Why wasn't this character an Obscurial?Could Harry turn into an obscurus, if Dursleys were successful in...

A seasonal riddle

Should I be concerned about student access to a test bank?

Why is "la Gestapo" feminine?

Why can't I get pgrep output right to variable on bash script?

C++ lambda syntax

Make a Bowl of Alphabet Soup

Unfrosted light bulb

Showing mass murder in a kid's book

PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?

Capacitor electron flow

Weird lines in Microsoft Word

categorizing a variable turns it from insignificant to significant

What is the tangent at a sharp point on a curve?

Is there any common country to visit for persons holding UK and Schengen visas?

Asserting that Atheism and Theism are both faith based positions

Why do Radio Buttons not fill the entire outer circle?

What is the purpose of using a decision tree?

How to test the sharpness of a knife?

Would a primitive species be able to learn English from reading books alone?

How do I prevent inappropriate ads from appearing in my game?

Can you take a "free object interaction" while incapacitated?

Extract substring according to regexp with sed or grep

Friend wants my recommendation but I don't want to give it to him

Non-Borel set in arbitrary metric space



Why wasn't this character an Obscurial?


Could Harry turn into an obscurus, if Dursleys were successful in keeping him away from HogwartsWhy was Hogwarts so adamant about having Harry go there?Why didn't Voldemort kill this character?How did this Fantastic Beasts character disguise themselves?Why wasn't this character executed?Did Percival Graves already know that this character was an Obscurial when he taunted them about being a squib?Why does the Obscurus not appear in the textbook?Can a child wizard be cured of being an Obscurial?Why did the Obscurus target this victim?Why didn't Merope Gaunt turn into an Obscurus?Why does the Obscurial not consistently appear as its given shape?Why did this character join Grindelwald?













13















In the movie, Newt reveals that the beast attacking New York was actually an Obscurus, which he explains is




a burst of dark power that manifests in witch or wizard that represses their magical power.




Now, he goes on to explain that




The oldest known Obscurial was 10 years old, but they're usually younger.




If this is true, why then




did Harry Potter or Hermione Granger not develop an Obscurus? They were not even aware magic existed until they were 11. My only thought would be that they didn't actively repress their magic, just didn't know what it was.




I don't know if there was any more detail given in a companion novel, Pottermore or the book itself, but on the wiki it made no mention of details other than was given in the movie. Are there any additional rules that would explain why this doesn't happen more often?










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

    – Jason Baker
    Nov 19 '16 at 4:15








  • 5





    Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

    – witchy
    Nov 19 '16 at 9:36













  • With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

    – Clavaat
    Nov 19 '16 at 20:31











  • Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

    – TARS
    Nov 21 '16 at 10:27
















13















In the movie, Newt reveals that the beast attacking New York was actually an Obscurus, which he explains is




a burst of dark power that manifests in witch or wizard that represses their magical power.




Now, he goes on to explain that




The oldest known Obscurial was 10 years old, but they're usually younger.




If this is true, why then




did Harry Potter or Hermione Granger not develop an Obscurus? They were not even aware magic existed until they were 11. My only thought would be that they didn't actively repress their magic, just didn't know what it was.




I don't know if there was any more detail given in a companion novel, Pottermore or the book itself, but on the wiki it made no mention of details other than was given in the movie. Are there any additional rules that would explain why this doesn't happen more often?










share|improve this question




















  • 2





    Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

    – Jason Baker
    Nov 19 '16 at 4:15








  • 5





    Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

    – witchy
    Nov 19 '16 at 9:36













  • With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

    – Clavaat
    Nov 19 '16 at 20:31











  • Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

    – TARS
    Nov 21 '16 at 10:27














13












13








13


3






In the movie, Newt reveals that the beast attacking New York was actually an Obscurus, which he explains is




a burst of dark power that manifests in witch or wizard that represses their magical power.




Now, he goes on to explain that




The oldest known Obscurial was 10 years old, but they're usually younger.




If this is true, why then




did Harry Potter or Hermione Granger not develop an Obscurus? They were not even aware magic existed until they were 11. My only thought would be that they didn't actively repress their magic, just didn't know what it was.




I don't know if there was any more detail given in a companion novel, Pottermore or the book itself, but on the wiki it made no mention of details other than was given in the movie. Are there any additional rules that would explain why this doesn't happen more often?










share|improve this question
















In the movie, Newt reveals that the beast attacking New York was actually an Obscurus, which he explains is




a burst of dark power that manifests in witch or wizard that represses their magical power.




Now, he goes on to explain that




The oldest known Obscurial was 10 years old, but they're usually younger.




If this is true, why then




did Harry Potter or Hermione Granger not develop an Obscurus? They were not even aware magic existed until they were 11. My only thought would be that they didn't actively repress their magic, just didn't know what it was.




I don't know if there was any more detail given in a companion novel, Pottermore or the book itself, but on the wiki it made no mention of details other than was given in the movie. Are there any additional rules that would explain why this doesn't happen more often?







harry-potter fantastic-beasts obscurus






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Jan 14 at 3:09









Ongo

1,653724




1,653724










asked Nov 19 '16 at 3:43









ClavaatClavaat

6815




6815








  • 2





    Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

    – Jason Baker
    Nov 19 '16 at 4:15








  • 5





    Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

    – witchy
    Nov 19 '16 at 9:36













  • With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

    – Clavaat
    Nov 19 '16 at 20:31











  • Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

    – TARS
    Nov 21 '16 at 10:27














  • 2





    Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

    – Jason Baker
    Nov 19 '16 at 4:15








  • 5





    Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

    – witchy
    Nov 19 '16 at 9:36













  • With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

    – Clavaat
    Nov 19 '16 at 20:31











  • Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

    – TARS
    Nov 21 '16 at 10:27








2




2





Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

– Jason Baker
Nov 19 '16 at 4:15







Does any of that actually need to be in spoiler markup? I haven't seen the film, but the information presented here about Obscuri doesn't seem that plot-important, from what I've read of the script

– Jason Baker
Nov 19 '16 at 4:15






5




5





Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

– witchy
Nov 19 '16 at 9:36







Ariana D was most likely an obscurus. She knew about magic and had a very traumatic experience when her attackers tried to make her stop doing it. The Dursleys denied that magic even existed in front of Harry and he probably got punishments often which were unrelated to accidental magic, so why would he bother to supress his magic?

– witchy
Nov 19 '16 at 9:36















With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

– Clavaat
Nov 19 '16 at 20:31





With regard to the spoilers, I wanted to play it safe, as it is a new movie and the role of the Obscura is the main thing the bad guy is after.

– Clavaat
Nov 19 '16 at 20:31













Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

– TARS
Nov 21 '16 at 10:27





Related: Why didn't Harry Potter become an Obscurial?

– TARS
Nov 21 '16 at 10:27










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















23














Neither of them were suppressing their magical power



Newt is quite clear about this in the script; an Obscurus only develops when magic is intentionally suppressed:




Newt: Before wizards went underground, when we were still being hunted by Muggles, young wizards and witches sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed what was called an Obscurus.



Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)




The early chapters of Philosopher's Stone give us some insight into Harry's pre-Hogwarts childhood, and it's revealed that he had incidents of accidental magic even before turning eleven:




Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his bangs, which she left "to hide that horrible scar." Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly.



Another time, Aunt Petunia had been trying to force him into a revolting old sweater of Dudley's (brown with orange puff balls) -- The harder she tried to pull it over his head, the smaller it seemed to become, until finally it might have fitted a hand puppet, but certainly wouldn't fit Harry. Aunt Petunia had decided it must have shrunk in the wash and, to his great relief, Harry wasn't punished.



On the other hand, he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on
the roof of the school kitchens. Dudley's gang had been chasing him as
usual when, as much to Harry's surprise as anyone else's, there he was
sitting on the chimney.



Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapter 2: "The Vanishing Glass"




Although we don't know much about Hermione's childhood, presumably she had similar experiences (though without the flagrant child abuse, I should think).



Interestingly, Harry would seem to be the perfect candidate for becoming an Obscurus; since he was quite literally abused for his magical outbursts, it seems logical that he would have tried to suppress them. Although I don't have any evidence for this, I suspect that his magical ignorance is actually what protected him; since he didn't have any notion of what was causing his outbursts, he didn't know how to suppress them.



But, regardless of quite how, it's clear that he spectacularly failed at supressing his magical powers; hence, no Obscurus.






share|improve this answer





















  • 1





    I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

    – Clavaat
    Nov 19 '16 at 20:34











  • @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

    – Jason Baker
    Nov 21 '16 at 14:42











  • I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

    – Xandar The Zenon
    Nov 27 '16 at 4:48








  • 4





    The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

    – user31563
    Nov 27 '16 at 6:33



















16














This question is answered by Rowling in the FAQ of her new website.




Why didn’t Harry Potter develop an Obscurus?

An Obscurus is developed under very specific conditions: trauma associated with the use of magic, internalized hatred of one’s own magic and a conscious attempt to suppress it.



The Dursleys were too frightened of magic ever to acknowledge its existence to Harry. While Vernon and Petunia had a confused hope that if they were nasty enough to Harry his strange abilities might somehow evaporate, they never taught him to be ashamed or afraid of magic. Even when he was scolded for ‘making things happen’, he didn’t make any attempt to suppress his true nature, nor did he ever imagine that he had the power to do so.
J.K. Rowling's new website - FAQ







share|improve this answer































    4














    The implication seems to be that not knowing about magic isn't enough, you have to be consciously repressing your magic, forcing it back inside until it finally erupts.




    ‘It’s a manifestation of Dark magic,’ explains Yates. ‘It’s really a
    wonderful idea that Jo came up with. When a young child is prohibited
    from developing their magic in a healthy, organic way, then this dark
    energy can develop,
    and the dark energy can suddenly get out of
    control and wreak havoc.’



    Inside the Magic: The Making of Fantastic Beasts




    Harry, by comparison isn't especially trying not to do magic. Rather than repressing it, it just occasionally bubbles out of him




    “So Harry had been brought up by his dead mother’s sister and her husband. He had spent ten years with the Dursleys, never understanding why he kept making odd things happen without meaning to, believing the Dursleys’ story that he had got his scar in the car crash which had killed his parents.



    ...



    And then, exactly a year ago, Hogwarts had written to Harry, and the whole story had come out.”



    Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 1 (The Worst Birthday)




    In his later year, had he remained with a vehemently anti-magical family like the Dursleys (rather than going to Hogwarts), there's a distinct possibility that he might have gone on to become an Obscurial, although that particular affliction only seems to affect younger children.






    share|improve this answer


























    • I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

      – Cartolin
      Dec 7 '16 at 7:39






    • 3





      @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

      – Valorum
      Dec 7 '16 at 9:54








    • 2





      Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

      – Cartolin
      Dec 7 '16 at 10:21



















    1














    I believe the reason that the reason why a young wizard or witch developing an Obscurus is rare is because they actually have to be extremely powerful to contain the magic inside of them, as shown when Grimwald told Credence that the person he was searching for was "Exceptionally powerful", suggesting that even if a young wizard or witch tries to hide their powers they won't become an Obscurus unless they actively use their own magic to repress their own magic.






    share|improve this answer































      0














      Harry Potter did not develop an obscuris because he was not supressing his magical power, as he did not realise he had any. From his point of view, strange and inexplicable things just happened around him. There was no suppression going on. He was actually expressing his natural ability, without his own knowledge.






      share|improve this answer































        0














        Just gonna leave my answer here from movies stack:



        Harry never knew he was a Wizard or could use magic in the first place to suppress magic. He just thought it was "strange"



        The Dursleys never liked to acknowledged Harry's magical roots. They just wanted to ignore it. Harry was forbidden to do or mention magic but not beaten about it the way Credence was beaten. He was hidden from guests, lied to about with neighbours, changed schools, but not suppressed.



        Also most importantly, Harry never held back magic. He made the glass disappear, he ended up on his muggle school ceiling top when Dudley and his gang were chasing him, he ballooned up Aunt Marge. So he had his own outbursts but they we not exactly parasitical like Credence's



        An obscurial arises from forcefully suppressing magic. Harry was never suppressed, and was in a lesser horrible condition as an obscurial (eg:Credence) was.



        That is probably the reason Harry never was an obscurial.



        One example of someone who might have been an Obscurial was Arianna Dumbledore.




        "It destroyed her, what they did: She was never right again,"
        Aberforth said. "She wouldn’t use magic, but she couldn’t get rid of
        it; it turned inward and drove her mad, it exploded out of her when
        she couldn’t control it, and at times she was strange and dangerous.
        But mostly she was sweet and scared and harmless."



        "[If] the Ministry had known what Ariana had become, she’d have been
        locked up in St. Mungo’s for good. They’d have seen her as a serious
        threat to the International Statute of Secrecy, unbalanced like she
        was, with magic exploding out of her at moments when she couldn’t keep
        it in any longer."




        I can be almost sure Ariana was an Obscurial.





        share























          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "186"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f145472%2fwhy-wasnt-this-character-an-obscurial%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes








          6 Answers
          6






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          23














          Neither of them were suppressing their magical power



          Newt is quite clear about this in the script; an Obscurus only develops when magic is intentionally suppressed:




          Newt: Before wizards went underground, when we were still being hunted by Muggles, young wizards and witches sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed what was called an Obscurus.



          Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)




          The early chapters of Philosopher's Stone give us some insight into Harry's pre-Hogwarts childhood, and it's revealed that he had incidents of accidental magic even before turning eleven:




          Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his bangs, which she left "to hide that horrible scar." Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly.



          Another time, Aunt Petunia had been trying to force him into a revolting old sweater of Dudley's (brown with orange puff balls) -- The harder she tried to pull it over his head, the smaller it seemed to become, until finally it might have fitted a hand puppet, but certainly wouldn't fit Harry. Aunt Petunia had decided it must have shrunk in the wash and, to his great relief, Harry wasn't punished.



          On the other hand, he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on
          the roof of the school kitchens. Dudley's gang had been chasing him as
          usual when, as much to Harry's surprise as anyone else's, there he was
          sitting on the chimney.



          Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapter 2: "The Vanishing Glass"




          Although we don't know much about Hermione's childhood, presumably she had similar experiences (though without the flagrant child abuse, I should think).



          Interestingly, Harry would seem to be the perfect candidate for becoming an Obscurus; since he was quite literally abused for his magical outbursts, it seems logical that he would have tried to suppress them. Although I don't have any evidence for this, I suspect that his magical ignorance is actually what protected him; since he didn't have any notion of what was causing his outbursts, he didn't know how to suppress them.



          But, regardless of quite how, it's clear that he spectacularly failed at supressing his magical powers; hence, no Obscurus.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 1





            I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

            – Clavaat
            Nov 19 '16 at 20:34











          • @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

            – Jason Baker
            Nov 21 '16 at 14:42











          • I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

            – Xandar The Zenon
            Nov 27 '16 at 4:48








          • 4





            The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

            – user31563
            Nov 27 '16 at 6:33
















          23














          Neither of them were suppressing their magical power



          Newt is quite clear about this in the script; an Obscurus only develops when magic is intentionally suppressed:




          Newt: Before wizards went underground, when we were still being hunted by Muggles, young wizards and witches sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed what was called an Obscurus.



          Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)




          The early chapters of Philosopher's Stone give us some insight into Harry's pre-Hogwarts childhood, and it's revealed that he had incidents of accidental magic even before turning eleven:




          Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his bangs, which she left "to hide that horrible scar." Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly.



          Another time, Aunt Petunia had been trying to force him into a revolting old sweater of Dudley's (brown with orange puff balls) -- The harder she tried to pull it over his head, the smaller it seemed to become, until finally it might have fitted a hand puppet, but certainly wouldn't fit Harry. Aunt Petunia had decided it must have shrunk in the wash and, to his great relief, Harry wasn't punished.



          On the other hand, he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on
          the roof of the school kitchens. Dudley's gang had been chasing him as
          usual when, as much to Harry's surprise as anyone else's, there he was
          sitting on the chimney.



          Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapter 2: "The Vanishing Glass"




          Although we don't know much about Hermione's childhood, presumably she had similar experiences (though without the flagrant child abuse, I should think).



          Interestingly, Harry would seem to be the perfect candidate for becoming an Obscurus; since he was quite literally abused for his magical outbursts, it seems logical that he would have tried to suppress them. Although I don't have any evidence for this, I suspect that his magical ignorance is actually what protected him; since he didn't have any notion of what was causing his outbursts, he didn't know how to suppress them.



          But, regardless of quite how, it's clear that he spectacularly failed at supressing his magical powers; hence, no Obscurus.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 1





            I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

            – Clavaat
            Nov 19 '16 at 20:34











          • @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

            – Jason Baker
            Nov 21 '16 at 14:42











          • I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

            – Xandar The Zenon
            Nov 27 '16 at 4:48








          • 4





            The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

            – user31563
            Nov 27 '16 at 6:33














          23












          23








          23







          Neither of them were suppressing their magical power



          Newt is quite clear about this in the script; an Obscurus only develops when magic is intentionally suppressed:




          Newt: Before wizards went underground, when we were still being hunted by Muggles, young wizards and witches sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed what was called an Obscurus.



          Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)




          The early chapters of Philosopher's Stone give us some insight into Harry's pre-Hogwarts childhood, and it's revealed that he had incidents of accidental magic even before turning eleven:




          Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his bangs, which she left "to hide that horrible scar." Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly.



          Another time, Aunt Petunia had been trying to force him into a revolting old sweater of Dudley's (brown with orange puff balls) -- The harder she tried to pull it over his head, the smaller it seemed to become, until finally it might have fitted a hand puppet, but certainly wouldn't fit Harry. Aunt Petunia had decided it must have shrunk in the wash and, to his great relief, Harry wasn't punished.



          On the other hand, he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on
          the roof of the school kitchens. Dudley's gang had been chasing him as
          usual when, as much to Harry's surprise as anyone else's, there he was
          sitting on the chimney.



          Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapter 2: "The Vanishing Glass"




          Although we don't know much about Hermione's childhood, presumably she had similar experiences (though without the flagrant child abuse, I should think).



          Interestingly, Harry would seem to be the perfect candidate for becoming an Obscurus; since he was quite literally abused for his magical outbursts, it seems logical that he would have tried to suppress them. Although I don't have any evidence for this, I suspect that his magical ignorance is actually what protected him; since he didn't have any notion of what was causing his outbursts, he didn't know how to suppress them.



          But, regardless of quite how, it's clear that he spectacularly failed at supressing his magical powers; hence, no Obscurus.






          share|improve this answer















          Neither of them were suppressing their magical power



          Newt is quite clear about this in the script; an Obscurus only develops when magic is intentionally suppressed:




          Newt: Before wizards went underground, when we were still being hunted by Muggles, young wizards and witches sometimes tried to suppress their magic to avoid persecution. Instead of learning to harness or to control their powers, they developed what was called an Obscurus.



          Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them (2016)




          The early chapters of Philosopher's Stone give us some insight into Harry's pre-Hogwarts childhood, and it's revealed that he had incidents of accidental magic even before turning eleven:




          Once, Aunt Petunia, tired of Harry coming back from the barbers looking as though he hadn't been at all, had taken a pair of kitchen scissors and cut his hair so short he was almost bald except for his bangs, which she left "to hide that horrible scar." Dudley had laughed himself silly at Harry, who spent a sleepless night imagining school the next day, where he was already laughed at for his baggy clothes and taped glasses. Next morning, however, he had gotten up to find his hair exactly as it had been before Aunt Petunia had sheared it off He had been given a week in his cupboard for this, even though he had tried to explain that he couldn't explain how it had grown back so quickly.



          Another time, Aunt Petunia had been trying to force him into a revolting old sweater of Dudley's (brown with orange puff balls) -- The harder she tried to pull it over his head, the smaller it seemed to become, until finally it might have fitted a hand puppet, but certainly wouldn't fit Harry. Aunt Petunia had decided it must have shrunk in the wash and, to his great relief, Harry wasn't punished.



          On the other hand, he'd gotten into terrible trouble for being found on
          the roof of the school kitchens. Dudley's gang had been chasing him as
          usual when, as much to Harry's surprise as anyone else's, there he was
          sitting on the chimney.



          Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone Chapter 2: "The Vanishing Glass"




          Although we don't know much about Hermione's childhood, presumably she had similar experiences (though without the flagrant child abuse, I should think).



          Interestingly, Harry would seem to be the perfect candidate for becoming an Obscurus; since he was quite literally abused for his magical outbursts, it seems logical that he would have tried to suppress them. Although I don't have any evidence for this, I suspect that his magical ignorance is actually what protected him; since he didn't have any notion of what was causing his outbursts, he didn't know how to suppress them.



          But, regardless of quite how, it's clear that he spectacularly failed at supressing his magical powers; hence, no Obscurus.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited Nov 19 '16 at 4:17

























          answered Nov 19 '16 at 4:08









          Jason BakerJason Baker

          142k34792704




          142k34792704








          • 1





            I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

            – Clavaat
            Nov 19 '16 at 20:34











          • @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

            – Jason Baker
            Nov 21 '16 at 14:42











          • I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

            – Xandar The Zenon
            Nov 27 '16 at 4:48








          • 4





            The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

            – user31563
            Nov 27 '16 at 6:33














          • 1





            I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

            – Clavaat
            Nov 19 '16 at 20:34











          • @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

            – Jason Baker
            Nov 21 '16 at 14:42











          • I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

            – Xandar The Zenon
            Nov 27 '16 at 4:48








          • 4





            The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

            – user31563
            Nov 27 '16 at 6:33








          1




          1





          I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

          – Clavaat
          Nov 19 '16 at 20:34





          I think you're right. The qualifications for "supressing" are a bit muddy, unfortunately. I would think any kid that was frightened of their powers at a young age would do anything to prevent them from happening, so why are Obscura not more rampant? Plus, the young age is a concern, since a lot of muggle-born wizards won't learn anything about magic until 11. Thank you for the well though-out answer, though

          – Clavaat
          Nov 19 '16 at 20:34













          @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

          – Jason Baker
          Nov 21 '16 at 14:42





          @Clavaat "Suppressing" seems quite clear to me, but it actually doesn't seem that unusual. Magical children obviously have their parents to explain things, but would we expect Muggle-born children to assume that they were the cause of the odd things going on around them? Some obviously could figure it out (Tom Riddle), but others (like Harry) had no idea that they were the cause

          – Jason Baker
          Nov 21 '16 at 14:42













          I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

          – Xandar The Zenon
          Nov 27 '16 at 4:48







          I think your answer is very good, but it seems pretty simple to me why Harry didn't become an obscurus. I don't think Harry tried to obscure his magic whatsoever. The only times magical things happened where when they benefited him, so why spoil a good thing? Besides, the way it is described, Harry didn't try one way or another to make things happen.

          – Xandar The Zenon
          Nov 27 '16 at 4:48






          4




          4





          The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

          – user31563
          Nov 27 '16 at 6:33





          The Obscurus in Fantastic Beasts was created because there was a wizard living in an orphanage run by a puritan who wanted to hunt magical folk. That seems like a very good incentive to suppress one's magical nature, an incentive that nobody in the Potter books had.

          – user31563
          Nov 27 '16 at 6:33













          16














          This question is answered by Rowling in the FAQ of her new website.




          Why didn’t Harry Potter develop an Obscurus?

          An Obscurus is developed under very specific conditions: trauma associated with the use of magic, internalized hatred of one’s own magic and a conscious attempt to suppress it.



          The Dursleys were too frightened of magic ever to acknowledge its existence to Harry. While Vernon and Petunia had a confused hope that if they were nasty enough to Harry his strange abilities might somehow evaporate, they never taught him to be ashamed or afraid of magic. Even when he was scolded for ‘making things happen’, he didn’t make any attempt to suppress his true nature, nor did he ever imagine that he had the power to do so.
          J.K. Rowling's new website - FAQ







          share|improve this answer




























            16














            This question is answered by Rowling in the FAQ of her new website.




            Why didn’t Harry Potter develop an Obscurus?

            An Obscurus is developed under very specific conditions: trauma associated with the use of magic, internalized hatred of one’s own magic and a conscious attempt to suppress it.



            The Dursleys were too frightened of magic ever to acknowledge its existence to Harry. While Vernon and Petunia had a confused hope that if they were nasty enough to Harry his strange abilities might somehow evaporate, they never taught him to be ashamed or afraid of magic. Even when he was scolded for ‘making things happen’, he didn’t make any attempt to suppress his true nature, nor did he ever imagine that he had the power to do so.
            J.K. Rowling's new website - FAQ







            share|improve this answer


























              16












              16








              16







              This question is answered by Rowling in the FAQ of her new website.




              Why didn’t Harry Potter develop an Obscurus?

              An Obscurus is developed under very specific conditions: trauma associated with the use of magic, internalized hatred of one’s own magic and a conscious attempt to suppress it.



              The Dursleys were too frightened of magic ever to acknowledge its existence to Harry. While Vernon and Petunia had a confused hope that if they were nasty enough to Harry his strange abilities might somehow evaporate, they never taught him to be ashamed or afraid of magic. Even when he was scolded for ‘making things happen’, he didn’t make any attempt to suppress his true nature, nor did he ever imagine that he had the power to do so.
              J.K. Rowling's new website - FAQ







              share|improve this answer













              This question is answered by Rowling in the FAQ of her new website.




              Why didn’t Harry Potter develop an Obscurus?

              An Obscurus is developed under very specific conditions: trauma associated with the use of magic, internalized hatred of one’s own magic and a conscious attempt to suppress it.



              The Dursleys were too frightened of magic ever to acknowledge its existence to Harry. While Vernon and Petunia had a confused hope that if they were nasty enough to Harry his strange abilities might somehow evaporate, they never taught him to be ashamed or afraid of magic. Even when he was scolded for ‘making things happen’, he didn’t make any attempt to suppress his true nature, nor did he ever imagine that he had the power to do so.
              J.K. Rowling's new website - FAQ








              share|improve this answer












              share|improve this answer



              share|improve this answer










              answered Dec 20 '16 at 21:50









              ibidibid

              44.2k18224340




              44.2k18224340























                  4














                  The implication seems to be that not knowing about magic isn't enough, you have to be consciously repressing your magic, forcing it back inside until it finally erupts.




                  ‘It’s a manifestation of Dark magic,’ explains Yates. ‘It’s really a
                  wonderful idea that Jo came up with. When a young child is prohibited
                  from developing their magic in a healthy, organic way, then this dark
                  energy can develop,
                  and the dark energy can suddenly get out of
                  control and wreak havoc.’



                  Inside the Magic: The Making of Fantastic Beasts




                  Harry, by comparison isn't especially trying not to do magic. Rather than repressing it, it just occasionally bubbles out of him




                  “So Harry had been brought up by his dead mother’s sister and her husband. He had spent ten years with the Dursleys, never understanding why he kept making odd things happen without meaning to, believing the Dursleys’ story that he had got his scar in the car crash which had killed his parents.



                  ...



                  And then, exactly a year ago, Hogwarts had written to Harry, and the whole story had come out.”



                  Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 1 (The Worst Birthday)




                  In his later year, had he remained with a vehemently anti-magical family like the Dursleys (rather than going to Hogwarts), there's a distinct possibility that he might have gone on to become an Obscurial, although that particular affliction only seems to affect younger children.






                  share|improve this answer


























                  • I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 7:39






                  • 3





                    @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                    – Valorum
                    Dec 7 '16 at 9:54








                  • 2





                    Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 10:21
















                  4














                  The implication seems to be that not knowing about magic isn't enough, you have to be consciously repressing your magic, forcing it back inside until it finally erupts.




                  ‘It’s a manifestation of Dark magic,’ explains Yates. ‘It’s really a
                  wonderful idea that Jo came up with. When a young child is prohibited
                  from developing their magic in a healthy, organic way, then this dark
                  energy can develop,
                  and the dark energy can suddenly get out of
                  control and wreak havoc.’



                  Inside the Magic: The Making of Fantastic Beasts




                  Harry, by comparison isn't especially trying not to do magic. Rather than repressing it, it just occasionally bubbles out of him




                  “So Harry had been brought up by his dead mother’s sister and her husband. He had spent ten years with the Dursleys, never understanding why he kept making odd things happen without meaning to, believing the Dursleys’ story that he had got his scar in the car crash which had killed his parents.



                  ...



                  And then, exactly a year ago, Hogwarts had written to Harry, and the whole story had come out.”



                  Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 1 (The Worst Birthday)




                  In his later year, had he remained with a vehemently anti-magical family like the Dursleys (rather than going to Hogwarts), there's a distinct possibility that he might have gone on to become an Obscurial, although that particular affliction only seems to affect younger children.






                  share|improve this answer


























                  • I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 7:39






                  • 3





                    @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                    – Valorum
                    Dec 7 '16 at 9:54








                  • 2





                    Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 10:21














                  4












                  4








                  4







                  The implication seems to be that not knowing about magic isn't enough, you have to be consciously repressing your magic, forcing it back inside until it finally erupts.




                  ‘It’s a manifestation of Dark magic,’ explains Yates. ‘It’s really a
                  wonderful idea that Jo came up with. When a young child is prohibited
                  from developing their magic in a healthy, organic way, then this dark
                  energy can develop,
                  and the dark energy can suddenly get out of
                  control and wreak havoc.’



                  Inside the Magic: The Making of Fantastic Beasts




                  Harry, by comparison isn't especially trying not to do magic. Rather than repressing it, it just occasionally bubbles out of him




                  “So Harry had been brought up by his dead mother’s sister and her husband. He had spent ten years with the Dursleys, never understanding why he kept making odd things happen without meaning to, believing the Dursleys’ story that he had got his scar in the car crash which had killed his parents.



                  ...



                  And then, exactly a year ago, Hogwarts had written to Harry, and the whole story had come out.”



                  Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 1 (The Worst Birthday)




                  In his later year, had he remained with a vehemently anti-magical family like the Dursleys (rather than going to Hogwarts), there's a distinct possibility that he might have gone on to become an Obscurial, although that particular affliction only seems to affect younger children.






                  share|improve this answer















                  The implication seems to be that not knowing about magic isn't enough, you have to be consciously repressing your magic, forcing it back inside until it finally erupts.




                  ‘It’s a manifestation of Dark magic,’ explains Yates. ‘It’s really a
                  wonderful idea that Jo came up with. When a young child is prohibited
                  from developing their magic in a healthy, organic way, then this dark
                  energy can develop,
                  and the dark energy can suddenly get out of
                  control and wreak havoc.’



                  Inside the Magic: The Making of Fantastic Beasts




                  Harry, by comparison isn't especially trying not to do magic. Rather than repressing it, it just occasionally bubbles out of him




                  “So Harry had been brought up by his dead mother’s sister and her husband. He had spent ten years with the Dursleys, never understanding why he kept making odd things happen without meaning to, believing the Dursleys’ story that he had got his scar in the car crash which had killed his parents.



                  ...



                  And then, exactly a year ago, Hogwarts had written to Harry, and the whole story had come out.”



                  Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets, Chapter 1 (The Worst Birthday)




                  In his later year, had he remained with a vehemently anti-magical family like the Dursleys (rather than going to Hogwarts), there's a distinct possibility that he might have gone on to become an Obscurial, although that particular affliction only seems to affect younger children.







                  share|improve this answer














                  share|improve this answer



                  share|improve this answer








                  edited Jan 14 at 0:37

























                  answered Dec 6 '16 at 22:26









                  ValorumValorum

                  410k11129853209




                  410k11129853209













                  • I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 7:39






                  • 3





                    @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                    – Valorum
                    Dec 7 '16 at 9:54








                  • 2





                    Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 10:21



















                  • I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 7:39






                  • 3





                    @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                    – Valorum
                    Dec 7 '16 at 9:54








                  • 2





                    Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                    – Cartolin
                    Dec 7 '16 at 10:21

















                  I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                  – Cartolin
                  Dec 7 '16 at 7:39





                  I see your point that Harry wasn't actually trying to do magic but he was being punished by the Dursleys every time he did magic anyways, and I wouldn't call Privet Drive a healthy, organic environment...

                  – Cartolin
                  Dec 7 '16 at 7:39




                  3




                  3





                  @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                  – Valorum
                  Dec 7 '16 at 9:54







                  @Cartolin - He was certainly being punished regularly, but the Dursleys weren't really connecting it to his use of magic. If anything they were pretending it didn't exist. By the time they'd acknowledged it, it was already too late.

                  – Valorum
                  Dec 7 '16 at 9:54






                  2




                  2





                  Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                  – Cartolin
                  Dec 7 '16 at 10:21





                  Ok I see your point, it wasn't suppressing magic so much as just being punished for everything that went wrong around him. Harry himself didn't know he was responsible for these things so he wasn't actively trying to silence his magic..

                  – Cartolin
                  Dec 7 '16 at 10:21











                  1














                  I believe the reason that the reason why a young wizard or witch developing an Obscurus is rare is because they actually have to be extremely powerful to contain the magic inside of them, as shown when Grimwald told Credence that the person he was searching for was "Exceptionally powerful", suggesting that even if a young wizard or witch tries to hide their powers they won't become an Obscurus unless they actively use their own magic to repress their own magic.






                  share|improve this answer




























                    1














                    I believe the reason that the reason why a young wizard or witch developing an Obscurus is rare is because they actually have to be extremely powerful to contain the magic inside of them, as shown when Grimwald told Credence that the person he was searching for was "Exceptionally powerful", suggesting that even if a young wizard or witch tries to hide their powers they won't become an Obscurus unless they actively use their own magic to repress their own magic.






                    share|improve this answer


























                      1












                      1








                      1







                      I believe the reason that the reason why a young wizard or witch developing an Obscurus is rare is because they actually have to be extremely powerful to contain the magic inside of them, as shown when Grimwald told Credence that the person he was searching for was "Exceptionally powerful", suggesting that even if a young wizard or witch tries to hide their powers they won't become an Obscurus unless they actively use their own magic to repress their own magic.






                      share|improve this answer













                      I believe the reason that the reason why a young wizard or witch developing an Obscurus is rare is because they actually have to be extremely powerful to contain the magic inside of them, as shown when Grimwald told Credence that the person he was searching for was "Exceptionally powerful", suggesting that even if a young wizard or witch tries to hide their powers they won't become an Obscurus unless they actively use their own magic to repress their own magic.







                      share|improve this answer












                      share|improve this answer



                      share|improve this answer










                      answered Nov 20 '16 at 11:44









                      HarleyHarley

                      111




                      111























                          0














                          Harry Potter did not develop an obscuris because he was not supressing his magical power, as he did not realise he had any. From his point of view, strange and inexplicable things just happened around him. There was no suppression going on. He was actually expressing his natural ability, without his own knowledge.






                          share|improve this answer




























                            0














                            Harry Potter did not develop an obscuris because he was not supressing his magical power, as he did not realise he had any. From his point of view, strange and inexplicable things just happened around him. There was no suppression going on. He was actually expressing his natural ability, without his own knowledge.






                            share|improve this answer


























                              0












                              0








                              0







                              Harry Potter did not develop an obscuris because he was not supressing his magical power, as he did not realise he had any. From his point of view, strange and inexplicable things just happened around him. There was no suppression going on. He was actually expressing his natural ability, without his own knowledge.






                              share|improve this answer













                              Harry Potter did not develop an obscuris because he was not supressing his magical power, as he did not realise he had any. From his point of view, strange and inexplicable things just happened around him. There was no suppression going on. He was actually expressing his natural ability, without his own knowledge.







                              share|improve this answer












                              share|improve this answer



                              share|improve this answer










                              answered Mar 8 '17 at 16:35









                              Ian YoungIan Young

                              1611




                              1611























                                  0














                                  Just gonna leave my answer here from movies stack:



                                  Harry never knew he was a Wizard or could use magic in the first place to suppress magic. He just thought it was "strange"



                                  The Dursleys never liked to acknowledged Harry's magical roots. They just wanted to ignore it. Harry was forbidden to do or mention magic but not beaten about it the way Credence was beaten. He was hidden from guests, lied to about with neighbours, changed schools, but not suppressed.



                                  Also most importantly, Harry never held back magic. He made the glass disappear, he ended up on his muggle school ceiling top when Dudley and his gang were chasing him, he ballooned up Aunt Marge. So he had his own outbursts but they we not exactly parasitical like Credence's



                                  An obscurial arises from forcefully suppressing magic. Harry was never suppressed, and was in a lesser horrible condition as an obscurial (eg:Credence) was.



                                  That is probably the reason Harry never was an obscurial.



                                  One example of someone who might have been an Obscurial was Arianna Dumbledore.




                                  "It destroyed her, what they did: She was never right again,"
                                  Aberforth said. "She wouldn’t use magic, but she couldn’t get rid of
                                  it; it turned inward and drove her mad, it exploded out of her when
                                  she couldn’t control it, and at times she was strange and dangerous.
                                  But mostly she was sweet and scared and harmless."



                                  "[If] the Ministry had known what Ariana had become, she’d have been
                                  locked up in St. Mungo’s for good. They’d have seen her as a serious
                                  threat to the International Statute of Secrecy, unbalanced like she
                                  was, with magic exploding out of her at moments when she couldn’t keep
                                  it in any longer."




                                  I can be almost sure Ariana was an Obscurial.





                                  share




























                                    0














                                    Just gonna leave my answer here from movies stack:



                                    Harry never knew he was a Wizard or could use magic in the first place to suppress magic. He just thought it was "strange"



                                    The Dursleys never liked to acknowledged Harry's magical roots. They just wanted to ignore it. Harry was forbidden to do or mention magic but not beaten about it the way Credence was beaten. He was hidden from guests, lied to about with neighbours, changed schools, but not suppressed.



                                    Also most importantly, Harry never held back magic. He made the glass disappear, he ended up on his muggle school ceiling top when Dudley and his gang were chasing him, he ballooned up Aunt Marge. So he had his own outbursts but they we not exactly parasitical like Credence's



                                    An obscurial arises from forcefully suppressing magic. Harry was never suppressed, and was in a lesser horrible condition as an obscurial (eg:Credence) was.



                                    That is probably the reason Harry never was an obscurial.



                                    One example of someone who might have been an Obscurial was Arianna Dumbledore.




                                    "It destroyed her, what they did: She was never right again,"
                                    Aberforth said. "She wouldn’t use magic, but she couldn’t get rid of
                                    it; it turned inward and drove her mad, it exploded out of her when
                                    she couldn’t control it, and at times she was strange and dangerous.
                                    But mostly she was sweet and scared and harmless."



                                    "[If] the Ministry had known what Ariana had become, she’d have been
                                    locked up in St. Mungo’s for good. They’d have seen her as a serious
                                    threat to the International Statute of Secrecy, unbalanced like she
                                    was, with magic exploding out of her at moments when she couldn’t keep
                                    it in any longer."




                                    I can be almost sure Ariana was an Obscurial.





                                    share


























                                      0












                                      0








                                      0







                                      Just gonna leave my answer here from movies stack:



                                      Harry never knew he was a Wizard or could use magic in the first place to suppress magic. He just thought it was "strange"



                                      The Dursleys never liked to acknowledged Harry's magical roots. They just wanted to ignore it. Harry was forbidden to do or mention magic but not beaten about it the way Credence was beaten. He was hidden from guests, lied to about with neighbours, changed schools, but not suppressed.



                                      Also most importantly, Harry never held back magic. He made the glass disappear, he ended up on his muggle school ceiling top when Dudley and his gang were chasing him, he ballooned up Aunt Marge. So he had his own outbursts but they we not exactly parasitical like Credence's



                                      An obscurial arises from forcefully suppressing magic. Harry was never suppressed, and was in a lesser horrible condition as an obscurial (eg:Credence) was.



                                      That is probably the reason Harry never was an obscurial.



                                      One example of someone who might have been an Obscurial was Arianna Dumbledore.




                                      "It destroyed her, what they did: She was never right again,"
                                      Aberforth said. "She wouldn’t use magic, but she couldn’t get rid of
                                      it; it turned inward and drove her mad, it exploded out of her when
                                      she couldn’t control it, and at times she was strange and dangerous.
                                      But mostly she was sweet and scared and harmless."



                                      "[If] the Ministry had known what Ariana had become, she’d have been
                                      locked up in St. Mungo’s for good. They’d have seen her as a serious
                                      threat to the International Statute of Secrecy, unbalanced like she
                                      was, with magic exploding out of her at moments when she couldn’t keep
                                      it in any longer."




                                      I can be almost sure Ariana was an Obscurial.





                                      share













                                      Just gonna leave my answer here from movies stack:



                                      Harry never knew he was a Wizard or could use magic in the first place to suppress magic. He just thought it was "strange"



                                      The Dursleys never liked to acknowledged Harry's magical roots. They just wanted to ignore it. Harry was forbidden to do or mention magic but not beaten about it the way Credence was beaten. He was hidden from guests, lied to about with neighbours, changed schools, but not suppressed.



                                      Also most importantly, Harry never held back magic. He made the glass disappear, he ended up on his muggle school ceiling top when Dudley and his gang were chasing him, he ballooned up Aunt Marge. So he had his own outbursts but they we not exactly parasitical like Credence's



                                      An obscurial arises from forcefully suppressing magic. Harry was never suppressed, and was in a lesser horrible condition as an obscurial (eg:Credence) was.



                                      That is probably the reason Harry never was an obscurial.



                                      One example of someone who might have been an Obscurial was Arianna Dumbledore.




                                      "It destroyed her, what they did: She was never right again,"
                                      Aberforth said. "She wouldn’t use magic, but she couldn’t get rid of
                                      it; it turned inward and drove her mad, it exploded out of her when
                                      she couldn’t control it, and at times she was strange and dangerous.
                                      But mostly she was sweet and scared and harmless."



                                      "[If] the Ministry had known what Ariana had become, she’d have been
                                      locked up in St. Mungo’s for good. They’d have seen her as a serious
                                      threat to the International Statute of Secrecy, unbalanced like she
                                      was, with magic exploding out of her at moments when she couldn’t keep
                                      it in any longer."




                                      I can be almost sure Ariana was an Obscurial.






                                      share











                                      share


                                      share










                                      answered 4 mins ago









                                      Anu7Anu7

                                      785711




                                      785711






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Science Fiction & Fantasy Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fscifi.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f145472%2fwhy-wasnt-this-character-an-obscurial%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Gersau Kjelder | Navigasjonsmeny46°59′0″N 8°31′0″E46°59′0″N...

                                          What is the “three and three hundred thousand syndrome”?Who wrote the book Arena?What five creatures were...

                                          Are all UTXOs locked by an address spent in a transaction?UTXO all sent to change address?Signing...