Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 161
- 4
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
https://harrypotter.fandom.com/wiki/Transfiguration
See the section on Human Transfiguration. Even if no spell lasts permanently, what's stopping you from re-casting it regularly? That's about as onerous as doing makeup or getting a haircut.
As a known steadfast supporter of my feminist idol, JK Rowling... it really doesn't bear thinking about too deeply. I am actually an unironic fan of the Harry Potter series, but it's absolutely not the sort of world in which the author spent a lot of time doing the kind of "worldbuilding" that engages with the real world and considers how magic would actually affect it. The Potterverse is less plausible than any superhero universe (which is saying something). It's meant to be English boarding school drama, with wizards. Rowling invented spells because they were clever, funny, or solved a temporary plot hole, and then forgot about them. "But why don't wizards just...?" is a question that will drive you crazy if you let yourself ask it once.
More options
Context Copy link
From the descriptions, fine changes appear to be less like doing makeup and more like plastic surgery, in terms of the skill required and the danger. (Most examples deal with transforming a human into an animal, presumably with stock spells). And then you're one antimagic spell or environmental effect (such as one installed in the bank) away from the glamour washing off, or worse.
Thus, even if some rare talented Transfigurationists or those able to secure the services of one practiced it, it would not be widespread or practical in daily social life. And that's just when we talk about external appearance. Transfiguration evidently does not solve aging, and it's debatable whether it can impart complex function the body didn't have, such as switching out your reproductive system. (What happens if you try to get pregnant on Polyjuice?)
More to the point, I think, in the Potterverse and in most pre-Millenium British fantasy novels magic has an implicit moral understructure. For example, the love of one person sacrificing themself for another is a powerful protective force against evil. Dumbledore makes it pretty clear that there are far deeper forces in the world than the paltry stuff that wizards usually throw around and regularly criticises Voldemort for fundamentally misunderstanding how magic works. You cannot feed yourself on magic - you cannot transfigure food. There is literally a room full of Love in the Department of Mysteries that is so terrible and dangerous that his lock-pick melts when he tries to enter.
I suspect that part of this moral superstructure is the implicit rule that you cannot magically hide your true self for long. Voldemort literally becomes ugly as he mutilates his soul. Harry’s father has an inherent nobility and his Animagus form is a stag, where Wormtail becomes a rat, and it is not possible I think for that to be reversed.
Trans people then seem to be ruled out. Even if you believe the trans identity is the reality, then I would think that spells would work better.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link