Leglimancy and Voldemort

[quick_silver71]

No: HPFGUIDX 170380

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "houyhnhnm102" <celizwh at ...> 
wrote:
>
> limerent:
> 
> > In book 5 Snape tells Harry that eye contact is 
> > necessary for leglimancy except in Harry's case because 
> > of the bond they seem to have. But in Book 4 Voldemort 
> > is able to tell that Frank is lying even though the chair 
> > is still turned away from Frank at that point. And a bit 
> > earlier Voldemort could tell Wormtail was lying though 
> > it seems they didn't have eye contact either as it made 
> > a big deal of the fear/disgust/reluctance each time 
> > Wormtail had to look at Voldemort. So is Voldemort that 
> > good at leglimancy, even better than Snape thinks, that 
> > he doesn't need eye contact? And what would this slip of 
> > judgement mean for Snape if it is true?
> 
> houyhnhnm:
> 
> I'm not sure that Voldemort would have needed to use 
> Legilimency in either case.
> 
> Surely Voldemort and Wormtail would have done a minimum 
> of  reconnaissance before taking up residence in the 
> Riddle House.  Simple observation would have told them 
> that Frank Bryce lived alone.

Quick_Silver:
However Voldemort and Wormtail doing reconnaissance is a very logical 
thing to do...despite the supposed subtext that wizards are not 
logical. 

<snip>
> houyhnhnm:
> I've never been certain whether the possession of a 
> magical art like Occlumency or Legilimency is supposed 
> to imply the absence of an ordinary Muggle ability like simple 
> human logic.  Dumbledore possessed both (He *deduced* 
> that Crouch!Moody was an imposter because of the 
> inconsistancy of his actions rather than discovering 
> it through Legilimency), but Dumbledore was the greatest 
> wizard of his age.  It may be that most wizards could 
> not have done that("A lot of the greatest wizards haven't 
> got an ounce of logic.")
> 
> Nevertheless, we know from the puzzle he devised to protect 
> the Stone, that Snape does possess logic.  That may be his 
> greatest strength against Voldemort.  It may enable him to 
> see Voldemort's greatest weakness--his megalomania--and use 
> it against him in a way that other wizards, even those adept 
> at the arts of Legilimency and Occlumency like Bellatrix, cannot.

Quick_Silver:
Yet you overlook the fact that Voldemort and/or Quirral managed to 
overcome Snape's vaunted logic trap in PS/SS. So either Quirral was 
another rare logical wizard or Voldemort does possess a grasp of 
logic. 

I'm always intrigued when people mention the wizard's lack of logic 
because I have trouble seeing it in the novels. Aside from Hermione 
mentioning that many great wizards have no logic I really can think 
of nothing else supporting the concept. So to me it comes across as 
Hermione making a unsupported statement and then JK using the concept 
to help the plot along when need be. 

For instance the wizards are implied to be illogical because they 
have magic instead yet JK then portrays their magic as being a very 
logical concept almost another branch of science and technology. It 
becomes very circular in my mind. 

Quick_Silver