Skip to main content

harry potter - Why didn't Snape cast Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore non-verbally?


Snape is a powerful wizard, who is capable of casting spells non-verbally. And, we know that even complex spells like Avada Kedavra can be cast non-verbally. Using non-verbal magic should have been second nature to Snape.


However, when Snape cast Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore, he did speak the name of the spell. Is there any reason why chose to cast a verbal spell here, when we would normally expect him not to?


Shouldn't the act of casting verbally have alerted the Death Eaters that something was up, possibly to his wish not to kill Dumbledore?



Answer



Generally speaking, when casting a difficult spell, verbal casting is to be preferred unless there is a specific reason to avoid it. Non-verbal casting increases the risk of the spell failing.


The only reason Snape might have wanted to use non-verbal casting when killing Dumbledore is if the Death Eaters might criticize or be suspicious of him for failing to do so. But Voldemort cast Avada Kedavra verbally when attacking Harry in Order of the Phoenix. From a Death Eaters point of view, if it's good enough for Voldemort, it's surely good enough for Snape.



Also, if he had cast the spell non-verbally it might have left doubt as to what spell he had actually cast; it could have been nothing but a spell for green light, after all. This way, the Death Eaters know for certain that Snape really did kill Dumbledore. That was pretty effective at diverting suspicion. :-)


[Out of universe, both Snape's and Voldemort's choice to cast Avada Kedavra verbally is presumably to avoid any confusion or doubt on the reader's part.]


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

harry potter - Did Dolores Umbridge Have Any Association with Voldemort (or Death Eaters) before His Return?

I noticed that Dolores Umbridge was born during the first Wizarding War, so it's very likely she wasn't a Death Eater then (but she is pretty evil -- who knows?). After that Voldemort was not around in a way that could affect many people, and most wouldn't know he was planning to rise again. During that time, and up through Voldemort's return (in Goblet of Fire ), did Umbridge have any connection with the Death Eaters or with Voldemort? Was she doing what she did on her own, or was it because of an association with Voldemort or his allies? Answer Dolores Umbridge was definitely not a good person. However, as Sirius points out, "the world isn't split into good people and Death Eaters". Remember that he also says that he doesn't believe Umbridge to be a Death Eater, but that she's evil enough (or something like that). I think there are two strong reasons to believe that: Umbridge was proud to do everything according to the law, except when she trie...

futurama - How much time is lost in 'Time Keeps on Slippin''

In time Keeps on Slippin' , Farnsworth creates a basketball team which he matures by abusing Chronitons. This leads to time skipping forward by random, but ever increasing amounts. How much time was skipped in this way? Answer Unfortunately, I don't think a good estimate can be made for this, for two reasons: Many of the time skips move forward by an indeterminate amount of time. At one point, the Professor mentions localized regions of space skipping forward much more than others. We then see two young boys on the street below complaining about having to pay social security, only to suddenly become senior citizens and start complaining about wanting their money. Thus, each individual could have experienced a different amount of time skippage.

aliens - Interstellar Zoo story

I vaguely remember this story from my childhood: it was about an interstellar zoo that came to Earth with lots of bizarre and unusual species, and humans would file through and gape at all the crazy looking creatures from other planets. The twist came at the end when the perspective shifted to the other side of the bars and we discovered that the "creatures" were traveling through space on a kind of safari. They thought they were the visitors and we were the animals. Neither side knew that the other side thought they were the zoo creatures. Answer Got it. Zoo, by Edward D. Hoch. Published in 1958. Link to Publication History Link to PDF

harry potter - What is the difference between Diffindo and Sectumsempra?

In the Harry Potter books, Diffindo is called the 'Severing Charm' and it’s most commonly used to cut ropes and the like. However, in the last book Hermione uses it on Ron but misses, creating a 'slash in his jeans' and his knee gets cut, causing him to 'roar in pain'. We've only seen Sectumsempra used once on screen when Harry directly uses it on Malfoy in the sixth book, but there it's mentioned that he is 'waving his wand wildly'. Wouldn't Diffindo, if used in such a fashion also cause a similar effect? Similarly, if it was able to cut Ron, it would also be able to, say, chop off an ear (George's)? In that case, how are these two spells different, except for Sectumsempra seemingly used exclusively to hurt humans? Answer While Diffindo and Sectumsempra both can be countered by other spells, Diffindo is far more easily countered. Reparo, a relatively common spell, can completely reverse its effect when used once. “He pulled the old cop...