|
Post by dancingpony on Sept 25, 2009 13:14:00 GMT -5
A pensieve might also be very difficult to use in a "jury" situation. The entire jury would have to "fall into" the pensieve, together, and "land" at exactly the same point in exactly the same memory. I suppose, with the witness's cooperation, the exact moment could be pinpointed, and it could be put into the pensieve alone, and the entire jury could then be allowed to enter (unless there are limits to the "technology" as far as how many persons can enter at one time). However, I think the witness's cooperation would be key -- which would make it of little use in a situation where the witness is trying to hide his or her guilt.
|
|
|
Post by birdg on Sept 25, 2009 13:47:22 GMT -5
Ah, but the British wizarding world doesn't appear to have trial-by-juries.
Which reminds me that I had something to say in the Ethics thread.
|
|
|
Post by dancingpony on Sept 25, 2009 14:01:04 GMT -5
Wizards are tried before the Wizengamot, though, which seems to be similar to a jury.
|
|
|
Post by birdg on Sept 25, 2009 14:41:36 GMT -5
Well, in the sense that they vote on it, yes. Not so much in the "of your peers" sense.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Sept 28, 2009 9:00:52 GMT -5
The wizarding world appears to be an oligarchy. The oligarchs appear to choose a leader from among it's members. They seem to handle all areas of government. They seem to play judge and jury in the legal system. (Wasn't one of the trials in the Pensieve looking like more of a jury trial. I seem to remember a difference between them.)
It's hard to tell how much the trials we see done by Barty Crouch were typical of later ones. Harry's trial was certainly unfair and he had no jury. They were willing to have a teenager defend himself without a lawyer and without legal preparation. The possible punishment, the loss of a wand, was quite severe.
There protections seem to apply to the fact gathering stage and seem designed to protect mostly the powerful and influential.
The size issue would be one for the pensieve whether we talk of the wizengamot or a jury. But maybe a law enforcement person could report what he saw under oath. He would be practically a witness.
To me the issue revolves around the need for the co-operation of the person giving up the information.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Oct 21, 2009 12:18:19 GMT -5
Is someone willing to make a stab at what separates the Dark Arts from other nasty spells?
I think it has something to do with the imposition of power.
|
|
|
Post by dancingpony on Oct 22, 2009 14:35:21 GMT -5
Is someone willing to make a stab at what separates the Dark Arts from other nasty spells? I think it has something to do with the imposition of power. I'll take a stab. There are probably several factors. One would simply be the amount of skill necessary for a witch or wizard the perform the spell. More than likely, any witch or wizard of reasonable ability would be able to perform, say, a jelly legs hex. However, it is strongly implied, and, in at least one instance I can recall, stated outright, that it takes a great deal of skill and practice to perform an Unforgiveable Curse. Another factor might be the danger level of the spell. A simple hex is not likely to cause severe or permanent damage to its victim. Not so with a Dark curse, which can easily have permanent, even fatal, consequences. I'd imagine that spells that come under the classification "Dark Arts" are carefully classified and monitored by The Ministry of Magic. We know that certain spells are classed "unforgiveable." It's not much of a stretch to think that other Dark spells are also outlawed, or at least monitored, and that there might be consequences for their illegal or improper use. So . . . as with any illegal or "frowned upon" activity . . . for a witch or wizard to engage in learning and practicing those Dark spells, there would have to be a reward to offset the danger of getting caught and penalized. Power might be such a reward.
|
|
|
Post by MWPP on Oct 24, 2009 0:32:54 GMT -5
Dark or Light is defined by intention. Altruism is caring about other than self, and is generally considered Light, whereas Dark is usually self-gratifying/selfish and lower of a vibration. The Dark Arts tend to manipulate for selfish ends, cause pain, destroy, draw down, function on a lower level. Defining/sorting which is which has little to do with skill because skillful talented wizards fall into both categories.
|
|
|
Post by the silent speaker on Nov 12, 2009 23:41:55 GMT -5
Except... is Accio Brain dark? Reductor to the chest? The abrupt cessation of wingardium leviosa?
What about Memory Charms -- vile when Lockhart is doing it, okay when Hermione is (or Aurors on anyone foolish enough to observe magic being done while Muggle)? Where is the line drawn on those?
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Nov 13, 2009 20:02:16 GMT -5
I think you bring up a good point. Intention is involved in the consideration of any moral choice. But a whole category of spells are put in a category of being dark without mention of the intention of the caster. While other spells which seem as deadly as the AK or as violating of the mind as Impirius or as potentially pain causing as the Cruciatus curse are not called Dark.
Now in our world a thumb-screw or the Rack as objects of torture might be considered a dark or evil object no matter who was wielding it. I may admire Queen Elizabeth the first, but still feel the Rack used during her rein is a dark object. I would be disgusted and disturbed by the sight of it more than a sword. I might think of a knife as an object neither light or dark even though a knife blow to the stomach might cause as much pain and would more likely kill.
I think Obliviating people is a questionable activity that the society itself accepts. Gilderoy Lockhart carries it farther in some respects since he is stilling other peoples experiences by claiming their achievements as his own and then obliviating their memory of having done the achievement. Which contains theft with the activity. I found Hermione's Obliviating her parents appalling.
Interestingly Harry use of Imperio in Grigiots sent his opponent to safety. Did that make it any less Dark?
|
|
|
Post by queenie on Nov 13, 2009 22:37:15 GMT -5
What about Memory Charms -- vile when Lockhart is doing it, okay when Hermione is (or Aurors on anyone foolish enough to observe magic being done while Muggle)? Where is the line drawn on those? Fascinating question! One of my main protagonists in my fic The Ollivander Children is a professional Obliviator, and another one is a Muggle. So there's a certain... tension between them no matter what happens. For an Obliviator, modifying the memories of a Muggle is their job. Hagrid bluntly states in Book 1 that the Ministry of Magic's main job is to keep Muggles from knowing that wizards exist. If the masquerade were to be broken, then it would mean the end of both worlds - and I don't mean that in an apocalyptic sense, but that both worlds are built entirely on their separation from each other. In that way, the Obliviators and Paramnesiacs (my own invention) are a necessity to the survival of the wizarding world. However, every Obliviator (according to my story) works hard to dissociate themselves from the people whose memories they modify. To sympathize too much with Muggles would make their jobs difficult - and this is a hard task because to modify a memory properly involves things like Leglimency and careful interviews, so there's a need to see the Muggle as a scientific experiment. Also I mention a Death Eater in my story who tortures Muggles by taking the memories of their loved ones and placing them in another part of the brain, the part connected to fear and anger. When Obliviators go to the bad, they can be creative. It depends on exactly what memory is being modified, and why, and by whom on whom. It's kind of a necessary evil - a procedure done against the knowledge or consent of the Muggle.
|
|
|
Post by Author By Night on Nov 22, 2009 8:57:47 GMT -5
Except... is Accio Brain dark? Reductor to the chest? The abrupt cessation of wingardium leviosa? What about Memory Charms -- vile when Lockhart is doing it, okay when Hermione is (or Aurors on anyone foolish enough to observe magic being done while Muggle)? Where is the line drawn on those? I think the difference between, say, Lockhart and Hermione is that Lockhart was doing it to save his own arse. Also, to use it would have caused Ginny's death and who knows what else - but at the time, Ron and Harry's concern was mostly Ginny, Ron's sister and who Harry cared about by virtue of being his best friend's sister. I know a lot of people question the morality of Hermione's actions, but while I agree they weren't exactly wholesome... it was war, and she was doing what she had to do. She made it clear doing so broke her heart, so I don't think it was easy. But "what is easy isn't always right." It has always bothered me, though, when I've wondered what the consequences are and just when the charms are used. What happened to the first years who were tortured for being muggleborn? Were they let go, memories modified and all, always wondering where the year of their life went? Are there Healers who are the equivalent of therapists? And are there physical consequences? We see in GoF that they can be temporarily confused.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Dec 6, 2009 1:24:46 GMT -5
I'm confused by your mention of first years who are tortured for being Muggleborns not remembering their year.
I've forgotten the incident that you are describing.
|
|
|
Post by Author By Night on Dec 6, 2009 13:19:25 GMT -5
Oh, sorry Vega. I was being hypothetical - I was wondering if memories were wiped because I figure they had to do something to clean up the mess the Death Eaters made. I have no idea whether or not the muggleborns were obliviated, and the books never even say what exactly ended up happening to them. We just know it wasn't good.
|
|
|
Post by MWPP on Feb 9, 2010 0:18:40 GMT -5
Pondering ~
We are at Bill & Fleur's wedding, Kingsley's Patronus arrives and says the Ministry has fallen and Scrimgeour is dead. Suddenly the protective spells on The Burrow no longer hold.
Why?
Was Scrimgeour some sort of Secret Keeper type, either personally or as his position at the MoM?
Did the shock of the Patronus' message make Molly/Arthur/whomever do some sort of magical hiccup that created an opening in the protections?
Or....?
.
|
|
|
Post by birdg on Feb 9, 2010 0:36:16 GMT -5
I think it was mentioned in Deathly Hallows that the various "safe houses" (Tonks' house, Shell Cottage, the Burrow) were under the Fidelius Charm.
It's possible Scrimgeour knew this and they tortured the information out of him. Or it could have been someone else at the Ministry, another member of the Order who was tortured or Imperiused for information.
|
|
|
Post by Mirabelle on Feb 9, 2010 23:31:17 GMT -5
I thought the Order didn't resort to the Fidelus until after the trio broke out of Malfoy Manor. Otherwise, the Weasleys wouldn't have needed to live with Auntie Muriel if the Burrow was already under Fidelus.
|
|
|
Post by vegablack on Feb 10, 2010 0:00:35 GMT -5
I thought the explanation for their ability to break into the burrow after the ministry had fallen was that now the Death Eaters had the power of the ministry behind them. The physical power, magical technology, spells, or even the force of manpower behind them allowing them to break down personal defences.
Remember that is what Remus says. After explaining that the various Order houses had been broken into including the Tonks family house, Harry asks how the Death Eaters were able to get passed the protective charms. (Remember even Voldemort couldn't get through.) Lupin answered, "What you've got to realize, Harry, is that the Death Eaters have got the full might of the Ministry on their side now," said Lupin. They've got the power to preform brutal spells without fear of indentification or arrest. They managed to penetrate every defensive spell we'd cast against them, and once inside, they were completely open about why they'd come."
So I think his statement implies that along with using unforgiveables on the Tonks family they had access to some kind of power that the ministry controled. It makes sense to me that a gov't institution would have magical power beyond an individual.
|
|
|
Post by MWPP on Feb 11, 2010 21:44:11 GMT -5
I guess I sort of have a "Borg-ish" concept of how Rowling's magic works - that energy and intention are the power that makes it work. To some extent Spells and Potions can be learned, perfected, but that the wizard's/witch's/'house elf's intent and focus give the magic power. Thus, The Ministry seems like its power comes from consensus (intent by a group) with each member contributing to make the group stronger than the individual. Meanwhile, Scrimgeour seems considerably stronger than the average person, so would (not counting Fudge, who seems to be a Poser) the Minister of Magic have to be something like a battery or transformer that super-charges the whole thing? [This concept also extrapolates to Dumbledore being strong enough to protect all of Hogwarts and the other teachers energy strengthening or helping his Spells, but not matching his in power.]
Whatcha think?
.
|
|
|
Post by MWPP on Feb 25, 2010 3:31:13 GMT -5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ RoR ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Filch is a squib, and Harry doesn't think Dumbledore or Flitwick ever found the Room of Hidden Things because they probably hadn't had a need to hide anything (he thought they were both good kids in school).
So ~ (1) how did the broken Vanishing Cabinet get put into the Room of Hidden Things?
(1a) Did Draco take it there (from where)? (1b) Would it open for Filch because its magic doesn't care about the person asking for entry having their own abilities?
Then ~ (2) After the Fiend Fyre, would the Room of Hidden Things still open if asked even though its contents had been purged? (3)Would the Fiend Fyre still exist in there until someone went in and used the counter Spell, or did it cease to exist once Crabbe died (since he cast the Spell in the first place)?
(4) How is The Room of Requirement organized?
(4a) Since the Trio plus Draco and Goyle left the Room of Hidden Things in an active condition (with Crabbe and a powerful Spell inside), would no other portion or idea open if asked, similar to the RoR keeping the DA renegades safe so long as one of them stayed inside its functioning as a hide-out? (4b) Did the purge with/from a powerful negative Spell damage some aspect of the overall magic of the RoR? (Basically, does it open as separate and completely different areas - like the round room-of-many-doors opens in the MoM - so only part of it would have possibly been affected, or is it the same place with different illusions and, therefore, whatever happens in one happens to all?)
....
|
|