Skip to main content

harry potter - Is Legilimency a Dark Art? Is it Legal?


I was watching Order of the Phoenix today and during the Occlumency scene I wondered if Legilimency is a Dark Art or even legal at all? Snape says to Harry:



‘Then you will find yourself easy prey for the Dark Lord!’ said Snape savagely. ‘Fools who wear their hearts proudly on their sleeves, who cannot control their emotions, who wallow in sad memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily – weak people, in other words – they stand no chance against his powers! He will penetrate your mind with absurd ease, Potter!’

Order of the Phoenix -- page 473 -- Bloomsbury -- Chapter 24, Occlumency



Snape presents Legilimency to Harry as if it were almost a predatory type of magic; he makes no mention of how Legilimency might be used in a positive way.


Is Legilimency a Dark Art?



Pursuant to the question about Legilimency being a Dark Art, I also wonder, is performing Legilimency even legal? Does J.K. Rowling address any legal issues regarding the use of Legilimency? For example, is a Legilimens required to register with the Ministry like Animagi are? Is there any canon source that addresses any guidelines regarding Legilimency?


Please no HP Wikia answers; subjective answers in the spirit of canon are fine.



Answer




"The mind is not a book, to be opened at will and examined at leisure. Thoughts are not etched on the inside of skulls, to be perused by any invader. The mind is a complex and many-layered thing... It is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly." -- Severus Snape



Severus's use of the word victims suggests a sinister connotation with the use of this magic, but this may just be Snape's pessimistic viewpoint on life.


Considering Dumbledore is a skilled Legilimens it probably isn't considered a Dark Art. However it is likely to be regulated in some way. The Harry Potter lexicon makes this observation:



However, we know that the use of Veritaserum is legally restricted, and we have seen Snape and Dumbledore cooperate in using it in an emergency (GF35) without apparent reference to such regulations.




Given the invasive nature of the spell, it is highly likely that the use of Legilimency is considered unethical unless deemed necessary. Snape and Dumbledore come up with a fake reason (remedial Potions) to teach Occlumency (through the use of Legilimency) to Harry, and asked him to be discreet about what is really going on. Maybe this was because it was shady to teach a student, or maybe they just didn't want Voldemort finding out they were trying to safe guard him.


If Legilimency is illegal (or restricted by law) then it is possible Snape is guilty of abusing his skill in the art. Throughout the books Harry is under the impression that Snape can read his mind, it is possible he WAS reading his mind.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

What is the etymology of Doctor Who?

I recently decided to watch Doctor Who, and started viewing the 2005 version. I have the first two episodes from the first season, and I can't help but wonder what is the etymology of the name "Doctor Who"? And why does the protagonist call himself "the Doctor" (or is it "the doctor")? Answer In the very first episode of Doctor Who (way back in 1963), the Doctor has a granddaughter going by the name "Susan Foreman", and the junkyard where the TARDIS is has the sign "I.M. Foreman". Barbara, who becomes one of the Doctor's companions, calls him "Doctor Foreman" (probably assuming that is his name given his relationship to Susan), and Ian (another early companion) does the same in the second episode, to which the Doctor says: Eh? Doctor who? What's he talking about? "Foreman" is most likely selected as a convenient surname for Susan to use because it happened to be on display near where the TARDIS landed....

story identification - Animation: floating island, flying pests

At least 20 years ago I watched a short animated film which stuck in my mind. The whole thing was wordless, possibly European, and I'm pretty sure I didn't imagine it... It featured a flying island which was inhabited by some creatures who (in my memory) reminded me of the Moomins. The island was frequently bothered by large winged animals who swooped around, although I don't think they did any actual damage. At the end one of the moomin creatures suddenly gets a weird feeling, feels forced to climb to the top of the island and then plunges down a shaft right through the centre - only to emerge at the bottom as one of the flyers. Answer Skywhales from 1983. The story begins with a man warning the tribe of approaching skywhales. The drummers then warn everybody of the hunt as everyone get prepared to set "sail". Except one man is found in his home sleeping as the noise wake him up. He then gets ready and is about to take his weapon as he hesitates then decides ...