Heroes and Not - What should Snape Have Done?

[spotsgal]

No: HPFGUIDX 145275

> Ceridwen:
> I *don't care* that our Ron tells us that to break the UV 
> means you die.  Somewhere, I think at Mugglenet, it is said that Ron 
> is *never* right (unless he is joking).  Ron isn't joking when he 
> tells Harry that the UV kills if it is broken.
> And, Ron's proof is pretty slim.  So, Arthur gets red-faced for once 
> and yells about Ron and the UV the twins are trying to foist on him.  
> And this is part of what he yells.  The UV looks to me like Dark 
> Magic, and one of the last people I would expect to really know 
> about Dark Magic would be Arthur Weasley....
> So, Arthur yelling that the UV would kill Ron if he broke it sounds 
> more like warnings about going blind or growing hair on one's 
> knuckles.

Christina:

I've always wondered why JKR chose to give us the information about
the UV through Ron, rather than through Hermione, our usual little
fountain of information.  I agree that when Ron is trying to solve the
mysteries of the books, he is often wrong (I've read the
unless-he's-joking theory), but do we have similar canon for things
that he says as *fact*, and not his opinion?  I don't think Ron's
given us enough "hard" information for us to judge how much we can
really trust him.  But like you said, we don't even have to doubt
Ron's ability to pass on information, because it's very possible that
Arthur was just exaggerating to him in the first place.

I think you're right about the UV being Dark Magic, but it seems odd
that the twins knew about it when they were so young (and at least had
a rudimentary understanding of how to go about doing it).  Ron says he
was about five when it happened, making the twins about seven- they
hadn't even gone off to Hogwarts yet.

> Ceridwen:
> I believe, Ron's explanation notwithstanding, that the UV 
> is 'impossible not to honor'.  And once Snape made the UV with 
> Narcissa, he *could not* choose not to honor it.  His choice in the 
> matter was closed.  There was no way out.

Christina:

I don't remember you bringing this up before, and I honestly can't
believe more people haven't gone this route in their speculation. 
Your explanation is just SO OBVIOUS, and it answers the tower scene
neatly- why didn't Snape just not kill Dumbledore?  He couldn't.

The only problems I can see are the same problems that comes up with
the original interpretation of the UV as well.  Namely,

1) The language of the vow is vague, and so the vow itself must make a
sort of judgement call about when it should kick in, and

2) How would the UV work if Snape didn't know what Draco's task was
(if he didn't know what he was promising?)

Thanks for re-introducing this, Ceridwen.  I like it a lot.  You can
even have my share of the ACID POPS- I've never really found them
appealing :)

Christina