to be a powerful wizard, and the Penseive memories show he has 
always been one.  Young children don't fret over the mechanics or 
whether or not they can.  They do what they *need* to do (apparate to 
the roof, disappear glass, intimidate an orphanage full of children), 
at least what's necessary in their opinions.  For intuitives, 
learning the mechanics may be a step backwards.

> Finwitch:
> 
> I think so, yes. Harry can do what he needs to do. It's more his 
own 
> disbelief in his abilities - much like with Neville and Merope - 
> that's holding him back. He's already *done* non-verbal and 
wandless 
> magic - apparating onto school roof, shrinking a sweater, turning a 
> wig blue, growing his hair back overnight, vanishing that glass in 
> the zoo (5th year spell, wasn't it?) -- all done with strong 
emotion, 
> wandlessly and non-verbally.

Ceridwen:
Unformed thought: Could this be where love comes in?  I assume that 
all accidental magic performed by children is the result of emotion.  
Fear, or desire, or whatever.  A wand helps to direct that power, and 
learning helps to refine it.  I just can't see how love will play out 
in directing and performing whatever magic it takes to vanquish 
Voldemort.

> Finwitch:
>
> What Harry needs to learn, is full awareness that he can, as well 
as 
> full control over his magical ability. That's what I think being a 
> fully qualified wizard means.

Ceridwen:
And to that end, children are recorded and invited to attend Hogwarts.

> Finwitch:
>
> I think that Aberforth Dumbledore is the person who can help Harry 
to 
> realise this. His brother doesn't know if he can read. I take that 
to 
> mean that Aberforth can do spells just as Albus can: no incantation 
> or wand required. I also think Aberforth doesn't appreciate reading 
> at all, because all these spellbooks make one think that the 
correct 
> incantation and wandmovement are necessary, when it in fact they're 
> not. All they *really* need are the three D's. (Hermione's in for a 
> shock!)

Ceridwen:
I love that last part!  None of them needed book learning to do magic 
as children.  If someone does it intuitively, he or she really 
doesn't need to learn it, only learn how to do it more effectively 
and deliberately.  And even then, if that's the case with Aberforth, 
then someone who is that in tune intuitively doesn't really even need 
that.

Of course, Aberforth may be a WW prodigy that way, but maybe Harry 
is, too.

Ceridwen.