Why DD did not ask Snape to kill him. (extremely long)

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 165928

Dana:
> Of course it is besides the fact that the majority of fans seem to 
hold this view while JKR specifically states it is not easily 
guessable what will 

happen in book 7 or she will be extremely annoyed.

Ceridwen:
While the interviews, and answered questions at JKR's site, are 
useful and considered canon-compatible if not actually canon for the 
purposes 

of this list, I tend to take what JKR says with a grain of salt.  In 
this case, what stops me from believing her unequivocally, is that 
this is a book 

series for children and "young adults" - teens - who may not have 
read as extensively as the adults on this and other lists.  For the 
target 

audience, any scenario will be harder to guess than it would be for 
adults.

Dana:
> From a logical standpoint, Snape's reaction in the forest makes no 
sense if DD indeed asked him to kill him. Why? Because Snape by that 

time already believed LV expected him to do it and he committed 
himself to an UV to do it if Draco failed.

Ceridwen:
There has been some discussion on this list about that statement of 
Snape's in Spinner's End.  To some, it is a straightforward statement 
made 

by one DE to another.  To some, it is misdirection by a spy to 
members of the group he is spying upon.  And to some, he didn't mean 
LV here, 

but DD.  No name is ever mentioned.

Dana:
> Because all of them (DD/LV/UV) give him the same option. Do it or 
die. DD's orders are totally irrelevant to the outcome under these 

circumstances, unless I am to believe that Snape had rather died and 
had planned to do so.  *(snip)*

Ceridwen:
Another bone of contention between DDM!Snapers and ESE!Snapers.  You 
already understand the ESE!Snapers' side.  Some DDM!Snapers 

do believe that Snape would rather have died than kill Dumbledore, 
but the curse on the DADA position manipulated events to make sure he 

had to do it in the end.  The reason for wanting to die varies, I 
think, from one proponent to another.  Snape wants to be recognized 
as a hero 

and will go out in a blaze of glory; Snape is tired of having to walk 
the tightrope between DD and LV - it's so nervewracking that he would 

rather let something kill him at his own discretion than wait for the 
sudden surprise of LV, for instance, doing it, with some torture for 
the salad 

course.  There are imagined reasons that fall between the two.  And 
of course, in a series for children and teens, suicide wouldn't be 
suggested.

Another possibility brought up by various posters is that Snape 
believed that he could get around the wording of the UV.  Looking out 
for 

Draco's safety is something Snape, as Draco's Head of House, would do 
anyway.  That he is also an old friend of Draco's father would 

strengthen this sense of obligation, so there was no harm done in 
taking that part of the UV.  Just because Narcissa means something 
more 

sinister doesn't mean that Snape is bound to go by her interpretation 
of keeping Draco safe.  Keeping him safe could just as easily mean 
that 

he dissuades Draco from doing the deed.  Draco rejecting the task to 
kill Dumbledore would actually be a safe thing for him to do, just as 
an 

example.  So, getting around that provision would be as easy as 
having a different interpretation of keeping Draco safe.

Dana:
> Okay the second argument of many Snape fans is that Snape is doing 
this on DD's order to save Draco from becoming a murderer. This 

necessitates the question; DD's death is serving Draco how?

Ceridwen:
Dumbledore's death comes in the same book where Slughorn tells young 
Tom Riddle that murder is an unnatural act, that it is the worst 
thing 

in the world to do, that it tears the soul.  This is such a horrible 
outcome on the overall level, that Dumbledore and Snape want to 
shield Draco 

from splitting his soul.  So, while *Dumbledore's death* doesn't 
serve Draco for many of the resons you state, having *Draco innocent 
of 

murder* serves Draco by leaving his soul unsplit.

I think you have outlined Draco's current position in the WW very 
well, otherwise.  He is definitely a fugitive, and guilty of a lot of 
things.  

Most DDM!Snape arguments come from the view that Dumbledore and Snape 
wanted to save Draco from the spiritual catastrophe of tearing 

his soul, not from the logical outcome of his own decision to act for 
LV, or for his subsequent actions.

Dana:
> Maybe Draco will be given a second chance (because LV is in such a 
good mood now DD is gone), and LV will find someone else for him to 

kill. Let see if Snape is still bound to the UV this time and do it 
for Draco again and again and again


Ceridwen:
I think the UV's provision that Snape do the deed if it seems that 
Draco is unable, was specific to the Dumbledore assassination.  The 
other 

two provisions of the UV may or may not still be in effect.  There 
has been some discussion about the UV, its limits, and its effects on 
Snape.  

There is quite a bit of disagreement as well as some areas where most 
posters agree.

Yes, some have suggested that Draco will be cut some slack because 
the deed was actually done, and that was what LV wanted.  Whether it 
is 

because this puts him in a good mood, or because it serves his 
overall mission, we just don't know.  We don't know that he will let 
Draco off the 

hook.  We do know that by the time of Dumbledore's funeral, the 
bodies of Draco, Narcissa and/or Snape have not surfaced to show that 
LV 

was displeased.

Dana:
> By the way, isn't it interesting that in the US version DD suggests 
something entirely different? Doesn't this suggest that if Snape and 
DD 

arranged this, then saving Draco was never part of it, why else 
suggest something different to the boy if all as been arranged in the 
first place?

Ceridwen:
Yes, it's very interesting that the only place where the "can't kill 
you if you're already dead" line shows up is in the US hardcover 
edition.  There 

has been a lot of discussion about this point alone, let alone why it 
was introduced to Draco in the first place.  It isn't 
necessarily "entirely 

different", but it is an odd thing that this part of the discussion 
was in the US hardcover edition and in no other.

And, there is the problem of Draco not wanting to tell Snape what 
he's doing through HBP.  He accuses Snape of trying to "steal his 
glory".  He 

keeps his activities secret, even from his closest friends at school, 
Crabbe and Goyle.  Since he was being uncooperative, there was no 
chance 

to make the offer until DD made it on the Tower.  There may never 
have been a chance to make the offer, since Draco was trying 
alternative 

methods of killing DD - the necklace and the poisoned mead - and may 
not have been available for a talk like the one we eventually did 
see.  

Proponents of the Dumbledore Stages It All theory suggest that DD's 
plan tried to cover every eventuality.  I imagine that the answer 
from 

that theory's viewpoint would be that not having the opportunity to 
broach the subject with Draco would be part of their contingency 
plans.

Dana:
> Oh, but there is more of course, because Snape fans will say DD 
asked this of Snape because Snape is more important to Harry alive. 
How?  

*(snip)*

Ceridwen:
First, some have suggested that DD did tell someone in the Order 
about the plan so Snape's ability as a spy would not be hindered.  
This 

person would be his contact, and would pass information along without 
revealing the source.  Not every Order member was shown reacting to 

Snape's AK of DD.  So there could be a contact person in the Order 
who was not in the hospital wing when the news was announced.

A second suggestion has made use of the Patronuses as a communication 
method unique to the Order.  This draws in the Tonks/Remus 

storyline.  Tonks's Patronus changed shapes because of emotional 
upheaval.  If Snape is DDM and is emotionally overwrought because of 

what he did on the Tower, his Patronus might change so that it is 
unrecognizable to other Order members as his own.  It would still be 

received with trust, because communicating with Patronus is something 
that only the Order does.  Dumbledore taught them this method, and 

it is unique to their group.  So an unknown Patronus used in this way 
would be accepted because the person sending it must have been 

instructed by Dumbledore on this use.

A third suggestion is that someone in the Order or close to Harry 
will figure out that something isn't right about the AK on the Tower, 
and will 

do some digging and put things together to arrive at the conclusion 
of DDM!Snape.  The two most likely candidates suggested are Hermione 

and Remus.

A fourth is what you suggest further down:  that no one will know, 
but in the end, Snape will prove himself to Harry's satisfaction in a 
dramatic 

way.

In most of these scenarios, Snape is helping behind the scenes - 
fomenting dissention in DE ranks; finding and at least informing 
Harry 

anonymously about the location of undiscovered Horcruxes; biding his 
time at LV's hand, soaking up information, and constructing a plan 

that will be useful in what we all tend to think of as the Final 
Battle.

Dana:
> Everybody keeps saying that Snape has tried over and over to save 
Harry's life, but the only real attempted that has registered with me 
is in 

book 1.  *(snipping other examples from books)*

Ceridwen:
People will, of course, disagree with your view that Snape did 
nothing to help Harry and friends in PoA.  I think the 'conjuring 
stretchers' to get 

the vulnerable people off the grounds while werewolf!Lupin was at 
large would be seen by some to be a life-saving measure.  And of 
course, the 

Dementors were out there, and we know from the beginning of the book 
that they seem to be attracted to Harry for some reason, and attack 

him accordingly.  So, while getting rid of Sirius may or may not be a 
motive for taking him into the castle, it would have no part in 
taking Harry.

And in OotP, Snape didn't have to send the Order to the MoM at all.  
Harry's comments were cryptic (he's got Padfoot at the place where 
it's 

kept, if I recall it right), Snape could easily say that he didn't 
understand and couldn't make eye contact for the purpose of 
Legillimency with 

Harry because Harry actively avoided his eyes.  Not true, as the 
readers know.  But, Snape could have said it.

Dana:
> He could have warned to MoM so the DE's would have been surprised 
by a dozen aurors instead of a couple of teenagers. For g*d sake, 
they 

were running around the MoM building: how hard would it have been for 
an auror to run into them without any risk to Snape's cover?

Ceridwen:
Since they didn't run into a dozen Aurors, it is feasable to assume 
that Aurors don't frequent the department in the MoM that the DEs and 

the DA were running around.  I expect that LV would know this, since 
at least one of his people works at the MoM.  If a dozen Aurors 
showed 

up, it would have been a tip-off that someone was passing LV's 
secrets.

Plus, at this point, official Ministry stance on the return of Lord 
Voldemort is that he hasn't returned.  A tip that LV's DEs were 
trying to steal 

a prophecy would probably be written off as a crank call.  If they're 
as sensitive about false reports as many Real Life police departments 
are, 

Snape would have been called in to verify, if he could, that the 
information was correct.  We do know that the MoM doesn't adhere to 
Real 

Life protocol regarding prisoners such as Sirius Black and Stan 
Shunpike, so I could easily see them dragging whoever reported a DE 
attack 

*in the Ministry itself* down to the Ministry for questioning, as 
their official line is that LV is not back.  This would be reported 
in the Daily 

Prophet, and it would probably have gotten to LV sooner because of 
his own man being in the Ministry.

Dana:
> Many argue that Snape did not hurt Harry on the way out at the end 
of book 6, but apparently they forgot Snape was run over by a 
Hippogriff.

Ceridwen:
Buckbea... er, Witherwings didn't attack Snape until after his 
confrontation with Harry.  I'm not sure where you're going with this 
observation, 

so I can't say any more.

Dana:
> So what do I think DD asked of Snape in the argument in the forest? 
Well, I believe DD asked Snape to stop his spying days and help Harry 

in his task to defeat LV.

Ceridwen:
But, Snape's spying is helping Harry to defeat LV.  Snape brings 
information to the Order that, apparently, no one has complained 
about, not 

even after events on the Tower.  It may well have been Snape's 
information that told Dumbledore that Voldemort knew about the 
destruction 

of his Diary Horcrux and blamed Lucius for it, for one example.  This 
gave DD insight into Draco's task and mindset, and to the probable 
fact, 

later borne out as truth, that Draco was being set up to die as 
punishment for Lucius.

Another thing is that Snape, or no DE for that matter, can just quit 
the DEs.  Karkarov tried it, and was hunted down and killed.  Regulus 

Black tried it, and died.  If Dumbledore is trying to protect the 
people under him, then he couldn't suggest that Snape just quit the 
DEs.  

Suggesting that he stop spying would be the same thing as suggesting 
that he just drop his membership in that organization, not go when 

summoned, just like Karkarov didn't go.

There are reasons why a leader would want to protect the people 
depending on him.  One very politic reason is that he would lose the 
trust of 

the rest of the people under his command if he were to fail one of 
them in such a way.  If he would betray Snape by ordering him to do 

something that would probably get him killed, then he would betray 
the rest as easily.

Dana:
> Personally, I believe DD's biggest mistake about trusting Snape is 
sending Snape back to LV in GoF. 

Ceridwen:
You're not the first to see it this way.  And, most people see some 
sort of validity to that argument, even if they don't agree that this 
sent Snape 

over the edge.  Some would say that, if DD really didn't give Snape 
the DADA position because he thought it would draw him back into his 

Dark Arts past, as JKR and, in HBP Spinner's End, Snape himself, 
says, then sending him back to LV, where the use of Dark Magic is 

expected and encouraged, would do the same thing in spades.

Dana:
> Snape indeed turned in his loyalty and the reason for this is not 
because he is LV's man, but because he lost faith in DD.   *(snipping)
*

Ceridwen:
Your support for this makes for a very sympathetic reading of Snape.  
I'm not sure you meant to do that, but you were very eloquent about 
the situations and their results.  I just wanted to reach out and pat 
his head for this!

*ahem*  (putting tissue away)  Again, others have suggested the same 
scenario.  Snape felt betrayed by DD, he felt as if he lost position 
with FatherFigure!DD when Harry arrived and supplanted him as the 
favorite son.  It's possible from an OFH (Out For Himself) or even an 
ESE viewpoint.  It's also possible from a DDM viewpoint with a Snape 
who is somehow feeling angsty but still determined to be against LV.

Dana:
> Only problem is, Snape still has the lifedebt and it will come into 
play in book 7, and there we will see that Sirius' little joke will 
save both Snape and Harry. Because it will force Snape out of LV's 
camp, and Harry's side will be the only one left, and Snape will take 
it.

Ceridwen:
Interesting prediction, given ESE!Snape.  And, very interesting that 
you credit Sirius with starting these wheels in motion.  It's true, 
but most people don't go back that far.  It does carry out the thread 
of choices having a bearing on future events, though.  Very 
interesting.  If Snape turns out to be ESE, then I would want to see 
something like this as it does carry the theme.

Dana:
> For those who might wonder why DD did not mention to Harry that 
Snape might have turned, and also why DD would never ask Snape to 
kill him in front of Harry, is because he knows what hate can do to 
you, that it can consume you and that it will drive all love out of 
you if you let it control you. 

Ceridwen:
Very true.  And, this has also been discussed.  Harry already hates 
Snape unreasonably at the beginning of HBP.  He blames him for 
Sirius's death.  He admits to himself that he only feels this way 
because it makes him feel better.  Harry's hatred has already begun.

And, I do believe that he has to get rid of it in order to use the 
Patented Power of Love to vanquish LV.  To me, getting rid of, 
releasing, his hatred, would be like cleaning a gun before using it.  
A lot of DDM!Snapers are worried about Harry's apparent slide into 
hatred  because of his Love being necessary to defeat LV.

Dana:
> Snape would not have died, not by UV or at the hands of LV, if he 
let DD die on his own accord (if he was really dying from the potion 
from the cave), so if Snape by legillimency saw DD was dying he could 
have stalled to let DD die because you cannot kill someone that is 
already dead, and the vow to do the task Draco was ordered to do 
would nullify at that same moment. 

Ceridwen:
Probably, the third provision of the UV would have been rendered null 
and void if DD had died on his own.  But we don't know what LV would 
have to say about that.  As you mentioned earlier, we don't have any 
proof that LV wanted Snape to do this in the end; we don't know that 
LV will let Draco off the hook if Snape does the deed for him (though 
he may see the measure as making sure the deed gets done - still, 
would LV think this way?).  And, we don't know if the UV would accept 
any DD death, or if it must happen at the hand of either the original 
contracted assassin, or the one who promised to do it if the first 
failed.  We just don't know that much about Unbreakable Vows.  So, we 
can't make the leap that Snape could definitely have waited for DD to 
finish dying before AK'ing him.

Or, we could make the leap that he did wait until DD died, and in 
that instant, produced the AK that sent the lifeless body over the 
battlements.

And, we don't know that Snape could have easily gone back to LV if 
he 'slithered out of action' again.  He may have actually needed to 
boost his credits with LV, since he's been sitting at Hogwarts while 
the others have risked capture at the MoM, for an instance.  He may 
need to prove by actions that he is LV's man.

JKR has written this character and his thread in the stories to be 
ambiguous.  As you mentioned at the beginning of your post, it's hard 
to outguess her, so I don't put anything past her.  She is developing 
this world; we don't know how half the things work in it.  We even 
have debates about things that should probably be straightforward, 
like whether the WW has habeas corpus or not: Sirius and Stan show 
that perhaps it doesn't, or perhaps that it has been suspended.  So, 
we're all still in the dark, no matter which side we take in the 
Snape Debate.

Interesting viewpoint on why you support a Snape who wasn't asked or 
ordered to kill Dumbledore.  Thanks for the discussion!

Ceridwen.