What Deathly Hallow Would They Choose?

In the time period when the Fantastic Beasts movies take place, Grindelwald is searching for the Deathly Hallows. He already has the wand and will never obtain the stone or cloak, so I don’t think they will play a large role in the movies, but the symbol has already appeared, and they’re bound to be mentioned at some point. I wonder if at some point the characters will hear the Tale of the Three Brothers, and if they did, which Hallow they would be most drawn to. Here are my thoughts:

The Wand

Gellert Grindelwald. Although he’s actively looking for all three, Dumbledore claims that they both were drawn more to the first two Hallows and mostly interested in the cloak simply because it completed the set; they did not see much practical use for it. However, while Dumbledore longed to bring his parents back from the dead, he admits to Harry that Grindelwald more likely saw the stone as a way to create inferi, which isn’t what it does at all. Inferi are reanimated corpses, basically zombies, that do the bidding of a dark wizard, while the people the stone brings back are more like ghosts. Its only real purpose is to talk to someone who has died. Therefore, if Grindelwald knew what each of the Hallows really does and knew he would only ever obtain one, he would almost certainly choose the one he already has.

Theseus Scamander. As an auror, his first impulse is to fight. He doesn’t seem to be in mourning for any lost loved ones, and he’s too much a man of action to see the value in the cloak, so I don’t think there’s any doubt he would choose the wand.

Tina Goldstein. At least, Tina before she met Newt would definitely have chosen the wand. The Tina from the second movie, who has “gone middle head”, as Newt puts it, might hesitate a moment longer. She might consider that the cloak has value as well (I doubt she’d be too tempted by the stone). In the end, though, she’s still an auror and still the most practical and straightforward of the main four. I would guess she would still choose the wand.

Credence Barebone. Or whatever his true identity is. Credence has been completely powerless for so long – abused by his adoptive mother, forced to suppress his magical abilities, manipulated by Grindelwald – that an unbeatable wand would no doubt appeal to him. I don’t know who he would want to bring back with the resurrection stone, and an invisibility cloak might be useful when he’s on the run in Crimes of Grindelwald, but it wouldn’t compare with what the wand offers (or seems to).

The Stone

Albus Dumbledore. Even as an old man, in Tales of Beedle the Bard, Dumbledore writes that he would have the easiest time turning down the third Hallow, though he seems aware that the third one is the wisest and “right” choice to make. Dumbledore does end up finding all three Deathly Hallows, but the wand is the only one he keeps and uses for a long period of time. However, he does not seem to think it’s the most valuable Hallow and notes that it is far from unbeatable, having been beaten many times and passed from one person to another when its owner is defeated. It is perhaps the stone that is the greatest temptation for Dumbledore; even as an old man, he tried it on and attempted to use it despite knowing that Voldemort had turned it into a horcrux and that it would be dangerous to do so. Having lost so many loved ones at a young age, it’s understandable he would long to bring them back.

Queenie Goldstein. Queenie’s greatest strength is also her greatest weakness: she loves deeply and cannot let go of those she loves. If she would make the choices she makes in Crimes of Grindelwald for the sake of her romance with Jacob, you can bet she would pick the stone, too. In a heartbeat.

Leta Lestrange. She has spent most of her life feeling guilty about Corvus, a situation which is even compared outright to Dumbledore and Ariana. Surely she would jump at the chance to bring him back.

The Cloak

Newt Scamander. Obviously. Newt rarely uses combative magic and would not see the need for an “unbeatable” wand. While he’s a compassionate person who would no doubt grieve if he lost loved ones, he would also be wise enough to understand that no magic can truly bring back the dead. He would find the invisibility cloak extremely useful in all the sneaking around he does, as well as to hide his magical creatures when necessary.

Jacob Kowalski. As a muggle, Jacob would be unable to use the wand and likely couldn’t use the stone either. Anyone can hide under an invisibility cloak. Even if he were a wizard, he’s a pretty humble guy who probably wouldn’t care for the power offered by the wand, and his willingness to step out into the memory potion rain suggests that he can let go and move on after a great loss, so he probably wouldn’t choose the stone.

Advertisements

The Fate of One, The Future of All

I said in my earlier post that I think “the fate of one will change the future of all” is about Jacob. Here’s my theory.

A few months ago, I wrote a post about Grindelwald’s supporters:

https://hogwartspensieve.wordpress.com/2018/03/21/who-are-grindelwalds-supporters/

In that post, I said that, since most of Grindelwald’s supporters are apparently “unsuspecting of his true agenda”, there might be large numbers of ordinary, well-intentioned-but-misguided people among them, especially those who for one reason or another are forced to live double lives: wizards with muggle relatives, wizards married to muggles, squibs who grew up in the magical world but have no powers of their own, and so on. These people would not fit Grindelwald’s “pure-blood” ideal, but that doesn’t mean he wouldn’t mislead them and use them for his own purposes. Grindelwald seems to be less of a cold and cruel Voldemort type and more of a charismatic would-be dictator who draws people in with promises, lies, and ideas that look all right at first glance but turn unpleasant under further examination.

Of the main cast, I theorized that Queenie and Jacob would be most vulnerable to Grindelwald’s false promises, especially since the laws in America make it illegal for them to marry and for him to remember magic. They basically have three options. They can accept his memory wipe in the first movie as final, they can have a secret relationship but risk punishment (and his memory being wiped again) if they are ever found out, or they can move to a different country (Britain, for instance) where wizard/muggle relationships are accepted and muggles who marry wizards can be told the truth about the magical world. Wouldn’t anyone in that situation be tempted by a man who talks about bringing wizards out of hiding if he conceals the darker parts of his agenda?  The same synopsis that describes Grindelwald’s followers as ignorant to his true goals goes on to say, “Lines are drawn as love and loyalty are tested, even among the truest friends and family”, which certainly makes it sound as if someone from the main four will question their loyalties, and it would make all the sense in the world for it to be Queenie.

Queenie is a legilimens, but she does best with American English and has trouble reading British people’s minds. How much harder would it be for her to read the mind of Grindelwald, whose thoughts are probably not in English at all? She didn’t notice that he wasn’t really Percival Graves, so she very well might not notice if he’s lying to her about something else. He, of course, would know that she’s a legilimens, because it’s not as if she tries to hide it. Being a legilimens gives her a lot of insight that other people don’t have, but what happens if Grindelwald sets her up to meet with supporters of his who honestly believe they’re creating a better world and don’t know about the worst parts of his plans? In that case, it could be a weakness, because their thoughts would be honest and well-meaning and she would have no way of knowing whether they themselves had been deceived.

Why would Grindelwald want Queenie on his side? Well, she’s a powerful legilimens with direct access to one of Dumbledore’s most trusted allies. Maybe he wants to know what Dumbledore has told Newt, or what their plans are. In that case, she would still be with the other main characters even after her loyalties shift. It would be hard for someone so warm-hearted to betray her loved ones, and especially to remain a part of their group and deceive them about it while she does, but maybe she thinks they’ll all be better off in Grindelwald’s world. Maybe he promises their safety – and remember, she can’t read his mind to know if he’s telling the truth.

Even if all that happened, I don’t believe Queenie would turn to the dark side completely or permanently. I think it’s far more likely she would be tempted for a while, take a few steps down the wrong path, but then come back to the right side by the end of the movie. And what would be most likely to make her change her mind?

Probably if something happened to Jacob.

The new trailer has a voiceover that says, “Muggles are not lesser. Not disposable,” with shots of Jacob onscreen. It’s a man’s voice speaking, but the message is certainly something Queenie would agree with, and it’s clear that Grindelwald believes exactly the opposite. If Grindelwald did something to harm Jacob – if he treated him as “disposable” because he’s a muggle, if he’s hurt or put in danger because of what she helped Grindelwald to do – that would have to change her viewpoint. And if she then caught a glimpse into Grindelwald mind – because that combination of anger and love seems like it could fuel a some powerful magic – she’d be hit hard by what he’s really planning, but maybe it would give her insight into how to thwart him as well. If all that happened because Grindelwald treated Jacob as “lesser” or “disposable”, then … well … “the fate of one will change the future of all”.