Wand Lore / Luna / Alchemy

[a_svirn]

No: HPFGUIDX 181656

> Carol:
> True, Harry tortured Amycus Carrow for a trivial insult, but Snape
is
> a much more intelligent and talented Wizard than Carrow. Considering
> that Snape is both an Occlumens and a Legilimens and that he's an
> expert on deflecting spells and using nonverbal spells, none of
which
> Harry has ever bothered to learn (he can cast Expelliarmus, which he
> learned from Snape, Stupefy, Crucio, and Protego, all of which Snape
> can deflect), I rather doubt that Harry would win the duel.

a_svirn:
You never know. A duel is always a chancy business. Dumbledore lost
to Draco, Bellatrix to a plump housewife, who probably hadn't used
magic for anything other than cooking and cleaning for years.
Besides, my point is that instead of helping them to communicate,
Dumbedore's plan, had it gone smoothly, would have made the clash
between Harry and Snape practically inevitable.

> Carol:
Snape
> defeated him handily in HBP, and Harry hasn't developed his skills
> since then. Besides, all Snape has to do is cast his Patronus to
> render Harry speechless. <snip>

a_svirn:
That's a somewhat overoptimistic view of the matter. Snape himself
clearly did not share your certainty. He took care not to reveal
himself in the Forest of Dean. Moreover, the doe patronus was Snape's
plan, not Dumbledore's. Dumbledore knew nothing about it.

> > a_svirn:
> > Then again, he could anticipate that VOldemort would try to
overcome
> > the twin-core connection. And what better wand than the best of
them
> > all?
>
> Carol:
> Voldemort knew about the twin-core connection from GoF onward but
did
> nothing about it until "The Dark Lord Ascending," when he forcibly
> borrowed Lucius Malfoy's wand.

a_svirn:
There is that. But it is never smart to rely on your opponent's being
obtuse. Far better to devise the worst case scenario.

> Carol:
> IOW, there was nothing inevitable about Voldemort's going after the
> Elder Wand, much less about his finding it before Harry found the
> Horcruxes (especially if Harry found it first).

a_svirn:
Nor indeed. There was nothing inevitable in Harry's finding even one
of the Horcruxes thanks to Dumbledore's careful planning.

> >
> Carol:
> > > Not necessarily. If the wand were stripped of its powers, Snape
> could just hand it to Voldemort (protecting himself if necessary
with
> Occlumency) and tell him that he took it from the dead DD.
> >
> > a_svirn:
> > Yes, necessarily. As soon as Voldemort realised that the wand
> didn't work for him as it should, he would surely kill Snape.
> Actually, as things played out he didn't have to kill him – it was a
> mistake on Voldemort's part. He had to kill Draco instead. But if
> everything had gone according to Dumbledore's plan, Snape would have
> died for certain.
> >
>
> Carol:
> No, not necessarily. :-) (Sorry about the ping-pong match response.
I
> couldn't resist.) All Snape would have to do is to show that it
> doesn't work for *him*--that it's just a stick of wood--and
Voldemort
> would know that he wasn't the master, either.

a_svirn:
Well, what was stopping him from doing just that in the Shrieking
Shack?
Besides, what do you think, would be Voldemort's reaction? If he were
to be convinced he would be enraged, and kill Snape out of sheer
frustration, if he remained unconvinced he would kill Snape just to
be on the safe side.

> Carol:
> Please explain to me how Dumbledore could have *planned* for Snape
to
> die when he needed Snape to deliver that crucial message to Harry.
> Dead men don't deliver messages.

a_svirn:
No idea. I never said that it makes any sense to me. On the
contrary, one of the reasons I felt so frustrated with DH is that the
whole business *doesn't* make sense.


> Carol:
> We know that DD wanted Snape to have the wand *and* wanted it to be
> stripped of its powers. The question is what he wanted Snape to do
> with the wand.

a_svirn:
The only possible answer I can find that he meant Snape to be a
target for anyone who was after it. That is, either for Harry, or for
Voldemort.

> Carol, who thinks that the only person Dumbledore deliberately
> sacrificed was himself and that Snape's death was no more inevitable
> than Harry's except in the mind of their creator, JKR (I refuse to
use
> the word "creatrix"!)

a_svirn:
Huh. So you take the author's intent into account after all?

a_svirn, who apologies for posting this reply for the third time. 
(But I really couldn't leave the "Shrieking Shark"! Might have given 
someone nightmares.)