Occlumency question...

[skriftlig.livejournal.com]

Hi! I have a question about how MAGIC works in Harry Potter's our world.

Specifically, do you need a wand for Occlumency? I know this sort of thing has probably been discussed a lot, but I haven't seen this specific case mentioned before.

The whole idea of wandless magic suggests a wand isn't always necessary for talented witches or wizards (or goblins, house elves etc..), but it also suggests that this is very rare and hard to do. I'm discounting accidental under-age magic, like when Harry blew up Marge.

I can't remember whether Harry uses a wand in his lessons with Snape and I don't have the books to hand to check. I've made a quick poll below; please vote if you are so inclined so we can see if there is a majority one way or the other.

Thanks for reading. Any comments, opinions and votes would be great! ♥

[Poll #1759338]

Comments

[slumber.livejournal.com]

I love questions like this! I read through the entries in the Lexicon and the HP Wiki and both suggest Occlumency is more of a mental skill, the act of closing one's mind to others' intrusions. In the HP Wiki, Snape is pictured using a wand, but that was him attempting to look into Harry's mind using Legilimency. Whether THAT needs a wand, though, could be up for debate.

[literaryspell.livejournal.com]

I don't thiiink so--but then you think of Legilimency, in which case it WOULD seem to make sense that you'd use a wand--yet the two are very similar, so why one and not the other?

Haha you're welcome for the non-answer. *shakes head* Sorry!

[naturegirlrocks.livejournal.com]

I believe Occlumency is a wandless skill, like some form of meditation or mind-training. I associate this with torture victims 'closing down' their bodies/minds to not feel the pain.

About Legitimenciy, I think that is a mental skill too, but the wand helps to focus.

[vaysh]

In the Occlumency lessons that Snape gives Harry in OotP, it says:

ʹYes, Potter,ʹ [Snape] said, his eyes glinting. That is my job. Now, if you are ready, we will start again.ʹ
He raised his wand. ʹOne — two ‐ three ‐ Legilimenslʹ
A hundred Dementors were swooping towards Harry across the lake in the grounds… he screwed up his face in concentration… they were coming closer… he could see the dark holes beneath their hoods… yet he could also see Snape standing in front of him, his eyes fixed on Harryʹs face, muttering under his breath… and somehow, Snape was growing clearer, and the Dementors were growing fainter…
Harry raised his own wand.

and

ʹSo,ʹ he said. ʹHave you been practising?ʹ
ʹYes,ʹ Harry lied, looking carefully at one of the legs of Snapeʹs desk.
ʹWell, weʹll soon find out, wonʹt we?ʹ said Snape smoothly. ʹWand out, Potter.ʹ

It seems very clear here that you need a wand both for Legilimency and Occlumency.

Wandless magic, I think, depends on the magical power of the caster. It must be possible to Occlude wandlessly because otherwise Snape could not have kept his mind closed when in the presence of Voldemort, without him noticing.

Interesting question. :)

[deirdre-aithne.livejournal.com]

I think Legilimency requires a wand (or at the very least, extreme skills to do it wandlessly) because there's actually an incantation to perform it. Where Occlumency was just closing off your mind from the invasion and we're never told Harry has to do anything other than focus on not letting Snape in to his mind.

So yeah, I'd say Occlumency doesn't use a wand at all, where Legilimency would.

[melusinahp.livejournal.com]

I don't think there's a definite right or wrong answer to this, but my instincts say no. I think it's something you do inside your mind rather than through the magic of your wand. I don't think you can perform Legillimency without a wand, but I think Occlumency is more internal, it's a thought process rather than a spell.

Basically, those are my thoughts, but I think a writer could write it in whatever way makes sense for them personally.

[jakuako.livejournal.com]

(ETA: I guess I had a lot to say on the matter, so I hope you don't mind rambling. XD)

Well, first off, what Voldemort was doing to Harry in the fifth book wasn't exactly Ligilimency. He was using the connection forged between them when Harry was a baby. This is why he was able to do it from such a distance and without the incantation "Ligilimens". To fend from this attack, Harry only needed to clear his mind so Voldemort wouldn't find anything useful.

Regarding the lessons with Snape, Harry did have his wand out and he did use it to stop Snape using offensive spells, though he never used any sort of Occlumency spell, per se. I think what he did with Snape is a lot like what he did with Mad Eye Moody in the fourth book. Harry was able to overcome the Imperius curse using only will power, which is basically all he used to overcome Snape. He didn't want Snape to see certain memories, so he willed the intrusion to stop. Having a wand just helped the process along because he was able to break Snape's focus.

Still, I think there is more hidden beneath the surface that prooves that practicing Occlumency doesn't require a wand. Take Snape, for example. He is a superb Occlumens; he would have to be to lie to Voldemort. But I can't see him whipping out a wand and shouting "Occlumens!" every time he's in Voldemort's presense. That might be a bit too obvious. XD And yet, I don't think Occlumency is a wandless magic either. I don't think it's a lot of magic at all. It's more about the mind. Ligilimency only requires magic to gain access to someone else's mind, and then from there it's a mind trick too.

But that's just my personal head canon -- hope it helps! XD

[meglw0228.livejournal.com]

The excerpts from the book quoted above by vaysh11 are what I'm remembering. And Harry had a wand for both, and from what I understood from the book, Snape expected Harry to be doing Occlumency. At that age, I figured the wand helped power the spell. So, I chose both the first answers. I think if you're very learned in Occlumency and Ligilimency then you wouldn't need a wand. But honestly, if it's writing you're doing, you could probably make a case for any of it by also giving a reason in the story.

[celestlyn.livejournal.com]

I really don't remember from the book, but in the movie, Snape viciously aims his wand at Harry and yells, "Legilimens!". After which Harry screams at the intrusion into his mind.

I don't get the impression that either one requires a wand. Snape is adept at both and seems to do it wandlessly. It would be hard to occlude your mind secretly if you had to use a wand. It would be obvious to everyone around. I never saw Voldemort using a wand when he tried to pry information from minds with Legilimens. My thought is that when he commands Harry to 'clear your mind' he uses his wand to needlessly torment him with images that rip through his mind and cause him as much discomfort as possible.

So, the answer is a qualified, 'no'.

[amt149.livejournal.com]

Technically, you shouldn't, because Occlumency doesn't use a spell; it is merely a mental resistance. Legilimency, however sometimes needs a wand. Voldemort, for example is so good at legilimency that he does not need to point a wand at his victim in order to use legilimency on them. However, "Legilimens" is an acutal spell, which (unlike what Voldemort does, pulls the memories/thoughts of the other person so that the vicitm knows their mind is bein penetrated. When Snape uses Legilimency at the end of HBP, Harry is not aware of it. This is the same as when Voldemort senses the True/False of his victim's words. The victim does not realize it.