Lockhart Removed My Bones!
Magic on Muggles/ Squibs
I was just wondering to what extent Muggles can be affected by magic. Because although there are lots of mentions of memory charms being used upon them, and charms specifically to ward Muggles off, but there's also a mention in DH of the fact that not having a wand may prevent you from Side-along Apparition.
Also if every piece of magic affected all Muggles it is pretty amazing that it was the wizards that went underground rather than the Muggles, given their superiority over them (in terms of power/ ability) even if they did not have the numbers- but that's JK being an optimist I think
So do you think things like Legilimency would be possible on Muggles/ Squibs? Also if a Muggle touched a portkey would it work for them, or would they have to have some magical ability for it to work?
Also I've said Muggles/ Squibs but given that Squibs can see dementors where muggles cannot do you think the rules differ from them? As in a Squib would still activate a Portkey whereas a Muggle would not?
Anyway, hope that made sense. Any thoughts?
Setting Off Fireworks in Potions Class
I think you can perform any kind of magic you want on Muggles, just like you can make rocks levitate or turn hair blue. Remember, Death Eaters had a lot of fun by cursing Muggles, so they can be affected by magic just like anyone else.
Originally Posted by welshdevondragon
If a Muggle touched a Portkey, I think they would be transported. Remember, Arthur Weasley (or maybe Ron - I can't remember) in GoF explained that Portkeys are usually mundane pieces of rubbish like old boots or car tyres so careless Muggles don't touch them. This should mean they would activate it.
Tim the Enchanter
There has already been an arguement about how Muggles could potentially be effected by magical diseases. You can find the thread talking about it right here, and maybe even use it for your own research.
As to how Muggles are effected by magic, I feel like it could be argued that the reason Muggles can't see Dementors is because the race as a whole is ignorant of what they are. This is more of a literary explaination, though, but a magical one could be because Dementors are just a sort of creature that can only be seen by those with magic, kind of like ghosts.
But just because Muggles can't see them doesn't mean that they aren't there. Being ignorant of something doesn't mean that it can't hurt you. I don't think Muggles would really have anything innate that could protect them from Dementors, but Dementors don't feed on magic, they feed on human emotions, and Muggle certainly are not lacking in this. Muggles can feel everything that wizards would feel when Dementors feed on them, they just don't know what is happening to them.
We know Dementors can harm Muggles; Dudley almost got Kissed by one.
But we also know that magic does affect Muggles just fine.
Other than Dementors, we don't know what other things might be perceptible only to wizards. It seems likely that Muggles could see ghosts, since belief in ghosts is pretty much universal in all cultures.
One of the questions I've pondered is what happens if a Muggle picks up a wand. Obviously, they can't cast spells with it, but to me, it makes more sense that it simply wouldn't do anything. In an interview, however, Rowling said that something "catastrophic" might happen. That suggests that a Muggle could produce some sort of magical effect with a wand (albeit a dangerous and uncontrolled one), which sort of contradicts the idea that Muggles can't do magic.
Setting Snakes on Hapless Relatives
Perhaps it has something to do with the whole wand allegiance thing - wands can sense, in some way, who is holding them, so maybe when a Muggle holds a wand, the wand knows that someone non-magical, who could never win its allegiance, is holding it and, err, freaks out. That made more sense in my head. But that might have something to do with why goblins are not allowed to have wands; for whatever mysterious reasons, wands only respond properly to witches and wizards. Maybe they're made that way. Also, though, while I really have no evidence and haven't nearly the patience to go look, I got the impression from the books that wands were sort of volatile - i.e. if you kicked a wand accidentally, it'd shoot out some stray sparks. So maybe if a Muggle was waving a wand around some "stray magic" would come out - and since Muggles have no magic / way to control magic, anything could happen. I agree though, the nothing-would-happen idea makes more sense.
Originally Posted by Inverarity
I thought Squibs couldn't see Dementors? I don't know if that's confirmed or not, but I think at the hearing when Mrs. Figg was giving her evidence, Harry got the impression she was lying because she said she saw the Dementor run or stumble or something like that. I don't think Squibs are in any way biologically different from Muggles; the only difference is that they know the magical world exists. I'd always figured the spells on Hogwarts had some specific clause in them to allow Filch into the castle, or else he had spells put on him so that he could see it.
Originally Posted by welshdevondragon
In terms of wands, I think J.K. has said in interviews that if a Muggle were to wield a wand, more or less anything could happen. Wands act as a channel for projects magic in a much more focused way, but wands are a magical object. But because Muggles don't have magic, they have no way of controlling the magical properties of a wand, pretty much anything could happen.
And for Potions, in theory, Muggles should be able to brew them, as long as there is no actual magic needed to brew the particular potion. If magic or wands are required to brew a potion, Muggles can't do it, but if no magic is required, than it would certainly be possible for a Muggle to brew on, I think.
What do the rest of you think about this?
I'm quite sure Rowling said in some interview that potion-making requires magic, and that a wizard would have to use their wand at some point in the process.
Originally Posted by OliveOil_Med