CHAPDISC: HBP24, Sectumsempra

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 161347

> 
> Cyril:
> > The reason for this opinions was the following examples:
> > 
> > Why was Snape not able to heal himself when he was presumably (as it
> > is Harry's assumption about the cause) bitten by Fluffy in SS/PS.
> > While there is no canon (other than Harry's assumption) about the
> > cause, Snape clearly was limping, and should have been able to heal
> > himself.
> 
> Carol responds:
> Good question, and one I've wondered about myself. First, JKR's
> characters are at the mercy of her plot--she needs to have Harry see
> Snape failing to get past the Three-Headed Dog and having him injured
> and talking to Filch is one way to bring that about. But also it
> appears that Snape's expertise relates to Dark spells and their
> countercurses more than Dark creatures.

Pippin:

Magical creatures such as werewolves can deliver cursed wounds that 
even wizards cannot  heal. It makes sense that magical 
creatures would evolve ways of overcoming magical defenses. It could 
be that sectum sempra, although it can produce a lot of physical 
damage, doesn't produce a contaminated wound.

Arthur's wounds could not be closed by stitches, so they must have
been magical as well as physical (magical wounds that will not 
close are well known in folklore.)

 Dumbledore warned that Fluffy would inflict "a very painful 
death." He may have meant the prolonged agony of magical
wounds such as Arthur suffered. Possibly the healing spell
Snape used on Draco would not work at all.  But it could be that 
it did work to some extent. Maybe the injury Harry  saw had 
already been treated and was much worse to begin with!
 It's also possible that Snape was involved in Arthur's healing 
but no one thought to mention it to Harry.

Pippin