Ello all, I'm rather curious about what your opinions are on these forms of magic. I'm sure we've all seen several approaches to them in Fanon and I think it would be better if we could pool together a more streamlined, consistent view. It does get rather tiresome reading thousands of words per fic, explaining the authors views and approaches to the magic they intend to introduce.

Anyway, my personal take, is that magic in itself, is unchanging, and commanded solely by its users intention. The reasoning, I suspect, for worded spells is simply that A) They provide a form of memorizing and communicating spells and B) They allow younger students to focus on a spell by thinking of the word, as it would be harder for them to focus on the spell itself. This would explain why Silent magic is a latent part of the Hogwarts curriculum, and why it is discarded in the heat of battle.

Another factor to magic that I have considered, is that Verbal magic in the HP universe somewhat contaminates the spell. After all, if you concentrate on the incantation, and what it should do, it will be less pure than Silent casting. This is backed up in canon, where stunning spells and disarming spells are described to fling people away, and killing curses set fire to objects, rather than merely complete their 'pure' purpose. It is also supported by the fact that magic that requires complete focus, such as Apparition, can only be done without an incantation. I would also theorize that a silently cast Portkey would remove the 'jerk under the navel' effect.

Of course, there seem to be exceptions, such as the Levicorpus spell, though it is arguable that that spell is easier to cast due to it being easy to imagine.

-IBG

P.S. I didnt include blood magic, ritual magic or wandless magic because they are not covered much or at all apart from brief mentions in canon, but feel free to discuss them. The only thing I can really hypothesize on them would be that wandless magic would be magic at its 'purest', since in canon even the most simple accidental magic seems to do very specific things.

 

Harry uses Snapes Sectumsempra without knowing what it did, he knew it was "for enemies", and he knew the wand moments and the name.

I'd like to think that magic is all about intention, so I have a hard time accepting that you can cast a spell that you never have seen before or knowing what is does.

I haven't really thought about your "pure" magic, so I won't comment about it.

 

I didnt really mean "pure" magic. By 'pure' I meant that the spell had only one intent, and only one purpose. Ie, when casting it, the user would be focused only on his intent, not what the spell's incantation is, and not what he would like to do to the other person.

For example, when casting Expelliarmus on friends in the DA, noone is said to be thrown back, but when someone who dislikes someone else throws an expelliarmus, they send the other person flying several metres, possibly by manifesting another desire rather than just disarming when casting the spell.

 

I've never thought about that, is there any other spells which can be used like that?

 

Most canon combative spells are hardly defined, though I imagine it applies to the Stunning Spell, and the unforgivables. The intent part certainly ties in, with Harry's wish to cause Bella pain manifesting for a short time, but his unwillingness to cause it for enjoyment preventing the spell from lasting.

It also shows somewhat in Book 5, where Harry's want for light as well as to find his want manifest by lighting his wand. Most people believe this to be him casting through the wand, but personally I think that it would be wandless magic manifesting his desire, by lighting his wand. So, rather than be two seperate acts of magic, I see it as one act of 'pure' intent.

 

He didn't just "want for light" and a light appeared - he used the "lumos" spell.

Anyway, there is no such thing as silent magic in canon. There is non-verbal magic, but even this still uses incantations, they are merely recited mentally (and thus are much quicker, and more covert).

One may theorise that, just as you can think an incantation rather than saying it once sufficiently skilled, you could also cast a spell by thinking only of the incantation (making a distinction between thinking a word and thinking of a word, the second of which is quicker by far), thus allowing a form of "silent casting", but this would be pure speculation.

As regards Harry's Sectumsempra, I explain it as follows. The more experience/skill you have with magic in general, the easier new magic comes to you. This works within disciplines too: the more experience you have with Transfiguration, for example, the easier new transfiguration will come to you.

So in this case, Harry was able to cast the Secumsempra without having knowledge of the spell beyond the incantation because of his reasonable level of skill/familiarity with magic used in a dueling context. A first year would not be able to do it, nor would someone worse at DADA.

It still does mean that the spell exists in and of itself and is not solely dependent on the caster's intent (an idea that I like, as I'm not a fan on the 'intent is all there is to magic' idea, probably because of all the bad super!Harry fics that it has resulted in, in which Harry 'realises' a really obvious aspect of magic that thousands of wizards before him should have discovered). It does, however, explain away the uniqueness of the Sectumsempra oddity.

 

Hmm, I think that non verbal casting has a lot to do with an individuals will power and confidence in their ability to use magic. They believe that no matter what, the spell will work. Remember in HBP, everyone was trying too hard, screaming the incantations in their head. They were thinking that it's the same as verbal magic only mentally incanted. I think they were lacking the inner will power and confidence in their magic to use non verbal magic. This may be why most wizards never truly master non verbal magic.

 

I see these as one and the same. Will power and confidence are part of one's ability to use magic. But yeah, like Snape said, non-verbal casting is all about mental focus.

 

Having been an avid D&D fan. I noticed that the somatic(i.e. gesturing) component of Magic in HP is almost always overlooked. It is even depicted in the movies that pointing your wand and shouting something produces effects.
WTF happened to swish and flick you assholes, this shit is retardedly inconsistent. Even in Fanon they spend hours "training" and remembering wand motions for supposedly old, complicated spells. Somehow, they eventually degrade to point and cast, even for first time spells.

 

Er, no need to get angry about it. Movies aren't perfect, neither is fanon. JKR herself didn't even give us all that many wand movements.

 

What about Harry's Levicorpus? He didn't think it would work and yet it did. He tried his favorite shield spell and that had no effect. It seems that some spells are easier to cast non-verbally regardless of experience or confidence.

 

I think its safe to say that there are several conflicting notions of magic in canon - I think we should use this thread to work out the best one for fanon, then try and assimilate it as the accepted form of magic in our fics.

 

I don't think magic is all intent, as it has been said before that there would be no other purpose for incantations and wand movements. If it was really just to help them visualize and focus, it wouldn't be in quasi-Latin. They'd have made it much simpler like float instead of Wingardium Leviosa. My theory was that magic is a force that must be channeled specifically, just as lightning requires the pre-existing weather conditions, so magic must follow the specific path provided in the key conditions, which seem to be incantations and wand movements. Undiluted magic would either be extremely dangerous or completely useless, so perhaps something in the phonetics and gestures (mental or otherwise) are what allows intent and purpose to form and utilize magic. However, I also think that with enough repetition or practice, a certain spell can become like a passing thought. Once you thoroughly know the spell, it's effect, and how to cast it, it becomes easier to perform quickly and to full effect. Say Dumbledore has been using the fire-whip for centuries and wants to cast it. His familiarity with that spell must be extraordinary, thus his ability to summon it with a mere thought and gesture, rather than the complex process all others must begin with.

 

That was all JKR not wanting her wussy!Harry to seem like he could deliberately hurt even one of his worst enemies("for enemies), so she pulled that shit from her ass.
And than he throws the Unvorgiveables around like candy in the last book(Imperio anyway).

Personally I think that there are a lot of different kinds of spells, curses and jinxes. Some need mainly intent to cast like the Unvorgiveables, others need complicated wandmotions. I think that are mainly charms and transfigurations, maybe because you are doing things like changing material into other materials, or let things fly, with them.

I don't think, as illogical as some other things in the wizarding world are, that the spells they use in a duel will have long or complicated wandmotions, that wouldn't only be illogical, but unpractical as well.

But I think every spell needs a certain amount of willpower and focus to channel.