Snape gave a stiff nod. [to: "I have your word that you will do all in your power to protect the students of Hogwarts?"] ...
At last Snape gave another curt nod [to the proposition that he should murder Dumbledore at Twinkle's word].
Yes, I agree with what you're registering: where Severus has given his loyalty, he doesn't need Unbreakable Vows or wand oaths or life debts or any other trash to be trustworthy.
An honorable person is bound by hir honor.
A dishonorable one, can be bound by nothing. You can try the Unbreakable Vow, but s/he'll probably find a way to wriggle out of performing hir debt, whatever penalties you impose.
I mean, this is the basic problem of signing a contract with a dishonest person. A slimeball can always find wriggle-room, however tight you try to make the contract.
So, yes, we see Dumbledore accepting Severus's nod in HBP (not even verbal affirmation!) as worth more than an Unbreakable Vow from a lesser man. (We don't know if Twinkles accepted Sev's "Anything" when he turned as worth the same, because that was Snape's memory and we never saw Dumble's response to Sev's affirmation. Snape gave that memory to Harry as proof of his absolute loyalty to Lily, so he'd hardly have shown Harry if Dumbles' response at the time had been to set spies on Severus to see if his repentence was genuine and abject enough).
But that's my whole problem with this incident.
Snape has no reason to be loyal, or protective, or whatever, of any of the principals here.
Yes, if he gave an authentic oath he'd honor it. But why would he give such an oath?
And a forced oath, an involuntary one, he'd instead look for means to circumvent.
Sev told both Lily (a few days after the incident) and Harry (his considered judgment as an adult) that wha HE thought was going on was: the Marauders (all four, the dominent pair, or the pair plus the werewolf, is not made clear) decided to rid themselves of the Slytherin spy by committing murder-by-werewolf.
Only James realized at the last minute that the Marauders might not be able to cover up such a crime, and intervened to "save" Snape. Or rather, to save himself, Black, and Lupin (and maybe Pettigrew) from expulson and Azkaban.
Severus owed no debt to James for that bit of self-serving cowardice. His honor was never engaged by James's "saving" him, not when James was principally saving his own arse and his friends'.
You're right, with Severus, his honor would bind him far more deeply than any magical contract/binding ever could.
With a magical contract, he would simply devote his considerable ingenuity to breaking/circumventing it.
Not so if his honor or loyalty were involved.
(Which, in fact, I rather think is what happened at the end of PoA--Sev had managed to make the binding not to speak directly about Lupin's lycanthropy contingent on that condition's not endangering anyone else.. Once he had proof of such endangerment, he was released to speak...)
But how could Sev's honor or loyalty be invoked in keeping Lupin's/the Marauders' secrets for them?
(And now that I think about it--part of Sev's conflict in PoA might have been between his forced obedience to a binding, which he was always looking for ways to circumvent or break, and his deeper feeliings of loyalty to the headmaster, who seemed, however foolishly, to trust Lupin....)
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-08-07 06:50 am (UTC)...
At last Snape gave another curt nod [to the proposition that he should murder Dumbledore at Twinkle's word].
Yes, I agree with what you're registering: where Severus has given his loyalty, he doesn't need Unbreakable Vows or wand oaths or life debts or any other trash to be trustworthy.
An honorable person is bound by hir honor.
A dishonorable one, can be bound by nothing. You can try the Unbreakable Vow, but s/he'll probably find a way to wriggle out of performing hir debt, whatever penalties you impose.
I mean, this is the basic problem of signing a contract with a dishonest person. A slimeball can always find wriggle-room, however tight you try to make the contract.
So, yes, we see Dumbledore accepting Severus's nod in HBP (not even verbal affirmation!) as worth more than an Unbreakable Vow from a lesser man. (We don't know if Twinkles accepted Sev's "Anything" when he turned as worth the same, because that was Snape's memory and we never saw Dumble's response to Sev's affirmation. Snape gave that memory to Harry as proof of his absolute loyalty to Lily, so he'd hardly have shown Harry if Dumbles' response at the time had been to set spies on Severus to see if his repentence was genuine and abject enough).
But that's my whole problem with this incident.
Snape has no reason to be loyal, or protective, or whatever, of any of the principals here.
Yes, if he gave an authentic oath he'd honor it. But why would he give such an oath?
And a forced oath, an involuntary one, he'd instead look for means to circumvent.
Sev told both Lily (a few days after the incident) and Harry (his considered judgment as an adult) that wha HE thought was going on was: the Marauders (all four, the dominent pair, or the pair plus the werewolf, is not made clear) decided to rid themselves of the Slytherin spy by committing murder-by-werewolf.
Only James realized at the last minute that the Marauders might not be able to cover up such a crime, and intervened to "save" Snape. Or rather, to save himself, Black, and Lupin (and maybe Pettigrew) from expulson and Azkaban.
Severus owed no debt to James for that bit of self-serving cowardice. His honor was never engaged by James's "saving" him, not when James was principally saving his own arse and his friends'.
You're right, with Severus, his honor would bind him far more deeply than any magical contract/binding ever could.
With a magical contract, he would simply devote his considerable ingenuity to breaking/circumventing it.
Not so if his honor or loyalty were involved.
(Which, in fact, I rather think is what happened at the end of PoA--Sev had managed to make the binding not to speak directly about Lupin's lycanthropy contingent on that condition's not endangering anyone else.. Once he had proof of such endangerment, he was released to speak...)
But how could Sev's honor or loyalty be invoked in keeping Lupin's/the Marauders' secrets for them?
(And now that I think about it--part of Sev's conflict in PoA might have been between his forced obedience to a binding, which he was always looking for ways to circumvent or break, and his deeper feeliings of loyalty to the headmaster, who seemed, however foolishly, to trust Lupin....)