LV's bigger plan (was:Fawkes possible absence)

[sistermagpie]

No: HPFGUIDX 166353

> Dana now:
> I know another DE kid that was up to his neck in the Dark Arts that
> DD gave a chance to change his life and come over to the right 
side.
> He kept him out of Azkaban before and after LV's downfall and
> provided him with a job to keep him on the side of good.

Magpie:
Snape was a DE who came to Dumbledore with a "tale of remorse" and 
was given a second chance. Draco isn't doing that. He's just 
attempting assassinations in the school. LV's plan is laid out more 
than once: he expects Draco to die in the attempt to kill 
Dumbledore, in some fashion, and that will punish Lucius. 
Dumbledore's response is to make something else happen. Assuming 
that everything is actually part of LV's plan is, imo, making LV far 
too clever by half, and robbing the story of a lot of its meaning. 

Dana:> 
> DD never killed anyone or had anyone killed by someone. LV would
> know fully well DD would not try to kill Draco.
> I was not implying DD risked his life for Draco but only that he 
was
> busy thinking about how to deal with Draco. If it was Draco alone
> then DD's life was never in real danger. And he had ordered Snape 
to
> make sure Draco did not cause any more harm to others.

Magpie:
Death Eaters have indeed been killed by the other side, and put in 
prison as well. Dumbledore himself says that LV would expect his 
side (DD's side) to kill Draco. That's the point of the plan as 
stated by a number of people--to get Draco killed (and if he 
succeeds, it's win/win). I don't think you can make Voldemort into 
Dumbledore and give him the same understanding of good. I don't 
think Voldemort expects or wants Dumbledore to offer to hide not 
only Draco but Lucius and Narcissa as well--what is LV getting out 
of this plan? 

Dana:> 
> Everybody has his weaknesses and LV knows DD always believes there
> is still good in people and therefore are worth saving, even if he
> never saw it in Tom Riddle.

Magpie:
Voldemort's expecting Draco to be killed--which by all accounts he 
*is* expecting--does not have to violate his idea that Dumbledore is 
a sucker who wants to see the good in people. He doesn't have to 
assume Dumbledore is going to kill anyone personally, or personally 
order a hit on Draco. He just has to let things take their logical 
course--just as Peter allowed things to take their logical course 
with Sirius and Dumble "I see the good in everyone" let him go to 
Azkaban. Dumbledore saw no good in Lucius in CoS or Barty in GoF. 
He's defeated Dark Wizards in his time.
 
> Magpie:
> > This is love of an even higher level than the person. It's caring
> about
> > somebody you shouldn't care about at all. It's having compassion
> for someone
> > who hasn't earned it.
> <snip>
> 
> Dana:
> DD has a tendency of taking care of the social outcast while others
> do not believe they deserve a chance. He made sure Hagrid could 
stay
> after him being expelled (caused by Tom himself). He made sure 
Lupin
> could attend school while considered a Dark Creature. He put his
> trust in Snape while having been a DE and gave him a job. So why
> would Draco be anything different to DD?

Magpie:
Taking care of a social outcast is a different thing--Voldemort is 
allied with far more social outcasts than Dumbledore. Dumbledore's 
outcasts are all on his side, loyal to a fault. Including Snape, in 
Voldemort's understanding, who comes to him with a tale of remorse 
(I suspect the level of real loyalty Snape has for Dumbledore would 
be totally incomprehensible to Voldemort). Dumbledore did not want 
Barty Crouch Jr. soul-sucked so quickly, but he was hardly welcoming 
him with open arms and trying to save him. 
 
> Dana:
> Precisely, LV would not care what happens to Draco, to him, he is
> just one means to an end but he knows DD would think about this
> entirely differently. And therefore Draco is the perfect 
distraction> to execute a bigger plan.

Magpie:
If he knew how "differently" Dumbledore thought he would be able to 
manipulate Dumbledore the way Dumbledore manipulates LV. Voldemort 
*thinks* he understands who Dumbledore thinks with his second 
chances, but he doesn't. Voldemort could not, imo, have conceived or 
understood what Dumbledore was doing with Draco in that scene on the 
Tower.

Dana:
 LV would not waste time on punishing Lucius
> by using Draco. If he really wanted Lucius to pay he could just 
have
> killed his only son. 

Magpie:
I don't understand the widespread resistance to this plan of 
Voldemort's which is stated flat-out in the book and is perfectly in 
keeping with his sadistic nature. This is not the first time I've 
hard people claim that Voldemort is not allowed to torment the 
Malfoys this way and I don't get it. Voldemort would and does "waste 
time" punishing Lucius by using Draco (it's barely a waste of time 
for him). He does not choose to just kill Draco. This is far more 
fun, and costs Voldemort nothing at all. And it's stated by a number 
of people. I see no reason to just reject that because I know 
Voldemort would never do this--especially when I think he would. If 
I was going to start throwing out plans because I didn't think they 
were a good use of his time I'd start with the plan in GoF. Talk 
about a time waster. I thought that plan was foolish, but I didn't 
think that meant I could reject it as having happened. And this plan 
is far better and more logical.

Dana:
LV wouldn't care less, he is not withheld by any
> feeling of fairness so giving Draco a chance to make it right for 
his
> family, has nothing to do with it. He uses Draco and get back at 
Lucius
> at the same time but not just to punish Lucius and risk that the 
boy
> will not be able to kill DD. I am very convinced that his use of 
Draco
> was a very calculated one.

Magpie:
He's not being fair, he's just doing what he wants to do--and if 
Draco succeeds all the better. If his use of Draco is calculated, 
what is it calculated for? Because you seem to be suggesting that 
he's playing Dumbledore--whose actions nobody else can understand--
like a fiddle so that Draco will be as potentially changed at the 
end of the book as he is and that, to me, is far more unlikely than 
his wasting time on getting Draco killed. (He's not wasting time, of 
course. Voldemort is very active causing trouble in the WW in HBP. I 
don't think he's paying much attention or wasting much time on Draco 
at all. DD's the one who's wasting time on him.)

Dana:
> 
> I believe LV never meant for Draco to kill DD, because he would 
know
> Draco would be incapable of doing so even if the kid shoots off his
> mouth, 

Magie:
That's canon, yes. He never expected him to do it.

Dana:
but I seriously suspect LV to have set up Snape for the
> job. You say why would Snape risk his life for Draco?
> You tell me why is he taking the vow? Could LV know Snape would 
take
> it? I think he would because he knows his minions well, knows their
> weaknesses and plays them to the max.

Magpie:
This issue really isn't his knowing his minions well, but, as 
Dumbledore has suggested, that he doesn't understand love or 
friendship. He only understands his own versions of them. It's a bit 
of a stretch, imo, to think that Voldemort planned the Vow--there 
were just too many random factors there. But he could probably 
understand ESE!Snape's reason for killing Dumbledore--to get the 
glory for himself. But what of it? Is that supposed to be his 
greater plan, to get Snape to kill Dumbledore? Because that doesn't 
seem to hold up to the standard you set earlier for Draco himself--
why not just tell Snape to kill Dumbledore? 

If the bigger plan is all about Trelawney and getting her out of the 
castle, I need to have some canon for where this is happening. All 
the DEs act as people there for Draco who leave after that job is 
done. There's not even a line where somebody says, "Trelawney is 
missing!"

As for why Snape took the Vow, a Vow I would assume LV didn't know 
about, I don't know. I don't think we will know until the next book. 

-m