[HPforGrownups] Re: ESE, DDM, OFH, or Grey? (WAS: DDM!Snape the definition)

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 162582

> Magpie:
> I don't see how OFH/LiD is not looking for wiggle room.  You need
> wiggle room if you're OFY always. People who are out for themselves
> don't make Unbreakable Vows to other people.
>
> Sarah:
> I kind of answered this already, but I think what is being asked in
> the UV is within Snape's pre-established boundaries, which are
> concurrent with what he has to do in order to not self-eviscerate,
> therefore he doesn't have a problem doing it.

Magpie:
But it's the self-eviscerate that's the problem, not agreeing to kill 
Dumbledore. If he doesn't want to eviscerate himself why is he taking a 
suicide pact?

> Magpie:
> That's why, imo, OFH!Snape arguments always have to focus on the
> fact that he's agreeing to kill Dumbledore instead of the more
> important aspect, which is what happens if he doesn't do as he's
> promised.
>
> Sarah:
> I think the more important aspect is what he's promised Dumbledore,
> which is basically the same thing he's promising Narcissa.

Magpie:
And as I said to Alla yes, killing Dumbledore is important but in the 
specific context of Snape being out for himself the suicide nature is the 
sticking point. Why is someone who is trying to avoid being destroyed 
agreeing to his own death?  I know that the idea is that Snape would be 
planning to kill Dumbledore and so fulfill the Vow, but the risk is still 
there that something would prevent it or circumstances would change. If 
Snape had just agreed to kill Dumbledore without the magical vow, it 
wouldn't be an issue.

> Magpie:
> Snape's
> entire personality disappears replaced by a guy who's got to be
> explained from top to bottom through exposition or our own
> imagination. Yes, Rowling has kept us from guessing Snape's secret.
> But she's also *got* us guessing by giving us actual clues to work
> with.
>
> Sarah:
> LDS suffers from this problem no more badly than DDM or ESE, and
> possibly less so.  And there are actual clues.  A theory should seek
> to solve problems, right?  Problem:  Snape keeps saving Harry even
> though he hates him.  If Snape were a huge fan of all that is
> Dumbledore, maybe he'd be convinced that Harry and Neville aren't
> jerks since they are liked by Dumbledore.  Problem: introduction to
> important Life Debt magic which has yet to play out.  Problem:  no one
> knows what that blasted Snape is up to.  There are more, but this is
> just a theory that would wrap up a lot of things.

Magpie:
I don't think this at all shows that LDS avoids the problems DDM Snape 
doesn't. The DDM theory is built from exactly these things. DDM is not "a 
huge fan of all that is Dumbledore." That's a straw DDM you're referring to, 
where he's a nice guy and being DDM means he mirrors Dumbledore's feelings 
and looks to him for all things, but he clearly doesn't and doesn't have 
to--he's more dynamic for not being that. (Harry, too, is DDM without 
understanding or agreeing with Dumbledore's nature half the time.)

The way DDM actually answers these questions is that Snape is driven by 
remorse over the events at Godric's Hollow, which fuels both his desire to 
protect Harry and his hatred of him. It made him switch sides, and he became 
loyal to Dumbledore. He has no reason to like Harry or Neville personally 
(any more than Harry has come to give Snape a chance since DD likes him). 
This is all connected to the Life Debt playing out in terms of Snape's 
personality.


> Magpie:
> I admit I haven't quite understood the explanation for the UV in
> this theory. It seems like it only understands why Snape would agree
> to kill Dumbledore rather than explaining why he'd agree to die if
> he didn't kill Dumbledore.
>
> Sarah:
> It makes sense if and only if LDS's Life Debt was transferred to
> Harry.  Dumbledore's mission in life is to defeat Voldemort.  Harry is
> the weapon.  Having a protector for Harry therefore helps the cause.
> Having a spy who outlives Dumbledore also helps the cause.
> Dumbledore's plan is convoluted, and related to the fact he's going to
> drop dead of various issues any minute anyway.  If Dumbledore told
> Snape, look, your best bet for protecting Harry is to kill me blah
> blah, then LDS Snape already has to do it to escape other gnarly
> magical consequences which may or may not include death, or may be
> "worse."

Magpie:
So basically we have to make up a fate worse than death that Snape is 
avoiding by taking a death vow? That seems like a lot for me to be assuming 
that I haven't seen any dramatic references to in canon. Especially since 
canon directly contradicts it. Snape's Life Debt was to James, not Harry. 
James died partially as a result of Snape's own actions and nothing bad 
happened to Snape literally. I think the transferrence of the debt to Harry 
is purely the doing of Snape's own emotions. The Debt itself, if it's the 
kind of magical contract you describe here, wouldn't hop over to Harry. It 
would play out on Snape at James' death and he would die or something worse. 
He didn't. You yourself in another post are referring to complications like 
"upgraded versions" and "second chances" which take any teeth out of it as a 
plot device. Unlike the kind of magical contract we see in GoF (the point of 
it being that it's a simple way to make Harry have to participate) it's 
fifteen pages of legalese with outclauses and interest gained. It's no 
longer a magical contract. It works beautifully as a metaphor for DDM's own 
feelings, however.:-)

-m