[HPforGrownups] My own wand theory

[Patricia Bullington-McGuire]

No: HPFGUIDX 54850

On Sat, 5 Apr 2003, Becky Walkden wrote:

> Transfiguring is another good example it seems as it was noted that
> Sirius Black could transform into a dog without a wand.  

It occurs to me that this may be a large part of what makes
transfiguration such advanced and dangerous magic, and why so few wizards
master it.  Not only is the transfiguration itself is very complex, but
you also have to be able to successfully complete it without a wand,
because you certainly won't be able to use a wand to turn back once you
are in animal form.  Given how dependent most wizards are on their wands, 
a doubt many would even be willing to try, much less able to succeed.

<snip>

> Most of the examples where wands were not needed are cases where
> the magic is performed on oneself.  (Like transfiguring or Harry jumping
> onto the roof or making his hair grow back.  I've never read yet where
> anybody pointed a wand at themself to perform magic)So spells on oneself
> seems to be the major exception to the essential usefullness of wands.  

Actually, at the Quidditch World Cup Ludo Bagman points his wand at his
own throat to cast the "Sonorus" spell that amplifies his voice.  So we do
have examples of wands used on their own wielders.  I'm having trouble,
though, thinking of examples of wizards or witches using controlled magic
on themselves without a wand.  (Incidents like freeing the snake at the
zoo are spontaneous and uncontrolled, and I think they shouldn't be
counted in the same category.)

----
Patricia Bullington-McGuire	<patricia at obscure.org>

The brilliant Cerebron, attacking the problem analytically, discovered
three distinct kinds of dragon: the mythical, the chimerical, and the
purely hypothetical.  They were all, one might say, nonexistent, but each
nonexisted in an entirely different way ... 
                -- Stanislaw Lem, "Cyberiad"