[HPforGrownups] Re: Original wizards/LiD!Snape

[Magpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 149812


> kchuplis:
>
> You know, I never thought about it before, but poor Draco doesn't have
> much of an imagination,does he. One thing I've noticed about the
> successful wizards good or dark is they are imaginative.  He doesn't
> stand much of a chance, does he. I sometimes wonder if Draco isn't
> going to be the sacrificial <cough> lamb <cough> in Seven.

Magpie:
I wouldn't worry about him too much on that score (as opposed to any number 
of things threatening him or his other personal flaws).  Hermione got the 
idea from the coins for the DEs Dark Marks to begin with.  Nothing wrong 
with using something you see someone else using--he and Hermione both seem 
to be taking an idea and changing it to suit their own purposes. Neither of 
them are really primarily concerned with getting points for originality. 
Snape sometimes invented spells, sometimes improved on Potions formulas. 
We've heard about a few wizard inventors, but that doesn't seem to usually 
be the key to victory  in the books.  HBP was more about "the other side can 
use magic too" (so don't be too cocky about the stuff you create because it 
may get used on you in ways you don't expect)--that was brought up a number 
of times: Snape's spells at school were used against him, as were the coins 
and the Twins' actions against Montague, and their products.  Sometimes the 
same idea is used independently by different wizards (animagi, polyjuice, 
etc.)  I don't know how "original" the Cabinet plot was, but Dumbledore 
didn't see it coming and didn't prepare for it so he hadn't thought of it. 
Sometimes even unoriginal thinkers can do something original just due to the 
fact they're individuals.  That seems to be more the kind of originality JKR 
highlights.  So Harry, for instance, doesn't make up his own spells, but he 
thinks very differently from everyone else because he's a unique individual.

Alla:

I said "of course he has the Order", didn't I?

Magpie:
You said it but then you dismissed it without reason.  I just don't see how 
one does that.  To me it's like saying, "If Harry doesn't play Seeker then 
they have no other capable players to fill the position (I mean, of course 
they have Ginny but Harry seems to be the most gifted Seeker talent-wise)." 
Yes, Harry seems to be the most talented, but that doesn't make Ginny any 
less of a valid choice or mean that the team *must* have Harry or forfeit. 
So if one remembers Ginny or any of the other Quidditch players one must 
reject the whole point.

Similarly, we can speculate on all the skills Snape has that others don't 
have, but Dumbledore still did indeed have many competent and powerful 
wizards at his disposal so "he had to go to Snape because there was no other 
powerful or competent wizards" can't be evidence of anything.  Whatever 
reason he had for sending Harry to summon Snape to him on the Tower, it can 
not have been that Snape was the only person able to fight Death Eaters.

Alla:
I am still to discover that ANYBODY in the order was inventing dark
curses except Snape, to me it seems quit reasonable to speculate
that former DE will have the most knowledge how to fight them.

Magpie:
I wouldn't argue that Snape couldn't be the most knowledgeable but that 
doesn't mean Dumbledore had to go to Snape alone and no one else.  We have 
canon of these people fighting Death Eaters.  Even if Dumbledore felt 
Snape's expertise was necessary to this fight it doesn't explain why he 
didn't summon him as well as the others.

-m