#leakycon 2019

[enter-the-phantom]

My Dapper Snape casual cosplay from LeakyCon 2019. I wore this to the Yule Ball and it was a hit. I made the tie myself (mostly)!

[foxestacado]

I'm all set up at LeakyCon Dallas! I'm in booth 616. Come by and say hi if you're here!

[thebookofsnape]

J.K. Rowling, Giftedness, and the Ghost of Ravenclaw

Notes from a talk delivered at LeakyCon in Boston, MA, USA, on Saturday, October 12, 2019. A shorter version of this talk was delivered at the Harry Potter Conference of Chestnut Hill College in P…

[wrockingwriter]

Obscurus and Patronus: Expressions of the Soul in the Wizarding World

If you’ve read my previous post about Obscurials, you know that I have this theory that Obscurus and Patronus are flip-sides of the same coin. It kind of consumed my panel in 2018 in the best of ways, so I wanted to explore this further with the new bits of evidence we get from the Crimes of Grindelwald film.

We are shown and told time and again that powerful magic takes conviction and strong emotion- and I’m here to claim that the Obscurus and Patronus are no different- merely the Light and Dark equivalents of one another. A protector, though ones with wildly differing means of doing so.

Let’s start with the bit of magic we know a fair bit about: The Patronus Charm.

The Patronus Charm (incantation: Expecto Patronum (literally ‘I summon a protector’)) is an ancient and mysterious charm that conjures a magical guardian. A projection of all of your most positive feelings. It is difficult, and many witches/wizards are unable to produce a full/corporeal Patronus, a guardian which generally takes the shape of the animal with whom they share the deepest affinity. You may suspect, but you will never truly know what form your Patronus will take until you succeed in conjuring it. -Miranda Goshawk’s overview

So there are two forms of Patronus- the basic Incorporeal, which is simply a projected shield and is confined to the range of one’s wand; and the advanced Corporeal, which takes the shape of a full animal (which is supposedly the animal one has the deepest affinity for) and can be directed to do tasks at a distance (send messages, guide, direct, distract).

To cast a full Patronus, you need two things:

An intensely happy memory (or fantasy, it seems, going by Harry’s ability to conjure a Patronus for his OWL by imagining Umbridge being sacked.

A confidence that it can be done. Perhaps just an overall surety of self, going by Harry was unable to fully cast a Patronus until he had evidence that he had already been able to do so. Hermione has trouble when she doubts herself.

It’s also shown that a Patronus can change form if the caster goes through an emotional upheaval- falling intensely in love, trauma (perhaps) etc.

James and Lily Potter are said to have had complimentary Patronuses, which implies either their souls deepest affinities are very similar, or Lily’s Patronus changed shape in the wake of falling for James.

A Patronus and an Animagus can take the same shape (which lends itself to the ‘deepest affinity’ portion of Patronus shape explanations, but not to a Patronus shifting shapes) as we are shown with McGonagall, Lupin, and James.

JK, in the days I still think of as Canon (interviews pre 2009, but this is a whole different topic) was once asked about James and Lily’s Patronuses being a set and she replied that ‘the Patronus often mutates to take the image of the love of one's life, because they so often become the 'happy thought' that generates a Patronus.’ so the thoughts that are used to form a Patronus CAN influence a Patronus Guardian’s shape.

But back to technicalities, a Patronus is only active while the caster is focusing on it- it’s a conscious directive by the caster that has to be held until it’s been done, else the Patrons dissipates.

If a Patronus Guardian is not actively facing a Lethifold/Dementor, it seems to take on traits of the animal they resemble- a semblance of sentience (Prongs approaching Harry after he’s first summoned)

As an audience, we are told repeatedly through the older witches and wizards that the Patronus Charm- a fully formed, corporeal, Patronus- is incredibly rare and difficult. We’re actively told by Lupin when he starts to teach Harry, Amelia Bones when she is so impressed by his conjuring one at the trial, Professor Tofty when he is so admiring of Harry’s ability to produce it during his OWLs. It’s also made clear through the disbelieving reactions of Fudge and Umbridge.

We are also shown, though, MANY characters who can cast the Charm fully, especially in the DA- but is that a show of how many powerful wizards Harry is surrounded by, or is it a way to show that there is a huge misconception about the difficulty of the Charm itself? (This is, of course, ignoring the ungodly amount of contradictory information to be found through Pottermore, the Wonderbook game, later JK interviews, etc)

So if we throw all this together, we know a Patronus Charm is:

Unique to the caster

More powerful when corporeal

Only able to be active while consciously cast

A passive protector (does not destroy anything, simply drives it away)

Made of light

A projection of the caster’s most positive feelings

---

The Obscurus is new to us with this Fantastic Beasts franchise, but with some (over) analysation we can pull together quite a bit about them!

And Obscurus is a Dark force that develops and grows inside a witch or wizard who must hide or suppress their abilities. Children who develop this seemingly parasitic force have lived through a trauma that’s associated with magic, and their shame/fear/etc causes them to attempt (and succeed) in suppressing their magic on a regular basis.

In the newest film, Crimes of Grindelwald, Dumbledore says that an ‘Obscurus grows in the absence of love as a dark twin, an only friend.’

In the first Fantastic Beasts film, Newt describes the circumstances that caused Obscurus to form in the past as ‘young witches and wizards sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed an Obscurus.’ Tina, in this same moment, describes an Obscurus as ‘an unstable, uncontrollable Dark force that busts out and attacks- and then vanishes.’

In the confrontation with GrindelGraves (cos that’s what I’m going to be calling him) where he asks about the Obscurus he found and removed from the case (which, by the way, the fuck happened to it? Newt did say it couldn’t survive outside of the box/bubble, so what happened???) and states that ‘it’s ‘useless without the host.’ And that makes Newt explode, calling the Obscurus a ‘parasitical magical force that killed a child.’

There is a seeming throwaway comment from a witness at the beginning of Fantastic Beasts, saying the thing was ‘like a wind with shining white eyes.’

There is no record of an Obscurial (the host of an Obscurus) surviving past the age of 10, but that doesn’t mean that it hasn’t happen- simply that it hasn’t been recorded.

When we see the Obscurus in action, it is near ALWAYS in response to a negative event that happens to Credence. (the notable exceptions are a deleted scene in Crimes of Grindelwald, and the scene we arrive to in Fantastic Beasts, though there is no way to know for sure without context)

Senator Shaw, at the newspaper, focuses on Credence explicitly at two key moments: when he calls ‘and take the freaks with you’ and when the flier falls he call Credence over to take it back, and then says ‘here you go, freak- why don’t you put that in the trash where you all belong.’

Shaw himself is directly targeted after this, other people at the event are tossed about and perhaps scared or minorly wounded- but Shaw is lifted up into the air, thrown against his own poster, and is dead and brutally scarred by the time he hits the ground. The poster itself is also destroyed before the Obscurus leaves, wreaking havoc in its wake.

Mary Lou Barebone is both stated and shown to be beating Credence for as long as she’s had him- and far worse than she treats the other children in her care. But the beatings alone are not enough to bring out the Obscurus- it’s not until Mary-Lou denies all connection/affection for Credence and insults his unknown biological mother all in one fell swoop (I’m not your ma! Your ma was a wicked, unnatural, woman!) that the Obscurus sees her as an active threat.

After the belt that Credence had only moments before handed her whips its way out of her hand and slithers away, there is a dark mass. It covers Mary Lou and throws her backward through the building, and by the time she lands on the ground she is already dead- and shares the scarring Shaw had.

GrindelGraves has, for an undetermined amount of time, been a positive in Credence’s life. He’s been shown healing his hurts, providing comfort when he feels overwhelmed, and we find out that he had promised to teach Credence magic. He snaps the trust Credence had in him like a twig, thinking that Credence is of no further use to him. (You’re a squib, Credence. I could smell it off you the minute I met you. You have magica ancestry, but no power. You’re unteachable. Your mother’s dead; that’s your reward. I’m done with you.’

We all know that this is the point at which Credence stops fighting, when he gives in to the Obscurus entirely (I don’t think I want to, Mr. Graves). Both the figurative and literal walls between them crumble, the Obscurus bursts from Credence, and his grief, rage, and betrayal fuel him as he lashes out at everything and everyone. This is the difference, I think, between Credence and other Obscurials- but that’s a different talk. The Obscurus, as we know, is at its most powerful in these moments where Credence has fully given in. The lashing out at the person who betrayed him, the city that degraded him, and the overall expression of his hatred of all the injustices this life has handed him.

During this confrontation Newt and Tina are able to talk Credence out of the Obscurus by being patient and understanding, by sharing in his hurts and not trying to fight him. These efforts are, of course, foiled by GrindelGraves and later Madame Picquery who only know how to appeal to the power of (GrindelGraves) or eliminate (Picquery) things outside of their direct control.

In Crimes of Grindelwald, we only see the Obscurus once- when Grimmson fires the killing curse while Credence is talking to Irma, keeping Credence from being hit.

Looking at this set of instances it seems obvious, at least to me, that the Obscurus growing within Credence was reacting to harm that came to Credence- whether physical or mental- and removing the threats presented. Once Credence loses himself to his grief and heartache it’s less focused- like Harry was when destroying Dumbledore’s office in the wake of Sirius’ death- but Tina and Newt’s kindness and care do calm the Credence and thus the Obscurus.

Happiness, hope, kindness, sympathy- these seem to contain/calm the Obscurus. And they’re the things that help when healing from trauma.

Putting this all together, we know that an Obscurus is:

Unique and dependent on the host

Instinctively/subconsciously directed

A dark mist with glowing white eyes

A destructive force to any perceived threat

Fuelled by an absence of love and the presence of fear

Formed through trauma

Leaves scars on the victims that are unique to Obscurus as a phenomena.

If a Patronus is meant to symbolise the healing strength of joy and contentedness in a soul/person, then an Obscurus (to me) is obviously meant to symbolise the destructive strength of anger and fear in a soul scarred by trauma.

To recap, a Patronus is:

Unique to the caster

More powerful when corporeal

Only able to be active while consciously cast

A passive protector (does not destroy anything, simply drives it away)

Made of light

A projection of the caster’s most positive feelings

Whereas an Obscurus is:

Unique and dependent on the host

Instinctively/subconsciously directed

A dark mist with glowing white eyes

A destructive force to any perceived threat

Fuelled by an absence of love and the presence of fear

Formed through trauma

Leaves scars on the victims that are unique to Obscurus as a phenomena.

Despite all their differences, their 3 key defining characteristics as powerful magic are the same: They are protective forces, unique to the magic user, that are powered by strong emotion.

Are you convinced?

[kay-elle-cee]

Going to LeakyCon Dallas again this year!

I’ll be cosplaying as a Slytherin Student (obviously), Nagini (the snake version), and a Cornish Pixie. Come find me- I’ll have rings and friendship bracelets in House colors to trade!

[invincibledrew]

@ my starkid mutuals, if anyone is thinking about going to leakycon boston this year (it’s in october) PLEASE let me know because I’m considering going. It’s the closest it’s ever been for me (I’m in NYC) and I really want to go, especially if starkid is there, but idk how I’d feel about going and not knowing anyone there.

[enter-the-phantom]

okay here’s the video

The Snape we found was a literal ballroom dance instructor. And I think you guys know my headcanon about Canon’s ballroom dancing ability soooo

Ignore my ugly self, the moment was cute af. Just a selfshipper and their platonic life partner sharing a dance to the only song that was even kind of slow.

[enter-the-phantom]

I’m ending up cosplaying a grand total of four different versions of Snape at LeakyCon this year.

This is my life now, folks.

For those that will be there, here’s the schedule!:

-Friday: Vampire Snape

-Saturday: Book Canon Snape

-Saturday night dance: Dapper! Snape

-Sunday: Young/Student Snape