In the book she isn't mentioned before the attack. She might've felt the effects and properly diagnose them and go to presumed location of most obvious target. "Never saw" doesn't necessarily mean "was incapable of seeing".

 

Rowling was not going to write about a governament that abducts little children and erase the parents/kids memory(like it was done in Prince of the Dark Kingdom).

If you think of all the trouble obliviators go to erase any memories about the wizarding world from the muggles, the ministry would never allow some kids going around and unleashing uncontrolled magic left and right.

 

Perhaps the same way the Grangers manage to get into Diagon Alley. Muggle repelling charms appear to only repel Muggles approaching the charms, not those already in it.

Of course, there might be an even simpler answer, which I quite like as I think it also neatly displays the way that magic differs from Muggle ways of thinking: the Hogwarts Muggle repelling charms don't work on Filch because he's not a Muggle: he's a Squib. Yes, Muggles and Squibs are the same in all physical respects. But I have no objection to the idea that magic can target one but not the other.

 

When canon scenes contradict each other, I'd definitely choose the earlier books over DH.

The truth is, however, that we do get another example of a wizard using multiple wands in PoA, when Sirius Black attempted to stun Harry with a wand in each hand.

 

I would agree with magical talent being about general intelligence. The more creative i.e. intelligent you are, the better you will be at using magic. I say this because I don't think there's much of an aspect of "talent," or general magical knowledge. Harry knew shit-all about Sectumsempra, but used it like a pro and almost killed Malfoy. It appears simply that if you perform a spell correctly, it will work regardless of how much one actually knows about it. Therefore, the determining factor would be who could more effectively use their magic, rather than who was more or less "powerful." What makes Harry the best duelist in his generation is not a supreme knowledge or massive innate talent, so much as his ability to think quickly on his feet.

If I interpreted canon correctly, what made Dumbledore and Voldemort great was not some unlimited well of power, but rather their ability to use magic in ways that no one had ever conceived, or to create magic of a similar standard. For instance, IMO, Dumbledore's invisibility is probably just a tweaked Disillusionment charm. Their fascination with magic allows them to become familiar with it, and to use it in ways that exceed a simple formulaic pattern of swish and flick.

 

This. With a slight addition, I think that it isn't perhaps just intelligence alone which allows someone to be adept in magic. We see that some people seem to have a natural talent for magic in general. Take Harry for example, he casts a banishing charm on his first try, Sectumsempra on his first try, and can apparently through the use of a few side notes in a potions book create a perfect potion in a subject he paid almost no attention to for 5 years when compared to say Hermione who studied her ass off for 5 years in Potions.

Harry has show great ability in magic through minimal study and before someone says magic isn't involved in potion making I'll redirect you to COS where squibs apparently struggle to do potions just as much as any other form of magic. I postulate that some people just have a connection to magic that allows them to bypass the traditional route of studying insane amounts to understand the magic due to the fact that for some reason or another they just understand magic without having to wade into useless magical theory which I assume is designed to help those who don't have the natural inclination towards magic that others do because the only thing that ever really seems to hold Harry back is his own lack of interest in his studies. As soon as he has a reason to be interested (thinking he found his father's old potions book for instance), Harry seems to be able to grasp magic very quickly. The same goes for him being too distracted to even notice that he got the spell right on the first try which happened in GOF when they were banishing pillows.

I don't equate such things to power or magical core rather I find it is much more likely to be a deeper connection to magic itself which allows certain individuals to succeed with little difficulty. The main difference between someone like Harry and people like Tom and Albus is the fact that they study as well as have a natural talent for magic. I believe the sorting hat even mentions Harry having a fair bit of talent iirc. I would further postulate that this innate understanding of magic allows people to twist spells from their original intent i.e. make them do things that would normally be considered impossible for such a spell to do just because they want the spell to work that way and can naturally change the magic instead of bothering with learning a new spell to accomplish the same effect.

As for the topic at hand, there is no real proof in canon either way, but I've yet to see a single case of anything similar to magic being tiring or even having draining effect. I mean as a third year Harry faces off with a dementor casting a high level charm multiple times trying to fend it off. He manages to produce a mist several times per practice and the only mention of drain is the one caused by the effect of the dementor. I don't particularly like the idea of magic being finite or some wizard being more magically powerful than another.

I'd say the only real type of magical fatigue I could see as a possibility would be if a person was someone without a natural connection to magic were to try a spell that requires a lot of magic to preform and this person were to pass out or feel exhausted not from a lack of magic, but from an excess of it because they forced past what they naturally understand and delved perhaps a bit too far causing the spell to complete it's intended purpose, but to also have a negative effect on the caster due to their lack of ability in high level magic, but even then I have a hard time with it because I feel that they probably shouldn't have been able to cast the spell to begin with, and that is my two cents on the subject...for what it's worth.

 

What about Neville? Did his intelligence get an unexpected boost in his fifth year?

 

I've always thought that emotions also play a factor in the magical ability of a person.

 

It's one of the things I choose to ignore in canon. I see it as one of JKR's lovely character swaps wherein she takes perfectly well established characters and screws with their personality out of nowhere e.g. Hermione from 6th year on, announcing Dumbledore is gay, saying Luna will someday learn that her dad wasn't all there, Ginny becoming 'hot' out of nowhere, etc.

 

You could be the greatest wizard of all time and still suck if you're not confident enough to use it. We never actually see Neville sucking at magic, indeed he manages to wtfpwn that boggart in third year on his first go. Usually his mistakes are entirely confidence based; kicking off too hard on his broomstick, performing poorly in potions, etc.

 

Eh, he also took forever to learn the simple summoning charm, couldn't do non-verbal magic, couldn't do occlumency, never masters a spell as quickly or as completely as Hermione...

He's pretty crap at magic. I certainly wouldn't be using him as an example of natural talent.

I do agree that some people are more "naturally talented" at magic than others. But I don't think that this is the end of the line: "natural talent" can be further broken down into a host of factors which, when combined, create the appearance of a naturally talented person.

 

Ehh, I'd go the opposite way and say he is naturally talented, but he wastes that talent by not studying enough and allowing his animosity towards Snape affect how he treats a subject. For example, I am wholly confident that Harry would have mastered occlumency if Dumbledore had taught him rather than Snape, especially since Dumbledore has better control over his own emotions than to kick him out half way through.

After all, to use your piano analogy, even a genius like Mozart would have lost the ability if he failed to practice every day.

 

Hermione probably started to learn spell before classes not because she had the talent.
She started to learn summoning charm at start of the GoF and practiced for mounts before the class while Harry doing other things. If Harry was trying as hard as Hermione he would be get past Hemione so fast she would look like slacking of.

Harry can do non-verbal magic if Snape isn't around. In fact he did in the dorm. He probably resisting Snape by not doing in the classroom. And occlumency is the same story. Resisting Snape. Snape says do something he does opposite.

I believe Harry has the talent but jkr ruined it by giving Harry same Owl's as Ron. It was just plain stupid. but it is for you...

 

Harry cast Non-Verbal magic on Ron accidentally, and again on purpose under the influence of our dear friend Felix.

This, and a whole lot of other stuff suggests to me that Canon!Harry is just a slacker who didn't apply himself. Ain't fanfiction great?

As for grades, I always thought he and Ron were getting similar academic results from the get-go.

 

Not only is this post way tl;dr, but you seem to contradict yourself (not that I read the whole thing...).

...which is fucking close to the original fail concept, because you're making magic quantifiable, and a certain caster would only able to use a certain 'amount' before feeling drained (and not being drained, sure).

Lol. Pretty sure we had a disagreement about that a while back, and you said Harry had mastered Occlumency. I agree with this though, so w/e.

Also, magical intelligence people. I know that's sort of what most of you are saying, but let's make it simple. It can behave exactly as normal intelligence does, in that it's not a one dimensional value, and is affected by practice as well as natural talent (and from a phenotypical point of view, is of course the result of both the environment and genetics - I know I'm repeating myself). It might be corelated to muggle intelligence (not sure about that).

Analogies I like are music or mathematics, in that some people seem to have an amazing natural talent, and can show incredible result with little formal training (see composers who start fucking young, or Ramanujan), but in which practice and theoretical knowledge are also essential.

And emotion and confidence do have a lot to do with the ability to cast spells (eg Felix Felicis, Patronus in PoA).

 

Oh really? I seem to remember Hermione taking a very long time to master the patronus charm even though she was a 5th year and not facing a dementor when trying to learn it.

I also remember her asking Harry to lead Dumbledore's Army, and furthermore, I recall reading an interview by JKR stating that Harry surpassed Hermione in defense about half way through 3rd year and she never came close to taking the top spot in that class after that. And, I'm pretty sure I've seen you take the opposite side of this argument before. Oh, and by the way if you would bother to go open your copy of DH you would do well to note that Harry states the reason he didn't learn occlumency is because he didn't want to learn it or some such nonsense about wanting to keep seeing the visions. I don't know the exact reason, but there you go.

I would also like to reiterate that Harry was a complete slacker who never bothered to learn magic unless for some reason it got his attention or he was forced to, and usually when he was forced to do so it was last minute and running very little sleep because unlike Hermione he never bothered to give two shits about preparing ahead of time even if his life was on the line.

Oephyx if you pay attention to my damn post you would note I said and even then I wouldn't be happy with the idea of magical fatigue. Also, your statement about not quantifying magic makes little sense to me. I never said wizard's had more magic than another wizard, but simply that some spells require more magic which I think is somewhat obvious from the books given the scope of some of the spells used and the literal feeling magic bleeding off of them.

 

Patronus charm is an exception, in that whether or not you can cast it depends on the emotions felt, not magical skill. When Harry couldn't cast it, it was because he wasn't using a suitable memory. When he got the hang of it, it wasn't because he got some technical detail right that he had missed before: it was because he was using a better memory and thus able to feel happiness stronger.

Not because of his magical prowess, but because of his non-magical talents which contribute towards doing well in a fight: bravery, reflexes, sense of the flow of a fight, ability to perform under pressure; and his experiences utilising these things.

Precisely. It's nonsense. He didn't learn it because he was unable to control his emotions, which is crucial to the discipline. Even when he got the hang of it in DH, it was a bastardised version which may have been so specific that it was unique to the scar-connection he shared with Voldemort.

Also, [Citation needed].

With regards to nonverbal magic: we have two instances of Harry using it properly: for one of them, the spell was designed to be non-verbal (Levicorpus) so does not reflect his ability at non-verbal magic (as shown by the fact that Snape notated that the spell was a non-verbal one, and the fact that after casting the spell successfully non-verbally, he still struggled with casting other magic non-verbally). The other instance he was under the influence of what is effectively a performance enhancing drug.

Agreed. He was a slacker. But even had he applied himself, he would have been an above average wizard at best. Note that when he does apply himself (i.e. when some piece of magic does get his attention), he still isn't some grand prodigy of magic. Given application, he probably wouldn't even be as good as his father, certainly not as good as someone like Snape.

You're falling victim to reading your desires for the character into the character.