Plot holes, inconsistencies, and contradictions v. 4

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

Sooooo.....what happens to your wand when you transform into an Animagus?

Same thing that happens with your clothes--transforms right along with you. Pay no attention to the PoA movie.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

Same thing that happens with your clothes--transforms right along with you. Pay no attention to the PoA movie.

Sounds about right. I'd think it odd if, say, McGonagall had to leave her wand behind when she went to Privet Dr. at the beginning of PS.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

Same thing that happens with your clothes--transforms right along with you. Pay no attention to the PoA movie.

McGonagall's spectacles become markings around her eyes and I imagine the clothes go along too (yes-the movie was quite annoying). But it seems odd that a wand would change it's shape and substance and still be able to work. And how do you wave it if it's part of you? Maybe that's what makes becoming an Animagus so dangerous.

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

McGonagall's spectacles become markings around her eyes and I imagine the clothes go along too (yes-the movie was quite annoying). But it seems odd that a wand would change it's shape and substance and still be able to work. And how do you wave it if it's part of you? Maybe that's what makes becoming an Animagus so dangerous.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that the wand can be used while the wizard or witch is in Animagus form, just that the wand stays with you until you transform back into wizard form, just like the clothes. When McGonagall transforms at the beginning of PS, she is wearing emerald green robes, which certainly weren't present on her cat form.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by willfitz

I don't think anyone's suggesting that the wand can be used while the wizard or witch is in Animagus form, just that the wand stays with you until you transform back into wizard form, just like the clothes. When McGonagall transforms at the beginning of PS, she is wearing emerald green robes, which certainly weren't present on her cat form.

Exactly, willfitz. A wand is not needed to transform to one's animagus form nor to return to human form.

[mirrormere]

Originally Posted by snapes_witch

Exactly, willfitz. A wand is not needed to transform to one's animagus form nor to return to human form.

A wand isn't needed? Do you know where that is referenced?

When the students are learning Apparation, there is no mention of using a wand to do so, but later in Malfoy Manor it says Ron tries to Disapparate without a wand and is unsuccessful. Rather sounds like, although not brandished to work the magic, it might need to be on one's person to accomplish. Could transformation to an Animagus be similar?

Even if a wand isn't needed, I suppose you'd want your wand with you.

[wolfbrother]

Originally Posted by mirrormere

A wand isn't needed? Do you know where that is referenced?

Sirius did not have his wand with him and he was transforming periodically in Azkaban.

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by wolfbrother

Sirius did not have his wand with him and he was transforming periodically in Azkaban.

And in PoA Peter had Lupin's wand but Harry cast an Expelliarmus and the wand flew out of sight and then Peter transformed--without a wand.

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by wolfbrother

Sirius did not have his wand with him and he was transforming periodically in Azkaban.

Good point. And where would an animagus animal put a wand anyway?

[snapes_witch]

Originally Posted by HedwigOwl

Good point. And where would an animagus animal put a wand anyway?

And we're right back to mirrormere's original question!

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by HedwigOwl

Good point. And where would an animagus animal put a wand anyway?

Same place it puts its clothes- they simply disappear along with the wizard's hands, feet, face, etc. Just like magic!

[meesha1971]

Originally Posted by HedwigOwl

Good point. And where would an animagus animal put a wand anyway?

From what we're shown, things like that are included in the transformation - i.e. McGonagall's glasses becoming markings around the eyes of her tabby cat animagus form. Their clothes and belongings transform as well.

However, we do have several examples of the transformation being done without a wand so it does not appear that a wand was necessary for that. Wands were necessary for focus and control when doing spells externally - i.e. starting a fire in the fireplace by aiming the spell there with your wand rather than having the sofa go up in flames. The animagus transformation is more of an internal thing - the focus and control had to be on themselves.

[SnapesBane]

SO, Ive been discussing the series with some friends and I was told that there is a contradiction regarding SWM and TPT. Lily never knew Snape in SWM because she asks what Snape did to be attacked. "What's he done to you?" What do you all think?

[willfitz]

Originally Posted by SnapesBane

SO, Ive been discussing the series with some friends and I was told that there is a contradiction regarding SWM and TPT. Lily never knew Snape in SWM because she asks what Snape did to be attacked. "What's he done to you?" What do you all think?

I think that was the general "what has he done to you?" like what a parent might ask one of two squabbling siblings. It doesn't mean that she was unaware of there ever being any unpleasantness, it just means that she doesn't think there was anything recently which ought to have prompted the attack.

[SnapesBane]

Yeah. I saw the scene as asking what he did at that moment to deserve attack.

[HedwigOwl]

Originally Posted by SnapesBane

SO, Ive been discussing the series with some friends and I was told that there is a contradiction regarding SWM and TPT. Lily never knew Snape in SWM because she asks what Snape did to be attacked. "What's he done to you?" What do you all think?

Sorry, but I don't see any contradiction based on that one comment...after all, didn't James attack Snape for no reason at all?; could you post the passages from each book that shows where the contradiction is?

[SnapesBane]

Originally Posted by HedwigOwl

Sorry, but I don't see any contradiction based on that one comment...after all, didn't James attack Snape for no reason at all?; could you post the passages from each book that shows where the contradiction is?

Okay. These are the texts that have been used to prove a contradiction.

Order of the Pheonix, pg. 647 “Leave him alone,” Lily repeated. She was looking at James with every sign of great dislike. “What’s he done to you?”

-

Deathly Hallows, pg. 673-674 “What’s Potter got to do with anything?” said Lily. “They sneak out at night. There’s something weird about that Lupin. Where does he keep going?” “Every month at the full moon?” said Snape. “He’s ill,” said Lily. “They say he’s ill —” “I know your theory,” said Lily, and she sounded cold. “Why are you so obsessed with them anyway? Why do you care what they’re doing at night?” “I’m just trying to show you they’re not as wonderful as everyone seems to think they are.”

Apparently this shows that Lily know why snape was attacked. There was no reason to ask “What’s he done to you?” Sirius saying its because Snape existed was a lie because he couldn't say Lupin was a werewolf.

I don't agree with the contradiction. Its obvious she was asking why he was attacked at that moment when he did nothing.

[MsBinns]

I'm sure it has been discussed on here, but has anyone come up with an explanation as to why Mrs. Weasley asks what the platform number is in PS? Do we think the platform number changes every 7-10 years? Or is it just an inconsistency?

[BurrowGhoul]

Originally Posted by MsBinns

I'm sure it has been discussed on here, but has anyone come up with an explanation as to why Mrs. Weasley asks what the platform number is in PS? Do we think the platform number changes every 7-10 years? Or is it just an inconsistency?

I think it was a way to help Ginny feel included as she saw her brothers off to school.

[MsBinns]

Originally Posted by BurrowGhoul

I think it was a way to help Ginny feel included as she saw her brothers off to school.

Hmm, I never read it in that context, but it makes sense!