Dark Magic WAS: Re:help with JKR quote/ Children's reactions

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 176564

> lizzyben:
> 
> <snip>  Yet the *connotation* remains - if 
> it's Dark, we assume it must be evil. If someone's using "Dark 
> Magic", we assume they must be evil as well. 

Mike:
Nope. I don't assume "dark" necessarily equates to evil. It can be 
evil but can be just everyday nasty. It's a matter of degrees for me. 
And someone can use some of these "Dark Magic" spells for less than 
evil purposes. So I don't "assume that they must be evil" either.


> lizzyben:
> And yet, w/o a 
> definition, it starts to look like the *only* real distinction is 
> in who is using this magic - if it's a designated Good Guy, it's 
> OK; if it's a designated Bad Guy, it's dark magic.

Mike:
Actually, that's about as good of a definition as JKR has bothered to 
present to us. Although she has had the occasional "good guy" perform 
Dark Magic.
  

> lizzyben:
> 
> Or maybe he [Snape] was telling the truth, or maybe making an
> assumption. Is it possible Lupin was involved in dark magic? 

Mike:
Or maybe Snape knew perfectly well who made that Map and knew that he 
was talking to one of the "Manufacturers". And maybe he thought it 
was a map that allowed Harry to sneak into Hogsmeade and wanted to 
confront Lupin with the evidence thinking Lupin had given Harry that 
map because Lupin was in cahoots with Black. I think a reasonable 
reading of canon would show all of that to be true. And Snape thought 
the map has as much "dark magic" in it as the suits of armor, which 
also laugh at students gaffs.

BTW, if we used Mr Weasley's definition without criticality, then a 
whole host of items become imbued with "Dark Magic", including the 
Ford Anglia that Arthur bewitched himself and, oh by the way, the 
Sorting Hat. (Which many on this list might agree *is* Dark) ;)


> lizzyben:
> 
> But I'm talking about "Dark Arts" as a supposedly separate 
> branch of magic - w/special spells, items, & techniques that 
> can be taught in a class. And here the map seems to have 
> definite similarities w/the "Dark Magic" diary. The items seem 
> to work in a similar way, and were perhaps created w/similar 
> techniques & spells.

Mike:
The only thing I see the diary and the map have in common is the 
written word, they aren't even made from the same material. (Map from 
parchment, the diary from Muggle, commercial paper) The map is just 
that, a map, and can plot beings on it. The diary is memories and a 
Horcrux which communicate with a person that writes in it. Snape 
didn't write on the map. The diary can't tell where anyone is in the 
school. The map reveals itself when a password phrase is used and 
blanks itself likewise. The diary vanishes everything written into 
it, after a fashion, including the words it produces itself, with no 
control from the user. Enough said.


> lizzyben:
> The Map isn't made using transfiguration, potions, DADA... 
> so what branch of magic was it created with? Dark Arts, maybe? :)

Mike:
Umm, how about Charms? In fact, just about exactly the definition.


> lizzyben:
> 
> I believe Lily meant what she said, but I'm still confused. JKR has
> stated that ... <snip>

Mike:
I've said before that I'm not counting anything that is not actually 
written in the books as what constitutes canon. I offer an example 
from JKR's website:

:: What happens to a secret when the Secret-Keeper dies?

:: When a Secret-Keeper dies, their secret dies with them, or, to
:: put it another way, the status of their secret will remain as it
:: was at the moment of their death. Everybody in whom they confided
:: will continue to know the hidden information, but nobody else.

Mike:
Does that sound like what she wrote in DH? No. IMO, canon is what has 
been written in the books and everything else, like the Black Family 
Tapestry, is only useful when it doesn't conflict with canon. That is 
NOT the case with JKR's non-canonical definitions of hexes, jinxes, 
curses, etc.


> lizzyben:
> <snip>  So how can Lily say that they [Marauders] don't use dark 
> magic? Snape is confused too, & here I don't blame him.

Mike:
That's not the way I read it. Snape knew perfectly well what was 
dark, he was trying to deflect criticism of his buds.


> lizzyben:
> We don't even know what the "Dark Arts" *are*. 

Mike:
But the characters do. There doesn't seem to be any confusion amongst 
them.


> lizzyben:
> I see a lot of conflation here, where James & co. are against dark
> magic & transfer that to Slytherins. They hate Slytherins & 
> transfer that to "dark magic". It all gets bunched together as 
> the "other" is associated w/everything evil.

Mike:
I see you conflating James & Co.'s prank magic with "dark magic", but 
I don't read that in the books. Lily said different when she clearly 
wasn't friends with James & Co. I never heard Snape dispute this. 
Either with Lily or later with Harry when he should have made that 
point if it was there to be made.



> lizzyben: 
> 
> So what is it then? If mean-spirited, violent, aggressive spells
> aren't dark, if even unforgiveable curses aren't dark - what is dark
> then? Why are we supposed to hate the Slytherins for using "dark
> magic" when we don't even know what that is, or how it's any 
> different from what our guys are doing?

Mike:
All I can suggest is a common sense approach. When someone uses a 
spell for school boy pranks, something that won't have lasting 
*physical* effects, we shouldn't read that as Dark, imo. I say 
physical because trying to judge emotional is way too subjective and 
takes into account way too many variables that cannot be assigned 
simply to the spell.

OTOH, magic which has sinister consequences appears to be classified 
as Dark. There also seems to be the added elemant of intent thrown in 
there. So, it would seem that a memory charm could be used for Dark 
purposes, if it were used in the way Crouch Sr used on Bertha or Tom 
Riddle used on Morfin.

Finally, we are suppose to "hate the Slytherins" because JKR set them 
up as the "bad guy" house from book/day 1. YMMV, but I think that it 
is just as simple as that. Any attempts to shoehorn this series into 
a more complicated moralistic story will meet with frustration, imo. 
And not accepting JKR's portrayal of Slytherins as the Bad Guys is a 
denial of the way she wrote the story, imo again. If that is 
unsatisfying personally, than that's for you (general) to come to 
terms with personally.

Mike, who has no problem accepting the Slytherins as the bad guys but 
takes into consideration Voldemort and his kin's influence on the 
house going all the way back to the namesake founder. And therefore 
figures that with that influence gone, the house has a chance for 
moderating that bad guy image.