Ok, I did a search and there hasn't been a thread on this yet. How does Transfiguration work in canon?


If I recall correctly, we are never really shown how it works unlike say Charms where there's a specific incantation for every spell. We are told stuff like "Harry managed to give his matchstick a silver glint" and "Hermione was the first one to turn her matchstick into a needle", but it never actually shows how this is done. There are a few ways I can see that Transfiguration works:

1. There is a different spell for every single transfiguration. This would make transfiguration extremely difficult because you have to memorize thousands of spells (eg match to needle, hedgehog to pincushion, etc). If you think about how many different objects, substances, and metals it is possible to transfigure, you could easily run up into the hundreds of thousands of spells for all the possible combinations of transfigurations there are. I see this as unlikely because it would make mastering (or even becoming decent) at transfiguration impossible for 99% percent of the population, because you would have to have a Godlike memory to be able to recall that many different spells. I think this scenario is the most unlikely.


2. There is a "one size fits all spell" for most transfigurations. This would mean that most transfigurations can be done with a single spell such as 'converto' or something like that. The rest is simply imagination, knowledge of theory, power, and willpower. This is more likely than scenario one, although it still seems somewhat unlikely. I'm not really a fan of this scenario, and I don't believe it has been explored or mentioned in any fanfics that I've read (and I've been reading HP fanfics for over 5 years).


3. There is no spell for transfigurations. A wizard or witch simply points his wand at the object to be transfigured, and using his/her imagination, willpower, and knowledge of the subject/theory, changes the object into something else. This is the most common view of Transfiguration (in fanon) if I'm not mistaken. Also, I think canon kind of implies this scenario of transfiguration because of the fact that there are no spells mentioned (at least that I can recall), and the lack of details given. We are told Transfiguration is a very difficult and precise subject, but there is a lot left to the imagination in Transfiguration scenes in canon.


I would have to say that I'm a fan of #3 the most simply because it seems most likely, you wouldn't have to memorize thousands of spells, and the fact that canon somewhat implies it.

Thoughts?

 

Number 3 does seem the most likely scenario. The reason JKR has not given an actual reason, in my opinion, is that she does not know. She said she has set limits on herself about what a wizard can do, such as food needing to be grown, harvested or killed, but we have seen examples of food appearing due to a spell (I think it was in CoS, when Ron and Harry arrive late for the feast).

My personal justification for that is that whoever performed the spell (can't remember who did it), simply made it appear from the kitchens. I refuse to believe that food can be conjured, as it would give no motivation for anyone to do anything.

"Hey I can just conjure food and Transfigure my own faeces into clothing," Ron said while Mollywobbles' food was dripping from his open mouth onto his new robes, for which Ginny whored herself. "I guess I don't need to work..."
"Oh Ronny, here is another plate," said Molly, proud of her 50 year old son, whose life achievements included living with his parents and carrying boxes for Fred and George for pocket money.

More important, I think are the limits of Transfiguration. We have seen in canon, very little of Transfiguration, either in useless, probably learning crutches, or combat. Fanon has turned Transfiguration into Merlin's recipe for everything.

I dislike the notion that Transfiguration could be used to create clothing, make food, furniture, houses etc. Not only would it wreak havoc on economy, but it would make Transfiguration the only subject really worth studying for the average wizard.

While agreeing with your assessment, I think Transfiguration has several limits imposed unto it, mostly dealing with size and complexity of the object.

I think Cedric transfigurated a boulder into a dog for the First Task. Assuming they are of similar size, that would be an insanely difficult task to achieve for a Hufflepuff. First he would have to have the necessary energy for the task. Then he would have to have a precise knowledge of how a dog is constructed. Lastly, he would have to visualise everything, and pour his magic to achieve the transition.

I personally hate Transfiguration for some weird reason. It might have to do with a scene I remembered, from my dark days of SIYE, when Harry and Ginny transfigure clothing for the baby they had in Fifth or Sixth year, but there is something perverted about using magic to obtain objects which would otherwise require skill and or money to get or construct.

 

I imagine there are base spells for the most basic of principles.

Using the example of the matchstick to needle transformation, you would master that, and the same principles would be used for transfiguring a tree trunk into a huge bar of steel/silver. The same would apply for the hedgehog to pincushion, which is turning a small mammal into an inanimate object... Can't see much use for it, but if you're ever attacked by a swarm of rabid squirrels, be confident in the fact that you can turn them into handy red sofa cushions that are just so soft!

Aekiel

 

There is no Canon explanation, in other words, another plot hole. So do with it what you will, make up your own explanation for it.

 

I agree. JKR should have given more details about the limits of Transfiguration and conjuring in the books. I believe that you can't conjure food from nothing, just transport it from one location to another (such as what you said, conjuring the sandwiches from the kitchens). Then again, I think there are numerous times throughout the series where Dumbledore conjures tea which brings up the question of what exactly is ready made in the kitchens of Hogwarts for conjuring. Do they have sandwiches and hot tea prepared at all times for the lazy Hogwarts professors to summon? Also, doesn't Molly Weasley conjure sauce from her wand in OOTP? I guess she could be could have conjured the sauce from a container or something, but there are times in canon where it appears conjuring food is possible. Fucking JKR not thinking things through and explaining things necessary to the HP world.

Exactly. JKR doesn't go into these kinds of details which is sad. I think there was an interview where she said conjured items don't last, but that's all I can remember. Also, what's to stop a wizard or witch from simply transfiguring stuff into gold? We saw in GoF that it's possible for a wizard to conjure silver (Wormtails hand), which is a plothole in itself since it's permanent, which goes against what JKR said on the matter.

Well, if it's possible to conjure a huge armchair out of nothing (albeit temporary), then it seems that transfiguring small objects to big objects is possible. I agree that there are limits on the size of what can be conjured and transfigured. Not everyone can conjure armchairs and hundreds of sleeping bags out of nothing like Dumbledore can, which goes to show that conjuring stuff is most likely an advanced art that takes a really powerful wizard to pull off.

Agreed. If wizards could just conjure cloths and materials, then why isn't everyone living in decadence like the Malfoy's? At some times in the canon there seems to be reasonable limits to magic, and at other times the same rules may be discarded. Damn JKR and her shoddy writing.

 

I tend to agree with 3 and yes while it is mentioned you can't conjure food, there are many instances where food is conjures in HP Canon, and while most can be taken as a switching spell, some don't have an answer (i.e Ollivander creating a fountain of wine in GoF, and while it's not food I don't see why you can create wine but not say grapes?). But I think it's fair to assume that food and drinks (cough ignore Aquamenti) can't be conjured or transfigured. As for clothes and such I think transfiguration can only transfigure things into other basic things. Such as wood to metal, or living thing to non living, the exception being Dumbledore and Mcgonagall, who I think is safe to assume have a better grasp on the subject then others.

If you recall a good comparison of Transfiguration would be Dumbledores conjured comfortable chair in relation to Mcgonagall's straight-back, utilitarian, wooden chair.
Dumbledore was able to bend this rule and create a much more complex object but Mcgonagall was only able to make the basic form of it.

Also I believe personality affects what you create. Dumbledore the whimsical fairy that he is was able to make a comfortable chair, allowing children to sit on his lap, while Mcgonagall's chair was very basic, and almost strict in design.

 

That's pretty much #3 only summarized. If there is no spell for most transfigurations, then why is it such a difficult art? Are most students just lacking in imagination? Or perhaps it has something to do with willpower and truly wanting the object to change. That, and you most likely have to truly believe you can do it. If you doubt yourself, it will most likely not happen.

 

I don't think it has to do with lack of willpower or imagination. If you have to visualise an object clearly, with most of its components in your mind, that calls for a highly disciplined mind. Perhaps, not enough students have the organised mind necessary for large scale, complex transfigurations.

Although disproved by some commentaries by JKR that all wizard's have the same amount of power, I refuse to believe her communist ideals on power. I reckon that the power amount for rapid, complicated transfigurations, such as the ones used by Dumbledore in combat are simply beyond the means of likes such as Dean Thomas and Seamus Finnegan.

 

Woah. I was somehow under the impression that transfiguration was just an advanced magical illusion.

For instance, one may transfigure a leaf into a cookie, and eat it. Depending upon the skill of the magical person, it may look, smell, and taste like a cookie, but that's only due to magical manipulation of the senses.

In the end, whatever ends up in one's stomaches is still of the same composition as the leaf and so it follows that it would have the same nutritional content of that leaf.

The advanced magical illusion theory would account for the fact that wizards have to grow their own food, and make clothing out of real raw material. For instance you can transfigure robes out of a piece of parchment, but it will still essentially be parchment and will revert back to parchment once the illusion wears off. If a transfiguration master performed the illusion, then perhaps the transfigured robes will actually feel and smell like real ones. But for the average magical person, I don't think they can get any further than one of the five senses: getting the parchment to look like a robe.

Which makes me wonder about permanent transfigurations, if there is such a thing canon. Would it be an actual change (reminds me of alchemy, almost) or just a really strong illusion?

 

I more or less agree with what has been said on this thread. Its fairly obvious Rowling didn't give much thought to what the ability to conjure food (or anything else, really) would do to economics, so gave us this weak-sounding law in DH, after we'ed already seen people conjure food/drink.

I disagree. It has been a while since I read the book this is included in, but the circumstances were much different. Dumbledore, conjuring before the Wizengamot, would have wanted to seem at ease and in control, hence the comfortable armchair. McGonogall (spelling?) was conjuring chairs for students, and did not seem to be in a mood that would make her consider conjuring comfortable chairs worth the effort. I do no think that this example displayed any difference in Transfiguration ability between them.

Why, may I ask? Does the concept make it seem like Thomas of Finnegan are equal to Dumbledore? I've never thought it implied that. In fact, because they have the capability to be as good as him makes their not being so more apparent. This system of magic seems more rewarding of good characteristics (drive, ambition, intelligence, etc.) than systems where only a few wizards can cast the best spells because they have the most 'mana points.'

Take Harry. As has been pointed out before, James, Dumbledore, Snape, Voldemort, all were very powerful at their age. The beauty of it is Harry has no 'but I just don't have as much magic' defense - his weakness is due to his own laziness.

Interesting idea. However, it does have its problems. The chair Dumbledore sat conjured and sat in, if the image was just an illusion, had to have some sort of barrier/forcefield keeping him up. And it would have to be really, really intricate to allow the 'cushy armchair' to be comfortable, rather than feeling like solid rock. Overall it strikes me as being less likely than Transfiguration actually being Transfiguration. Even Rowling would probably have given us some hint if it was all illusion. Still, iron out the kinks and it would be an interesting idea.

P.S. Methene. By 'SIYE,' did you mean 'Sink Into Your Eyes?' If so, my deepest sympathies. I started there too. Dark, dark days indeed.

 

Q. How does transfiguration work?

A. Magic.

Thread over.

 

You're no fun.



Edit: What did I just quote? It's gone =/

 

On the way Transfiguration works, I believe the same as Aekiel. There are certain ways to change certain groups of objects into another certain group of objects. The spell that you would use to change a duck into a couch is the same as to change a pigeon into an armchair. But you would not use the same spell to turn a rat into into a cup because the first object is not a bird and the second is not a comfy, squishy object used to rest on.

On the matter of what transfiguration does, I am pretty positive that if all Transfiguration did was make an advanced sort of illusion than they would have called the class something like 'Illusions.' Transfiguration, as a name, implies a change in form, not an illusion. The Animagus Transformation shows this, I think. Sirius looks, feels, and sounds just like a dog would (and probably tastes and smells too). It is no illusion covering his body, but an actual metamorphosis into a new form.

On the matter of food, is conjuring even transfiguration? It seems more like it would be a charm, not a transfiguration, unless conjuration is actually transfiguring Carbon Dioxide in the air, or something, into what is being 'conjured'. I think the only real question is whether transfigurations can be permanent. If they can't, than you can't make food. If they can, than you can make food. And if transfiguration can't be permanent, than how did Pettigrew spend 13 or so years as a rat?

 

I think conjuring is a sub-topic in Transfiguration. At least that's the expression I always got. Can conjurations be permanent? Canonically, who knows? Not Rowling, that's for sure. As for Pettigrew, the Animagus transformation is probably just a change in state from human to animal form. Staying in human or animal form doesn't require energy, but changing between them does.

 

That is what I am trying to get at. The change took energy, but you aren't constantly using your magic to keep it changed. Therefore, why wouldn't the changes be permanent until the caster actually canceled the effects?

 

I highly doubt that Peter spent the entire 13 years since the Black incident in rat form. He's a cowardly fuck, no way would he be able to spend 13 years as a rat. I mean, would you be able to spend 13 years as a creature so small a garden gnome could take you on and win?

No, I'm willing to bet Peter transformed back to his human self on regular basis, probably when the Weasleys were out, to get some real food, take a shower, listen to a bit of the Wireless, jack off, perform a little magic, and try to feel a bit more human.

EDIT: Does anyone remember how Peter got a wand after the Sirius incident? Did they ever find one in the blast crater and send it to his mother with his finger or did he take it with him when he transformed?

 

You're right, of course. He probably didn't spend all his time as a rat. (Pettigrew/kid-Ginny fics anyone?)

But there is no support from canon that says that the Animagus Transformation just gives out when you have been in it for too long. Hermione would have known about it and certainly wouldn't have taken the chance of potentially killing Skeeter if she transformed back in that unbreakable glass jar.

Therefore, I think it is safe to say that the Animagus Transformation could be permanent. And if it is permanent than other transfiguration can be permanent. And if that is the case than wizards should be able to make food out of their own feces if they so desire.

And, yeah, Pettigrew most likely had his wand. They would have mentioned finding it had he not brought it.

 

Anyway, I figure transfiguration is merely the manipulation of the air molecules surrounding the object being affected. In the case of conjuration, air molecules are manipulated to construct an entirely new item.

Of course, this requires a lot of skill and attention. I have no doubt that it is exceedingly dangerous as well. That speech that McGonagall gives at the start of every year tipped me off, and it true. How many times did Harry, Ron, and Neville fuck up a transfiguration? What if they had being fucking around and turned that hedgehog into a vicious wolverine? Or a classmate into something lacking lungs?

EDIT: I can see why so many people lack transfiguration skills in canon. I mean, you could transfigure a rock into a shield, or you could levitate a rock in front of you. Charming an object just seems to be much easier than altering the physical makeup.

 

Ah but you forget, he was a lazy rat.With him being in a cage and them giving him food. Going out and changing him back could be dangerous, what is more cowardly then staying in a rat? In a cage, being served food and being safe he'd stay there as long as possible.