And then two paragraphs later comes the bit about "good" food:

The reason there's room for the "bad food" interpretation is that we're talking about an exception to Gamp's Law - and we don't even know what Gamp's Law is.

It could easily be along the lines of what you said: "There is no difference between a transfigured something, and a natural something." In that case, transfiguration of food could be possible, but it would be different in some way that makes it inedible in the long term.

My point is that even under Rowling's sometimes-clumsy care, there are highway-sized offramps that you can take to escape this sort of apparent plot hole. But God forbid she tries to explain Gamp's Law in Pottermore. She might just shoot herself in the food foot.

 

No he didn't Sesc. He said the law is that, in general, there's "no difference" and that food is an exception to the law because it specifically is different in some way. In the context of his post, that's obviously what he meant and it does follow.

 

IIRC, Ollivander also conjures wine in GoF during the testing of the wands. I'd probably hazard a guess and say that he pulled the DD/MM summoning spell and merely summoned some real wine from a pre-existing bottle. It's pretty explicitly said by Hermione that you can't conjure food, but then again, alcohol isn't food.

It would be kind of amusing if you truly could conjure alcohol. It would be a great way to get drunk on the cheap (you'd only have to know the spell), especially if you were an underage student who stumbled upon the wine conjuring spell in a random book. But seeing as how the Three Broomsticks, Leaky Cauldron and Hog's Head all seem to have good business, I would say it is probably impossible to conjure alcohol along with food.

 

At this point I don't really care, but I've got to ask. Doesn't it seem much mortem likely that the exception to Gamp's law is a retcon?

 

Conjuring it the first time would be easy. Doing with as you get drunker would be the tricky part.

 

So has anyone considered spell that get you drunk and drugged.

Cast a spell on yourself and your stoned for an hour, wouldn't that be awesome.

Arco Stonus - stoned for an hour

Boozeiphicus - a spell that is the equivalent of 60 ml of scotch


How does anyone get anything done in the wizarding world?

 

Magic. /10char

 

God, I wish there was an "ignore thread" option.

 

I wish there was an "ignore retard" option, myself.

 

I wish this thread would get back on track, but, ya know... Does this thread even have a track anymore? :facepalm

Maybe the whole thing should just be locked until Santi updates, since most people lost even the pretense of being on topic something like three pages ago.

 

Once this story is finished I'm going to read every page in this thread, just to get the percentage of how much of the posts are people just bitching.

 

There are 4336 posts in this thread. How many of them could possibly be on track?

 

Besides, if this thread was locked the traffic on this site would see a drastic drop. This seems to be the most popular thread om DLP.

 

You say that as if it's a bad thing...

 

Obviously not all of them, but I doubt it's gone more then a few posts without people actually discussing the story many times, either.

True, but that doesn't mean it should become the new spam thread.

 

I wonder what classes the Durmstrang delegation will attend while at Hogwarts.
Only Karkarov and another teacher go to Hogwarts, how should they teach all the classes.

At the same time I can't imagine Durmstrang students attending Hogwarts classes.
They have a different curriculum and surely wouldn't waste a whole year in their education.
And it was hard for Harry to even step a foot in Hogwarts as his brother was injured. Something about secrecy or whatever, I don't think the board of governors would like foreign students in their classes.

 

Protip: making a load of posts bemoaning the state of the thread just bloats it even more.

I actually don't think it's a retcon.

It's badly thought out, sure, in that the exceptions seem to be what they are for plot-based reasons rather than systematically sensible reasoning. Further, it doesn't make much sense given some of the magic we see e.g. transfiguring rocks and desks into edible animals.

But that doesn't mean it's a retcon. There are interviews from very early in the series' history where JKR talks about how certain things can't be created with magic. Further, the fact that the Weasleys are poor in the first place implies that from the very start JKR wanted magic to not be able to provide a family's needs.

 

This.

When did JKR state that conjured or transfigured animals are indistinguishable from natural animals? I always thought that conjured animals lacked any sort if nutritional value.