Hm, this question has been bothering me for a while now, and I've seen multiple authors arguing both sides of it. It's on the premise of animagus', and their restrictions.

My question: How is it wizard/witch animagus forms are completely bare of anything previously on said wizard/witch, but when they change back, those items are once again on their person?

This baffles me, because many authors argue that anything on your person will be effectively "dropped" when in animagus form, and yet whenever we have seen an animagus transform back to human forms, they're fully clothed.

This may be JKR trying and failing to keep it PG-13 and having it still make sense, or something else that I'm not quite getting.

Here are some examples:

First book; first transfiguration class, there's a mysterious tabby cat on the teacher's desk. Minutes after the beginning of class, said tabby cat turns back into their instructor, clothes and wand in her possession.

Third book; Sirius transforms from Grim, once again fully clothed.

There are obviously several other examples that I'm glossing over, but this one right here threw me for a complete loop:

Peter transforms back into his human form in the Shrieking Shack, once again, with everything in his possession on him. Then, while bound, he transforms back into his animagus form.

He shrinks down into his rat form, but his clothes and other things stay where they are. :?:

It can't be self transfiguration, because that would transfigure him and his clothing, so I'm left wondering.

I'm not sure if this question has already been answered, or there is some alternate dimensional pocket, or some other such shit JKR came up with.

Hoping to get some answers, thanks to all viewers.

 

When it comes to dealing with magic you can't try and wrap your head around it, because it is exactly that, magic.

 

Yes, and that was the conclusion that I was drawing, but then Peter left his clothing and newly stolen wand. Why would he do this? I never pinned Peter down as the streaker type, then again, I have been wrong before...

Urgh, bad thoughts, happy place, happy place... Think Harry doing Lily, Fleur, Nymphie, Daphne, Luna... Mmmm, okay, I'm better now.

How would you explain that though? Why would Peter leave a wand (just going to leave the clothing bit alone for now) he'd just gotten behind? I don't believe in that "You need a wand to transform into your animagus" bullshit.

Any feedback?

 

Peter didn't leave his wand back, he was disarmed by Harry, if I recall canon correctly.

Also, you don't need a wand to transform into your animagus form or else how do you explain Sirius transforming in Azkaban? So, yeah, you're correct about that.

 

Peter did get disarmed, but as I recall, he took somebody's wand in the confusion of Lupin transforming. I'm almost completely sure he took back his wand, but I can't be certain.

And yeah, that's what I figured, because I seriously doubt they would allow Azkaban level criminals to have their wands.

 

But when he was force transformed back into his shape in PoA, by Sirius and Remus, he was clothed.

 

It was the wand (Ron's wand, IIRC) that he took during the confusion of Lupin transforming that was disarmed by Harry. Peter freed himself out of the ropes that he was bound with and knocked out Ron before getting disarmed by Harry. And no, if I remember correctly, he didn't take back the wand, he just transformed and ran. He also, did not have a wand on him when was forcibly transformed by Lupin and Sirius.

Is it clear now? If not then you can simply check your copy of PoA, if you have it.

 

Okay, thanks, I was unclear on that.

Oz, I agree with your assessment on Peter's skills, but that is my exact question. What skills did Peter not possess to bring his things with him? And, if he couldn't do that skill, how did he do it so that he was fully clothed when Sirius and Remus de-morphed him?

EDIT: Uh, what does IIRC mean?

 

If I Recall Correctly. And IIRC McGonagall's tabby cat had black marking's around the eyes, similar to her glasses. So it may be the clothes/wand/etc. is incorporated somehow into the Animal form.

 

I guess that could make sense... But then, what would represent the wand? Another thing, if say, Sirius was wearing bright pink robes, would his Grim become bright pink or some such thing?

Thanks for the translation Kalas.

 

I don't think so. McGonnagal's glasses are integral to her, despite being nonmagical, whereas clothing changes day by day. Same with Skeeter's glasses manifesting on her beetle form, despite her different changes of clothing.

I dunno about the wand, except to say that perhaps its so magical that it disappears without manifesting itself on one's form.

 

It's kind of like how you can have a hole room inside a trunk. Lots of stuff in a space too small to cover it. Yeah, that dog doesn't seem to be wearing a robe, but it is, on some magical level. This is also what happens when a killer-whale animagus eats more than a human could hold in their stomach.

 

Well, if some of the things always on said witch/wizard are represented through a desiegn, what would they be classified as? A cross between a bottomless bag and magical seal under the guise of a tattoo or birthmark?

If what you said about the clothing is also true, than how would it be disguised? Some combination of the featherweight charm, shrinking charm, sticking charm, and dislusionment charm which is automatically put in use when transformed? Perhaps a non-visual magical sealing?

I'm serious on this, this is a question I will not be satisfied being answered with "its magick!!1!!one!!eleven"

 

It probably follows the same principles of either the multi-chambered trunk, or the Vanishing spell. Either it's shifted into non-magical storage, or it goes into non-being (everything) when transforming, and reassembled when the transformation is reversed.

Going back, I thought Peter only lost his clothes in the movie (which would make it a movie plothole) ?

 

IIRC awesome), the Vanishing Spell is permanent, or at the very least transfers items to some otherworldly containment/trash bin. If what you said is true, than the animagus reverse transformation would be creating a new and apparently important spell.

If that was true, don't you think the DoM would have studied and cataloged this by now?

On the matter of non-magical containment, how would it get there, and what/where would the containment be? I highly doubt there's some enormous multi-chambered trunk hidden somewhere, or some other such means of containment.

This argument has been surprisingly productive, please continue.

 

It's what Blaise said. The multi-compartmental trunk, thing. Two different, completely full, trunks occupying the same space.

When a wizard transforms, all his shit stays exactly where it is: on his wizardly body. It doesn't need to be represented on the animal in any way. It doesn't vanish or get transported to some remote location. It's just there, waiting for him.

 

I should have clarified; the animagus transformation handles clothing like the Vanishing spell. I didn't equate them.

The Killing Curse and Sectumsempra can kill you, albeit they go about it in different ways and the latter is reversible. The Vanishing spell and the animagus transformation both vanish clothing, albeit they go about it in different ways, and the latter is reversible. Savvy ?

I don't doubt that they have. We don't know their findings because none of it was pertinent to the plot. Finding out the conducted studies done on where an Animagus' clothing goes when they transform (lol) has dick-all to do with Harry Potter, since the story is told almost exclusively from his POV, and he didn't become an animagus in canon.

Truth be told, there will never be an answer that satisfies you, as this was one aspect of the story that wasn't meant to be focused upon. You may as well ask where wizarding children go to preschool, for how pertinent this question is.

Why do you doubt it? Which factors that go into changing into a completely different species sound more plausible than any other idea ?

 

Yeah, I suppose not... That was a really annoying aspect of the series for me, JKR introduces an incredible idea that could not only be an important part of the plot, but a fun subject to run with, and what does she do with it? Nothing.

It was like she was making them solely so that the mauraders could deal with Moony during his time of the month. She proffesses how rare the skill is, and virually nobody has it in cannon, and yet all three of the aspiring mauraders have it.

The only other people I can remember are Minerva and Rita, who I'm almost certain are afterthoughts on JKR's part to make it seem more authentic.

Blaise: say I agree with your idea, where do you suggest this contanment center to be?

Heh, not trying to be so Hermione-ish, this question has just been bugging me for a while.

I'm going to apologize in advance for my mistakes, I'm wriing this on my phone now and I don't expect the grammar to be all that good.

I'm enjoying this, thanks.