DIVINATION CLUB: Term XXI, Activity 7: Cold Readings vs The Noble Art of Divination

[anbyrobanby.livejournal.com]

Every year, this squabble seems to happen. Somebody throws a tantrum, fed up of not being able to see anything, or seeing shapes in tea-leaves only to be shot down for saying something. The whole class pipes up about how it's a waste of time, until somebody points out what has correctly been predicted over the course of the year. It seems Trelawney has a special way of dealing with this: she opens a fresh pack of greenish joss sticks and lights them; the thick mossy smoke makes everybody go mellow and thick-headed, and she smiles at the renewed optimism.

Activity: Cold Readings vs The Noble Art of Divination
Points: Long debate: Participation 10pts, Additional comment: 2pts.
Deadline: 20th December @ 11:59PM UTC.
Details: Do you believe there is a difference between the Divination presented in the HP series, and those techniques applied by Muggles in the real world? Could you or I walk into a class and be on equal footing with those at Hogwarts? Do Wizarding folk simply have greater sensitivity to the paranormal workings of the universe? Debate and discuss.


Okay! Seeing as people seemed to enjoy the Hogsmeade debate, we're going to have another one (before I forget). So here's the point of discussion:

Is wizarding Divination any different from Muggle fortune telling?

Note that this question is NOT asking if you think Muggle fortune telling is a sham or not: that's a completely different issue. If possible, let's try to keep things on track!

I would like you to consider whether there's any real differences between our brand of fortune telling, and the one depicted in the books. Do you think a Muggle could teach the kids as well as Trelawney? Did the predictions that came true in the novels happen because of Divination's magic, or was it just dumb, serendipitous luck? Are both types just cold readings manifested in different ways? Feel free to cite things from canon as much as from your own point of view!

A substantial opening comment is worth 10 points. Follow-on elaborated responses are worth 2 points each, so long as they're a bit more meaty than "I agree/disagree". Cap of 30 points total.

Make Hermione proud, guys! Or Trelawney. Or Firenze. Whichever.


_{The future will look bleak if you forget to sign the ROSTER}

Comments

Questions? Quandries? Quijibo?

[anbyrobanby.livejournal.com]

I'm running out of decent Q words. :(

[pinksonia.livejournal.com]

In general, I think that successful divination is more a question of having “the gift” (for lack of a better word) rather than something that can be taught. Therefore, I would say that a Muggle divination teacher would be just as effective as a magical one. The students either have the ability or they do not. Divination lessons should focus on introducing different techniques so able students may find the method most suited to them as well as things like breathing and relaxation techniques which may help stimulate prophesy. None of these lessons would be inherently outside the ability of a Muggle well versed in divination.

The only barrier to a Muggle divination teacher would therefore be the possibility that the ability to tell the future is inherently magic bases. If there are no Muggles well versed in divination (ie. people who tell the future have some sort of latent magical ability and are therefore not truly Muggles. Maybe Squibs?), then the question would become moot. Though I suppose even in that case, a true Muggle would be able to teach theory, which is all a divination class would really be based on anyway, they would just have possible difficulty resulting from a lack of respect from their students due to their inability to “practice what they preach.” That would, of course, go just as much for a Wizard teach who did not actually have any divination ability.

Allison//Ravenclaw

[canarycream.livejournal.com]

Given Ron, Hermione, et al's lack of success in the field, I was under the impression that Divination was a waste of time for anyone who wasn't at least a partial Seer... I guess then that someone who was magically sensitive to the future for whatever reason (centaur blood? :S) might be adept at it, but, in general, wizarding-kind isn't very prophetic. That is, just being magical isn't necessarily indicative of skill in Divination. I wonder then if, in the wizarding world, Seeing is an ability outside of magic but one that simply tends to be more common amongst magical folk - that is, maybe legitimate Muggle Seers might exist as well? If that were the case, I suppose then that a Muggle might be able to instruct another Seer just as well as a magical one would.

Mari-Linn // Slytherin // I hope this is long enough?

[capeofstorm.livejournal.com]

Okay, prepare yourself for a tl;dr.

The difference between fortune telling and divination is a very basic one. In fortune telling, as practised by us Muggles, it is the cards/runes that tell the future and the person who reads them simply translates them in a way which can be understood by others. Divination, on the other hand, requires some kind of gift - an open mind, intuition, inner eye, whatever have you. In divination, the person with gift sees the future or is a conduit for 'force' which sees the future. Then, there are seers and prophets who are, for the lack of better words, vessels for some kind of unknown force which is able to tell the future.

Look at it this way: Trelawney couldn't divine your future for the life of her. However, when she was reading cards (book 6, anyone?), she was able to see what could happen. In this instance it was the cards that held the future. On the other hand, when she gave the prophecies before the books started and in book 3, she was a vessel for something which had the access to future. Let me reiterate here: she wasn't divining. She was a vessel, a seer or a prophetess, what have you, but it was an outside 'force' which allowed her to make the prophecies.

Another difference between fortune telling and divination. Fortune telling is more like giving guidelines of what can happen. Divination, on the other hand (along with prophecies) tells us about something that will definitely happen, something that is set in stone, so to speak.

To illustrate my point: I read (or rather used to read) Tarot cards. Many people for whom I read later told me most of things I told them came true. But that doesn't mean I know what will happen in the future; I simply passed along the message I read in the cards.

Do I think a Muggle would be able to teach kids divination? Well, that would depend if the Muggle had an inner eye, open senses, whatever you call it. I have to say, that for divination, you certainly have to have a gift, which is why I think it should only be taught to those who show an ability for it. The rest of kids should be taught fortune telling instead. Tarot, runes, things like that which do not require a gift but which instead require someone who can read them. And n this case even Hermione would be able to do it because there's not hidden tricks to it. You just need to learn the meaning of cards/runes and be able to contextualise them.

And we need to remember this: fortune telling is often validated by hindsight. Prophecies, on the other hand, are something that needs to be unravelled.

Lena/Gryffindor

[mmailliw.livejournal.com]

I think that Divination as taught by Professor Trelawney is exactly the same as Muggle fortune telling. The tools used seem all Muggle and the results seem completely ineffective... why would a Divination method that completely fails involve magic?

On the other hand, the divination practiced by actual Seers such as Trelawney's trance has got to be different from both classroom Divination and Muggle methods. For one thing, the behavior is very different (and it can't come on command); on the other hand, the results are clear and perfectly effective when in a trance.

The one remaining question is: what about Trelawney's other predictions, which are technically correct but misleading? My guess would be that they come from a small bit of a magical inner eye which has a vague glimpse of what happens but can't get everything. This seems to be what the centaurs teach as well...

William//Slytherin

[narianha.livejournal.com]

I don't think that the majority of wizarding Divination is any different than Muggle fortune telling. It was still all about interpreting the cards/coffee grounds/tea leaves/what have you. There was still astrology, and dream analysis. The Sight is a noticeable difference, but only if you don't believe that there are people in the Muggle world who genuinely have visions. It seemed like there was very little magic involved in the teaching of Divination, the magic was more in the ritual than in the person themselves. It was up to the individual to interpret, but that doesn't really require magic.

Rita//Slytherin

[beautifulbluee.livejournal.com]

I think that wizarding Divination is different than muggle fortune telling. I think that it has a lot to do with magic especially because of how realistic it seems to be. I don't think that a muggle would be able to get away with divination. I'm not bashing on the credibility of muggle fortune telling, because I think going to see one is very interesting, but I think that when it comes to success there's a big difference in the two.

With muggle fortune telling, I think it's more of advice. The person who gets the reading usually takes the results and applies them to his or her life or sees it as advice for the future. It's more of the part of the person getting the reading to make the reading real or correct. Does that make sense or am I babbling? I don't think a wizard would do that. If they get a divination reading, then it must be what's going to happen.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that muggle fortune telling is more in the eye of the beholder and divination is more realistic. Muggles see what they want to see where wizards are more likely to see it how it is. But that's just my opinion.

Lindsay of Hufflepuff

[anbyrobanby.livejournal.com]

Coming back to this debate now, I'm really intrigued by the number of people who have brought up Trelawney's Inner Eye. I think it's an interesting point that is somewhat pivotal to the question. It's clear that she did make some prophecies that way. However, it seemed the majority of Trelawney's teaching comes from her own self-belief rather than anything actually mystic. Call it a placebo effect if you like, it's though she is imparting her knowledge onto others.... but the gift of prophecy is personal and unteachable.

To compare with muggle cold readings, a lot of it is built around the mystic deducing things from the querant that aren't said explicitly. To quote an example: someone who is clearly worried by something may be surprised when a fortune teller "knows" they are facing a tough decision, or they have paths ahead of them despite how things feel now. Truth is, ANYONE who is worried likely has to make a big decision; the description could be regarding financial, personal, relationship, career, education, health, family, you name it. It's a big umbrella but is made to look specific by dressing it up properly. I think a lot of HP Divination is about the dress-up, too. The presentation, the setup, the expectation, and maybe on occasion the odd self-fulfilling prophecy, too.

What I find interesting is how Hermione was ejected from the class (well, she stormed out but she knew she wasn't welcome). Was it because she lacked an inner eye? No, it's because she was a cynic and was sceptical from day one. Trelawney knows on some level that if you don't believe in Divination you'll never hope to get a thing from it. I think that's true with Muggle psychics etc, as well.


Rob/Gryffindor

[slumber.livejournal.com]

It looks like there isn't much of a difference between the way Divination was taught at Hogwarts over how we view it. The only exception, I think, would be the crystal balls. Granted, I don't have much experience with them in real life but I doubt they would actually be misty with visions and show Harry and Ron what lies in their future. I think for the most part, both Trelawney's and Firenze's brands of divination are very familiar to Muggles.

Now that you've brought it up too, it does seem as though Divination is the one thing that's unchanged or unmagicked in the world. Even Muggle Studies has the "Ariel using a fork as a comb" effect where Muggle objects are reimagined from a different perspective, but I have never really thought anything was interesting or different in Divination classes. I guess the reason is because it's already part of the occult in our world.

Evy//Ravenclaw

DEBATE CLOSED!

[anbyrobanby.livejournal.com]

Thanks for participating, everyone! Results will go up soonish.