If Dumbledore were an Animagus, or even a Polymagus

[Tom Wall]

No: HPFGUIDX 55049

Briony wrote:
McGonagall can certainly take 
more than one animal shape, so 
why shouldn't Dumbledore?

Finwitch wrote:
Hmm.. I don't know if McConagall 
can take more than one shape; 
I've only read of her being a 
cat. I don't discount the possibility 
of taking many forms, even one of 
choice, but so far there's nothing to 
say that even the first form can be 
chosen by the wizard.<snip>

I reply:
I agree with Finwitch here, but would like to expand a little bit.

Without having the books handy, I believe that there's a substantial 
difference between transfiguring oneself into an animal, and the 
animagical transformation.

An animagus can transform at will into an animal, or rather, a 
specific animal. From interviews with the author, we have a decent 
idea that this shape is determined by factors in one's personality, 
and is really not a matter of personal preference or choice.

At www.mugglenet.com, JKR suggests just that:
Q: If you were Animagus, what kind of animal would you be?
A: I'd like to be an otter-- that's my favorite animal. It would be 
depressing if I turned out to be a slug or something.

In other words, JKR seems to believe that she might possibly end up 
as a slug, and since one could argue that it's unlikely that she'd 
*choose* this form deliberately, I conclude that the animagical form 
one takes isn't up to the individual witch or wizard, and once the 
magic is completed, the transformation can take place at will, 
without the casting of a spell.

Now, we also have evidence to suggest that transfiguration is also a 
possible method of assuming an animal form. In GoF, Second Task, Krum 
tries to transfigure himself into a shark, that he might go 
underwater to rescue his hostage. But the transformation goes awry. 
Accordingly, he ends up as a shark-man hybrid sort-of creature. 

In other words, you can *try* to transfigure yourself into a specific 
form. This magic, however, is quite different from an animagus' 
abilities, as transfiguring yourself requires the casting of a spell, 
whereas an animagus doesn't need to cast a spell but can transform at 
will.

As for Dumbledore possessing the animagical abilities, I gotta 
confess that I'd be highly disappointed if he did. Granted, there are 
six animagi (in addition to McGonagall) from "this" century that are 
registered with the Ministry that are as yet unaccounted for. And 
Hermione didn't mention any of them in the Shrieking Shack. And 
Dumbledore *is* old, like 150 years or so, right, so he could have 
been registered from the "last" century and might not even have been 
on the list that Hermione checked, unless there's some sort 
of `rollover effect' or something. So, these six animagi are 
unexploited plotwise, as of yet. But, we already have 4 illegal 
animagi on record in canon: Wormtail, Padfoot, Prongs and Rita 
Skeeter.

And Dumbledore aside, I'd be disappointed if we find out about too 
many more animagi period – about as disappointed as I was watching 
Mission: Impossible 2, when the characters kept pulling off those 
plastic face masks ad nauseam. The device just becomes tired if it's 
used too often, and there's got to be a saturation point with the 
animagi that we're approaching quickly, IMHO. I think that I could 
stand one, maybe two more. But that's it - after that, I think that 
the plotlines will start to lose credibility if they rely too heavily 
on animagi to save/destroy the day.

-Tom