Dark Mark visibility . . . (was: Snape and the Order)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 93878

Inky-Julie wrote:
Actually its not my suggestion that the mark was less 
> visible but what both Karkaroff and Snape said. I don't know if its 
> just faded or invisible. Both men indicate that the appearance of
the Mark has become more noticable.  And on 709/710 Snape tells Fudge 
> that the Mark's appearance changes.  "It is not as clear as it was
an hour ... ago... but you can still see it."  So when Voldemort is 
> actively signalling his followers, it burns black (gah! Burns black, 
> why, oh why, did I call it a tattoo?)

Carol responds:
Don't worry about calling it a tattoo. I've probably made worse
mistakes on this list. And JKR makes them, too. We even have a name
for hers (Flints), as you may already know. You're clearly right that
the mark has faded and become dark again, as dark as it was before
Godric's Hollow, evidently, but I'm still not sure that it ever faded
completely. I don't think we have canon one way or another on that.

Inky-Julie wrote: 
> I agree totally "one of the purposes was to enable DEs who didn't 
> know each other to recognize each other" as you said, although I tend 
> to think that its not just a matter of rolling up sleeves, but more 
> of a magic signature to the brand. I think that the dormancy of the 
> Mark was a further factor in the DE's ability to lie low after 
> Voldemort vaporized (snicker, love your 'vapormort'!) 

Carol responds:
Wish I could take credit for "Vapormort," but I just picked it up from
other list members. We also have Quirrellmort and various other clever
little designations. (I call the ugly, baby-sized Voldemort that
Wormtail put in the cauldron "Babymort"; I don't know whether anyone
else does. :-) )
 
Inky_Julie wrote:
<largish snip> 
> Hum.  Now that I think of it I'm less convinced that that DArk Mark 
> serves as a visual recognition device (besides its primary function 
> as V.'s tool to summon/contact his followers).  Voldemort seems to 
> be the only one who can activate it--hence the 'fading' both 
> Karkaroff and Snape refer to.  I can see it burning darkly
> during a Death Eater function or raid, when Voldemort activates it so 
> that the 'team' knows each is supposed to be there (no aurors in 
> disguise).  I think there must be more than just a visual quality to 
> it, perhaps a non-visible magical resonance or some such 
> that all who bear it can pick up on.  Still mulling this over.

Carol:
There's an interesting moment in GoF that may be relevant here. When
Crouch!Moody (whom Snape still thinks is the real Moody) says, "I say
there are spots that don't come off, Snape. Spots that never come of,
d'you know what I mean?" Snape "seize[s] his left arm convulsively
with his right hand, as though something on it had hurt him." (GoF Am.
ed. 472) Of course, this passage reads very differently on a second
reading, when we know that Crouch!Moody is an imposter, but it
indicates to me that Crouch knows that Snape is loyal to Dumbledore
and therefore disloyal to Voldemort and that a loyal Death Eater can
cause pain to a disloyal one just by mentioning the mark. I wonder
what Snape thought of that incident, whether he reported it to
Dumbledore, and what they thought it meant at that point. (Surely the
real Moody speaking of the Dark Mark would not have caused Snape pain?
Or would it? Were Snape's suspicions aroused, or did he just view
"Moody" as a dangerous enemy even though they were technically on the
same side? He certainly was angry that "Moody" had been in his office,
dared to question his loyalty to Dumbledore, and tried to order him
around, but all of that would fit with the real Moody, too.)

Inky/Julie: 
> I agree, it was a courageous **and** a frustrated move on Snape's 
> part to shove the Mark under the nose of an angry and in-denial 
> Fudge. But I assume that Snape can only tolerate so much stupid self 
> delusion about a life threatening danger as Voldemort. And the 
> dialog notes Snape as speaking 'harshly' to the minister.  Much more 
> comfortable and safe to keep the mark hidden, and coast along under 
> Fudge's self-delusion that its all over, than to remind him by 
> showing off Voldemort's name tag.

Carol:
Yes. Good way of looking at it. Thank you for coming to the rescue of
my favorite character. (A side note on Fudge: Does anyone besides me
think Fudge, rather than Voldemort, sent Macnair as envoy to the
giants at Malfoy's suggestion, not knowing that Macnair is a DE? I
think Fudge is Malfoy's tool, not actually evil but ambitious,
foolish, and, as Julie says, in denial. How convenient for Malfoy,
trying to get back in LV's good graces after the Dark Mark incident,
that Macnair happens to work for the MoM's magical creatures division.)
  
> 
Inky/Julie
> who is so thrilled that Carol took the time and commented on her 
> ramblings.

Carol:
You're very welcome. And they were interesting, well-thought out 
"ramblings." :-)

Carol, who also tends to ramble when she has too many thoughts in her
head and no Pensieve handy