Show Hide image Film 17 November 2016 How Fantastic Beasts changes the Harry Potter story – and what to expect from the new films The film gives us new insight into wizarding history and the events leading up to the Harry Potter series Print HTML Warning: this piece contains spoilers for Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Big ones. Huge. And not just a handful – loads. All the spoilers. Yep, big, juicy spoilers discussed in terrifyingly close detail. We’re about to get nerdy. Now don’t say I didn’t warn you. So Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them is finally released tonight – and it’s a wild ride for Potter fans. The plotline involving Newt Scamander’s escaped animals aside, the film reveals much about the politics of the magical and muggle worlds. We are introduced to MACUSA, the American equivalent of the ministry for magic, we learn that muggles and wizards can’t marry in 1920s America, and that the USA is particularly interested in concealing anything magical from the muggle community. And, in the film’s big reveal, we discover that Gellert Grindelwald has been spying on its inner workings disguised as auror Percival Graves, in order to start a war between wizards and muggles. How do these revelations change the original Potter story? Gellert Grindelwald The dark wizard Grindelwald’s rise to power in the 1920s was a bit of a mystery in the Harry Potter books. Until now, all we’ve known is that he was “in Europe” as he amassed followers. Now, it becomes clear Grindelwald was already one of the Wizarding World’s most wanted – we see newspapers with the headlines: “GELLERT GRINDELWALD: DARK WIZARD STRIKES AGAIN IN EUROPE”, “EUROPEAN AURORS READY TO FIGHT” and “GRINDELWALD ATTACKS RISKING WAR WITH NO-MAJS – I.C.W. [that’s the International Confederation of Wizards, duh] CONVENED FOR EMERGENCY TALKS.” Grindelwald spends a good period of time looking for Obscurials (see below) in the US – and is arrested there. He’ll almost certainly escape in the next movie – but I’d like some explanation as to why we haven’t heard about this landmark moment in the wizard's history before now. Obscurials The most important new concept introduced in this film is that of Obscurials – young wizards and witches whose magic has been suppressed due to traumas during their childhood, resulting in their magical potential manifesting as an obscurus – a strange black cloud that is unpredictable and destructive. Grindelwald is obsessed with trying to track them down and harness their power. So far, we’ve only seen one example – Credence Barebone – but know there are others. Ariana Dumbledore It seems likely that Ariana Dumbledore was an Obscurial – and potentially the source that seduced Grindelwald into seeing their potential for dark magic. At the age of six, she was attacked by muggle boys, which left her traumatised to the point of rendering her magical abilities uncontrollable. A few years later, she caused a magical explosion that killed her mother. She died in a three-way duel between her brothers Albus and Aberforth Dumbledore and Grindelwald. The evidence all points towards Ariana being an Obscurial – and perhaps her status had more to do with the argument that killed her than we have previously been lead to believe. The Elder Wand Grindelwald should have The Elder Wand – an immensely powerful wand and one of the Deathly Hallows, which Grindelwald stole from wandmaker Gregorovitch in the early 1900s – by this point. It’s unclear whether he’s using it in the film – the wand he’s using as Graves certainly doesn’t look like the Elder Wand as we’ve seen it in previous Potter movies. If Graves was a real person that Grindelwald disguised himself as, then it’s likely he was using Graves wand. But, in the unlikely event that he was using it, the disarming scene at the end of the film could change who is the master of the Elder Wand (Tina?). Lord Voldemort This film is set in winter 1926 — Lord Voldemort was born on New Year’s Eve, 1926. Perhaps it’s just a coincidence – or perhaps JK Rowling wants to connect Voldemort and Grindelwald together in ways we’re not yet aware of. Don’t forget, she has said that “There are ways in which we connect to the Potter books that I think people will find surprising.” Leta Lestrange One of Lord Voldemort’s closest allies and most fierce supporters is Bellatrix Lestrange (neé Black). So there’s a strange parallel in the revelation that Newt Scamander’s closest schoolfriend was Leta Lestrange. He still keeps a picture of her in his case, but seems bitter about their estrangement. Played by Zoë Kravitz, we don’t know much more about her – she’s about the right age to be the aunt, or mother, of the unnamed Lestrange who joins Voldemort’s circle at Hogwarts. (If she is his mother, then the fact that her son took his mother’s name raises questions about his father. Is he absent? Is she ashamed of her son’s parentage?) Albus Dumbledore There’s only one casual mention of Dumbledore in this film – Grindelwald as Graves asks Newt, “Why is Albus Dumbledore so fond of you?” after revealing that Newt was expelled from Hogwarts (a detail that contradicts the original book, which notes Newt’s “graduation from Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry”), despite Dumbledore’s protests. That means Dumbledore is already teaching in the 1910s – a decade after his own graduation. Other than that, we don’t learn much in this film at least. 19 Years JK Rowling seems to like to work in spans of 19 years – there were 19 years between the main action of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows and its epilogue, and 19 years between the release of the first book and the release of Harry Potter and the Cursed Child and Fantastic Beasts and Where to Find Them. Rowling has confirmed that this franchise will be “spanning 19 years,” – ending in 1945, the year of Grindewald and Dumbledore’s famous battle. Maybe she just bloody loves the number? What will happen in the sequels? Some things we know for sure – Grindelwald will duel Dumbledore and lose, Newt will publish his book and marry Tina, magic will remain undiscovered for another day. But what about the new characters and plotlines introduced in this film? Grindelwald will escape It’s impossible to get around – Grindelwald will escape and continue rising to power. Otherwise magical history as we know it is a lie. Credence’s presence will become more important David Yates has made it clear that Credence Barebone becomes “pivotal” in later films – which suggests that, as that tiny whisper of black smoke implied, Credence didn’t die in the massive obscurus explosion at the film’s end. Credence, then, will form another example of Rowling’s long line of troubled young men with difficult pasts tempted by dark magic (see also: Dumbledore, Grindelwald, Voldemort, Harry, Malfoy, Albus Potter). Whether this is the origin story of a hero or a villain is yet to be seen... The muggle press will make an appearance JK Rowling makes no secret of her dislike for the press in the Harry Potter series – from the Daily Prophet’s constant misinformation to Rita Skeeter’s outright lies. This time, one potential villain for the next series is Henry Shaw Sr. – a newspaper magnate whose son is murdered by magic, who vows to expose the magical community. Shaw and his son, an anti-magic fanatic drawn in by the wizard-hating New Salem Philantrophic Society, will almost certainly cause problems for the magical community in later films. › Is polling dead? Anna Leszkiewicz is a pop culture writer at the New Statesman. More Related articles Is Fantastic Beasts a stretch too far for JK Rowling's imagination? The Beauty and the Beast trailer is here, and it looks like a scene-for-scene remake of the cartoon Remembering Raoul Coutard, the French New Wave cinematographer (1924-2016) Subscription offer 12 issues for £12 + FREE book LEARN MORE Close This week’s magazine
Show Hide image Books 20 November 2016 What would happen if women ruled the world? Naomi Alderman's The Power imagines how women would behave if they, not men, were the dominant gender. Print HTML Feminism has done a thorough job of establishing the existence of sex-based inequality, but less so of explaining where this gross unfairness came from. Instead, feminist engagement with evolutionary theories has been mostly of the debunking kind: Simon Baron-Cohen tells us that women are adapted to nurture while men are adapted for conquest; Cordelia Fine patiently explains why this isn’t true; and everyone resumes his or her place to repeat the same debate in another five years’ time. Naomi Alderman takes a look at this depressing situation, grasps the whole lot in her fist and crushes it down to a new beginning. The Power starts with a simple question: what if women got the edge? What if, somehow, nature placed a thumb on the scale so that women’s tendency to be smaller and weaker than men no longer mattered? This edge, whatever it is, would have to be more significant than physical parity, because it would have to overcome more than bodily difference: something sufficient to upturn millennia of male dominance and all the traditions that sustain it. At the start of The Power, that something has already happened. The narrative is framed by an exchange of letters thousands of years in the future between a character called Naomi Alderman and her anagrammatic counterpart Neil Adam Armon, who pleads for patronage from an address at the “Men Writers Association”. Even that casual use of “Men” as an adjective is shocking, so unfamiliar that it feels like a breach of grammar. It isn’t, however: it’s just an explosion of the male default. The Power places us in a world where woman is the “one” and man is the “other”. Neil is trying to cajole Naomi into supporting his manuscript, which tells the story of how that world was made. “I think I’d rather enjoy this ‘world run by men’ you’ve been talking about,” she tells him. “Surely a kinder, more caring and – dare I say it? – more sexy world than the one we live in.” She does dare to say it; or rather, there is no daring at all in a woman venturing her opinion and talking smuttily to a man if women have become the superior sex class. Because Naomi has something that Neil doesn’t: she has the Power. Some time around the early 21st century, according to Neil’s research, women developed a new organ: under the skin, in the curve of a collarbone, a muscle that allowed them to deliver vicious electrical shocks and even, in the most skilled cases, to control the bodies and minds of their victims. This organ, called the skein, is a response to male violence – we first see it in action when a teenager fights back against the gangland goons sent to murder her mother – but it can also be a source of sexual pleasure. With it, women can inflict as much violence as men can with their penises, and then some. “The power to hurt is a kind of wealth,” realises Margot, an aspiring politician, as her skein starts to flicker. The question is: what would women choose to do with such riches? If Baron-Cohen were right, the violent potential of the skein would be countered by inherent feminine gentleness. In Alderman’s imagination, no such moderating influence exists. All of the signifiers in the sexual caste system are upended: “Boys dressing as girls to seem more powerful. Girls dressing as boys to shake off the meaning of the power, or to leap on the unsuspecting, wolf in sheep’s clothing.” But what starts as cathartic retaliation – and it really is a pleasure to see women zapping gropers and rapists with a touch of their hands – becomes first gratuitous, and then a holocaust. The slide from tweaked normality to plausible horror is realised here as perfectly as in the best of John Wyndham or Margaret Atwood. The only thing missing, perhaps, is some acknowledgement of that uniquely female ability that Atwood identified in The Handmaid’s Tale as the reason men want to possess women: the ability to make babies. Alderman cannot tell us how we got to where we are. Yet this thrilling, spark-throwing version of the future detonates almost everything that seems normal about gender in the present. The Power by Naomi Alderman is published by Viking (341pp, £12.99) Sarah Ditum is a journalist who writes regularly for the Guardian, New Statesman and others. Her website is here. This article first appeared in the 17 November 2016 issue of the New Statesman, Trump world More Related articles The bluster and blunder that birthed a new political era Books of the year: politicians on their favourites of 2016 Books of the Year: authors on their favourite books of 2016 Subscription offer 12 issues for £12 + FREE book LEARN MORE Close This week’s magazine