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

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 166215

> 
> Jen:  Ihe Unbreakable is requested by someone who doesn't 
care if another person dies, it  symbolically ties the hands of those 
involved and takes away choice and freedom from the 
one taking the Vow.  Given the nature of the Vow ceremony 
and the name, as well as Ron's  description, my guess is the 
person in Snape's position is unable to change his/her mind 
once the Vow begins and therefore is at the mercy of the 
other person re: what he will be asked to do.  

Pippin:
I'd be wary of assuming the vow has some sort of special
dark mojo just because Narcissa and Bella are DE's. 

In its inflexible nature the vow seems no different than the 
other magical contracts in canon. The Goblet of Fire and
Hermione's scroll also were also binding notwithstanding  
changes in circumstance, ignorance of the 
consequences of a breach, or lack of genuine consent.
The consequence of breaking the UV is particularly
dire, but that's a difference of degree, not kind.

The dire consequence explains Arthur's reaction without
assuming the Twins were about to perform some 
horrible dark ritual. Where on earth would they have
learned enough to make it work? And if it wouldn't
have worked, what reason was there for Arthur to be
angrier than Ron had ever seen him?

Since the tongue of fire leaps out *after * the vower says,
"I will"   the vower should be able to refuse before that.
Snape's hand twitch shows, IMO, that he considers
breaking things off when he guesses what Narcissa is
going to ask next. 

Yes, the vow is a big production, but so is Trelawney's
utterance of the prophecy, and yet that turned out not
to be important in a symbolic sense, but only as a way
to get Voldemort from point A to point B. He's superstitious
and so he reads omens as important, but to Dumbledore
such predictions are rare and interesting, but not 
necessarily accurate.

I think JKR wants her readers not to be swayed by superstition;
just because something looks impressive doesn't mean it's 
important.


> Jen:  So far Potterverse characters tend to act at pivotal 
moments because they know  specifically what another character 
is planning to do (even if they are making a wrong 
> assumption) or they have an emotional reason to act.  
<snip>
> Snape assuming Narcissa was about to go off the deep end and 
do something rash or that  she had the ability to keep Draco from 
Hogwarts (which I don't think she did from Draco's 
> actions in HBP), is a very vague scenario in my opinion.  
I don't think Snape's motivation 
> for the UV is clearly printed on the page yet.

Pippin:

It's unclear to us because we're not in a position to 
know or guess what Narcissa would do if Snape turned her down.
But Snape is. He seems to know Narcissa pretty well.
He also knows what other DE's did when the Dark Lord's
commands became too much for them -- they got
themselves killed.

Narcissa had already done something rash by going to Snape
in the first place. Whenever we've seen her before, she's always
seemed in command of herself, but now she's on the verge
of emotional and physical collapse.  Whatever other options 
for herself and Draco she might be considering, in so far as
she can consider anything in such a state, she wasn't likely to 
think of any that were better than relying on Snape. Yet she 
wouldn't have asked for the vow if she
thought she could trust him without it.

It reminds me of the situation in LOTR where Frodo tricks
Gollum into coming to him. Frodo couldn't explain the situation
honestly because Gollum would never have trusted that Faramir's 
men would spare him if he surrendered. He'd have staked his 
chances on flight, and he'd have been killed.

Pippin
who wonders if little wizard kids point their fingers at
each other and shout "Avada Kedavra!" all the time,
with no more consequence than saying, "Bang! You're dead."