| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 01:42:00 |
| Current mood: |  contemplative |
Just a quick update while I have time...
Minister Fudge has sent in some cauldrons to be examined, and some of them are simply exquisite. Although certain brothers of mine would have you believe that this job is not important, we cannot have cauldrons thinning out. Imagine the catastrophes. Imagine, for example, if poor Neville Longbottom got a hold of a faulty cauldron. I am saving lives here, and I wish my family would give me the respect I deserve.
Throughout history, cauldrons have been a familiar and essential tool for innumerable practical, spiritual, and mystical purposes. Nowadays, of course, we tend to rely more heavily on our wands than anything; however, let us not neglect the cauldron. I, for one, happen to agree with Severus Snape regarding the brilliance and subtlety of Potions. And of course, what is the main tool required for the art? A cauldron.
What do we see in the brilliant wizard, Shakespeare's, Macbeth? A cauldron. Of course, I cannot say that I agree with his method of trivialising our rituals, but it is only for the sake of Muggles. Bless their soft little heads.
I was into a bit of an engrossing quarrel with Miss Penelope Clearwater (a friend at the Ministry) yesterday regarding which was more important to wizards today--wands or cauldrons. Of course, I was quite verbose in my stand for cauldrons, and she for wands. I have to say, though, her points were all quite valid, and nearly so much as mine. Admittedly, there is no one I would prefer squabbling with.
Minister Fudge has given news today that there is a bit of a problem in Portugal. Very top secret, of course, I cannott mention anything about it, but I assure you that it has virtually nothing to do with Death Eaters. Nor You-Know-Who.
I am hoping he will send me on ahead so that I can help as well as possible.
And thus, on that note, I bid you 'Good night' . . . or should I say, 'Boa Noite'?
Percy Weasley.
Comments:
| pennyclearwater @ 2002-05-18 12:57 am UTC |
Well, I certainly agree that, on the surface, the wand looks to be a recent innovation, while the cauldron has been with us since time immemorial. In fact, we have recently acquired a beautiful specimen from the British Museum, an exquisite hollowed stone container unearthed from a burrow on one of the outlying Orkneys. There are a few cosmetic differences - the lip, for example, does not curve in as significantly as we might be used to, and it is, overall, much shallower - yet it is quite clear to even the layman that it is a cauldron.
And you are right, wands in their modern form didn't make an appearance until 1689, when Thomas Marlowe inserted a hair from a bezoar into a hollow cylinder of yew. But since then, wands have become indespensible to the wizard - even necessary in potions brewing, which would, of course, be impossible without the cauldron.
Also, I think that you will recognise that the wand is just the latest form of magical channelling devices. It is the clear decendent of the staff, and of the striking stones found near Lasceaux. Though the present, diminuitive form may be unique, the sense of the wand, the idea of the wand has been with us as long, if not longer, than that of the cauldron.
| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 05:05 am UTC |
There are, of course, magical artifacts dating back to time itself that are clearly influenced by the wand's structure. The magical sceptre, for instance, could be claimed as an over-extension of a wand. As you know, I myself would be thrilled to acquire a sceptre, but that is for another place and time.
However, I cannot help but feel the wand is simply a shortcut. Before the wand, magic took both careful practise and concentration, and was a skill that not every witch or wizard could control. I find it fascinating to hear about the times when we had to learn to control our 'emotional outbursts.' The idea of magic practised via nothing but one's own two hands and a great deal of mind power would clearly be much more satisfying than it is, today, to wave a simple piece of wood. It is why I, for one, find Apparation to be one of the more enjoyable magical practises.
Preparing a magical potion with a cauldron takes precision and work. I think that all of us, even myself, could use a little more hard work in our lives. And it is simply fascinating that something magical, something so powerful, can be created within the bowels of a cauldron. The rhythm of stirring, the soft bubbles of a Potion being created, and the fact that the cauldron does not heat to the touch are impressive. That is it - it is simply impressive.
With a wand, it is not exactly so. Obviously concentration and precision are necessary, but it is indeed possible to use very little work once you have mastered the task at hand. There is nothing that can be done with a wand that cannot be done with the right cauldron and a smidgen of dedication.
The striking stones of Lasceaux cannot be compared to a wand! I cannot concur with this, Penelope, I simply cannot. They are a magical device of their own right; something we, perhaps, may never come to comprehend. They are of a completely different calibre of both the wand AND the cauldron.
| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 05:26 am UTC Re: |
Ronald,
With a head as filled with thoughts as mine is, it is a relief to express them in some form of log. Years from now I shall certainly need something like this to look back upon for reference. Therefore, shut up.
Love,
Percy.
| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 05:42 am UTC Re: |
Percy, your head is too big and no one cares about cauldrons. There is nothing you can do to stop Neville from destroying them every week and stop trying because it is my only entertainment in Potions class and YOU shut up first!
Ron.
| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 05:44 am UTC Re: |
Ronald,
If you did not have a perfect cauldon, imagine how much you would hear from Professor Snape. Cauldrons are extraordinarily important to wizardkind.
Love,
Percy.
P.S. - At least my head is not smaller than my nose.
| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 05:48 am UTC Re: |
Percy,
Professor Snape does not deduct point for cauldron thickness, he deducts points for breathing.
Ron.
P.S: Your head is still the biggest in the family.
| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 06:23 am UTC Re: |
If the bottom of your cauldron thinned out, you would be having atrocities during every lesson. Granted, if you do not keep up with your studies, the same thing will happen...
(parent)| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 06:25 am UTC Re: |
If you have Neville Longbottom in your class, you would be having atrocities during every lesson. And it is very funny.
Ron.
| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 05:52 am UTC Re: |
Well, I WILL ask her myself then!
Hmmph!
The cauldrons are begging you to mind your own business, too.
| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 06:24 am UTC Re: |
That is just ludicrous, Ronald. Cauldrons are inanimate.
(parent)| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 06:27 am UTC Re: |
Cauldrons have feelings, too! You wouldn't like it if some idiot keeps telling the whole world that you are too thick or too thin, would you?!
(parent)| perfectprefect @ 2002-05-18 06:37 am UTC Re: |
Inanimate objects, by definition, have no feelings. A cauldron is a piece of pewter, Ronald.
(parent)| knight_to_h3 @ 2002-05-18 06:39 am UTC Re: |
Why must I have the most boring brother on earth? Why? Why?!
(parent)