Protego, and Snape's suspicions (Was: Protego (and a bit on Impedimenta))

[Annemehr]

No: HPFGUIDX 185936

 
> > > > Annemehr:
> > > > So, I wonder if Snape could have used [Protego] to shield 
himself 
> > from 
> > > Buckbeak at the end of HBP - or, can't you use it when you are 
> > > moving, because then you'd just run into your own wall? <snip>
> 

> Carol responds:
> 
> The wall would be between you and the hippogriff, which means that
> when you turned around to run, it would be behind you--unless, of
> course, the wall is all around you, in which case, it would have to
> move with you, or you'd be trapped by your own spell. Same thing 
with
> riding a broom. 


Annemehr:

D'oh.

Yes, I was just assuming it would be a wall all the way around you.  
I hadn't thought it out or anything, it was just unconscious.

I swear, an unconscious assumption is going to kill me one of these 
days.


Carol:

> If you just want to create an obstacle between
> yourself and the pursuer, you probably cast Impedimenta rather than
> Protego. When Harry is on a broom, he casts Impedimenta at a masked 
DE
> (who turns out to be Stan Shunpike), causing him to strike an
> invisible barrier. It might be better to cast Impedimenta at a
> pursuing hippogriff rather than Protego, depending on how long the
> wall lasts and whether it stays with you.


Annemehr:

Whereas, Snape just did the Muggle hands-over-the-head-and-run 
thing.  *snort*  And I don't think it's because he was watching for 
the gate, either.  I think JKR was just getting a dig in.

Anyway, Impedimenta seems pretty redundant now, doesn't it?  For one 
thing, it seems to need to be aimed, and Protego doesn't (its barrier 
is bigger, I think).  Although, it was much easier for Harry to learn.


Carol:

> Of course, a conjured snake is
> different from a real hippogriff or a Dark witch/wizard. The best
> counterspell for Serpensortia is clearly Evanesco, the Vanishing
> spell. But if the choice is between Protego and Impedimenta, I think
> that Protego would be better because the wall would last longer,
> creating *protection* as opposed to an *impediment* if the names of
> the spells are any indication of their respective purposes.


Annemehr:

Hmmm.  I don't think Protego would be of any less use against a 
conjured snake than against a real hippogriff -- after all, it is 
described as a protection against *spells* that also apparently works 
against *bodies.*  So whether the snake is "real" or not shouldn't 
make any difference.  

The point of using Evanesco is not just to protect against the snake, 
but to get rid of it altogether - I suppose that was the sense in 
which you meant it was the "best" counterspell, yes?


Carol:
> 
<snip interesting enumeration of the various effects of Protego 
throughout the series> 

> (I wish JKR were more consistent in describing the various spells 
and
> their effects. At this point, to be honest, I'm just confused.)


Annemehr:

Thanks for that!  And I agree, she's awfully inconsistent about many 
things, and not all of them "minor details."

 
> Annemehr:
> > I can't really say whether he thought Harry might be responsible 
for 
> > the attacks.  That would partly depend on how much DD told him.  
But 
> > it really doesn't look as though Snape suspects Harry in 
connection
> with them, as I recall. <snip>
> 
> Carol responds:
> 
> "Guilty until proven innocent, Severus"? (I'm quoting from memory, 
but
> it's in the scene in CoS when they find the Petrified Mrs. Norris.
> (Filch, of course, definitely suspects Harry.)


Annemehr:

Ah, but guilty of *what?*  By the time Snape is recommending 
restrictions for Harry, it has already been clearly established that 
this was advanced dark magic, and not a mere Petrificus Totalus, 
nothing a second year could have done.  DD has already tried several 
things unsuccessfully, to undo it.

No, Snape just wants to know what Harry was up to, to take him to 
that corridor.  He can tell that Harry is not telling the whole truth 
about why he was there.  And his smirking, I think, is because he's 
enjoying the fact that Harry was very much in the wrong place at the 
wrong time, and will end up paying for it (something Ron knew, 
too: "Trust me, we don't want to be found here," he told Harry).

Besides, if Snape manages to see Harry punished for *something,* he 
has no doubt that Harry will know what it's for. ;)

> 
> > Annemehr:
> > Given that I don't think he believed that Harry was opening the 
> Chamber, I'm thinking this was at DD's behest.  (Was there ever any
> indication that Snape ever knew that Voldemort was the one who 
opened
> it the first time, btw? I can't recall.)
> 
> Carol:
> He would know that the Chamber had been opened fifty years ago, at 
the
> point when Hagrid was expelled and Tom Riddle received his award for
> services to the school, which was prominently displayed in the 
Trophy
> Room. And he would know, of course, that Voldemort was a 
Parselmouth.
> So, if he also knew that Tom Riddle was Voldemort, he would know 
that
> Tom Riddle, the original Heir of Slytherin, had opened the Chamber
> fifty years earlier.


Annemehr:

This suggests to me, the subject of a whole new thread: who knew 
what, and when?  But I would need a reread first, especially of DH.

The fact that LV is a Parselmouth may not necessarily tell Snape 
anything.  The general superstition is that it is the "mark of a Dark 
Wizard."  And it is general knowledge that LV is a Parselmouth.  But 
DD is the only one we know for sure who knew that the "beast" was a 
basilisk, and thus that Parseltongue was necessary to carry out the 
attacks.

We have two descriptions from books of what a basilisk is: the page 
from the old library book that the petrified Hermione had clutched in 
her hand, and the very similar entry in the FB that JKR wrote for 
charity.  Neither mentions petrification as an effect of seeing the 
eyes reflected.  And it seems that no one could tell by Myrtle's dead 
body that a basilisk had killed her.  So I don't think there is 
anything to connect a basilisk, and therefore Parseltongue, to the 
Chamber.

Lucius Malfoy had Tom Riddle's diary, and must therefore have known 
that this was LV's given name.  Does this mean that Snape may have 
known, as well?  I wouldn't trust that assumption - recall in the 
beginning of HBP, when Narcissa and Bellatrix visited Snape, and 
Bella *almost* mentioned that LV had entrusted her with Hufflepuff's 
cup.  She stopped herself: apparently she was told to keep that a 
secret, and probably Lucius was told the same thing about the diary.

It's just possible that Snape may know who Moaning Myrtle is, and had 
asked her how she died, at some point.  If so, he may recognize 
what "great big yellow eyes" would mean.  But, no one in Harry's time 
seems to know who Myrtle is (seems odd, but there you are).  And 
after all, she hadn't been in the castle the whole time, she'd been 
haunting Olive Hornby for a while first.  Perhaps that's when her 
identity had been forgotten.  There's nothing to suggest that Snape 
knew she was the victim of the "monster."

Finally, we're down to the question of whether DD told Snape that it 
was Riddle/LV who did it.  And, who knows?

That's all I can think of, for now.

> 
> Annemehr: 
> > As for the Dueling Club in particular, he may just have been 
looking
> for a good opportunity to elicit Parseltongue from Harry, and this 
> was it.  I can't imagine him setting a snake on Harry himself, as it
> would would be construed as attacking a student, and it wouldn't be 
> his style anyway.  Best to induce Draco to do it sometime; those 
two 
> are always at odds and it would look like business as usual.
> 
> Carol responds:
> The whole point being that DD asked him to determine whether Harry 
was
> a Parselmouth without telling him anything else? Snape would at 
least
> connect Parseltongue (and DD's suspicion that Harry spoke it) with 
the
> Petrification of Mrs. Norris and would probably know that the 
monster
> must be a Basilisk. (He, of course, must be the one who brewed the
> potion from the Mandrake roots that Madam Sprout was conveniently
> growing.) I think that Snape had suspicions of his own, as 
the "shrewd
> and calculating expression" indicates (as does his reaction when 
Harry
> is found near the Petrified cat). Obviously, if he suspected that
> Harry was the Heir of Slytherin, he was wrong, having once again 
used
> his excellent powers of deduction to arrive at the wrong conclusion,
> but it would at least provide him with a reason for wanting to
> determine whether Harry spoke Parseltongue other than merely 
following
> DD's inexplicable orders.


Annemehr:

Well, I have no problem imagining that Snape may have done it merely 
on DD's inexplicable orders, and done it well to boot.

But yes, if DD suddenly became interested in Harry's Parseltongue 
abilities while the attacks were occurring, that would give him a 
hint that a basilisk was involved.

But I still can't see that Snape could really have thought that Harry 
himself was responsible for the attacks.  I mean, we're talking about 
the *Chamber of Secrets* and the *Heir of Slytherin* here.  The 
presence of a real Dark Lord.  Snape wouldn't be merely sneering at 
Harry, if he thought that was who he was.  Really, he can only be 
thinking that Harry is messing around as usual, sticking his nose in, 
and getting himself involved with things he knows nothing about.


Carol:

> Interesting dilemma for Snape, who has to protect Harry while 
exposing
> him as having an ability associated with Dark wizards, 
<snip>


Annemehr:

Oh, well, I think it was just a regular snake; as this was planned, 
I'm sure he had an antidote ready, whether magical or "muggle."  
There was surely no real danger anyway.


Carol:

> One thing is certain: Snape reported to Dumbledore that Harry was a
> Parselmouth, probably describing the incident in detail. I'm quite
> sure that his methods and intentions met with Dumbledore's approval
> even though DD didn't share his (apparent) suspicions. 
> 
> Carol, who likes the Dueling Club scene because it provides the 
first
> hints that Snape knows something besides Potions (and because Snape
> shows up Lockhart so completely)
>


Yep, agreed on all points, except for that "apparent suspicions" 
part. ;)

Annemehr