Comparing Secret Keeper plan and UV plan (Re: Why DD did not ask Snape)

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 166200


> Jen:  If this is the case, then there wouldn't really be a 
parallel, or no parallel with Snape 
> and Sirius.  Come to think of it, there never was one since Sirius 
never actually took the 
> Fidelius, it was Peter, and he was lying when he took it.  So if 
Snape is lying, then the 
> parallel is Snape and Peter, both took a vow/oath and lied about 
what they were planning 
> to do.

zgirnius:
Snape's position is parallel to Sirius's not because they were both 
the targets of a spell, but because they both took on a role which 
places them in jeopardy. The idea of the secret SK switch was that 
everyone would believe Sirius was the SK, and thus it is he, not 
Peter, who would be in the most danger. If Snape swore a vow to carry 
out a task he had no intention of performing, Snape likewise put 
himself at risk.

> Jen:  That could be, I see that possibility.  Even if this is 
true,  I still see an ethical dilemma 
> if Snape agreed to take an Unbreakable, a risky Vow even before he 
heard all the clauses,  
> when he had a perfect excuse not to since his loyalty is 
(supposedly) pledged to the Dark 
> Lord above the DE's.  Snape can't guarantee a good outcome by lying 
and planning not to 
> carry out the clauses.   

zgirnius:
Snape can't guarantee a good outcome, period. I don't understand your 
objection. Snape can prevent the worst outcome in the worst case 
scenario by simply not killing Dumbledore (he thinks).

> Jen:  Do we know when Snape told DD? 

zgirnius:
We don't even know that he did, ever. There are other explanations 
for the bits of canon I think suggest he did. The parallel Quick 
Silver suggested, however, was inspired by the Snape theory I 
expounded, in which Snape tells him soon after taking the Vow.

Jen:
>  Back to the parallel with the Secret Keeper, I was pointing 
> out the ethical difference between the two scenarios:  Snape making 
a unilateral choice 
> which could potentially involve killing Dumbledore, even if Snape 
didn't intend to and was 
> lying, is different from the Fidelius.

zgirnius:
I guess I think about ethics differently than you do. What makes 
Snape's choice bad here, it seems to me, is circumstance, which is 
not something on which I judge the rightness or wrongness of a 
previous action. I recognize your opinion may differ on this.

Snape did not think his Vow would ever lead to his killing Dumbledore 
because he knew what he was going to do if the Vow kicked in - 
nothing. In my opinion, this was a reasonable assumption to make.

Jen:
> Cleaning up after 
> the fact is not the same as informed or indirectly informed 
consent. 

zgirnius:
Dumbledore did not ask to be the target of an assassination plot any 
more than James did. That's where I see the parallel. And that is the 
part that made the plan necessary, not the Vow. (As you point out 
below, the Vow was not necessary to the plan to protect Draco; the 
flip side is that the plan for Draco was necessary, even without the 
Vow).

> Jen:  I'm uneasy if JKR takes the route of Snape choosing the Vow 
with the idea that he 
> wouldn't ever carry out the clauses, and then placing the 
responsibility for his choice 
> squarely in Dumbledore's lap (if Snape was ordered to kill him). 

zgirnius:
I'm not. I'm not sure why you are based on your post...I'm being 
dense today, I fear. At any rate, Snape is free to disregard 
Dumbledore's wishes. (As, it would seem based on his 'pleading' tone, 
Dumbledore is well aware). He is also in a position to understand and 
agree with Dumbledore's reasons for the request.

There could be, as you suggest, more to the story behind Snape's 
initial decision to take the Vow. If so, I have no idea what. I'm 
trying to put together the pieces we have in a way that makes the 
most sense to me.

Jen:
> That's his job anyway, he doesn't need a dark vow to ensure getting 
> information.  

zgirnius:
It's his job anyway, so he should not do anything at all shady in its 
performance? If he does not do things actively to improve his chances 
of getting information, presumably he will get less of it than he 
otherwise would. The Vow is a lie if he does not intend to keep it, 
and I would imagine, not his first. Other than that, it seems to 
endanger him, which seems a risk he has the right to take on if he 
finds the possible rewards worth it.

Especially if "he means me to do it in the end, I think" is a correct 
perception with he=Voldemort, Snape is already seeing a kill 
Dumbledore or die situation in his future.

> Jen:  But they didn't need the UV for that plan!  That's a fine 
plan, a good plan.  The UV was 
> an error on Snape's part, not because of the poor outcome, but 
because there was no need 
> for it in the first place (given the information we have).  

zgirnius:
I don't have a problem with the idea that the Vow was an error. 
However, I do see a purpose for a Vow of some sort in the plan. If 
Snape has been told about Draco's task by Voldemort, he can't be seen 
interfering with it to save Dumbledore. The Vow gives him a cover for 
his involvement in the guise of helping Draco, and a motive for doing 
so (the risk to him if Draco fails).

Note Draco does not doubt that Snape is asking him questions and 
trying to give him advice for selfish, yet loyal to Voldemort, 
reasons (stealing the glory). I believe that is the motive Bella 
ascribes to him, and explained to Draco during his summer lessons 
with her. If there were no Vow, I'm guessing the idea she would have 
been trying to plant in the minds of anyone who would listen is that 
Snape's interference proves he is a spy. She's not, because the Vow 
convinced her (and anyone else who may know about it).