Wandless magic

[Writer]

I've heard a lot about wandless magic, but never about Harry actually performing it in the books. Maybe it's common knowledge, I don't know, but I thought I'd bring it up.

In one of the books (possibly the fifth? I think it was in the forbidden forest) Harry drops his wand on the forest floor in the dark and says 'Lumos' to find it. It lights without him holding the wand, and he is thus able to find it when he sees the light coming from the wand tip.

Sorry I'm being so vague I can't remember in which book this happened (I don't have the books at hand) but it definately did. Perhaps someone with access to the books could check that for me

It seems like JKR to make Harry do something casually without realising it's real significance (eg, talking to the snake at the zoo in book 1). Lumos is the type of spell where it wouldn't be so obvious to readers so they might not notice.

Anyway this might be the start of a whole new ability for Harry!

[Broccoli]

Yup, I've found it it at the beginning of the 5th book:

'DUDLEY, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT! WHATEVER YOU DO, KEEP YOUR MOUTH SHUT! Wand!' Harry muttered frantically, his hands flying over the ground like spiders. 'Where's - wand -come on - lumos!' He said the spell automatically, desperate for light to help him in his search - and to his disbelieving relief, light flared inches from his right hand - the wand tip had ignited.

I fully agree with you, this SHOULD be of some significance in the future.

[Aberforth]

Harry does wandless magic all the time when staing with the Dursleys - he blew up Aunt Marge (PoA), regrew his hair, suddenly found himself on the school roof when trying to escape bullies.

This is one of the ways wizards demonstrate their ability before going to Hogwarts - the fact Neville hadn't done an for so long meant that his family thought he might be a squib.

They generally do wandless magic when they are not in control of their emotions.

[Broccoli]

Yes, but I think we have something different here because now Harry knew exactly what he wanted to achieve.

[Violet]

Or it seems when they are very powerful wizards/witches then they have the ability to perform magic when they have no wand

[darkcloak]

Two things:

It does indeed seem that when Harry is angry he can produce magic without the aid of a wand. He grows back his hair, he vanishes the snake's window at the zoo, he makes Auntie Marge blow up and, as said already, in the alley he gets annoyed when he can't find his wand.

Also (having just re-read OotP) when Sirius has fallen, Harry gets really mad with Bellatrix and follows her out into the round room with all the doors. Harry doesn't know which door to use and shouts "Which way out?" and the room obliges. Now this could be a feature of the room, but why would the Ministry have the rooms 'not labelled' and then allow someone to just ask? Could it be that again, Harry's power is such that he can control this room with just his anger and voice rather than his wand

Anyway on a different note, I like this bit:

Harry muttered frantically, his hands flying over the ground like spiders.

Doesn't it remind you of someone

[Cruzio]

I agree with Aberforth, Harry has done wandless magic all the time.
I don't think it's possible for a wizard to perform and 'fine' magic without a wand though. Voldemort could posess others without his wand, but that was all.

As for when Harry lit his wand, well it's a pretty simple spell, and the wand was nearby. Nothing says you need physical contact with the wand to perform spells, just that it's (obviously) easier

[Writer]

Thanks Brocolli!
Anyway it may not be of any significance, but it seemed significant to me
Like Brocolli said- "Yes, but I think we have something different here because now Harry knew exactly what he wanted to achieve."
I agree with that. Harry actually said the spell and had it work, without having to be holding his wand. It was absolutely intentional, and while other wizards may be able to perform wandless magic unintentionally, perhaps Harry is at an advantage for being able to perform it intentionally.
Just a thought

Oh yeah, oops it wasn't in the forest like I thought. I don't know where that came from

[Aberforth]

Oh yeah, oops it wasn't in the forest like I thought. I don't know where that came from

It was in the alley between Privet Drive and Wisteria Walk, which was also where Harry saw Sirius for the first time.

Back to the Lumos thing though, perhaps that it is a feature of wands that you can perform their inbuilt functions without physical contact. Lighting the wand is like an inbuild function of a wand like a tin-opener being an inbuild function of a swiss army knife.

[Scellanis]

hasn't Dumbledore done wandless magic before...I cant remember a specific example but I'm convinced he has.....

[Emma'I'm a real witch']

Didn't Kingsley perform a memory charm on Marietta in DD office without (it appeared??) his wand. It just says Harry felt something rush past him, surely if Kingsley had used his wand someone would of noticed??

[Writer]

Y'know after reading all these posts I've realised there's an awful lot of things I must have missed in OotP. I suppose thats what I get for having to read it literally at the speed of light, lol. In between my exams and with my mum and sister clamouring to read it after me I really ought to find it to read it again. Now that would just involve navigating my way through my sister's labyrinth junkpiles... maybe I'll just buy a new one

Anyway! I'm really not sure if it's of any significance whatsoever but I thought I'd post my theory anyway. I'm willing to bet it has at least a teeeeeensy bit, so all you non-believers remember you heard it off me

[fierce]

Hey I just wanted to share with you all a quote from an interview with JK Rowling:

Do you need a Wand to do Magic?

You can do unfocused and uncontrolled magic without a wand (for instance when Harry blows up Aunt Marge), but to do really good spells, yes, you need a wand.

This quote comes from this interview: http://www.mugglenet.com/bbcchat1.shtml

And a few other interesting things are revealed in it too!

[Amon Rê]

I think it said something about it being up Kingsley's sleeve(not to sure haven't read it again recently)...I think it has mentioned Dumbledore doing magic without a wand before...you don't ever hear of him using wand...i.e. Dumbledore removed his wand to cast the spell...you know. I agree that there may be something more, like using your body as a wand you know...focusing the power through you rather than through a wand...what about in the preview where the **NEW** Dumbledore lights the candle without a wand...could she be leading to something...

[Scellanis]

The movies are not that accurate, you cant judge anything by what happens in the movies..take for example James being a seeker or Hermione fixing Harry's glasses in Diagon Alley in before second year....