BenLowell comments on Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality discussion thread, part 8 - Less Wrong

8 Post author: Unnamed 25 August 2011 02:17AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (653)

You are viewing a single comment's thread.

Comment author: BenLowell 08 September 2011 05:03:57PM 0 points [-]

Chapter 78

I have some questions on Snape: In an earlier chapter during a conversation with Harry Snape says, "and what your mother saw in him was something I never did understand until this day." Does anybody know what this is? I find it implausible that Snape had not considered that Lily was more likely to forgive James for being rich and handsome.

In the new chapter he mentions his two mentors. I am thinking the first mentor was Voldemort, who would not have mentioned missed perspectives as he was not out to make his death eaters better at their jobs, or better at finding his weaknesses. However, I was still confused as to why Dumbledore would have a specific reason for not enlightening him. Perhaps Snape assumes that nobody would trust his wretched self, and that he too hopeful to even think they could.

I was wondering if anybody else had any ideas on these two things.

Comment author: pedanterrific 08 September 2011 09:14:18PM *  1 point [-]

As to the second: correct me if I'm wrong, but the context seems to indicate that "the things [he] wasn't seeing" that his mentors failed to mention to him were A) mooning after Lily the way he did was "creepy" and B) still being in love with her years later was "pathetic," in Miss Felthorne's words. Going by canon motivations, Dumbledore would presumably not try to convince Snape of those things because his love for Lily, however childish and misguided, was the primary motivation for Snape's opposing Voldemort and protecting Harry.

What I don't understand, though, is why Voldemort wouldn't say anything. Breaking Snape's ties to Lily specifically and the Light in general was obviously to his benefit.

Also, as a side note, remember that MoR!Voldemort wrote the Evil Overlord List. Specifically, the idea that he was "not out to make his death eaters better at their jobs" contradicts Bahry One-Hand's internal description of two Death Eaters, which was

Two of You-Know-Who's own warrior-assassins, personally trained by their dark master.

Death Eaters are a big deal in MoR. And Snape bears the Dark Mark for a reason.

Comment author: Raemon 09 September 2011 03:38:09PM 3 points [-]

Also, as a side note, remember that MoR!Voldemort wrote the Evil Overlord List.

Except that instead of "I will not turn into a snake, it never helps," he instead wrote "Become an animagus"

Comment author: Raemon 09 September 2011 04:53:50PM 1 point [-]

(I am SO looking forward to the eventual ramifications of this)

Comment author: Xachariah 09 September 2011 06:34:18AM 2 points [-]

What I don't understand, though, is why Voldemort wouldn't say anything. Breaking Snape's ties to Lily specifically and the Light in general was obviously to his benefit.

I doubt Voldemort would have known who Snape was infatuated with specifically. Voldemort isn't the kind of fellow you swap feelings or share tales of old loves with. Snape is one of the best occlumens alive, it seems unlikely to accidentally give up his most secret memory. Doubly so if it's a mudblood. Triply so if it's a member of the Order of the Phoenix he's in love with.

Voldemort probably knew that Snape pined after someone (in a rather creepy and pathetic manor), but not specifically who he pined after. Well, not until he was on his way to kill her anyhow, and he hasn't had much opportunity to use it as leverage since then.

Comment author: gwern 08 September 2011 10:26:05PM 2 points [-]

(You messed up your last quote, BTW.)

What I don't understand, though, is why Voldemort wouldn't say anything. Breaking Snape's ties to Lily specifically and the Light in general was obviously to his benefit.

Think I agree with grandparent; the connection to Lily makes Snape manipulable, by anyone. Voldemort can operate by, say, threatening Lily in order to control Snape; Dumbledore operates by threatening Snape's memories and self-image ('what would Lily think?' etc.).

Neither one has incentive to break the thread - if Lily were Snape's wife who might ask him to leave Voldemort, that'd be one thing, but she's not; and Dumbledore regards himself as good and so it'd be bad to snap the one thing that keeps Snape in The Light, so to speak, and love is intrinsically good anyway.

Note that Snape says he would be naive to ask why the second one stayed silent. Naivety is usually about taking appearances at face value when that is false. Voldemort makes no pretense of being good, and acts in his own self-interest, and so remaining silent is 'clear enough'. Telling Snape about what he perceived would be something a 'good' mentor does, and expecting a 'good' mentor to do so would be naive if the mentor is not so good or not so interested in Snape's well-being. This fits with Dumbledore.

As far as Bahry goes, if you read the context, it's Death Eaters in general - the warrior-assassins here is more rhetoric than anything. (What, Aurors aren't warrior-assassins either, who would happily assassinate a Death Eater if ordered?) Voldemort can train them if he wants - training would make them more effective (they are already bound by Dark Marks), and even with tons of training, no one and no small group of them would be a threat to him, the most powerful wizard to come along in ages.

Comment author: pedanterrific 08 September 2011 11:16:31PM *  0 points [-]

(Thanks, fixed.)

Okay, that's a motive for Voldemort I hadn't considered... but. But Snape had already joined the DE of his own free will and apparent natural inclination, no threats needed; but he had taken the Dark Mark, which is supposed to obviate the need for threats; but Lily was a fighter for the Light, and even without the prophecy would have been on Voldemort's hit list soon enough; but the moment Snape realized Voldemort was going to kill Lily he went straight to Dumbledore... etc. It still seems unnecessarily risky, which doesn't seem like Quirrel's style, let me put it that way.

Agree wrt Dumbledore, that was my thought process as well.

Yes, the whole point is that it's Death Eaters in general - the implication is that all of them were powerful fighters, such that a veteran Auror with 80-90 years in the force brags about just surviving a fight with two at once. (This is just a tangent, anyway - the only relevance is to show that MoR!Voldemort makes an effort to increase his subordinates' usefulness.)

Comment author: Desrtopa 09 September 2011 02:29:09AM 3 points [-]

Yes, the whole point is that it's Death Eaters in general - the implication is that all of them were powerful fighters, such that a veteran Auror with 80-90 years in the force brags about just surviving a fight with two at once.

I don't think they were all supposed to be powerful so much as they're all familiar with violence. A two on one fight is a lot more than twice as difficult as a one on one fight, so fighting two death eaters at once and not losing means he would have to be a lot better than they were.

Comment author: gwern 09 September 2011 12:19:12AM 0 points [-]

But Snape had already joined the DE of his own free will and apparent natural inclination, no threats needed; but he had taken the Dark Mark, which is supposed to obviate the need for threats;

Someone like Snape is not controlled so simply; you could not simply Dark-Mark him into being the best Snape he can be, any more than you can whip a programmer into coming up with a brilliant new algorithm. You have sticks and carrots. Snape can be a Death Eater who does nothing to merit the death penalty, and still malinger and cease to be an effective agent. (This is especially true if he was to play highly demanding roles like being a spy.)

but Lily was a fighter for the Light, and even without the prophecy would have been on Voldemort's hit list soon enough; but the moment Snape realized Voldemort was going to kill Lily he went straight to Dumbledore... etc.

IIRC, Voldemort was perfectly happy to turn Lily over to Snape, who presumably would've been able to control her (with potions if nothing else).

It still seems unnecessarily risky, which doesn't seem like Quirrel's style, let me put it that way.

Whatever Quirrel is, he's already shown himself quite different from Voldemort. If nothing else, he learned the lesson of the monastery.

Comment author: pedanterrific 09 September 2011 02:21:14AM *  6 points [-]

but he had taken the Dark Mark, which is supposed to obviate the need for threats;

"Someone like Snape is not controlled so simply; you could not simply Dark-Mark him into being the best Snape he can be [...] Snape can be a Death Eater who does nothing to merit the death penalty, and still malinger and cease to be an effective agent."

Well, the thing is... from the mouth of Quirrel:

Your parents faced one Dark Lord. And fifty Death Eaters who were perfectly unified, knowing that any breach of their loyalty would be punished by death, that any slack or incompetence would be punished by pain. None could escape the Dark Lord's grasp once they took his Mark. And the Death Eaters agreed to take that terrible Mark because they knew that once they took it, they would be united, facing a divided land.

Of course, he could be lying.

IIRC, Voldemort was perfectly happy to turn Lily over to Snape

Yes, but... he was also perfectly happy to just kill her right there. From the mouth of Voldemort:

"I give you this rare chance to flee. But I will not trouble myself to subdue you, and your death here will not save your child. Step aside, foolish woman, if you have any sense in you at all!"

And then, of course, he ended up just Abracadabra'ing her anyway. So the answer actually seems to be that he just didn't care about retaining Snape's loyalty. He listened to Snape beg for Lily's life and, instead of explaining why this was pathetic (as current!Snape seems to believe he could've), he went off and made a quarter-assed effort not to kill her.

Whatever Quirrel is, he's already shown himself quite different from Voldemort. If nothing else, he learned the lesson of the monastery.

Tom Riddle, when he was young, journeyed to an ancient place of learning, highly esteemed in the rarefied circles to which it was known, to obtain obscure lore that can only be passed from living mind to living mind, and thereby increase the strength of his art. The lessons were difficult, but he studied hard and well; and when he had absorbed all that he could, the last words he spoke to his non-wizard mentor were: "Avada Kedavra."

Rule Twelve: Never leave the source of your power lying around where someone else can find it.

Comment author: TobyBartels 09 September 2011 01:03:52PM 2 points [-]

obscure lore that can only be passed from living mind to living mind

Oo, I missed that! Does it work to transmit from Muggle to Wizard? That would be a great place to hide information, if for some reason you didn't want it to be lost forever.

Comment author: pedanterrific 09 September 2011 04:39:30PM 3 points [-]

Er. That's not actually what I was referring to. (Although it could work... ideally you would make sure the information would be transmitted down through generations, and through multiple lines, to ensure redundancy... and it would need to be an oral tradition, as it couldn't be written down... and you would need to make sure every new Muggle was trustworthy before letting them in on the secret... anyone else thinking Freemasons?)

This is perhaps stretching the analogy a little too far, but... powerful wizardries can only be passed down that way because of the Edict; martial arts can theoretically be learned from books (or ghosts, or paintings) but it seems like it would be really hard.

Maybe it was a little too obscure? I feel like "non-wizard" is a really clumsy way to lump a Basilisk and a Muggle into one category, but it was all I could come up with.

Comment author: TobyBartels 09 September 2011 05:42:30PM 0 points [-]

I feel like "non-wizard" is a really clumsy way to lump a Basilisk and a Muggle into one category, but it was all I could come up with.

Well, now I have to reread Quirrell's description of the monastery incident and see if it makes sense as an allegory for the Chamber of Secrets. I'll vote you up or down when I get back.

Comment author: pedanterrific 09 September 2011 05:52:28PM *  4 points [-]

Okay, apparently it was too obscure. To clarify, my interpretation is that Tom Riddle went to that monastery, learned martial arts and how to (pretend to) lose, and once he was done, put on the glowing-red-eyes schtick and killed everybody (except his one friend) to prevent anyone else from learning what he had. He wasn't foolish to want that story spread by the one survivor - he wanted to be underestimated, to make people think he was murderously impatient when he was coldly calculating.

Rule Twelve is more general than just "kill Slytherin's Monster," it applies to all sources of power.

(The account is about halfway through Chapter 19, btw.)

Comment author: gwern 09 September 2011 02:44:23AM 2 points [-]

Well, the thing is... from the mouth of Quirrel:

The pain thing is a bit troublesome, but again, someone like Snape, their greatest abilities can't be unlocked with just pain. As Wedrifid suggests, the pain may unlock some ability... for subtle skilled betrayal and subversion.

And then, of course, he ended up just Abrakadabra'ing her anyway. So the answer actually seems to be that he just didn't care about retaining Snape's loyalty.

That only shows he didn't care about his loyalty that much. To echo Harry's dark side, Snape being disloyal is annoying, but the woman irrationally resisting and sacrificing herself and troubling him was even more annoying.

Also, remember that in MoR, Lily was implied - stated? - to have tried to Avada Kedavra'd Voldemort. All deals are off when one's life is on the line - Lily's life could have bought Dumbledore or the whole Wizarding world! but self-defense still takes priority.

Comment author: rdb 09 September 2011 12:55:12PM 0 points [-]

If Salazar Slytherin foresaw use of Rule 12, a hidden requirement to pass on the knowledge to the next heir in the transfer ritual could explain Harry's survival. The transfer ritual requiring a later deposit, a checkpoint of the recipient's state, could explain why Quirrell seems more than how Voldemort has been described - if he does contain multitudes. Or the different instantiation has avoided physical pathologies Voldemort lived with.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2011 02:14:26AM 1 point [-]

Someone like Snape is not controlled so simply; you could not simply Dark-Mark him into being the best Snape he can be, any more than you can whip a programmer into coming up with a brilliant new algorithm.

I could be whipped into writing a brilliant new algorithm. Unfortunately the improved focus and creativity would only be active while plotting against them and for purely my interests.

Harry isn't the only one with a cold dark side!

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2011 02:09:12AM 2 points [-]

What I don't understand, though, is why Voldemort wouldn't say anything. Breaking Snape's ties to Lily specifically and the Light in general was obviously to his benefit.

Snape blames the messenger even more than every other human does. We saw Snape's massive overreaction when Harry suggested even the abstract hypothetical student was pathetic. If he was told directly that he was pathetic - regarding the aspect of himself that he worships - it would not be beneficial to the speaker.

Comment author: pedanterrific 09 September 2011 02:29:19AM *  2 points [-]

So, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that Voldemort was afraid of Snape's reaction to being told he was pathetic - but not afraid of Snape's reaction to Lily's meaningless death?

I mean, given that he randomly murdered the woman Snape loved more than life itself, I think it's pretty obvious Voldemort didn't particularly care what Snape thought.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2011 02:34:15AM *  3 points [-]

So, I'm confused. Are you suggesting that Voldemort was afraid of Snape's reaction to being told he was pathetic - but not afraid of Snape's reaction to Lily's meaningless death?

Yeah... that wasn't terribly smart on Voldemort's part, was it? Although on the other hand this was a big deal to Voldemort. He was outright terrified by the prophesy and may have been willing to sacrifice Snape's loyalty to get his bane out of the way. The mistake, then, is that he didn't kill Snape at the earliest opportunity after he rose back to power. It's ok to betray allies from time to time if necessary but you don't let them live!

Comment author: Nominull 09 September 2011 05:07:20AM 0 points [-]

It may not be an entirely trivial task for the currently-weakened Voldemort to murder Snape. Snape is something of a Skilled Player of Magic: the Gathering, and Voldemort would have to not only win in a fight but also prevent Snape from escaping to safety or getting out a message or leaving evidence he couldn't cover up. We know that he was able to do it to a random guard in Azkaban, but we haven't seen him in a real fight against any wizard more powerful than that. He lost on purpose when he fought Snape, but that doesn't mean he would have been able to win on purpose

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2011 05:29:28AM *  5 points [-]

It may not be an entirely trivial task for the currently-weakened Voldemort to murder Snape.

"Hey guys, I killed the woman Snape loves so now he's like... on Dumbledore's side. So, kill him if you see him, mmmk? Ooh, ooh I've got a plan. I'm calling a death eater meeting. Lucius, set up some anti apparition wards before it starts and you guys all cast Avada Kedavra at him. Also, put a land mine with a shaped charge under Snape's chair."

Or you could let one of your greatest enemies hear all your secrets, feed you misinformation and be standing near you where he might try an assassaination attempt. That's an option too.

Magic power is nothing compared to the power of people do what you say.

Comment author: Nominull 09 September 2011 05:37:50AM 0 points [-]

That seems like it would fall under the category of "leaving evidence he couldn't cover up"? He doesn't command an army of death eaters, because an army of death eaters being commanded is something Dumbledore or Mad-Eye Moody or Harry Potter will notice. You don't want to mobilize your troops until you're ready to fight your war, and you probably don't mobilize death eaters unless you want to fight your war against Harry Potter.

I have no doubt that Voldemort could kill Snape if he bent all his powers and genius to the task and was prepared to commit all his resources. I just doubt he could do it costlessly.

Comment author: wedrifid 09 September 2011 06:00:48AM 1 point [-]

I was assuming that Voldemort would start worrying about whether his army of deatheaters contained double agents at a time when he had an army of deatheaters.

Of course the right time to eliminate snape would have been before Snape was even aware that Voldemort was considering the possibility of killing Lilly.

Comment author: Nominull 09 September 2011 06:02:49AM 0 points [-]

Well, you said he made a mistake letting Snape live after he rose back to power - he hasn't risen back to power enough to have an army of death eaters yet, so he still has a chance to avoid that mistake.