On the trivial and the profound.

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 165586

> > Neri:
> > Agreed. However, the vow doesn't seem much more rational from the POV
> > of ESE!Snape. True, ESE!Snape wouldn't mind killing Dumbledore, but as
> > he says himself he's going against the Dark Lord's orders in making
> > the vow. 
> 
> Pippin:
> Not quite. Voldemort hasn't ordered Snape not to kill Dumbledore, he's
> ordered him to let Draco try first.

Neri:
Not quite <g>. Voldemort hasn't ordered Snape to let Draco try
*first*. He has ordered Draco to do it, period. Snape (at least
according to what he says in Spinner's End) is only guessing that
Voldemort means him to do it in the end, and guessing what Voldemort
would like is risky, a risk that ESE!Snape doesn't need to take. Snape
taking this risk suggests he has an agenda of his own here.


> Neri:
> And moreover, he also puts himself in a big risk, because if
> > Draco tries killing Dumbledore on his own and fails or gets hurt
> > before Snape can reach them, then Snape is dead. So it looks like
> > Snape has reasons of his own to make the vow, which by definition
> > means OFH. 
> 
> Pippin:
> Huh? If Snape doesn't take the vow, why should Draco's failure
> mean his death? Or are you referring to the first two portions? They
> require Snape to watch over Draco, and protect him *to the best of
> his ability. *  
>

Neri:
I'm referring to the third part. The third part implies that if Draco
tries to kill Dumbledore and fails, and Snape isn't present to step in
and do the deed instead (say, because he's teaching or sleeping at the
time) then he has broken the UV and he's dead, and there are no "to
the best of your abilities" excuses in this part.

Moreover, even if Draco merely manages to kill himself or blow his
cover, *not* while actually attempting to kill Dumbledore, but for
example killed by Harry during the bathroom scene, it could logically
be argued that he has failed in his task. So again, if Snape wasn't
present to do it instead, then he has broken the third part of the UV,
"best abilities" or no, and he's dead. Yes, maybe the UV wouldn't
consider Draco getting killed as a failure of his task, but does Snape
want to make this experiment? Not unless he has good reasons to take
this risk.


> Neri:
> > 
> > While I frequently sound like I'm joking when promoting ACID POPS, I
> > must say that I don't know of any other theory that is even close to
> > explaining why did Snape make the vow. And as a nice bonus ACID POPS
> > also explains another unsolved mystery: what did Draco suddenly have
> > against Snape in HBP, after liking him so much for five books.  
> > 
> > 
> Pippin:
> Oh, LOLLIPOPS works just as well. Lollipops!Snape sees himself
> in Narcissa. Her loyalty to the Dark Lord has endangered her 
> dearest blood, and Snape pities her. She's begging
> for his help to save Draco, as once, perhaps, Snape begged
> Dumbledore's help to save Lily. 
> 
> But unlike Dumbledore, who trusted Snape, Narcissa does not,
> and asks for the vow. What can Snape do? If he refuses, that's as
> good as saying she's right not to trust him. Who knows what
> she'll do then? <snip>


Neri:
Sorry, not buying this stuff <g>. DDM!Snape pities Narcissa, so his
solution is to take a magical Vow meaning either Dumbledore or himself
must end up dead? I reminds you we were looking for *rational* reasons.

Neri