In what way do magical powers define witches and wizards?

[donnaimmaculata]

I'm currently re-reading HBP and a question has begun to form that has been nagging on the back of my mind for ages. In very simple words that question is: What does magic really mean for witches and wizards? How integral a part of their selves is it?

Basically, witches and wizards define themselves over magic. Magic is part of what they are. It's not just an extra skill but rather an inherent power that, carefully cultivated and honed, results in extra skills that are used to faciliate many aspects of life. Right? Magical powers are a bit like intelligence: a gift of nature based on which extra skills can be acquired. This would make witches and wizards the prodigies of the human species, and the way many witches and wizards talk about Muggles, it is apparent that this is what they consider themselves when compared to Muggles.



Magic is often used as a substitute for machinery or physical exertion. - An example that springs to mind is Hermione's "Muggle Studies" book which features an illustration of "Muggles lifting heavy objects". It implies that the act of "lifting heavy objects" is something out of the ordinary for witches and wizards, who use charms instead. However, we know that underage witches and wizards are not allowed to use spells outside school. They must lift heavy objects manually. (IIRC, this is what Fred and George do in PS, when they help Harry heave his trunk onto the Hogwarts Express.) They are not allowed to use their powers and their skills - even though these do already exist - until a certain age. To me, this implies that magical powers are not, in fact, as inherent and "natural" a part of a witch's and wizard's life as it seems. Their use is strictly regulated. (People who were kicked out of Hogwarts are not allowed to use magic, either (cf. Hagrid).) So, if magical powers are inherent, like intelligence, this would mean that the use of intelligence is restricted by law.

Moreover, as illustrated on the example of Tonks in HBP, magical powers can be reduced and, possibly, even lost due to suffering and emotional distress. OotP implies that being a Metamorphmagus is what Tonks is, what she has been since always and what defines her sense of self. "Metamorphmagi are born, not made" (paraphrased), as she tells Harry on first meeting him. And yet, even though she is a Metamorphmagus, this does not mean that she will always remain one. If she loses the powers that have defined her all her life her because of an unhappy relationship/lovesickness/worrying about loved ones, what does that mean for her sense of self? If magical powers are an inherent part of what witches and wizards are, they are more than just extra skills. And if they are more than just extra skills, their loss must be truly shattering.

So, I'm not sure how to approach the concept of magical powers. On the one hand, they come intrinsically, as a gift of nature. On the other hand, witches and wizards are painfully aware of these powers as something "special". Magical powers are actually treated like privileges of birth: wizards are the aristocrats, Muggles are the serfs, and HBP!Tonks is the impoverished relation.

Any thoughts, anyone?

Comments

[donnaimmaculata.livejournal.com]

See, I find it quite difficult to wrap my mind around the concept of what it means to have magical powers in Rowling's universe, and even harder to articulate it. I guess what I'm really driving at is that witches and wizards defined themselves through their magical powers and looking down at Muggles who can't perform magic. People like Arthur view Muggles almost as a different species. So, the logical conclusion would be that magic is something entirel natural and intrinsic to witches and wizards. (In Muggle terms: white people viewing themselves as superior to other races. Or aristicrats viewing themselves as superior to commoners.) But on the other hand, they are very aware of their magical powers as something that is constantly controlled and regulated and comes and goes, depending on the circumstances - see Tonks. (In Muggles terms, the white-vs-other-races analogy does not apply here, because you can't just stop being white. Or an aristocrate.) So the thing that defines them, that constitutes the basis of their superiority, is not static. midnitemaraud_r compared magical powers to senses and their loss (or reduction) to the loss of an eye/limb/etc., and if it is so, than the whole circle of depression and - for lack of a better word - illness is the exact opposite than for Muggles: Muggles might lose the use of a sense (e.g. their eyesight) and suffer depressions as a result, while witches and wizards might lose the use of their powers as a result of depressions. This would make them rather emotionally fragile.

And yeah, the "fully qualified" sounds like being a witch or wizard was an occupation rather than anything else. (I am fully prepared to contribute a major part of this confusion to Rowling and her approach to magic, but it's fun to speculate anyway.) However, it is obvious that it is much more than just a skill that can be acquired thanks to a certain predisposition. A poorly skilled witch or wizard is still one. And I also wonder how the whole process of being-kicked-out-of-Hogwarts works: because if Harry was kicked out of school, he would still retain the powers, which would make him rather more dangerous - because unable to control these powers - than if he remained under the school's control (lax though it may be).