Snapedom

The January Challenge: Lily revisited

sylvanawood

1/3/11 04:02 pm

The Challenge for January 2011:

Lily revisited

Years ago (we've been around for a while, oh yes!)we had 'Severus and Lily' as a monthly challenge.

alicekinsno1 suggested to take a closer look at Lily's character:

Maybe something that discusses the character of Lily more deeply? I'd love to see what some of your ideas are for just how Lily went from treating Snape so harshly and talking back to James, to being the stereotypical "saintly mother" at the end of her life. There's something about her personality that doesn't add up.

That is to say, how her apparently selfless decision to die for her baby makes sense in light of the way she treated Severus or even James. With possibly a side comment about how despite being so powerful and gifted she didn't really show any of that by dying pleading for her baby's life without even trying to take on Voldemort.

Please post your entries here or in a separate post. I'm looking forward to your entries.
If you have ideas for new challenges, please post them here. (This is a new list, your earlier suggestions are still in the old post).

• Tags:
  challenge

• Send your Patronus

• Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

  00sevvie

  1/14/11 10:24 pm (UTC)

  

  No, it seems that at least some spells considered by at least some people to be dark are able to cause harm. This is the same as a definition of dark magic itself: to create a definition one must extrapolate, assume that the *reason* they are all dark is this ability an no other. And there is no solid evidence in the text that this is in fact the case; it's a generalization from a very limited number of examples with little other evidence yet presented for it.
  
  Sectumsempra could theoretically be used to chop plant or dead animal ingredients - there is nothing in the text about it's *only purpose* being to harm people. It seems to work like an invisible knife you can use at some distance, that the caster can control finely, and that can cut flesh but not bone (Draco got the worst of it and there is no bone damage indicated). It's name means 'cuts always,' which is likely to be a play on the famous British knife brand Staysharp. Nothing there indicates anything about causing harm being it's only possible use. That's merely how the two characters who wield it choose to use it.
  
  Assuming that one interprets the text as indicating that it was indeed dark, upon the comments of some characters. The only spells agreed upon by *everyone* we see in the text as being Dark are the unforgivables, but nothing states if what makes them Dark Magic specifically is their ability to harm, or if that is characteristic of all Dark magic. It could just as easily be a characteristic of one rather limited class of dark magic; nothing in the text prohibits that reading.
  
  Also, what of Voldie's resurrection potion? Is that Dark Magic? It's main purpose is not to harm a living being, but it does involve willing and unwilling harm in its creation? Or is it specifically dark according to some other aspect of its nature as a piece of magic? And again, what of scourgify? That harmed Severus. What about Ton-Tongue Toffees? Dudley nearly choked to death on them, and their purpose IS to harm, though not necessarily to kill. What of Confundus? It's effects are almost as bad as Imperious, but Ron is never accused of using *dark magic* on the Muggle driving instructor. What of a Reductor curse that hits a person instead of a wall? Is that dark magic?
  
  My point is not that dark magic *isn't possibly* magic that harms, it's that that reading of dark magic is an *interpretation* of the text involving the making of assumptions and speculation, not something ever spelled out directly in the text, and making that interpretation requires answering all sorts of questions like the ones I pose above in order to have a coherent reading of the text - questions the text does not answer. The text *does not directly present* any clear, coherent definition of the dark arts. It is not there. Quote it to me if you think it is. Find the passage that says "the dark arts are..." The closest you will find is Snape's DADA speech, which is a listing of abstract qualities he personally ascribes to dark magic, not a theory one can use to tell if a particular spell is dark or not. Everything else is character opinion (which differs between characters except in the case of three individual spells, for reasons not explicitly explained to us), or reader interpretation.
  
  We have a scattering of evidence as to what might constitute dark magic, but some of it is personal opinion of the characters, some of it doesn't always fit with everything else, and some of it can't be definitively classed as characteristic of dark magic as a whole or as characteristic only of a specific branch of dark magic. To decide that it is characteristic of one or the other is to make an interpretation, to add one's own assumptions to the evidence presented in the text. Which is fine, everyone makes sense of the text in their own way - but an interpretation is not the same thing as the text clearly spelling out a single coherent definition. Interpretations can differ, even ones using all the same evidence, as is the case here. Because the text does not state clearly one way or the other; there are too many gaps that the reader has to fill in.

  • Reply
  • Parent
  • Thread

  • Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

    summeriris

    1/14/11 11:44 pm (UTC)

    Sorry, I must agree to disagree here. The only real Dark Magic spells in the books do nothing else but hurt the victims of those spells. Sectumsemprs means forever cut. Snape wrote the spells for 'enemies'. Enemies tend to be alive. If their dead what's the use of cutting them up and there are planty of spells for cooking. We see Molly casting a spell on her cooking knives to cut up potatoes. I rather doubt she was using Setumsempra. Besides Snape himself classified it as Dark Magic. His words to Harry were that he didn't know that Harry knew such Dark Magic when Harry was stupid enough to use the spell on Draco. There has to be some that qualifies spells as Dark, the Dark spells we see hurt people. I do think it is that simple.

    • Reply
    • Parent
    • Thread

    • Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

      00sevvie

      1/14/11 11:54 pm (UTC)

      

      I am not saying we don't see dark spells hurt people! Or that some characters consider sectumsempra dark. My only point is that choosing one aspect these *four* spells have in common as *the* definitive characteristic of all dark magic - what makes magic dark or not dark - is an INTERPRETATION. It is NOT a coherent theory of dark magic explicitly spelled out by the text. (Whereas for example it IS spelled out by the text that magic for example cannot create information; this is part of JKR's magic system spell out IN the text.)
      
      It is an interpretation allowed by the text, but there are other interpretations ALSO permitted by the evidence we have in the text. The TEXT ITSELF does not state explicitly that the interpretation you make is correct or not, so nobody can say their interpretation of dark magic is the only correct one. It does not give a definitive account of what dark magic is; that is a matter of *interpretation.* That is my point. That you are making an INTERPRETATION, which is not the same thing as something spelled out by the text itself as a clear coherent theory of dark magic. I am not offering a counter interpretation of what dark magic is, I am pointing out that it is something we must necessarily interpret because it *is not spelled out textually.* Am I being unclear?

      • Reply
      • Parent
      • Thread

      • Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

        summeriris

        1/15/11 12:20 am (UTC)

        I'm not saying that there is a definitive explanation about what qualifies as Dark Magic. I'm saying that the Dark Magic spells that we do see only injure or kill their victims. That seems to be their purpose. So for me it seems quite reasonable to say that Dark Magic causes harm/death to the victim, hence the term Dark. Why do you think the spells are termed Dark? I don't think any Dark Magic spell is created to be done at parties as entertainment. They are created to be weapons and they are not nice. But then I don't think guns are nice either and I'm leery of knives. A very peaceful person, me, myself and I.
        
        PS, I think that Memory Charm that Lockhart used and it backfired on him. I would term that as Dark. Anything that would wipe out a human being's memory as permanently as that did, is certainly Dark in my book.

        • Reply
        • Parent
        • Thread

        • Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

          00sevvie

          1/15/11 01:54 am (UTC)

          

          They we aren't really disagreeing. My point all along was what you said in your first sentence: that in the text there is no definitive explanation. (I'm not saying it's unreasonable to calls spells that harm dark, I'm ONLY pointing out that that is a personal interpretation, not an explanation the text puts forward itself.) Therefore all the explanations we propose are personal interpretations. Which is fine; it's just that occasionally a specific interpretation gets treated as if it were textual canon, which was why my argument came up in the first place actually. I'm not saying your interpretation is wrong or unreasonable, I'm only saying it's one of multiple possible interpretations of the text. I'm not trying to insult, sorry if I do. I'm only trying to be clear about what argument I am actually putting forth.

          • Reply
          • Parent
          • Thread

          • Re: Lily, Sev, Mary, dark magic

            summeriris

            1/15/11 08:02 am (UTC)

            It's fun to discuss things sometimes. The only information we get from the text really is that some magic is Dark with a capitol D. But yes we are agreeing that whatever it is, it's not good.

            • Reply
            • Parent