A Magical Theory Question

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

In order to perform most spells, wizards and witches must speak or think a particular incantation and wave their wands, often using specific movements. Different combinations of incantations and wand movements will have different magical effects.

I've long believed that all of the incantations and wand waving involved in spell-casting are merely focusing techniques. In other words, while the words and movements help to center one's attention upon a specific spell, it is ultimately the caster's intent which produces the desired results. However, I now realize that there is at least one instance of spell-casting in canon that defies this reasoning. It is the case of Harry casting Sectumsempra upon Draco in HBP. This has undoubtedly been discussed elsewhere before, but it is a new conundrum for me.

Harry finds the incantation for Sectumsempra in the Prince's potions book at the beginning of chapter 21 of HBP.

He had just found an incantation “Sectumsempra!" scrawled in a margin above the intriguing words "For enemies," and was itching to try it out, but thought it best not to in front of Hermione. Instead, he surreptitiously folded down the corner of the page.

There are no accompanying directions for how to wave one's wand to cast the spell, nor is there any description of what the spell is supposed to do.

Harry casts Sectumsempra for the first time in response to Draco's attempted Cruciatus Curse in chapter 24.

"SECTUMSEMPRA!" bellowed Harry from the floor, waving his wand wildly.

Blood spurted from Malfoy's face and chest as though he had been slashed with an invisible sword. He staggered backward and collapsed onto the waterlogged floor with a great splash, his wand falling from his limp right hand.

If Harry had ever studied Latin, he would have known that "sectum sempra" means something like "always cuts" or, as Whitehound put it, "sever forever." But he never learned Latin, and so he didn't know beforehand what the effects of the spell would be.

"I didn't mean it to happen," said Harry at once. His voice echoed in the cold, watery space. "I didn't know what that spell did."

Setting aside Harry's deplorable behavior in casting an unknown spell designed "for enemies," what does it mean magically that shouting "Sectumsempra!" produced the result of slicing Draco open, even though Harry had no specific thought behind the spell? If Harry didn't know what Sectumsempra would do, then who or what did know? Who or what processed the incantation of "Sectumsempra" and interpreted its meaning to be "sever forever," if it wasn't Harry's brain?

Was it Harry's wand? Could wands be something like magical computers that are programmed to interpret Latin commands? Or was it magic itself? Is magic somehow sentient rather than simply a form of energy?

What are you thoughts?

Comments

the French theorists called; their influence is showing

[parenthesised.livejournal.com]

It's almost Derridian, isn't it? There is no outside to the text, etc... the idea that text permeates all areas of life, and that as soon as we learn to understand it, we are contained by it...

...apart from the fact that Harry probably doesn't recognise the linguistic implications of a spell such as sectumsempra (and interesting, how the spell is intrinsically tied to Severus Snape...) ...you really would expect Latin to be taught at Hogwarts, even with the priviledging of purebloods.* But, say it's picked up on a subconscious level, because that's part of Derrida's linguistic principle... after a certain length of time, Hogwarts students are aware enough of their spells to make subconscious leaps from words to things, flinging language around without really processing it, because it's so imperative to their world...

So, say that minds hold more than they know. Say that spells do require the intentions that accompany words, but that, in a world completely constructed and contained by language, these intentions can be subconsciously sculpted by words? I think I read a theory somewhere that the Unforgiveables are unforgivable precisely because the caster has to mean and want the result completely, to the exclusion of all else. They have to mean the words fully, and be completely aware of it. But the rest of the time? The subconscious of the brain, which started off by learning the practical applications of words, their meaning, would ultimaqtely be able to extrapolate other meanings, even if the witch or wizard never fully realised them. And so much better if the language of magic relates to the caster's own language, a bit like Plato's forms. If you run with Derrida, the arbitary rules of Potterverse magic start to make a lot more sense...

...This, of course, must also mean that there are other languages of magic, such as, presumably, sanskrit, so that minds that are taught different linguistic rules can also adapt to a world where the word really is the thing...



*there's fic space here I think, for a world in which Hermione never got to Hogwarts but was sent to the local grammar school instead. And started to realise that Latinate words had an effect on her surroundings. No one would expect the muggle world to leave anyone better prepared for magic than the wizarding world, after all...

Re: the French theorists called; their influence is showing

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

Sigh, I sometimes really regret never taking a philosophy course....

So I had to go do some reading on Derrida. If I'm understanding is correctly, then his notion of There is no outside to the text is essentially the postmodern idea that it's pretty much impossible for us to ever be "objective" because every aspect of reality is filtered through the interpretive lenses of our brains.

It reminds me of the story (http://www.ted.com/talks/jill_bolte_taylor_s_powerful_stroke_of_insight.html) of Jill Bolte, a neuroscientist who suffered a stroke in the left hemisphere of her brain. As the left side of her brain shut down, she lost the ability to define the boundaries between her body and the world around her. All she could see was energy.

Metaphysically speaking, this raises the possibility that magic might work in our own universe despite breaking numerous scientific laws because even the "laws of physics" are interpretive constructs.

Maybe that means that wizards and witches are able to do magic because their brains are somehow wired in a way that gives them a very different perception of reality from the norm. It's not that magic is some special energy or force that only they can access; it's that their interpretation of reality allows them to manipulate it in ways that the rest of can't....

Anyway, I'm not quite sure if you're offering one or two possibilities for how spells work, or if I'm totally missing your point.

On the one hand, it sounds like you're suggesting that the interpretation of "Sectumsempra" did take place entirely in Harry's brain, but at a subconscious level. That certainly makes a lot of sense, if that's what you meant.

But your plot-bunny of Hermione discovering that Latinate words affected her surroundings seems like you might be suggesting something else. If the interpretation of an incantation happens entirely within someone's brain, either consciously or subconsciously, then that would mean that a spell only works because the words, at some level, have meaning to the caster. In this case, the words are only a set symbols used to interpret reality; they have no intrinsic power.

So why, then, would Latinate words, in particular, have an effect upon Hermione's surroundings? Are you maybe thinking of something like a collective subconsciousness? If we think in terms of the boundaries between us as only being mental constructs, then that makes some sense. Even if Hermione were ignorant of the WW at a conscious level, she could still be tapped into it at a subconscious level, and so her subconscious mind would know to make something float if, for some reason, she said "leviosa" (which, granted, she probably wouldn't since it isn't a real word).

If this is at all what you're thinking, then it's maybe not so different r_ganymede's "magical program" theory (which I really like), but the programs are stored within the collective subconsciousness rather than "out there" somewhere.

Re: the French theorists called; their influence is showing

[oryx_leucoryx]

because even the "laws of physics" are interpretive constructs.

And it is only a matter of interpretation that someone broke hir neck when s/he fell from a tall building. There's a limit to how crazy I am willing to think. :)

Re: the French theorists called; their influence is showing

[danajsparks.livejournal.com]

And it is only a matter of interpretation that someone broke hir neck when s/he fell from a tall building.

Well, it is an interpretation in the sense that you saw a group of molecules which you defined as a "person" fall from another group of molecules that you defined as a "building." Before that group of molecules fell, you identified it as "alive," and afterwards, as "dead."