The Unbreakable Vow performed at Spinner’s end may have a loophole ignored by most of us and plotted cunningly by The Queen Of Magic- J.K. Rowling. The three conditions related to the Vow were-
1.Snape will watch over Draco as he attempts to fulfill Dark Lord’s wishes
2.He will, to the best of his ability protect Draco from any harm
3.If it seems that Draco will fail, Snape will perform the deed the Dark Lord had
entrusted Draco with
Now, looking closely at the three conditions, it is easily said that he watched over
Draco and to the best of his ability- his dexterix, knowledge of Dark Arts cunningness,
did protect Draco. Looking closely at the third point, though, nowhere it has been mentioned , what the DEED is!! Many would say it is as clear as a solution that the deed was to kill Albus Dumbledore, but I think otherwise. There is a distinct possibility that the deed is not what we are thinking. I believe it could have been-
Bring the Death Eaters to old D’s school.
Simply have him wandless so that when the Death Eaters come, they finish him off because the Dark Lord doubted whether Draco would have been able to perform the Killing Curse.
Now the possible arguments are-
Why did Draco try to kill Dumbledore on numerous instances?
My contradiction is that remember the person who send Lucius Malfoy- well our very own Dumbledore. It could simply have been tactics to revenge for his father’s death
Why did the Death Eaters order Draco to finish old D off?
I believe that this part of the information was told only to the Death Eaters and this was not included in the DEED Draco had to carry out. Even the Dark Lord thought that Draco would not be able to prepare a trap for Dumbledore. Could this count for another big fact that Dumbledore is not Dead, since Snape fulfilled the terms of the Vow, yet never killed Dumbledore.
The usual argument has again been evoked by me by the means of this potion. I am looking forward to all your comments. Till then Nitwit! Blubber! Oddment! Tweak!
9 comments:
Peace, my fellow sorcerers!! It seems we all need a calming potion too soothe our agitated senses.
Before coming to Bowman's potion, let me address my worthy wizards...
Dear Roderick,
I am gratified that you are so considerate regarding your friend's potion, but I really don't mind being a humble force of inspiration. Bowman is a very talented warlock (and so are you) and his actions are certainly not contemptuous.
But my friend, your despicable attitude towards Cliodne is not aceptable. She is a respected member of A&M and has full liberty to have her own set of views and values.
It is Cliodne's privelege that she notices the subtle aspects of life, taps the underlying philosophy of fiction. It is quite possible that you may not share her views of life, that she relishes Hope Faith and Love... while you enjoy the Quidditch matches between Gryffindor\Slytherin; and Dumbledore Death-Eater Duels(my favorites!).
Nevertheless, it only means that we have variety in our blog!! It only contributes to the ulterior fact that we need to mantain harmony and encourage progress. Cliodne's beliefs are not her weaknesses (far from it!) but the strength of Aurors and Marauders!
A simmering potion and an electrifying jinx may have nothing in common, but they both are necessary for Auror training.
Dear Cliodne,
It is quite rare to see you lose your temper. I expected more sophisticated ways of argument, but then... you certainly had your reasons.
I feel that both Roderick and you will erase your difference. I sincerely hope that you both acknowledge each others talents and compliment your strengths and weaknesses.
Almerick,
Thank you for those kind words. Though,the contradiction you gave has already been cotradicted by me. Read my other potions.
Cliodne,
Don't you see the irony in my words. Dumbledore is certainly not dead and this is a major contributing factor to the fact.
I would say this is a possible argument against those who believe Dumbledore to be dead coz he fulfilled the Vow
Roderick,
How dare you say my potion was taken from that of Andros. I am a fully accomplished wizard who is not that dirty sqiub Gringotts.For your cruel information the header have a slight difference which make all the difference in the world. The ingridients are completely different from one another. Mind your words hereon
Though I appreciate you appreciating my potion
Andros,
You say "Before coming to Bowman's potion..." But you never came to my potion!You just calmed Cliodne. You know comments are valuable.
Hoping to hear from all the sorcerers
Yours Magically
Bowman
The Snitch Maker
Dear Bowman,
You need not remind me that comments are valuable, as I am quite certain that I know the importance of thoughts. Internet is as complex as magic and I had published a commnet, though it seems to have lost in the oblivion of data. Now I shall come to your theory.
Unfortunately, your theory lacks your trademark freshness and originality. I see you are too deeply inspired by the now cliché Dumbledore is not Dead Theory.
Conciously or not, you have just taken a part of the elaborate above-mentioned theory and used your skills to expand it. Hence your theory is hardly thought-provoking or enticing. The ambiguities of the Snape\Narcissa Unbreakable Vow have been discussed for too long and too often, and hence are not new at all.
Now, you have emphasised and speculated on the fact that JKR has not mentioned what the "DEED" in the vow is...
...My friend, will J.K.Rowling, the "Queen of Magic", mention it in the beginning of the book that Draco, or clearly Snape, will have to kill Dumbledore? Would you have relished HBP as much as you did wil all the mystery regarding who will die??
I regret that your common theory did not enlighten me at all, and it was, as you yourself said it, a "usual argument". It is meant to be evoked again and again, but not by talented sorcerers like us.
But I have to admit the fight it cultivated between Roderick and Cliodne was quite entertaining, although undesirable at the same time.
Lucius is certainly alive, albeit not in the best of moods. I request you to edit the part boasting of the " tactics to revenge for his father’s death", along with the grammatically incorrect title.
You have also placed doubts on the fact that Draco had to kill old D, but this point is also refutable. Please remember that it was big V's explicit request that Draco should kill old D. It may be a way to vent out frustration at the malfoy sr. for being captured and losing the prophecy.
I hope that you take my remarks in good spirits and use them to enhance your powers. Please take this as an advice from a truthful and true friend.
Your well wisher,
Andros the Invincible
Andros,
My slippery
I have not read the theory in the site you mention.How do you think, I could do that act of nuisance. The title , you say is incorrect, well choose one for me coz you seem to grow arrogant as the time passes.Wait! I have enough knowledge of the subject to know that it is absolutely correct.So no need to suggest one
I guess you have got agitated by what happened between Cliodne and Roderick and have written such a harsh reply.
Though, I am an experienced wizard to guess such a thing and let me remind you again that I have not copied the article, nor has it been my inspiration. It is just like"Great minds Think Alike"
So my article is completely original from my part and thank you MR.ANDROS for your KIND and VALUABLE comments.
Bowman The Replenisher
Ps-I won't change the word death coz it has an implied meaning here
Bowman,
You read my comment's contents, but I think you didn't understand the words "grammatically incorrect title". I meant that in the title, the spelling of the word "Unbreakable" is wrong as in your title, the 'a' is missing.
However, your comment is certainly very illuminating. My friendly attempt at showing you a simple spelling error in your theory's title has given you the liberty of calling me 'arrogant' and 'no need to suggest me' etc.
You have guessed that I have grown agitated by the fight b/w Cliodne and Roderick. I regret that you are as always, wrong.
Bowman, by reading my first comment, you must have realised that I was the one who calmed their agitated senses. I am as composed as ever and you must be knowing that my tranquil composure cannot be disturbed by such things.
Although, it seems that your composure is not as balanced as mine. You may have found my reply harsh, but it may seem less so if you visit HERE and read the second point of the theory given in the link. I assure you that this theory has been read by you earlier.
I was amazed to see the lack of manners and spohistication in your comment. Bowman, it is you who gets agitated by comments and lose their sense and sensibility.
Also, you have called yourself a "great mind". Pls do not compare yourself with the great website's founders, as your powers are negligible in his (and many others') compare. Apparently, you "seem to grow arrogant as the time passes."
You have taken my friendly words of advice in the wrong sense, and called me imprudent things in a very unpleasant tone. You such unacceptable behavior seems to be a way to vent out your frustration at my good-natured criticism. Nevertheless, I had prepared a list of friends and foes in my mind. Apparently, by reading your comment, I will have to edit that list.
Magically,
Andros the Invincible
PS: The implied meaning of 'death' is only limited to you. I feel that you are only wasting time so that meanwhile, you can search your own 'implied meaning.' Also, I hope that now atleast you will correct the spelling in your title.
Andros,
I believe that thye misunderstandings that had cropped between the two of us will certainly be solved through this post.
1.I assure you that I had not read the theory. I won't deny that I have been to this site, yet I read only the portion of the historic sequences of the unbreakable vow.
Secondly, you call me agitated, well, anyone would be coz your words such as 'hardly thought provoking or enticing','talented sorcerers do not evoke usual arguments', well the are you calling Cliodne, Paracelsus, Almerick, Flaveus, me of course as untalented? Haven't we countless no. of times discussed snape's works in our potions. Don't tell me you didn't mean that. Though, you could have over -exxagerated, yet, you deny so in your next article.
You were right about the grammatical error, though, to be specific , you could have used spelling error.
You say my powers are negligible as compared to a muggle who founded that site???
You call your criticism - good natured, after using imprudent words.
No one knows what jk would do but you talk that she could not reveal much in the first chapter. My friend, remember the first chapter of hp book1 , you surely would have guessed as much from that text, that she is a master at disguising the plots.
Coming to the word death, read Roderick's first comment. Even he understood its meaning. Lucius is living or should I say surviving at a place where death is better. I used a milder emotion in fact!!
Even if you edit your list , let me tell you that you remain forever my friend.Though your loss would as a worthy friend and advisor would hurt me, yet rest assured, I will always remain true at heart.
Magically Yours
Bowman
Ex-Minister For Magic
Bowman,
Once again, you have misinterpreted my words, which were : "talented sorcerers do not evoke usual arguments". Neither of the talented wizards you mentioned have evoked any kind of usual arguments. The discussions on Snape were radically new and mainly speculated on his past. I meant the lines only for you... the words 'talented' were used for you and the words 'usual argument' for your theory. It seems you have tremendously diverted from my intended meaning.
Please remember that I shall not withstand anyone mishandling my words, and giving the wrong meaning that I underestimate my exquisite & talented fellow sorcerers.
I shall again say my comment was good-natured, until you decided to vehemently misinterpret it. I cannot help it if you take out thorns from flowers.
I re-emphasise on the fact that JKR cannot reveal much in the begining chapters, and hence she could not mention the DEED. The main \mystery of PS was that Quirell was big V's host and what is the philosopher's stone, and nothing of it was mentioned in the beginning chapters. This is why JKR is the 'she is a master at disguising the plots', as she doen not reveal anything sensitive in the beginning and keeps us on the edge till the dramatic end.
Now ciming to the use of the word 'death'. As our dear Cliodne put it, you have certainly over-exaggerated Lucius's condition in a dementor-free Azkaban, but this can also be ignored. Above all, you Bowman, of all people, have forgotten old D's words...(HBP, Pg475)
"... I would not be surprised if he (Lucius) is secretly glad to be safe in Azkaban at the moment."
See the word- 'secretly glad'? Miles far away from 'death' as you said, isn't it? I hope at least now you will realise your ghastly error in using the word 'death'. Azkaban is not acting as a place 'where death is better', and instead it is a sanctuary for him from the wrath of big V. Your word did not represent a 'milder emotion', but a terribly out of proportion one.
Also, I feel that the creator of DIND is an Order of Merlin First Class Wizard.
Let me assure you shall also remain my very good friend till eternity. Our potions shall sometimes overflow with too much heat but its contents shall always remain inexhaustible and true, like our friendship.
Yours Magically,
Andros the Invincible
Chief Warlock and Grand Sorcerer
dont tell me that lucius malfoy is dead and this theory has been there on this site before.so next time try and brew up ur own potion.got it?
Post a Comment