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

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.
Post a Comment
Read more

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...
Post a Comment
Read more

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF
Post a Comment
Read more

Could one of Voldemort's Death Eaters have killed or harmed Harry at Privet Drive?

In Order of the Phoenix , Dumbledore explains to Harry the protection that the Dursleys' home provides: While you can still call home the place where your mother's blood dwells, there you cannot be touched or harmed by Voldemort. He shed her blood, but it lives on in you and her sister. Her blood became your refuge. You need return there only once a year, but as long as you can still call it home, there he cannot hurt you. Your aunt knows this. I explained what I had done in the letter I left, with you, on her doorstep. She knows that allowing you houseroom may well have kept you alive for the past fifteen years. Dumbledore says that he cannot be "touched or harmed by Voldemort". Does this mean that he could have sent a Death Eater to just bust down the door and kill Harry, assuming that Voldemort would allow them to? And even if he didn't want them to kill him, could they have harmed him in some other way (e.g. the Cruciatus Curse)? Answer No. Harry was protect...
Post a Comment
Read more