Transfiguration question/ Was: Identifying with Muggles in Potterver

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 158267

DA Jones wrote:
> > Transfiguration spells seem to work by transfering something. For 
> instance the turing teacups into mice requires that a whole mouse be 
> swapped through space and with a teacup. <snip>
> 
> Tonks:
> I do not agree. First lets look at what the word means both inside 
> and outside of the WW:
> --------
> Dictonary.com says that Transfiguration means:
> –noun 
> the act of transfiguring.
> the state of being transfigured.
<snipping the religious references>

> Wikipedia says:
<snip> 
> •	In the Harry Potter books and films, transfiguration is the 
> art of metamorphosis, changing of the form and appearance of an 
> object, and the conjuring and creation of objects. 
> 
> HP Lexicon says:
> Transfiguration is magic which changes one object into another. It 
> is possible to change inanimate objects into animate ones and vice 
> versa. Some Transfiguration spells alter a part of something, such 
> as changing a person's ears from normal into rabbit ears. At 
> Hogwarts, Transfiguration is taught by Professor McGonagall. Fifty 
> years ago, Dumbledore was the Transfiguration teacher at Hogwarts 
> (CS). Transfiguration spells were cast in ancient times as well. 
> Circe, a Witch who lived in the Greek island of Aeaea, was famous 
> for turning lost sailors into pigs (CS/g).  
> The opposite of Transfiguration is Untransfiguration, which would be 
> returning something to its proper form. (OP29) 
> ---------
> It seems that it is a form of metamorphosis, not a transfering one 
> object through time and space to another. It is, IMO, more like what 
> happens to a butterfly. <snip>

Carol responds:
I agree that Transfiguration is a form of transformation in which the
form or nature of the object (or part of it) is altered. Vanishing
objects and conjuring objects out of thin air are also considered
Transfiguration though I agree with DA Jones that a Vanished object
isn't necessarily obliterated; it's just transferred somewhere else.
At least that seems to be the case with the Vanishing Cabinets, but
the Evanesco spell that Snape uses (often nonverbally) to vanish
spilled potions does seem to eliminate them completely. Conjured
objects are another matter. It's quite possible that Dumbledore is
just summoning the mead and glasses from somewhere rather than
conjuring them; otherwise, the mead should in theory have no lasting
effects. JKR said in an interview that you can't conjure (real) food
or (real) money--it will vanish like Leprechaun gold (or, in the case
of food, will presumably have no nutritional value. Otherwise, no one
in the WW would be poor. Lupin, for example, could conjure clothes and
meals.

But back to ordinary Transfiguration, as opposed to conjuring and
vanishing, which are inherently problematic. Unlike Charms, in which
the properties of an object or person are temporarily changed
(he/she/it can fly or float or be cheered up or feel a tickling
sensation or be silenced or change color hear a buzzing in their
ears), Transfiguration turns something (or someone) into something
else (a match into a needle or a hedgehog into a pin cushion or a
person into a dog). The wandless magic practiced by an Animagus or
Metamorphmagus is a form of Transfiguration: a person is changed into
an animal or into another person (I think an imaginary person, not a
real one--IOW, the older women that Tonks transforms into in OoP are
not real people, in contrast to the effects of Polyjuice potion).

Since the definition of an abstract noun like "transfiguration" is
likely to depend upon the verb from which the noun is derived ("the
act of transfiguring"; "the state of being transfigured"), I think it
would be more profitable to look at the defintion of the verb
"transfigure" (from Merriam-Webster online):

Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): -ured; -ur·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French transfigurer, from Latin
transfigurare, from trans- + figurare to shape, fashion, from figura
figure
[Definition]: to give a new and typically exalted or spiritual
appearance to: transform outwardly and usually for the better

Tonks may be onto something with the "exalted" nature of
Transfiguration and the fact that it's taught by Dumbledore and
McGonnagall, both of whom are almost certainly on the side of Good or
Light (but so is Flitwick, the Charms teacher). I'm not sure that
Transfiguring an object into an animal is necessarily a transformation
for the better, but vinegar into wine is certainly an improvement. And
Sirius Black into Padfoot--never mind.

It does seem to me that Transfiguration is more difficult and
potentially dangerous than Charms, but I'm not sure that it's a more
exalted subject. It's even possible to be better at Transfiguration
than at Charms, as seems to be the case with Augusta Longbottom
(maiden name unknown).

Carol, who thinks that turning your eyebrows a different color ought
to be taught in Charms rather than Transfiguration since it doesn't
involve turning something into something else