Occlumi... nah. Occlumens seems fine for plural and singular.

 

Some quick googling seems to confirm that Occlumentes is the correct Latin plural (something to do with the third declension), and I think it sounds fine. I don't know if JKR ever used a plural.

 

I agree with most of Warlocke's post about ''compartmentalising''. I have always thought of Occulmency as a way of basically as Snape said, 'clear your mind', while also redirecting Legilmens attacks.


As for the actual topic. It seems to appear to be absed on a persons disposition. Someone good at lieing will a 'natural occulmens' or as I prefere just more gifted with with the art. The same would be true for leglilmens for reading people. Some people have been mentioning the aspect of leglilmens in dueling on its own, which in my point of view would be extremly difficult without its counterpart. You would have to be able to jduge who is feeling what emotions ect which would be EXTREMELY distracting in a life or death situation.


As for Dumbledore having Snape teach Harry, I tihnk he was right. He was just SEVERLY underestimating how difficult Harry would be. I mean, look at it from his perspective, would you imagine Harry giving the half hearted attempt in canon, or giving it everything he had and more for the simple fact he didn't want his enemy looking through his memories? Harry was just to stubborn or stupid....the fact he actually wanted to see where the dreams led didn't help a thing.

As for the teaching method itself, I doubt there would be a manual as everyone is saying rather just a simple instruction on how to go about it. It would be much easier with an accomplished legilimens however as you know what will be happening and be more motivated. Snape was teaching Harry the basics first, and the way he taught was likely the way he learned. You can't just jump the ball on something deemed this important.

 

Quite frankly, there's not enough information in canon to determine much of anything about occlumency and legilimency. Occlumency protects a mind, legilimency violates a mind, and both are spelled with e's not a's.

Clearing the mind may or may not be the preferred method, depending on whether one believes Snape's occlumency teaching style is based on his general misanthropy and terseness or on something more sinister and cliche.

I'm fairly sure that Snape mentions Harry's ability to resist the imperius curse should lend itself to the endeavor of learning occlumency, so one might assume that there is an element of will power.

As for the plural form...occlumentes sounds quite cumbersome, but is probably the most correct way if you can't just dodge the issue all together.

 

One thing about occlumency as it's often depicted in fanon is its seeming ability to block every form of magic that affects the mind. Potions like Amortentia (strongest love potion in existence, right?) should be able to largely overpower Occlumency, especially since they have a physical component. Sure, Occlumency probably gives you some ability to fight stuff off, especially with curses like the Imperius, but it shouldn't be a super-powerful tool that makes the user completely immune to mind-altering magic.

 

I see no reason why it should do anything of the sort, at all.

Yeah, I think there might be something in canon (though I'd like it if someone could show me where, in the books themselves, Rowling said this) that Occlumency can fight off Veritaserum. But most spells and magic seem to have very specific effects, conditions, and counterspells, the Protego shield perhaps an exception. For instance, polyjuice requires human-to-human transformation, and transfiguration spells turn one specific object into another specific object, as insane as such a thing is.

Likewise, Harry's ability to resist the Imperious curse has no standing on any innate ability to block Snape, however horrid his method of teaching might be. It does not stand to reason that Occlumency would naturally protect an individual from love potions, the Imperious curse, Veritaserum (books, not interview), or any other method of mental manipulation. Occlumency is a skill specifically designed to counter Legilimency. While it may have a few fringe benefits on the side, it is not your one-stop-shop to all mental attacks. If it were, then its already admittedly large incentive to learn would increase many times over, to the point that it would be unfeasible to assume that it wasn't common knowledge.

That, and love potions are apparently more about creating overwhelming lust, and anyone who's ever had a hardon can tell you that you can know perfectly well the person you're jonesing a bonesing for is a piece of shit, but the mind has very little to do with it.

 

Yeah, I based my post on the assumption that Occlumency can be used to fight Veritaserum, but I would much rather have Occlumency as a specific counter to Legilimency than as a defense against all mental influences. I do think, though, that an Occlumency user would fare better than the average wizard against mental manipulation, simply because Occlumency probably results in increased mental discipline.

Edit: WOOT! 400th post.

 

This thread needs to be merged with this one I think.

 

Meh, potions like amorentia would likely erode your will to fight them. They make you want to be in love with someone as simple overwhelming lust doesn't actually propel people on raping sprees and doesn't make people go at it like rabbits since they can still say no. Occlumency would probably save you from sex with a hag but perhaps not with a piece of tail you might have been partial to in different circumstances depending on your level of skill with Occlumency of course. It addles your mind a bit by offering a "reward" unlike Veritaeserum that would make you spill your secrets and earn you a trip to Azkaban.