So I was thinking while reading a story in the barely recommended thread, the story had the typical Order adults tell the group who were 6th and 7th years that they were to young to fight and would have their arses handed to them.

But this got me thinking, compared to what I knew on the day I left high school, in many ways I know a lot less now. I have forgotteen 90% of the maths I knew back them, the physics and chemistry I hold a working knowledge of but couldnt do the equations any more. Biology I am probably equal to due to a old job where i used it a bit.

I think this is the same for most people, if you dont use it you lose it. And most of us have specialized jobs that only use a small fraction of what we learn at high school.

So by that logic, shouldnt a 7th year or even a 6th year who uses magic every day, gets specific lessons in DADA, charms and Transfiguration. Fields that many adult wuzards may not use a lot, have a signifigatn advantage over pretty much every adult who isnt an auror?

Most adult wizards only seemm to use normal everyday magic, house hold charms, apparation, maybe, maybe a spot of transfiguration once a week.

99% of them wouldnt of had reason to fire a curse or "dueling" spell since they left school.

The same goes for the Death Eater as well, sure they might get shown some "dark" magic as Bellatrix claims she learned from Voldemort, but still its not the relentless training the students at Hogwarts get.

This also ties into the theory I've had for ages that there are no real wards at hogwarts appart from anti apparition. We only see them show up in HBP and then they are special made by Dumbledore.

Hogwarts reputation of being safe would stem from having a dozen to two dozen highly trained adult wizard teachers at the top of their game who use magic everyday along with 40-50 7th year students who could mop the floor with most adults.

Barring Tonks, Madeye and Shaklebolt, Harry might actually be the best "fighter" in the Order when DH rolls around.

 

I don't necessarily disagree.

But that said, certain professions might be such that they gain a great deal of magical expertise that a typical 7th year has little chance of standing up against.

Curse-Breaking (we have no knowledge of it, canonically, but bear with me here) could be, in my opinion, two-fold. First, literally speaking a "curse-breaker" could be charged with removing the baleful enchantments on objects like the cursed necklace that nearly killed Katie Bell in HBP. Secondly, and this is due to the fact that they are employed to break into tombs, would be an expertise in breaking down protective enchantments - the canonical ones are Protego Horribilis, Protego Totalum, Cave Inimicum, and Salvio Hexia.

Only Hermione had any clue, in her 7th year (at least GOING into it) how to cast these protective enchantments, much less how to break through them. I imagine a curse-breaker would be much better versed in this kind of magic. They might be less familiar with transfiguration, however, for reasons you mentioned.

Unlike what most fanfiction would have us believe, I also don't believe Aurors throw around the kinds of magic typically found in a duel (in GoF we see them all use Stunning Spells); their job is to track down dark wizards. I could see Hit Wizards (all we know is that the pay is good but the healthcare is exceptional because they tend to be cursed frequently) being pulled in frequently for the apprehension of dark wizards.

I've considered writing a CSI-type series of one-shots depicting this difference, but of course have never found the time. Aurors would, in my opinion, certainly not be incompetent with defending themselves, but I certainly don't see them as the "SWAT Team" they are frequently depicted as.


And yes, I think that most 7th years when they graduate are about as accomplished with magic as they ever get. Those who continue progressing, however, are the Dumbledores and Grindelwalds of the magical world. This is actually something I've thought about a great deal in regards to another unwritten story about Harry being a magical prodigy comparable to Tom Riddle. I may never write that because it'd end up too similar to Santi's "HP and the Boy Who Lived".

 

I agree on the people who work in fields that use a lot of magic. Your example of curse breaking is good, and the person there is probably very good at that field of magic and just gets better with time, te same anyone does who has a job for years. They may also get quite a bit of practice in transfiguration ect if they are in the field. But from what we see a lot of wizards ect have rather boring or mundane jobs that only need basic magic every day.

Arthur Weasley is probably good at charms due to his job, better than most 7th years by a good margin, and he probably get a bit of practice in with Transfiguration as well, maybe keeping him on par with OWL level stuff. But if he isnt pushed to in his skills he would quickly lose them.

 

Arthur Weasley, in his capacity of disposing of objects cursed and given to muggles, might also be acceptably novice at disposing of cursed objects, come to think of it.

But yes, most ministry paper-pushers would fall behind, I'd think. Though Percy seemed to do alright for himself in DH.


Molly Weasley should have been eviscerated by Bellatrix Lestrange after being thoroughly tortured; this may be the single worst part of canon.

 

Percy was the top of his year and only a few years out of school.

 

While you may forget individual pieces of information, I don't think many people think they understand the world worse now than at age 18, or are less intelligent now than when they were 18. So while an adult may have forgotten specific pieces of information, their understanding of magic in general is most likely greater than when they were 18. And a person's general understanding of magic seems to back up a lot of their spellwork.

Perhaps that's the main difference here. Compared to Muggle fields of expertise, magic is remarkably unified. The same skills that back up household charms are also used in duelling, transfiguration, etc. So when I'm practicing household charms I'm not just practicing household charms - I'm practicing magic in general, and the skills learned from that practice are transferable if I want to then cast spells of a different kind e.g. duelling spells.

 

I can see where this is coming from, though I don't necessarily agree entirely.

You are still waving your wand about in specific patterns, sure - and maybe doing magic nonverbally, which might transfer over to all of your other magic.

But in other areas, I could see a typical housewitch (even assuming she doesn't have a house elf to do everything for her!) severely lacking.

Despite the fact we know the charms/transfiguration/conjuration exist, we don't see the Weasleys each with a large, spacious, 30 ft x 30 ft bedroom (space expanded from a closet), and with stately matching furniture (transfigured from grass clippings). And we don't see Molly Weasley degnome the garden with Summoning Charms and Blasting Curses.

This is probably not because they don't WANT huge bedrooms, pristinely transfigured furniture, and a garden where gnomes fear to enter, but because they are incapable of it. Perhaps the gnome issue is morally based, who knows...

 

It's probably more accurate to say that the majority of adult wizards simply aren't used to dueling with magic. And I doubt that the majority of six/seventh years are much better. From what we saw of DADA, it was rather apparent that it's focus wasn't to teach children to fight. It's focus was to prepare them for an attack.

Knowing how to defend oneself and knowing how to fight are very different things.

 

I'm more with Taure on this one. Dueling with magic seems to be less about what spells you know than it is about anticipating your opponent's next move and attempting to take advantage of it. Of course having more spells at your disposal makes this a lot easier, as does knowledge of spells/enemies/legilimency, but at the core of it a duel can be won by pretty much anyone provided they are good at thinking on their feet. Well, until you get to the Snape and above tiers.

Also explains why Harry is so good at it. He's not much for planning ahead, but when shit hits the fan he's good at keeping his head together and using the right spell at the right time. Case in point: the Department of Mysteries.

 

I think it's interesting, when trying to give a bit of realism to the HP universe, to add more magic into the every day lives of witches and wizards. If that were the case, I'd agree with Taure more than Sesc. In that universe, culture itself would change drastically between wizards and other Brits, with a difference not unlike the one between the British and that of a random village in Papua New Guinea, except muggles would be the villagers, living their lives well, but with vastly inferior technology (magic being equal to technology in all important accounts).

In the HP universe, not AU, it's a very different story. Magic isn't used for nearly as much as it seems like it should be, considering how little muggle tech the wizards seem to realize exists, let alone comprehend.

Hermione is honestly the smartest witch of her age, no matter how much it annoys most DLPers. Harry is also extraordinarily good at DADA work, no matter how shitty he seems to us. While it makes sense that 7th years could just be at a point in their lives where they're as magically well trained as they will ever be, I also think our narrator was a poor one, and we didn't get the whole story.

 

I think to a degree Taure is right and that in a way adults would be more comfortable with magic.

But we see and are told time and time again that you have to use certain specific wand movements, you have to pronounce correct (although this seems to be over ridden by silent casting) so I think in terms of certain spells, yes, if you dont use it, you lose it.

 

As some have mentioned, the main reason why 6th and 7th years would not be useful on an Order mission is because the Hogwarts education in fighting/dueling is pretty much nonexistent. Sure, they might remember a few odd charms and bits of theory better than older wizards, but none of those will have direct application in a fight. And there's good evidence (i.e. the Voldemort curse on the D.A.D.A. position) that education in that area has been bad for a long time.

And yet, some adult wizards who went to school at Hogwarts do excel at combat magic. How can this be? Presumably they've learned through experience, or have trained in it outside of the school environment.

To me, this makes intuitive sense. Schools in the real world often have a physical education component, and yet that doesn't prepare you for fighting. Experience in fights and/or martial arts instruction prepare you for fighting. Or if you want to look at it from a more intellectual standpoint: schools teach engineering. But the world's most esteemed engineers are not the ones fresh out of school (some software engineers excepted).

In the wizarding world, if you want to be a better duelist, you need to seek out duels, or find someone who is willing to teach you. And yes, not all adult wizards are good at fighting. But an adult Order member is probably more likely to have experience fighting than most.

 

The problem is that magic doesn't really parallel that well with anything in the real world. If I want to kill you, I need to learn how to fight or I need to learn to use a gun. If I want to cook for you, I need to learn how to use a stove and then make a meal. If I want to show you a cute kitten, I need to find one on the internet or in real life.

A wand can kill you in a thousand ways, can prepare any meal I can think of, or can conjure/transfigure a kitten. There are skills necessary and certain magical laws that deny the possibility of this or that, but I think the point is clear:

Magic doesn't work like any muggle form of education. If someone can do magic, it seems conceivable that they can do ANY magic. There's no necessary limit based off of body type or even mental prowess. Crabbe of all people summons Fiendfyre. Molly Weasley takes down Lestrange. Harry beats Voldemort in a duel of magical wills.

 

I'd have to agree with Taure regarding magic in general. However, I could see getting rusty as far as Potions and Transfiguration go, since non-permanent Transfiguration (which is the dominant type if I remember right) probably has a surprisingly limited use. For instance, the only time Molly Weasley would use it is to conjure extra tables or make the house look good for a three-hour party.

Once a wizard gets a desk job and they don't have time to mess around with magic so much, I imagine they get out of practice pretty quick. That's probably why most of the Ministry is so incompetent, doing nothing but paper-pushing and taking bribes all day and have house-elves do everything at home. And since these idiots are presumably the ones designing most of Hogwarts curriculum, it's no wonder why things are so stagnant.

Fred and George being as talented as they were could be evidence of this too. They didn't worry about grades and spent all their time fucking around, but actually learned more useful magic than probably anyone since the Marauders (who kind of had the same outlook).

 

Conjuration might not be permanent, but Transfigurations are.

 

Hagrid transfigures a pig's tail on Dudley's back side. They have to go and get it surgically removed.

 

Well fuck, that just breaks everything even worse, doesn't it? I still think it's supposed to be extremely difficult, but if Hagrid can do it...

 

Well he WAS trying to make him into a pig, so there was some definite failure involved.