Yeah, Rowling said it disappeared in her interview after DH:

 

Is it ever stated or mentioned why Voldemort's spirit went to the Forests of Albania? The location seems kinda random, am I missing something?

 

No stated reason. It was known as a 'Dark' place though.

Probably all the Eastern Europeans.

 

Harry thinks he felt safe there since it was where the diadem was hidden. But I don't think we get another confirmation.

 

In my infinite wisdom I posted this question into wrong thread. So here we go again.

What do we know exactly about Dark Magic or Dark Arts? What is Dark Magic and is it inherently evil?

 

Has Harry, whether in canon or fan fiction, ever used Dobby to apparate out of a bad situation? For e.g, in the graveyard at the end of year 4.

 

Well yes, Malfoy Manor. I'm pretty sure it's the only time Dobby apparates him anywhere in canon. In fanfiction, I see it used more often to get in protected places (Hogwarts, Azkaban or the Ministry for example) than out of them. I don't remember Dobby in the graveyard in any fic, but I haven't read everything.

 

And that is one of the greatest cans of worms. We know very little of what Dark Magic is, really, and it all comes down to how magical theory works.

In my opinion, Dark Magic is just a catch-all term wizards (and the Ministry) use for spells whose primary purpose is to commit acts of evils, with no underlying common characteristic between them — a Dark cutting spell was just spellcrafted dangerously, but is not "made" of different magical energy than a non-Dark cutting spell. The darkest of Dark Magic is, of course, harmful soul magic like the Unforgivable Curses, the Dementor's Kiss, and the Horcrux, which do belong in the actual same category.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, there are many in the fandom who see magic as divided, somewhat like Star Wars' Force, into inherent Dark and Light sides, with all Dark Magic being, well, Dark, and spells like the Patronus Charm being Light. In this theory, just like the Dark Side of the Force, prolonged use of Dark Magic corrupts you in body and soul, and Voldemort was hit much harder by fit for having practiced the Darkest of all arts, Horcrux-making, hence his disfigurement.

There is a story (I forget which) which argued that while the vernacular use was the one I described in the first paragraph (any and all evil curses), the true definition was entirely based on the Never used a Dark curse before, Potter? You have to mean them! line. "Normal" magic is just knowing the incantation and wand movements and focusing on the desired effect hard enough; whereas Dark Magic is rooted in emotions. Amusingly, this means that the Patronus Charm is actually "some of the Darkest magic out there" by this definition.

Finally, some take "Dark" to mean "secret", and consider that Dark Magic refers to magic that was developped in secret and is usually passed down in pureblood families. Most of it is harmful and evil because… well, you're going to be more motivated to keep your new spell a family secret if it's a spell to explode eyeballs than if it's a new way to cook turnips. This explanation has some charm but fails to take into account Dark Magic being formally taught at Durmstrang, which sort of defeats the idea of dark magic being defined by its personal, non-academic nature.

 

For a moment I couldn't remember the canon example. God, forgetting such basic things

As for escaping via Dobby in fanfiction... I think Forging the Sword had one such scene. After fighting some Death Eaters, Dobby and Harry pop out of the World Cup area. Link: https://www.fanfiction.net/s/3557725/13/Forging-the-Sword

 

What does canon say about stunning spell?
What are its effects and how do you deal with them?

In fanfictions its mostly a spell that revives people after being stunned, but then it wouldn't make sense for people to use it in duels with multiple opponents.

 

Effect: it stuns you. That's it. There could be indirect effects, for example stunning someone on the edge of a cliff could cause them to fall off and incur further injury/die, but all the spell does is knock someone out.

To deal with it: dodge/block, or use ennervate (or however it's spelled). There's no other canon method that I'm aware of, although I'd be willing to accept that there's a potion of some sort, or that it simply wears off after a while.

As to its suitability for dueling multiple opponents, it's no better or worse than any other instant but non-lethal spell, like Petrificus Totalus, and better than something that injures without instantly putting your opponent down.

 

Is ennevrate or whatever spell one uses to undo a stunning spell is mentioned in canon? Or is it part of fanon?

 

Canon, first seen used at the Quidditch World Cup by Amos Diggory.

 

As a small addition to this, the stunner seems to be less effective against some magical creatures, with it requiring several dragon handlers in the 4th book to cast it simultaneously in order to bring down a dragon. Hagrid also appears to shrug off several stunning spells in the 5th book, presumably due to giant heritage.

Also in the 5th book it's implied that the stunner can have other adverse effects. McGonagall is hit by several and I believe requires a trip to the hospital wing afterwards. It's mentioned that she took them straight to the chest and that she's "not exactly young anymore" implying that it's more serious depending on where it hits and that youth or general fitness can mitigate the effects or side effects.

 

She was hospitalized at St. Mungo's for a couple of weeks. Additionally she walked with a cane for a while afterward. When considering the amount of injuries and afflictions the wizarding world can fix with a wave of the wand or some potions, the damage done must be quite extensive.

 

The whole "stunner is useless because of reenervate" argument is an old one and has always somewhat missed the mechanics of magical combat. If an opponent takes the time to revive their fallen companion, that's just opening themselves up to an attack knocking them out too.

 

Exactly how (un)helpful was McGonagall towards Harry in canon?

Off the top of my head, I remember:

a) Getting him on the quidditch team
b) Giving him a room to train during the tournament
c) The promise to help him become an Auror (did anything tangible even come out of that promise?)

On the flipside, I know in the early books she dismissed Harry's warning about the Stone. And maybe a few similar dismissals in later years?
And of course the crown jewel of moments where she told him to "keep his head down".

How does that translate into Harry casting a cruciatus because a DE insulted her?

Where do you infer the Harry/McGonagall relationship stands at the end of Deathly Hallows? (disregard the epilogue)

 

http://harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Tom_Riddle Potter wiki has three wands listed: his Yew wand, Lucius Malfoys Wand, and the Elder wand. The elder wand is the one with a Thestral Hair core. Not listing it as his normal wand having a Thestral Hair Core.