What's In A Patronus? (updated and revised)

[ewe2]

What's in a Patronus?

What indeed, eh? Silmariel and Ewe2 present the theory of Narcissa!Tonks and
daddy dragon Snape.

There are three Patronuses. Narcissa!Tonks Patronus, Snape's Patronus, and
Patronus the latin for Protector.

If this seems a bit overblown, I (ewe2) admit I've been watching too much
Spooks lately. Hence technical words like "cover" (false identity) and
"legend" (background to provide a believable "personality"). 

This is the new revised version for those who need citations to argue over.
Some new cites have been added as they were found.

Page and Chapter references Bloomsbury hardback edition.

Basic Assumptions:

1. We assume Narcissa!Tonks.  
2. We assume either that Molly is (a) inadvertently backing up Narcissa's
   cover or (b) is actively involved. (Spinner's End)
3. We assume that DD knows what's going on.  
4. We assume Snape knows about Imposter!Tonks as well.

Let's take this in turn:

1. There are several good reasons for Narcissa!Tonks:
	a) Keeping an eye on both Snape and Draco
 	b) The patronus/metamorphagus question
 	c) Tonk's unexpected appearances
 	d) Tonk's ignorance
 	e) The legend doesn't fit.

	a) We suspect that Snape and Narcissa may be in it together. This better
	fits 2a. It covers the Vow (Spinner's End), Snapes interesting remark
	about Patronuses (Snape Victorious pp152-153), the Polyjuice requirement,
	and certain Tonks appearances.

	b) The Patronus excuse is too weak, and in apparent conflict to canon (A
	Very Frosty Christmas p319. What did Harry guess it was?). A metamorphagus
	unable to metamorph (pp93-94, why didn't Ron think so? He immediately gets
	contradicted) is believeable but not in conjunction with a different
	Patronus. And where's the clumsiness, eh? (according to Fleur, ibid.)

	c) "Tonks" appears in odd places. She needs an excuse to be close to
	Snape/Draco but wasn't assigned guard duty (p126 suggests she shouldn't
	have been anywhere near the train or Hogwararts. Why the sudden change?),
	but somehow manages it. So why was she elsewhere? (Silver and Opals p232)
	Where was she really during the fight at Hogwarts? (The Phoenix Lament
	p578 but see also p571 for an intriguing comment) Is her story credible?
	But she is often near Draco, and conveniently not too close (3d for why).

 	d) The ignorance of asking about letters between the Order members is so
 	obvious it should even have made Harry notice. But then, a Patronus that
 	doesn't send messages is pretty useless for an Order member isn't it? And
 	why ask Harry, who has never been at the centre of Order communications as
 	frequently shown in OoP? Just because she knows he sees DD? (pp435-436 The
	Unknowable Room)

 	e) The story slips. First she's upset about Sirius (p93) then suddenly it's all
 	about unrequited love of Lupin (p582). Why Lupin? Any connection to the fact that
 	Snape HATES Lupin? And if we're to believe the time-scale, either its an
 	amazingly sudden transformation, something major has happened we're not
 	being told about, or porkys are hovering outside the window. Just because
	Harry makes 2+2=5 does not convince me we should also.

2. Molly's involvement (pp313 and 318):

 	a) While not ruling out Silmariel's idea below, Molly is ideal protection
 	for Narcissa's cover. She provides Narcissa with the means to track OotP
 	movements whilst also diverting others from close inspection by
 	championing the "unrequited love" legend. Of course, in the end, she has
 	to play the part to the hilt to protect her cover in the hospital wing.
 	Molly shushes Fleur because she won't hear of anyone slighting the poor
 	girl in her desperation. Why would she not choose to be with her family at
	Christmas?	The fact remains that oddly, Fleur is the only
 	evidence for a clumsy Tonks at all, and Fleur is hardly a credible
 	witness. (Slug Club p126, A Very Frosty Christmas pp313, 318)

 	b) Silmariel suggests that Molly may be in with Narcissa on the basis of
 	saving their children, which is a good motive. So Molly makes sure that
 	Fleur doesn't draw too much attention to "Tonks". But in the final scene,
 	Molly would know Narcissa!Tonks is acting, could she really keep quiet
 	about it? What kind of duress could Molly be under to enforce her silence?

3. DD knows what's going on.

 	a) "Tonks" is fearful of spending any time in DD's presence. She was lucky
 	DD wasn't going to stay back with Molly, but then if Molly is 2a, she's in
 	more danger from DD herself than Molly. Of course, if DD already knows
 	because he is protecting her, then he probably wants her off as quickly as
 	possible so as not to tip Harry off. (An Excess of Phelgm pp81-82)

 	b) Assume Snape told DD about the Vow and Draco. He *may* have told
 	him about Narcissa!Tonks. This bears on a more general question: Has DD
 	successfully Legilimens Snape? It is a vital question in other ways, but
 	in this case at least, if DD suspects that the Vow was a conspiracy, he
 	may have his own ideas about Narcissa's involvement; we do not know if he
 	was around "Tonks" long enough to suspect except at the Weasleys.

 	c) DD refuses to give his motives for many of his actions leading up to
 	his death. If we find it hard to believe he does not know something vital
 	about Snape that redeems his actions, then it is impossible that he heard
 	about "Tonks" also but had nothing to say about it unless she is
 	completely genuine or he knows its an imposter. And if we're right about
 	4a below, then he certainly knows, but may be keeping this secret from
 	Snape because it was a condition of Narcissa's.  It's a fair bet DD is a
 	good Occulumens too.

 	d) What is DD likely to know about Snape that may have a bearing on this?
 	Silmariel thinks two things: Snape Loves Narcissa. Snape's Patronus is a
 	dragon. Yes, we *do* mean Draco. Never awaken a sleeping Dragon, or daddy
 	Snape.	It fits the Vow, it fits Narcissa!Tonks, and it fits DD's puzzling
 	silence. DD may also have kept his knowledge secret from Snape. but that's
 	not necessarily the case (4c).

	e) Assuming DD knows about Narcissa, why? Because Snape may fail to fulfil
	the Vow in the end (p573, "Tonks" needs to know how DD died). Because he
	can use her to keep an eye on Snape.  Because in any case Harry knows
	enough now to stop Voldy (only he doesn't quite know that yet). Is DD
	responsible for the Vow? Look at the resistance Bella puts up to the idea
	of even dealing with Snape, and the Vow leaves her dumbstruck. This almost
	certainly means that the real Tonks is dead or out of reach of help.

4. Snape and Narcissa!Tonks (pp152-153)

	a) If 3d isn't enough to satisfy you, Silmariel has the original idea that
	Snape's remark about a "new Patronus" is exactly that: a new guardian,
	from Voldy to DD. Narcissa wouldn't be pleased to have that hinted at in
	front of Harry, but Snape seems arrogantly sure Harry wouldn't pick it up
	and he's unfortunately right. Of course, he also has to cover for the fact
	that Narcissa's Patronus wouldn't send messages anyway. Snape is covering
	for Narcissa's presence at Hogwarts by answering the "Patronus". May she
	not only be minding Draco but is a go-between for Snape and others? 

 	b) One scenario is Snape knows about Narcissa going to DD but thinks DD
 	doesn't know this (3c & d).

 	c) The other option, naturally is that DD has masterminded the Vow for
 	Snape and Narcissa to protect Draco in any case.

There are minor questions that arise from the situation not covered above:
does Bella have another motive for making Draco Legilimens-proof from Snape
apart from several obvious ones? If she knew of Draco's real parentage it
would be a powerful motive.

Problems with the theory:

1. Where is the real Tonks?

 	a) If DD knows of Narcissa!Tonks, then he presumably knows about what
 	happened to the real Tonks. Is she dead, or merely out of reach? Why would
 	he allow this situation?

 	b) If Molly knows, she would be even less capable of keeping quiet about
 	it. This strongly argues against Molly's knowing involvement.

 	c) Is it possible that Lupin (assuming the lovestory is not mere legend)
 	can be fooled by Narcissa!Tonks? It's all a bit sudden isn't it?

	Silmariel adds:
	
	They don't appear to be together in the whole book, at least not with the
	Tonks we see. Lupins says in Christmas he hasn't seen her in a long time,
	and if we are to believe chapter 21 at face value (hinting what the real
	Tonks is about with Lupin), Tonks is desperate looking for Lupin's news.
	My reading was they could have seen each other say 2 or 3 times, and that
	is not out of reach, if the couple doesn't know each other well enough,
	they might don't know exactly if the other has changed in such a period
	and with a war at hand, and insecurity can run rampart.

 	d) We are faced with another missing time-period. Something happens
 	between OotP and HBP that we are not privy to. Is this credible?

 	e) It is still possible that the real Tonks is in fact in love with Lupin
 	and Narcissa!Tonks stole the legend to provide cover. So the real Tonks
 	could conceivably appear at the end. But I have two problems with this:
 	surely the real Tonks would be warning the others about a ring-in! How
 	could she be allowed to escape otherwise?	How successful a conspirator
 	could Molly be in this case?

	f) It must also be conceded that despite the apparent contradiction, a
	Patronus might possibly change as a result of the "happy memory" being
	connected to a loved one. But this 'palely loitering' form of attachment
	that inteferes with Patronuses and Metamorphagi doesn't satisfy my inner
	Ockham's Razor, it's too far-fetched.


2. Snape, Narcissa, Draco.

 	a) Where is the tangible evidence? As a theory to explain current events,
 	it may hold up but where is outside confirmation? Why didn't Harry see
 	something of this in the Pensieve?

	Silmariel:
	Draco went to Hogwards because Narcissa didn't want him in Durmstrang.
	Suspicious minds can tie it to Snape (we knew so little of Narcissa up to
	OoP but we knew that).

 	b) What was the point of the Vow if it was only to convince Bella and
 	Voldy?


3. Does DD have to know EVERYTHING?

 	a) Well no. But then, we didn't know about silent magic or many other
 	major things before HBP. We don't know what DD knew. We can't rule it out.
 	But its not necessary for him to know it all for the theory to be
 	plausible.

	Silmariel adds this zinger:
	
	"Only taking your life would not satisfy me" - that's throwing a gauntlet,
	as I see it, he told Voldie he was going to hunt him, he could expect a
	reaction. A question: if all magic leaves traces, Can Cissy's arm and hand
	betray her? 

	So there's a possble path to proof and a threat from beyond the grave.
	Rhetorical or not?

4. Surely Molly isn't that stupid?

 	a) No, but she is a romantic well-meaning mother. I differ from Silmariel
 	in that I don't see a conspiracy as necessary and indeed possibly too
 	dangerous. But then it's possible she is under duress.

	Silmariel:
	Don't see it as necessary but I can't disregard conspiracy shadows over
	Fleur.  I still think she has to serve for something other than being
	perfectly pretty and perfectly in love with Bill because she was one of
	the champions in GoF, she should be a competent wizard. Oh, at least I
	hope so.


Ok, we're done. Over to you!




-- 
"I reject your reality and substitute my own!" - Adam Savage