Dear Mr. Stroud,
, and I'd like to ask you a question that has been bugging me ever since I read The Golem's Eye.
In The Amulet of Samarkand, Underwood relates a story about Disraeli transforming a clumsy apprentice into a solid iron boot-scraper. However, in the second book, Bartimaeus states definitively in a footnote that no spirit can permanently alter the true nature of something. I would have thought that Underwood only told this story to frighten Nathaniel into behaving, and that it held little if any truth: however, Nathaniel later remembers that the formula for Petrifaction involves an afrit of some power (which he doubts Underwood is capable of summoning), so it is a real spell. How is this possible?
Thanks,
Nemaides

Hello Nemaides,

Sorry to have taken so long to reply here. It's a good question, and it has to be said a bit of a tricky one too. You're quite right that this is what Bart says, and there is a bit of contradiciton between the footnote and the claims made elsewhere. My answer is that there's a subtle distinction between arbitary spells of change (such as turning lead into gold, say) where one element would simply become another, and the aggressive spells that every spirit worth his salt can employ on humans (and other spirits) - Detonations, Spasms, Concussions... and Petrifaction. These interfere and mess around with the things they hit. So in the same way that an Inferno, say, can set something on fire, Petrifaction can harden something to make it akin to stone... But this may not be exactly the same as just waving a wand and turning flesh into rock....
Hmmm. I'm not sure that I've even convinced myself there. Even a lawyer might struggle with my cunning distinction of terms... Oh well. What do you reckon?

J