Heroes and Not - What should Snape Have Done?

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 145356

Orna:
> I like the description of what makes it dark magic. I think you 
have 
> tapped on something crucial about the nature of dark magic- thanks. 
> I feel it deserves more elaboration, but for now – Thanks.

Ceridwen:
It would be interesting to talk about what Dark Magic might be.  I'm 
sure we all have ideas!

Orna:
> Still I have some doubts about how this non-choice is working. 
> (Perhaps I didn't understand you) And about how total control dark 
> magic has: 
> 
> I don't think there is any curse – except the AK – and even that 
> not, after Harry's scar, that has absolutely no counter 
possibility, 
> provided you are strong enough, and/or ready to pay the price.
> It doesn't sound like what we know about other spells to have a 
> spell which makes you do acts which involve complex human 
processes, 
> like thinking, judging, feeling, and have it done as a robot, 
> without any choice or submission to it, except the moment you take 
> it. 
> The imperius curse is resistible, the crucio – can be stopped by 
> another person – as we see when Snape stops Harry's torture in HBP. 
> So I find it difficult to imagine that the UV is a vow which works 
> outside Snape's choice, like this. I am not saying it isn't 
binding, 
> or having any consequences, if you don't follow it – most certainly 
> it is a powerful spell. I take it, that Ron might be wrong about 
> being killed if you break it, but his father's reaction means it is 
> a very powerful spell, with disastrous consequences, if you chose 
to 
> disobey it. OTOH we see Snape trying in HBP to help Draco – but he 
> seems free to choose the time of intervention, the amount of effort 
> he puts into it.

Ceridwen:
At a certain point, in any sort of magic, or any decision, choice 
disappears.  As decisions are made, further choices drop from the 
list of possibilities.

But, Imperio, Crucio, the AK, the UV, Stupefy, Expeliarmus, etc., are 
never reciprocal.  Some, like Imperio, can be resisted.  Some, like 
Expeliarmus, sneak up on the victim so quickly (if you do it right 
and have been practicing your non-verbal spells ;) ) that they have 
no chance of resisting.  And certainly, a victim's level of mastery 
would have something to do with how well he or she can react.  I 
don't envision a robot-like response, just a sudden compulsion that 
takes over while you're still going, 'Wha' happened???'

The 'victim' would, of course, be the person who took the vow, not 
the one who engineered it.  Once that victim has agreed to the vow, 
he or she has given up further choice.

bboyminn:
> I don't think the 'force' of the UV turns you into a mindless robot
> who is forced to act. I do believe you can summor a force of
> resistance against the compulsion to fulfill the Vow. Yet, as you
> summon the will to resist, that starts a cascade that makes the
> compulsion to act that much stronger...

Ceridwen:
As Orna pointed out, even Imperio can be fought.  But look at what 
happened to Barty Crouch sr. when he tried, it seemed his mind was 
going.  But something like the UV would give you the immediate 
compulsion to just do it.  Unlike the Imperius curse, the UV acts 
immediately.  When we see Imperio being resisted, it takes time.  I 
don't think the UV allows for time.

Once you have agreed to the UV and have taken the vow, it is 
internalized.  Unlike Expeliarmus (yes, I know this isn't Dark 
Magic), the UV works from the inside, so there's nothing to block.

Orna:
> So the point I'm trying to make is that Snape has choice about when 
> to act, how to act etc., even if basically he can't break the spell 
> (without very grave consequences, IMO) Like Ron wants Romilda 
> desperately, but how to go about it – is in his choice, in his 
> character (I'm sure Neville under the love-potion's influence 
> wouldn't hit Harry – well perhaps with a plant
) That's also where 
> he is open to influence.

Ceridwen:
Until Snape was informed that Draco was not going to do it, he had 
all the time in the world, as long as it fit in with the time table 
LV had set for Draco.  If LV said that Draco had to do the deed by 
the first of June, then Snape would not have until the second.  As 
well, Draco would be in danger from LV if the deed was put off 
another day.  So the part of the vow to protect Draco would kick in 
too.

The love potion chocolates were pretty crude, if you ask me.  I 
think, whatever Ron's methods, they would have had to be equally 
crude.  Would have been funny, though!

Orna:
> Hadn't the situation in the tower been that there were DEs there, 
> and Snape had been informed Draco is unable to do it – he would 
> surely be able to check it with Draco, see if he can help him 
refine 
> his skills, or have time to outline a plan for himself. He wouldn't 
> be forced to rush to DD and AK him just like that, IMO.

bboyminn:
> I've used the example several times, that if Snape maintained the
> intent to kill Dumbledore, he could put off the consequences
> indefinitely.

Ceridwen:
I agree.  If the DEs hadn't come up to the tower, they wouldn't have 
been able to inform Snape that Draco couldn't do it.  So he would 
have been free to continue as he was (unless Draco broke down and 
admitted that he was unable).  As long as he maintained the intent to 
watch over Draco, help him as needed, and fulfill the task if Draco 
couldn't, I think he could have gone on indefinitely.  The problem 
with the scene on the tower is that they had to go and tell him that 
Draco wasn't doing it, didn't seem to be able.  Trigger words for the 
vow.

Orna:
>  Snape's acts in the tower are IMO his decision about how to tackle 
> this situation, with all the complexity he sees there. And not an 
> involuntary robotic act produced out of the UV.
> Perhaps in principle a bit like the Felix-potion works– it makes 
you 
> see the thing which feels right under its influence – but you have 
> some freedom to choose, and perhaps even to resist it - and pay the 
> consequences.

Ceridwen:
Oh.  Okay! I see.  You're saying that the vow wouldn't force 
completely robot-like responses, down to the method of killing.  I 
agree.  Someone who can't cast an AK couldn't possibly use one.  
There are plenty of ways to kill someone.  How to tackle the 
situation would completely depend on the person who is under the 
influence of the vow, and on that person's abilities.  Absolutely!  
I'm just saying that, whatever method Snape chose to use, he was 
forced, by the internal spell, to kill Dumbledore.  It would make 
sense to use the AK, being Snape, and with all those DEs there.  It 
also seems like a very quick way to go for Dumbledore, rather than 
some of the other options available.

bboyminn:
> Still, I think we have so very little information on the details of
> the Unbreakable Vow that almost any speculation is fair game. For
> example, who or what is the judge of the UV? How and what determines
> when and if the Vower has failed?

Ceridwen:
I think, in the case of the UV, it would work like a thermostat set 
to a particular temperature.  When the air gets too hot or too cold, 
the A/C or heat kick in.  With the UV, when certain criteria germain 
to the vow are met, the UV kicks in.

bboyminn:
> This is JKR's magic as a writer, she gives us just enough
> information to drive us crazy, but not enough to truly answer the
> questions that come up.

Ceridwen:
This would be a pretty boring list if she didn't!

Ceridwen.