Animagus Transformation & Naked Wizards (WAS Sartorial blind-spots, )

[naamagatus]

No: HPFGUIDX 36323

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "cindysphynx" <magicalme at c...> wrote:
> Elkins wrote:
> 
> >You know, I have to admit that it never once occurred to me to 
> > wonder what Pettigrew was wearing in Shrieking Shack.  <snip 
> cringing>
> 
> Not to worry.  There's plenty of evidence that Animagi keep their 
> clothes.  ::pauses to imagine McGonagall in her birthday suit on 
the 
> wall on Privet Drive and in the classroom in PoA::  Well, if there 
> isn't evidence, we need to find it *right now*.
> 

How about the spectacles markings both McGonagall and Rita Skeeter 
retain in animal form? It's not proof, since glasses seem to be more 
of a personal item than clothes but still... I'm pretty sure 
McGonagall didn't sit naked there in Privet Drive (or have we found 
another reason for Dumbledore's using the Putouter?)

> I think Peter dropped a spare set of robes, because he knew that 
his 
> own robes would go with him when he transformed.  Yes, that's it.  
> 

I think that's quite reasonable myself. No reason why he shouldn't 
have taken this into account, since he had everything else well 
planned ahead.

<snip> 
> So where is Pettigrew's wand?  It should have transformed with him, 
> but he appears not to have it.  That's, uh, because he set his wand 
> on self-destruct, see.  He didn't just blow a hole in the street 
with 
> his wand.  He's a weak, talentless thing, right Sirius?  Pettigrew 
> had his wand blow *itself* up.  He yells out, then he drops the 
wand, 
> transforms, scurries, and then the wand explodes before the muggles 
> know what hit them.  Now *that* would generate some seriously 
lethal 
> magical energy.  So they never found Pettigrew's wand because it no 
> longer exists.  

I don't remember it being said specifically that Pettigrew's wand 
couldn't be found. If this is true, why not assume that it was found? 
That makes for a nice, simple explanation of why Pettigrew doesn't 
have a wand when he changes to human form. He would have had to leave 
his wand behind in order to make the heroic-murdered-Pettigrew story 
credible. 

> 
> Cindy (not eager to imagine Rita Skeeter in the altogether, either)

Nor me. Still, at the very least she has her glasses on...

Naama ;-)