Transfiguration =/= conjuration.

 

Then why is it taught as transfiguration?

I don't like the "it will disappear" explanation. There is nothing in all of canon to suggest that a conjured item is anything but permanent. My favorite explanation of why you cant conjure food is that they don't think that they can conjure food. The whole magic/belief thing.

Or maybe, since it is made from your magic, it would be seen as cannibalism, and discouraged. I don't know.

 

It's not taught as transfiguration, it's taught as conjuration. If you meant why is it taught in the Transfiguration course, thats because it involves similar skills/techniques. While the name "Transfiguration" is less obviously an umbrella term for a group of subjects (as opposed to the more obvious Charms, Herbology, and most of all Defense Against the Dark Arts), in this case it obviously refers to a wider discipline, not the narrower technical transfiguration.

 

Note that conjuration is taught in both Transfiguration and Charms.

 

I never understood why Rowling had Aguamenti taught in Charms, not Transfiguration. It's probably just a minor plot hole. As for magical "theory", save any evidence from canon or confirmation from the author, what we're left with is pretty much speculation.

Also, conjured items disappear after a while. Source:

Q: It seems that the wizards and witches at Hogwarts are able to conjure up many things, such as food for the feasts, chairs and sleeping bags. . .if this is so, why does the wizarding world need money ? What are the limitations on the material objects you can conjure up ? It seems unnecessary that the Weasleys would be in such need of money. . . (Jan Campbell)

A (Rowling): Very good question (well done, Jan!!). There is legislation about what you can conjure and what you can't. Something that you conjure out of thin air will not last. This is a rule I set down for myself early on. I love these logical questions! ​

 

Well this is certainly a long-ass thread-jack.

Anyway, back on topic (maybe).

Instead of trying to mesh the two universes together, why not just transplant the vamps and Nevernever into the Potter-verse? It allows for both the White Court Voldemort and Winter Knight Harry, but without the messy details of the two separate magic system's. You would still have the problem of Harry actually becoming the Winter Knight and explaining just how Voldemort is a White Court vamp, but those two questions are much easier to deal with than the previous five pages of quasi-logical, mostly fan boyish, "debate" between which universe has the best magical dick.

 

So you put a realm like the Nevernever into HP and assume you won't need to balance the two systems? What? Indeed, this would introduce even more complications, because instead of inserting a single person into one universe but otherwise leaving it intact, you have completely changed the fabric of the HP universe by inserting a whole cosmology.

Ye gods, I feel diminished. Your superbly detailed and evidence-laden claim has completely undone me, and surely all involved with the faux-debate will now agree to repudiate the blatantly fanboyish attitudes they all shamefully displayed.

 

Because the White Court and Winter Court are both based on their respective systems. Furthermore, what would having the power of the Winter Knight mean to HP, then? I mean, in the DV, having that kind of raw power is certainly impressive. But in the HP-verse? Much less so. They operate completely differently. That's not to say the Winter Knight is weak, but having a lot of raw power in fights were raw power means nothing...

Also, Voldemort. Now a White Court vamp. So what? Now he can move at fast speeds and have super-strength for a short time after having a lot of sex. And? So what. Fights in HP have little to do with speed or strength. So while he'll have those powers, he probably won't use them a lot.

Edit: Ninja'd.