Hagrid and non-verbal spells/Harry's Assumption

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 151549

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, OctobersChild48 at ... wrote:
>
> Peggy:
> > I noticed today that Hagrid appears to have done a couple
> > non-verbal spells.  In Sorcerer's Stone, when he and Harry were
going to buy
> > Harry's stuff in London, Hagrid tapped the boat with his
umbrella/wand
> > pieces to speed it up, but didn't say anything.  And when they
got to Diagon
> > Alley, he tapped the magical brick to open the passageway.  I
wonder if
> > Hagrid can do non-verbal spells, and if so, how he learned,
after just
> > having studied for about three years.  Thoughts?
>
>> Sandy
> He may have had only three years of formal training at Hogwarts,
but by the
> time Hagrid took Harry his letter Hagrid had *been* at Hogwarts
for 50 years. I
> would think that over all those years Hagrid would have picked up
a thing or
> two. Also, perhaps Dumbledore gave Hagrid some private tutoring?
>

Magpie:
Those things don't seem like non-verbal spells to me.  They seem
like they're something built into the magical boat or brick.
Portkeys don't require you to say anything either, nor do you have
to speak to enter the train platform, but they're not non-verbal
spells of the kind Harry learns. Not that I'd be surprised if Hagrid
did a non-verbal spell, I just suspect I'd think it was more flinty
than significant.

Potioncat:
My opinion falls somewhere between Sridhar's and Alla's. It's one
reason I think Severus's Potions book went missing while he was a
student. Although the timing doesn't work out correctly.

In the book Levicorpus is nvbl. So even if Severus used it, he wasn't
saying it out loud. Either he taught someone who passed it on quite
freely, or someone stole it.

Magpie:
But as I understand it there is no such thing as a verbal vs. non-
verbal spell.  A spell is a spell, and you can perform it either
way.  Snape may have started out saying Levicorpus.  Presumably
James never used Sectumsempra.

Arief Hamid:

I just finished re-read the first 5 books in order to
have a better insight before reading the sixth book.
One thing that's confusing me most, how come Dumbledore
trusted Snape so much and seems like ignoring the
statements and facts that given by Harry, that Snape
is nothing more than a treacherous member of the
order. What makes DD believes that Snape's is worthed
every bit to be in the order and will protect the
order with all his might.

Damn, I couldn't find the reason why in the books, and
it just kicks me in the nuts.

Magpie:
I think the key there is that you're supposed to feel that way!
Dumbledore always makes a big point of trusting Snape but never ever
says why he trusts him, just that he has a reason.  None of the
Order members know why he trusts him either.  So we've no idea why
Dumbledore trusts him (Snape claims he's got to believe the best in
people, but there's no reason to assume Snape's telling the truth
there, or if he is, that he really knows Dumbledore's thoughts), and
other people trust him only because Dumbledore does.

-m