10

In Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, Draco Malfoy hexed Hermione's front teeth to grow to inhuman size, and Madame Pomfrey used a shrinking charm to fix them, shrinking them to smaller than their original size.

In Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, Hermione and co. broke into Gringotts to retrieve a Horcrux. On their way in, she used Polyjuice Potion as a disguise, and this was washed away by Thief's Downfall, revealing (and undoing) all potion magic that hid (changed) her features. It also washed away transfigurations performed on Ronald Weasley and the Imperius curse performed on the goblin Bogrod.

Now my question:

Did Hermione Granger's front teeth grow back to their old size due to Gringotts' Thief's Downfall?

|improve this question
  • 10
    Nope. And her bag of holding didn't explode either. – Valorum Jan 27 '18 at 23:44
  • 14
    ..Harry's multiple repairs to his glasses didn't come undone, Harry's bones in his arm stayed put, Ron's leg remained unbroken, etc... – NKCampbell Jan 28 '18 at 0:59
  • 5
    I think healing charms and such weren't a concern for "the thief's downfall" – dobby Jan 28 '18 at 9:40
  • 1
    @Valorum a bag of holding is an item for keeping items, not for concealment. Therefore it may not be affected. – 0oDaano0 Jan 29 '18 at 10:40
  • 3
    @NKCampbell Harry's arm and Ron's leg were healed (by magic) in the past but by now should have been fixed without magical trace, it is also not something like a disguise or transfiguration thus I think this has nothing to do with the waterfall. The same for the glasses, they are repaired only. – 0oDaano0 Jan 29 '18 at 10:40
7

By law of conservation of detail, I'd say no. Such a thing would probably have been mentioned if that were the case. As to why, I would say that what was done on Hermione's teeth was probably a single spell to permanently change her teeth, rather than a sustained magical effect that kept her teeth that way day after day.

|improve this answer
  • 1
    Is there any reference you would like to quote here about the "permanent" and "temporary" spells here? the difference or any mention of such a thing maybe. – Shreedhar Jan 28 '18 at 19:11
  • Pottermore states: In 1994, Hermione had Madam Pomfrey magically shrink her front teeth after she was accidentally struck with a Densaugeo spell, making it unnecessary for her to receive the braces her parents had originally intended for her. harrypotter.wikia.com/wiki/Hermione_Granger. It is not mentioned on the (human) Transfiguration page. Rowling has said that magical change and conjuration are not everlasting (sorry for not having the source for that on hand) – 0oDaano0 Jan 29 '18 at 10:53
5

No. The Thief's Downfall only removes "magical concealment".

Whilst it's impossible to be definitive I think it's highly likely that the Thief's Downfall wouldn't have worked on Hermione's teeth.

The Thief's Downfall successfully erased Ron's disguise. But I think it wouldn't have effected Hermione. The difference, I believe, is that Hermione's teeth shrinking was a medicinal procedure rather than a purely cosmetic alteration. The Thief's Downfall deals primarily with spells of concealment.

"The Thief's Downfall!" said Griphook, clambering to his feet and looking back at the deluge on to the tracks, which Harry knew, now, had been more than water. "It washes away all enchantment, all magical concealment! They know there are imposters in Gringotts, they have set off defences against us!"
(Deathly Hallows, Chapter 26, Gringotts).

Ron's disguise was surface-level and temporary.

Hermione sighed and set to work, muttering under her breath as she transformed various aspects of Ron's appearance. He was to be given a completely fake identity, and they were trusting to the malevolent aura cast by Bellatrix to protect him.
(Deathly Hallows, Chapter 26, Gringotts).

The procedure Madame Pomfrey used on Hermione seems to be much more long-lasting. The shrinking spell was presumably designed to be permanent, after all.

"Hermione," said Ron, looking sideways at her, suddenly frowning, "your teeth..."
"What about them?" she said.
"Well, they're different...I've just noticed..."
"Of course they are - did you expect me to keep those fangs Malfoy gave me?"
"No, I mean, they're different to how they were before he put that hex on you...they're all...straight and - and normal-sized."
Hermione suddenly smiled very mischievously, and Harry noticed it too: it was a very different smile to the one he remembered.
"Well...when I went up to Madame Pomfrey to get them shrunk, she held up a mirror, and told me to stop her when they were back to how they normally were," she said. "And I just...let her carry on a bit." She smiled even more widely.
(Goblet of Fire, Chapter 23, The Yule Ball).

Madame Pomfrey is a skilled magical physician. Her treatments have to be able to withstand the 'rough and tumble' of the magical world. They wouldn't be effective if they were subject to alterations by spells like the Thief's Downfall. I think that Madame Pomfrey's spells are durable enough to stand the test of time.

Even if they aren't, Griphook says that the Thief's Downfall is designed to uncover "magical concealment". Ron's disguise was an attempt to conceal himself. Hermione's teeth shrinking was not. I think that the Thief's Downfall can tell the difference between the two and only shows the subject as they usually are, whether that normal state has magical alterations or not.

|improve this answer
  • 2
    how do you reconcile the second half of the statement being the only effect with the first "It washes away all enchantment"? – JohnP Jan 29 '18 at 20:17
  • @JohnP The Thief's Downfall removes enchantments like the Imperious Curse (see Bogrod). It removes concealments like the use of Polyjuice Potion (Hermione) or magical transformation (Ron). Hermione's appearance changed because she was using a disguise (the Polyjuice), and for no other reason. Otherwise she would have been like Harry and wouldn't have been effected. – The Dark Lord Jan 29 '18 at 20:24
  • 1
    @JohnP That is to say that I think there is a distinction between the two rather than enchantment and concealment being one and the same thing. You can be using concealment without using enchantment. And indeed Hermione wasn't using enchantment. She was using a potion. – The Dark Lord Jan 29 '18 at 20:28
  • Right, I get that. But you still haven't made the case that the teeth would be unaffected. You sort of gloss it over and concentrate on all the concealment effects. – JohnP Jan 29 '18 at 20:29
  • @JohnP I agree with you, to me this makes the claimm they should be big again stronger, not weaker. – 0oDaano0 Jan 30 '18 at 10:23

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.