Is Snape good? If not, will he come back to the good side? v3

Pages : [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

runitsandrew
December 25th, 2005, 8:35 am
1. Please treat other members with respect. There will be no bashing of other members or their ideas. If you disagree with somone please provide canon evidence and do so without condescension or bickering.
2. No character bashing. You can say "I believe Sirius/Snape/the Giant Squid acted in such and such way in this scene" but please do not make blanket statements about any of the characters like "Snape is an evil slimy git" or "Sirius is a vain loser"
3. We are prohibiting the use of non-canon sources in this thread. Non-canon sources include song lyrics, fiction by other authors, historical events etc.
4. Staff reserves the right to ban members from this thread either permanently or temporarily if we feel they are not following these rules. You will be given a warning via owl or via official warning points before you are asked to leave the thread.

The Official Staff Monitor for this thread is AlastorD (http://www.cosforums.com/member.php?u=3065).. If you have any questions about the thread or would like to discuss a specific problem please owl them directly. Please be aware that other staff members will also be monitoring this thread. If you are warned by another staff member, as always contact them directly or contact an Admin.


Reference: Version 1 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?p=3237166)
Reference: Version 2 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=77469)

First, Snape could have killed Harry at the end of book 6 but did not. He has been continuously trying to protect Harry through all the books while allowing his anger at James to prod and goad Harry to allow him to show that he "hates" Harry. Secondly, at the end of book 6 he warns Harry about learning Occlumency as Snape was unable to teach him since Harry hated Snape so much he was unable to concentrate. Look at the other books for proof.

Did anyone ever stop to think that Snape did not kill Harry in book five or book six for the same reason none of the Death Eaters killed him as he was escaping the graveyard in the fourth book? The Dark Lord told them not to. Remember, Voldemort strictly believes in the prophesy; that he is the one who has to kill Harry because "one must die at the hands of the other for neither can live while the other survives." And Snape said in Spinner's End that you do not defy the Dark Lord, for his word is law. So there you go. Make of it what you will.
So if someone like Dumbledore is not happy with the information his own spy is providing (or not providing), then Dumbledore is not going to be doing anything about that?

Dumbledore would very likely do something about that, but the impression I got from their discussion that Dumbledore was telling Snape to do something he didn’t want. If they were talking about Snape not wanting to give information to Dumbledore anymore, I just think that Snape would be incredibly stupid to let Dumbledore know that he isn’t on his side and doesn’t want to give him information about Voldemort. If Snape is loyal to Voldemort, he has to pretend that he is loyal to Dumbledore, and therefore telling Dumbledore that he doesn’t want to be his spy anymore isn’t very clever. I just don’t really understand the idea that they were talking about Snape’s spying duties, so I think they were talking about something else. My guess would be the Vow, but it could be something else too.

Do you believe a headmaster like Dumbledore put the students teaching as a priority knowing that the teacher would be leaving them at the end of the year? I just don't picture Dumbledore (or any other headmaster) being that sort of person.
The whole curse on the DADA position is really confusing, I don't think we know for sure how it actually works, and how much Dumbledore knows about that. But I do think that Dumbledore would want the students to study DADA, even if they have a different teacher every year, if that’s the only option.
What really stands out here, something that just occurred to me, is that Snape put Crabbe and Goyle in detention. I don't remember why and I'm not sure if I'm forgetting because it was never mentioned or if I just don't remember. Either way, Draco was missing classes, not doing homework, and basically had a free run of the school and yet Snape didn't punish him. One would think, if Snape was evil, he'd want Draco to succeed. It's obvious that Draco, when looking for backup, would turn to those two dunderheads so why put them in detention when Snape could have let them go? That left Draco alone, an "elementary mistake", as Snape himself says.

Wow, that's a great point that I never thought about. Great!
I just don’t really understand the idea that they were talking about Snape’s spying duties, so I think they were talking about something else. My guess would be the Vow, but it could be something else too.
Fair enough.
The whole curse on the DADA position is really confusing, I don't think we know for sure how it actually works, and how much Dumbledore knows about that. But I do think that Dumbledore would want the students to study DADA, even if they have a different teacher every year, if that’s the only option.
Well I for one am glad someone else has doubts about this whole "curse" idea. Nice of you to understand what I'm saying. :D

Go ahead and continue discussion. :)

sqizzer
December 25th, 2005, 5:52 pm
Golly - we're already on to the third version and no closer to a clear cut verdict than the day it started:lol:

I am for Good!Snape as I believe his intensions good however screwed up his actions may seem:D

I wanted to address the whole curse of the DADA post thingy. The fact that some say Dumbledore may have eventually given Snape the post, thus knowing that he would be gone by the year's end. Now we know for a fact that the post is cursed and no teacher has remained in the position for more than a year - Dumbledore says this. I was wondering whether the rumor of Snape's desire for the post was just a rumor.

Let me explain... Maybe the rumor started and was never squashed because it helped Snape's "dark position" as a spy for Voldemort. It seems to me that the speculation surrounding Snape's desire for the position painted him perfectly in the eyes of everyone watching. It would appear that Dumbledore was suspicious of him being in that position, and that keeping him from the post would keep him from old tendencies. Even though Snape wasn't sure of Voldemort's survival status, but we know that Dumbledore suspected Voldemort to be alive in one way or another. We also know, now more than ever, that Dumbledore trusted Snape completely. This trust, it would seem to me, was obtained when Snape jumped ship, ie. before he was given a position at the school.

Still follow? So we know Dumbledore trusts Snape completely, and so would therefore not need to worry about Snape falling into old habits because of the DADA post. Dumbledore suspected Voldemort's survival, and suspected that someday he would return, and so therefore that someday it would matter what Snape had done in the time that had elapsed. So it makes sense to me that if Snape would return as a Death Eater (as a double agent for the Order), it would be necessary to have a history tainted enough to be taken back. So if the rumor of Snape wanting a position that was denied year after year because Dumbledore didn't trust him enough to remain good within it, was not squashed, and as all rumors do, would grow. A good thing for proof to those who would be watching or asking questions later on ie. Bellatrix in Spinner's End. She thought it a crude excuse and though it may have been that, it was still a good way to prove to the necessary people that Dumbledore never truely trusted him (we know better:p ).

Also, Dumbledore suspected the position to be cursed and I assume that Snape would have suspected it too. Year after year he saw new teachers filling the post, I think he was smart enough to have figured it out. If this is true, then why would he want the position knowing that he would have to leave after a year? He was not sure that Voldemort would return, and Dumbledore seemed his only ally at the time. Why would he jeopordize that? Giving Snape the position in HBP seems to me a move thought out by Dumbledore (and maybe Snape too) knowing that Snape would leave at the end of the year, but maybe giving him a perfect IN back into the trust of Voldemort in light of the Unbreakable Vow etc. before the start of the school term.

Snape seemed more of a POTIONS fundi (in light of the new book) than a DADA fanatic to me, and I have no specific reason to see it otherwise.

Feel free to slice, splice, dice or tear this apart

Sqizz:p

Awiana
December 25th, 2005, 6:07 pm
I was wondering whether the rumor of Snape's desire for the post was just a rumor.
:agree: Thatís exactly what I think. Maybe he would have preferred to teach DADA, because then he wouldnít have to worry about incompetent students melting their cauldrons and causing havoc in class, but I think it was mostly just a clever act. He can use Dumbledoreís refusal to let him teach DADA as proof that Dumbledore doesnít trust him entirely, and thatís highly useful when he needs to pretend to be loyal to Voldemort.

padfootandme
December 25th, 2005, 6:10 pm
I am torn. I agree that Snape could could be good because the liquid that Dumbledore drank could have been poison or some other uncurable liquid. In that case, it would have been better to just have a quick death, which Snape provided him. However, Dumbledore might have had a chance of survival, and Snape just killed him like that. Plus, Dumbledore always trusted Snape, but we don't have any reason of why. It's hard to make a decision of Snape being good vs. evil until we have all the information.

MERRY CHRISTMAS!!! (and Happy Hanukkah!)

snapes_witch
December 26th, 2005, 6:52 am
Golly - we're already on to the third version and no closer to a clear cut verdict than the day it started:lol:

I am for Good!Snape as I believe his intensions good however screwed up his actions may seem:D

I wanted to address the whole curse of the DADA post thingy. The fact that some say Dumbledore may have eventually given Snape the post, thus knowing that he would be gone by the year's end. Now we know for a fact that the post is cursed and no teacher has remained in the position for more than a year - Dumbledore says this. I was wondering whether the rumor of Snape's desire for the post was just a rumor.



During Umbridge's inspection of Snape (OoftheP, pgs. 363-64 US trade ppbk) she asks about the DADA post and he does admit to applying for it every year. Although this doesn't necessarily mean he really[U] wanted it, I think it [U]is a strong inference that he did.

Snape's Witch
who believes Snape's good, nasty and mean-tempered, but still true to the Light

grocho
December 26th, 2005, 7:07 am
dumby wasnt pleading for his life with snape, he knew he was gonna die, he was pleading not to blow snapes cover as a double agent

DrAcOs_HuN
December 26th, 2005, 7:43 am
I hate Snape...sorry i just wanted to stop by and say that. I don't think he's good. I think he's evil and stupid and ugly and evil and evil! GR! maybe there is some good in him at the bottom of his cold black heart.

laluna
December 26th, 2005, 3:03 pm
I think he is still a good guy, Dumbledore trusted him, and i am sure for good reason. He must have been really truthworthy towards Dumbledore otherwise Dumbledore wouldn't have defended him so sternly when Harry mentioned his suspects against Snape in front of him. I am sure that Snape wanted to give him hints when he was fleeing. I think he was hurt when Harry called him a coward. I guess he was acting on **'s order (why those arguements in the forbidden forrest which Hagrid accidently heard...). Obviously Snape didn't want to do it anymore or refused to kill Dumbledore when necessary. When Snape entered the scene on the tower he checked the scene within seconds. His first glance went to Dumbledore (did Dumbledore give him instructions?). When realising the situation his face showed revulsion and hatred. He had to do it, but didn't want to. He had to do it, because he made an unbreakable vow with Narcissa, he would have died if he hadn't done it. Draco, the ugly git, couldn't do it. And he had to do it, to proceed with his double agent job.

But i highly doubt that Voldemort doesn't know about Snape's true loyalities. I think he is the one, who left him forever, and Voldemort knows that. I think he will die for Harry in the 7th book to rescue him.

pensievepeter
December 26th, 2005, 3:54 pm
I haven't made my mind up as to whether Snape is good or not in the first six books. This will sound strange, I think it's irrelevant either way you look at it.

If he is good, he will help set up Harry's final confronation with Voldemort in such a way that Harry will win.

If he is evil, I think he will have to redeem himself. Their's a soft side to Snape if you ask me. And even if you don't agree, he still has to repay his life debt to Harry somehow.

So, in conclusion, I don't really know whether or not Snape is good or evil leaving the sixth book, except that by the end of the seventh, he will be good.

weaselbee
December 26th, 2005, 4:28 pm
I may be an optimist, but I still believe Snape has some good in him. This is, at least, what I want to believe. He can't be entirely evil, can he?
When Dumbledore plead's to him ("Severus.. Please..."), could he be pleading for his own death? So he would be doing according to Dumbledore's wishes. Maybe they had talked about it earlier or something. I'm sorry if this has been discussed before. I'm rather new here so I'm not all that aware about what has been going on in these threads. Maybe I should have gone and read them, yet here I am posting this. Sorry again.

sqizzer
December 26th, 2005, 4:53 pm
On the ever so often quoted conversation (argument) between Dumbledore & Snape overheard by Hagrid...

True to form, JKR probably put it in there as a completely misunderstood conversation (very selective wording - as usual) to get us going on a path taking us further away from the truth. You'll probably find that it will obviously play an important part in some form or another in book 7, but not come close to the completely disillusioned mountain we've made out of a mole-hill.

It definately is a most deliciously gripping piece of non-information for us to sink our teeth into about what could make Snape challenge Dumbledore, and furthermore, what could be so important that Dumbledore would become blunt about duty?

Maybe the whole secret behind the conversation, would be to weed out what Dumbledore could possibly take for granted, and then start building a new mountain from there?

Just a thought
Sqizz

Psithe
December 26th, 2005, 8:03 pm
I think the main reason I'd like to believe Snape is good is out of respect to Dumbledore. If he's evil then Dumbledore, a great, wise, kind, gentle, powerful wizard will have been getting played for a fool for years. I know Dumbledore admited to making mistakes, but such a monumental one taints how I see his character. I think I could accept Snape being evil, but not quite come to terms with him outwitting Dumbledore for 17 years. Doesn't feel right. Knocks him off the pedastal.

pensievepeter
December 26th, 2005, 8:25 pm
On the ever so often quoted conversation (argument) between Dumbledore & Snape overheard by Hagrid...

True to form, JKR probably put it in there as a completely misunderstood conversation (very selective wording - as usual) to get us going on a path taking us further away from the truth. You'll probably find that it will obviously play an important part in some form or another in book 7, but not come close to the completely disillusioned mountain we've made out of a mole-hill.

It definately is a most deliciously gripping piece of non-information for us to sink our teeth into about what could make Snape challenge Dumbledore, and furthermore, what could be so important that Dumbledore would become blunt about duty?

Maybe the whole secret behind the conversation, would be to weed out what Dumbledore could possibly take for granted, and then start building a new mountain from there?

Just a thought
Sqizz

I agree, I think she purposely given us a little scent to lead us of the trail.

It will obviously have bearing on Book 7, but how much and where. Will it help the final Confrontation or the premise to know exactly what was said?

I think it would be smartest to start very general and gradually get more and more specific as we go on, its the only way to figure out what was said and what impact it will have.

Capt_Obvious
December 26th, 2005, 10:22 pm
I wanted to address the whole curse of the DADA post thingy. The fact that some say Dumbledore may have eventually given Snape the post, thus knowing that he would be gone by the year's end. Now we know for a fact that the post is cursed and no teacher has remained in the position for more than a year - Dumbledore says this. I was wondering whether the rumor of Snape's desire for the post was just a rumor.

...

Snape seemed more of a POTIONS fundi (in light of the new book) than a DADA fanatic to me, and I have no specific reason to see it otherwise.

Feel free to slice, splice, dice or tear this apart

Sqizz:p
I think you have a problem with this theory when you consider everything we learn in Snape's Worst Memory about his interest in the Dark Arts when he was young. You could chalk that up to being very academic and argue he was that way in all his classes, but if I remember right there were several lines about how Snape had a particular interest in the Dark Arts, which is distinguishable from Potions being that they're different classes.

sqizzer
December 27th, 2005, 5:06 am
By no means am I saying that he was not that interested in the darks arts, indeed I do think that he found it very intriguing. I think too that he would have been quite Hermione-ish in his approach to magic at Hogwarts in general, absorbing everything that he could.

I too thought that he was DA DA DA DA since the beginning of the series, but my opinion changed with HBP. As obsessive as he may have seemed about DA in the memory (which granted is only a snippet), reviewing all the information Harry saw in the book during his last year, it seems that Snape had a knack for potions coupled with an obsession to fix, tweak, and conjure up all sorts of things. In order to do this he must have been a bit obsessed, and had obviously spent an unimaginable amount of time testing, retesting, fixing and tweaking everything in the book to have come up with what he did. My view is that it was done only in one year (as they get new textbooks every year), and that if he had spent time working on the book after that year, it might have been important enough to move it from the locker and not leave it there for some student to use when an extra book was needed.

But I could be wrong

Selene Sedai
December 27th, 2005, 5:57 am
When Voldemort spoke about the 'one who has left him forever.' i at first thought that he was talking about his muggle father Tom Riddle...but maybe i need to reread it again...

random_musing
December 27th, 2005, 6:03 am
I think he's evil and stupid and ugly and evil and evil! GR!
...Wow...I respect your opinion of him being evil (even though I disagree completely) but he is FAR from stupid. He is possibly one of the most clever characters in the book. It doesn't matter what side of the Snape debate you are on, but Snape is certainly not stupid.

When Voldemort spoke about the 'one who has left him forever.' i at first thought that he was talking about his muggle father Tom Riddle...but maybe i need to reread it again...
He was talking about one of the Death Eaters.

Selene Sedai
December 27th, 2005, 6:09 am
It seemed like it could've been either but i guess not.

Tarragon
December 27th, 2005, 3:00 pm
I think the main reason I'd like to believe Snape is good is out of respect to Dumbledore. If he's evil then Dumbledore, a great, wise, kind, gentle, powerful wizard will have been getting played for a fool for years. I know Dumbledore admited to making mistakes, but such a monumental one taints how I see his character. I think I could accept Snape being evil, but not quite come to terms with him outwitting Dumbledore for 17 years. Doesn't feel right. Knocks him off the pedastal.

This view-your desire for Snape to be good to preserve your vision of Dumbledore-is very interesting to me.

Saying that Dumbledore getting played by Snape for so long knocks him off the pedestal seems an odd statement to me because I never thought of Dumbledore as being on a pedestal. To me, he is a very human character.

After all, he made a huge mistake for five years in not telling Harry about the prophesy because his love for Harry and his desire to see him happy outweighed the good of the wizarding world in his mind. He has shown that his emotions concerning others can have adverse affects on his better judgement. So perhaps his desire to believe that people can change made him blind to possible warning signs of the contrary concerning Snape.

hermione26591
December 27th, 2005, 3:22 pm
I believe that Snape is on the Dark side, because of his past with James Potter...I believe that he had held a grudge against James and that he joined Voldemort to get back at him for what happened when they were at school... i don't think that he means to do what he does, but it's just out of spite that he does...and he was merely following Voldemort's o0rders...another theory is that he was under *** Imperius curse *** whole time, but i don't think that's the case...as i said before, i think it's all to with his past... but i think he'll stay on the dark side, i don't think anyone can persuade him to return to the godd side!

Bob_Malefoy
December 27th, 2005, 3:40 pm
Okay here I join this hot discussion :lol:

Personally I think Snape is still on Dumbledore's side

The overheard speech between Snape and Dumbledore:I think when Snape says he doesnt want to do it anymore,it means he doesnt want to join the Death Eaters once again.He might be afraid of the risk it implies,I would too...

Now with the prophecy and the fact Snape didnt kill Harry when at the end:Ok it might seem normal,If Snape really is evil,that he wants to keep Harry for Lord Voldemort thus he didnt kill him.But this doesnt mean he couldnt capture Harry and bring him to Lord Voldemort!!!:clap: Wouldnt it have been a perfect day for Snape:Kills Dumbledore and brings Harry to his "master"...Note that Harry is tired and weak...and alone when he faces Snape.It would have been easy to capture him the way he counters his spells at will.

hot_gurl_izzie
December 27th, 2005, 3:40 pm
Snape definitely not a good guy.He betrayed everyone else-Dumbledore's trust.He went back to Dumbledore's side when he knew Voldy was down .. so who can guarantee he won't do it again..PLUS..Harry will NEVER forgive him even if he come back to Harry's side..look what has SNAPE DONE?And he will never go back to Harry because Harry'd think he was a coward if he do so.Harry clearly states that he wasnt going to and will never forgive SNAPE..so is Snape going back to the right side?
I think my answer is same with Harry's -FAT CHANCE:clap:

Bob_Malefoy
December 27th, 2005, 3:52 pm
I dont think the fact that Harry will never forgive Snape for what he did is a good argument.First of all,we knew that Snape didnt know who would have to be killed when he reported the prophecy to Voldemort.So he didnt "directly" kill James ans Lilly.Thus its possible that he regrets his actions.If it happened to you,it would be hard for you to forgive him too...that doesnt mean he does not regret it.

Awiana
December 27th, 2005, 3:56 pm
Saying that Dumbledore getting played by Snape for so long knocks him off the pedestal seems an odd statement to me because I never thought of Dumbledore as being on a pedestal. To me, he is a very human character.

After all, he made a huge mistake for five years in not telling Harry about the prophesy because his love for Harry and his desire to see him happy outweighed the good of the wizarding world in his mind. He has shown that his emotions concerning others can have adverse affects on his better judgement. So perhaps his desire to believe that people can change made him blind to possible warning signs of the contrary concerning Snape.

I agree with you that Dumbledore is a very human character and he makes very human mistakes. I do think, however, that trusting Snape wasnít one of his mistakes.

I think itís one thing to make the mistake of not telling Harry about the prophecy, or not realising that there was something wrong with Quirrel and Crouch/Moody, and quite another not to realise in 16 years that Snape might be up to no good. He had no reason to suspect Quirrel and Moody, but he had very good reasons to suspect ex-Death Eater Snape. I think he must have had a very good reason to trust Snape, something else than just wanting to see the best in others.

Snape claims in the Spinnerís End chapter in HBP that Dumbledoreís greatest weakness is his insistence on believing the best of people. I do think that Dumbledore sees the best in people, but I think thatís his greatest strength, not a weakness. But if Dumbledore was betrayed and murdered because he thought there is something good in the human nature, then it would seem like trusting people and seeing the best in them is indeed a weakness. I donít think thatís the message JKR intends to send.
Okay here I join this hot discussion

:welcome:
The overheard speech between Snape and Dumbledore:I think when Snape says he doesnt want to do it anymore,it means he doesnt want to join the Death Eaters once again.He might be afraid of the risk it implies,I would too...
Well, I agree with you that Snape is on Dumbledoreís side, but I donít think they were talking about Snapeís spying duties, and that Snape didnít want to be a spy anymore. We see in GoF that he is perfectly willing to risk his life in order to spy for the Order, and we also see that Dumbledore doesnít force him to do anything, he asks Snape if he is ready and prepared. In my opinion Snape refusing to be a spy anymore and Dumbledore telling him that he must do it seems out of character for both Snape and Dumbledore.

Bob_Malefoy
December 27th, 2005, 4:20 pm
Well, I agree with you that Snape is on Dumbledore’s side, but I don’t think they were talking about Snape’s spying duties, and that Snape didn’t want to be a spy anymore. We see in GoF that he is perfectly willing to risk his life in order to spy for the Order, and we also see that Dumbledore doesn’t force him to do anything, he asks Snape if he is ready and prepared. In my opinion Snape refusing to be a spy anymore and Dumbledore telling him that he must do it seems out of character for both Snape and Dumbledore.

There I disagree with you.Snape probably tried to convince Dumbledore that he could STILL be a spy without having to go OPENLY on Voldemort's side..that he could stay at Hogwarts.Remember his reaction when Harry calls him a coward?Thats the kind of reaction that shows he cares for his reputation after all...his years at Hogwarts as a teacher were probably the best of his life.Knowing that he must now leave and be known as a Death Eater for the good of the order troubles him.

When Dumbledore begs Snape in the end is directly linked to this discussion:"Please Snape do it..."And he did...

Awiana
December 27th, 2005, 4:31 pm
There I disagree with you.Snape probably tried to convince Dumbledore that he could STILL be a spy without having to go OPENLY on Voldemort's side..that he could stay at Hogwarts.Remember his reaction when Harry calls him a coward?Thats the kind of reaction that shows he cares for his reputation after all...his years at Hogwarts as a teacher were probably the best of his life.Knowing that he must now leave and be known as a Death Eater for the good of the order troubles him.
But how could he be a spy without attending Death Eater meetings? How would he gain any information about Voldemort and the Death Eaters if all he does is hide at Hogwarts?

Or do you mean by having to go openly on Voldemortís side that they are talking about the Vow and what happens after Dumbledoreís death, when everyone assumes that heís a traitor and a murderer and a loyal Death Eater?

RemusLupinFan
December 27th, 2005, 4:43 pm
I haven't made my mind up as to whether Snape is good or not in the first six books. This will sound strange, I think it's irrelevant either way you look at it.

If he is good, he will help set up Harry's final confronation with Voldemort in such a way that Harry will win.

If he is evil, I think he will have to redeem himself. Their's a soft side to Snape if you ask me. And even if you don't agree, he still has to repay his life debt to Harry somehow.

So, in conclusion, I don't really know whether or not Snape is good or evil leaving the sixth book, except that by the end of the seventh, he will be good.You know, I think you have a very valid point here. I agree with you that in the end, Snape will probably be redeemed no matter what his loyalties are at present. Despite the fact that Snape is a very nasty man (I believe JKR called him a horrible man, or something to that effect), I truly believe that in the end, he will be redeemed if he isn't good already.

To tell you the truth, I'm more and more siding with the position that Snape is neither "good" nor "evil", but simply working for whichever side benefits himself the most. I think this would be in character for Snape, since he is a Slytherin after all. I think it really depends on how you interpret Snape's motives whether you believe he's good (ie working for Dumbledore), evil (working for Voldemort), or neither (working for himself).


Here is a list I put together a while ago with evidence for all three positions of Snape's loyalties. I posted this on the last version of this thread as well, so tell me what you think (feel free to add to the list or to debate the points made):

1. Snape killed Dumbledore and thus, Snape is evil.
His explanations to Bellatrix of why he didnít kill Harry before are plausible to some degree.
Snape may have made the Vow knowing full well that Draco would fail, so he made the Vow so heíd be the one to kill Dumbledore, thus doing Voldemort a huge favor, thus getting himself further into favor with the Dark Lord.
The look of hatred and revulsion could have been due to contempt for Dumbledore.
Dumbledoreís words of ďSeverus, pleaseĒ could have meant ďplease, donít do this, go back to the right sideĒ.
Snape may have been taking Draco to Voldemort at the end of HBP.
Snape didnít take Harry with him because this is not what Voldemort wanted- ie these were not his orders, and for Snape to break Voldemortís orders would warrant dire consequences. We have no idea what Voldemort is planning, so it very well may have been Voldemortís orders to leave Harry where he was and Voldemort would lure him in himself, especially since Voldemort's score with Harry is just as personal as Harry's score with Voldemort. Itís also possible that Snape was not taking Draco directly to Voldemort, but to somewhere else.
Instead of teaching Harry with his comments, Snape is simply mocking him, knowing how terrible Harry is at ďclosing his mouth and opening his mindĒ. After all, we have been told by JKR that Harry won't be able to learn Occlumency because his emotions are naturally just too close to the surface.
I find it hard to believe that Dumbledore would order Snape to kill him for a multitude of reasons- I just canít see any reason for it other than protecting Draco, which Snape got himself into by making the Vow.
Snape was able to intercept Tonksí patronus even though he is a Dark Wizard because JKR said patronuses are ďhighly resistantĒ to dark wizards, but not fool-proof.
The spells that Snape created (namely Sectusempra) clearly show that Snape was into the Dark Arts as a teenager, and therefore may still be into them (if his words during the DADA lesson were any indication, despite what Hermione said).
The idea of Snape supposed feelings of remorse over Jamesí and Lilyís deaths doesnít seem a plausible reason for Dumbledore to have trusted him, considering how much Snape hated James.
The idea that Dumbledore wanted him to kill him doesnít sit well because it doesnít seem likely that Dumbledore would want to cause Snape to commit the ultimate act of evil (murder) and thus tear his soul.

2. Snape is cleverly playing both sides and is only out there for himself.
Snape could have easily made the Vow to protect Draco in order to gain Bellatrixís trust and make Narcissa trust him even more (and perhaps to make her indebted to him for protecting her son).
By pretending to follow Voldemort loyally, Snape could have the power and protection that goes along with being a Death Eater, but he may be planning to emulate Voldemort and become a Dark Lord himself (just check out his nickname, the Half-Blood Prince; and the fact that his potions book loosely resembles Riddle's diary in that there was technically dark magic contained within both of them).
By pretending to follow Dumbledore also, Snape is in a win-win situation as far as knowing vital information on both sides goes: heís in a perfect position to play both sides to his advantage and ultimately choose the winning side for his own gains. This doesn't mean he'll necessarily decide to follow his own agenda when it comes down to it (aka he may choose to aid Harry and be redeemed), but it's very possible he's setting things up so that in the end, he'll have a choice.
Snape may have either taken Draco to Voldemort if this was Voldemortís wish, or he may have taken him somewhere to protect him to bring himself further into favor with Narcissa and the Malfoyís; and to bring them further into his debt.
Killing Dumbledore likely worked greatly to his advantage in keeping him in favor with Voldemort, who at this point appears to be winning.
Snape may have been able to intercept Tonksí patronus because he isnít a ďDark WizardĒ per se.

3. Snape is good and had to kill Dumbledore for the good of the Order.
Some of his explanations to Bellatrix of why he didnít kill Harry before donít make quite as much sense.
The look of hatred and revulsion when killing Dumbledore could have been due to contempt for what he had to do.
Dumbledoreís words of ďSeverus, pleaseĒ could have meant ďplease remember, you must follow my orders no matter whatĒ.
Snape may have been taking Draco somewhere to protect him.
Snape didnít take Harry with him because he doesnít want to see Harry dead.
He appears to be trying to teach Harry a lesson with his remarks when Harry fires spells at him.
Snape was able to intercept Tonksí patronus, and JKR has said that it is an ďanti-Dark Arts device highly resistant to Dark WizardsĒ, so Snape might not be a dark wizard.
Dumbledore must have had some reason to continue trusting Snape, even if we donít know what it truly was. The idea of Snape supposed feelings of remorse over Jamesí and Lilyís deaths doesnít seem a plausible reason for Dumbledore to have trusted him, unless he loved Lily (which is an idea I am not overly fond of).
Snapeís ďdonít call me a cowardĒ line might have reflected the fact that he killed Dumbledore on Dumbledoreís orders.

Bob_Malefoy
December 27th, 2005, 4:45 pm
But how could he be a spy without attending Death Eater meetings? How would he gain any information about Voldemort and the Death Eaters if all he does is hide at Hogwarts?

Or do you mean by having to go openly on Voldemort’s side that they are talking about the Vow and what happens after Dumbledore’s death, when everyone assumes that he’s a traitor and a murderer and a loyal Death Eater?

Ok I will elaborate more.First,we know that Snape wasnt "attending" the Death Eaters meetings.We know this because of his discussion with Bellatrix at the begining of book 6.Yes he was somehow in contact with Lord Voldemort but thats all we know.It was probably through Wormtail and Lucius.Also,he had a reason to "hide"in hogwarts without having to interact with the other DE,he had to "spy" on Dumbledore.How did he gain information about Lord Voldemort?He knows the Malefoy...they are his main source of information.He tells them some information about Dumbldedore and in return he gets their thrust and information about LV's plan.He acts "cool" with Draco in order to buy his parents good will.

What I mean is that he fears leaving his relatively comfortable position and that he now has no reasons to stay behind at Hogwarts to avoid having to be known OPENLY as a death eater.Before Dumbledore was killed,the only ones who thought he was a DE were some of the DEs themselves.Now EVERYBODY thinks he's a DE.He knows that he will be tested by the other DE and Voldemort himself,thats what he fears.

Awiana
December 27th, 2005, 5:21 pm
Ok I will elaborate more.First,we know that Snape wasnt "attending" the Death Eaters meetings.We know this because of his discussion with Bellatrix at the begining of book 6.Yes he was somehow in contact with Lord Voldemort but thats all we know.Also,he had a reason to "hide"in hogwarts without having to interact with the other DE,he had to "spy" on Dumbledore.How did he gain information about Lord Voldemort?He knows the Malefoy...they are his main source of information.He tells them some information about Dumbldedore and in return he gets their thrust and information about LV's plan.He acts "cool" with Draco in order to buy his parents good will.

What I mean is that he fears leaving his relatively comfortable position and that he now has no reasons to stay behind at Hogwarts to avoid having to be known OPENLY as a death eater.He knows that he will be tested by the other DE and Voldemort himself,thats what he fears.

Maybe ďattending Death Eater meetingsĒ was badly worded, but we do know that Snape has been in direct contact with Voldemort, and thatís why it doesnít seem that plausible to me that the Malfoys are Snapeís main source of information, although of course he probably gets some information from them too.

I donít think Snape fears that much for his own life, but I do think that he might fear he wonít be of any use to the Order if he has to spend more time with the Death Eaters, since the more he has to spend time with them the more likely it becomes that his cover will be blown.

My guess would be that they are talking about the Vow in the Forest, and Snape doesnít want to go through with it anymore, and what Dumbledore is taking for granted is what happens after his death. Maybe Dumbledore is assuming that Snape can keep his cover despite having to spent a lot of time with the Death Eaters, or maybe heís assuming that Snape can still help the Order somehow, and Snape isnít feeling as optimistic.

The idea of Snape supposed feelings of remorse over Jamesí and Lilyís deaths doesnít seem a plausible reason for Dumbledore to have trusted him, considering how much Snape hated James.
I donít know about that. Firstly, Snapeís remorse might have been over Lilyís death, not Jamesí. Secondly, even though Snape hates James, it doesnít mean that he wants him dead. James hated Snape, and yet he didnít want Snape to be fed to a werewolf, although of course itís possible that he only did that because of his friends. And even though Harry hates Draco, he still didnít want him dead. I guess I see no reason to assume that because Snape hated James he canít have felt remorse over his death.

Bob_Malefoy
December 27th, 2005, 5:25 pm
or maybe heís assuming that Snape can still help the Order somehow, and Snape isnít feeling as optimistic.


Good you get my point :D

RemusLupinFan
December 27th, 2005, 6:01 pm
I don’t know about that. Firstly, Snape’s remorse might have been over Lily’s death, not James’. Secondly, even though Snape hates James, it doesn’t mean that he wants him dead. James hated Snape, and yet he didn’t want Snape to be fed to a werewolf, although of course it’s possible that he only did that because of his friends. And even though Harry hates Draco, he still didn’t want him dead. I guess I see no reason to assume that because Snape hated James he can’t have felt remorse over his death.I see your point, especially about Snape's feelings regarding Lily's death. But I guess I just don't see Snape being remorseful about the death of someone he hated with a passion. The fact that Snape is constantly bashing James is what leads me to believe he isn't sorry about James' death at all. That kind of behavior doesn't seem to be that of someone who is remorseful of indirectly causing someone's death. I definitely agree that Snape probably didn't hate James enough to murder him, but I don't get the feeling that he's at all sorry that James died. But I agree that Lily might be another story.

Awiana
December 27th, 2005, 7:12 pm
I see your point, especially about Snape's feelings regarding Lily's death. But I guess I just don't see Snape being remorseful about the death of someone he hated with a passion. The fact that Snape is constantly bashing James is what leads me to believe he isn't sorry about James' death at all. That kind of behavior doesn't seem to be that of someone who is remorseful of indirectly causing someone's death. I definitely agree that Snape probably didn't hate James enough to murder him, but I don't get the feeling that he's at all sorry that James died. But I agree that Lily might be another story.
Yes, Snape doesnít really seem to be all that remorseful about Jamesís death. Maybe he didnít exactly want James dead, but wasnít really all that sorry that he was dead, either. But maybe he was sorry that it was him who caused Jamesís death, even if he didnít exactly grieve for him?

Personally, I believe Snapeís remorse was to a large part because of Lily, but even if we assume that Snape didnít have any particular feelings towards Lily, I think feeling remorse over causing the death of the Potters isnít such an unconvincing reason for Dumbledore to trust Snape. Maybe it was a kind of a wake-up call for Snape, even if he didnít particularly like either of the Potters. Maybe thatís when he realised that his actions as a Death Eater have consequences, and causing the death of people he knew was more shocking to him than knowing that somewhere out there some people die.

I wonder how much Snape actually knew about Voldemort and how far he was willing to go to gain power when he joined the Death Eaters. I absolutely donít believe that he had no idea what he was doing when he joined them, but I wonder if he knew exactly what kind of a madman Voldemort actually is. It was said in OotP that when Regulus joined the Death Eaters his parents thought he was a real hero, but they got cold feet later when they saw what Voldemort was prepared to do to gain power. So I wonder if Snape knew that Voldemort was going to murder an infant and his parents when he told him of the prophecy?

perkamentus
December 27th, 2005, 9:46 pm
maybe this has come up already but I sincerely believe that JKR didn`t want to create a character that is flawless. Yes, ** is very wise, trustfull, powerfull etc. but even the wisest will make mistakes. Usually it`s because of a personality trait that is otherwise a good trait but is exaggerated in this particular person.

Maybe some of you know the personalitytraits of daniel offman?? everyone has strong traits..for example honestness..when you are that kind of a person then you might not like dishonest people because they go against everything you belief in. the dishonest trait is your personal allergy. But because you belief in being honest you might tend to overdo it sometimes..thats your personal ambush. to overcome this ambush there will be a goal for every core quality you posess..you need to become a little more like your allergy..so this means you sometimes can tell a lie when this will help you.

so I believe ** is the person that is to trustfull for his own good. It`s his weakness but maybe, like harry, he needs this weakness for a goal. Al the times he didn`t give up on people he gained some allies: remus the lycanthrope, hagrid the one who cared for the killer, the durselies who cared for harry, tom riddle himself..and snape..so he gained some, he lost some..lets hope he gained more allies than enemies..

so, I do think that snape is evil and that ** has been misled..and remember, every great person has his own coming and going..when the greatest of greatest went away, another one, naturally took his place. The ranks have changed somewhat. nr 1 voldy, nr 2 snape nr3 harry???

another argument for snapes evilness, I believe, is the look of hatred and disgust as JKR wrote down a sentence before **`s end. That`s the true snape..

random_musing
December 27th, 2005, 9:51 pm
another argument for snapes evilness, I believe, is the look of hatred and disgust as JKR wrote down a sentence before **`s end. That`s the true snape..
Well you can easily twist it. If someone asked you to kill them would you have a huge smile on your face as you did so? No. His look of disgust could have been due to the fact that he had to kill one of the only people who trusted him and knew more about him any anyone else.

Though Dumbledore is flawed, I just...can't see him making such a huge blunder like that. I think there was more to his general statement of Snape feeling remorse.

Tarragon
December 27th, 2005, 11:24 pm
I agree with you, Awiana, that it would be quite difficult for Snape to convince Dumbledore he was "good" for over sixteen years if he truly was not.

However, at the same time, I also think it would be extremely hard for Snape to convince Voldemort he is truly a Death Eater if he were really a "good guy." The Dark Lord is a powerful and talented wizard, and he exceeds even Albus Dumbledore in certain areas of magic (Dumbledore told this to McGonnagall in book 1). The Dark Lord is also a very suspicious person, as most evil dictators are, so it would most likely be harder to convince him rather than Dumbledore because unlike Dumbledore, Voldemort does not have to see the good in people. To him, "there is no good or evil, only power and those too weak to seek it."

Anwe
December 27th, 2005, 11:26 pm
I always thought Snape was good, even when he made the unbreakable vow.

He could have acted on orders from Dumbledore when he killed him (as said above)
But the rest of the order don't seem to be in on the plan so the onley chanse he's got to help Harry is to sabotage Voldemort's circle from within, all by him selfe. That could explain the "don't call me a covard" comment

and he seems to encurage Harry to study Occlumency or it would be pretty obvious to Voldemort what he's final plan will be (asuming that Harry has one)

so I'm hoping that he is good altough it the "snape is evil" evidence seems more valid to me. :(

Who knows, maby Snape ends up throwing him selfe infront of Harry to protect him from the killing curse...;)

random_musing
December 27th, 2005, 11:36 pm
I always thought Snape was good, even when he made the unbreakable vow.
Same with me. During that scene I was like "Oh Snape. You're so clever..."

gertiekeddle
December 27th, 2005, 11:43 pm
An evil Snape wouldn't have blocked Harry's spells in HBP.

WingFour
December 27th, 2005, 11:54 pm
It really come down to politics. Snape killed Dumbledore to save face. Dumbledore knew about the plot for his life and the vow that Snape made. Had he not killed dumbledore, Malfoy clearly wouldnt have been able to and that would have left both S and M dead. While M's death would be no major set back to either side, D wouldnt want him to die regardless, and the Order would have lost a major advantage by losing S as a spy. So D simply rolled over and let S kill him. It was the best option at the time. D's death may have been a set back to the Order due to his lost wisdom. S's inside info on the Death Eaters could lose the war. S didnt kill or capture Harry proving some degree of loyalty to the Order at least. On a the issue of the over heard conversation, it most likly had to do with the vow. S didnt want to plot against D, but D reminds him that he has to continue for this issues I have already stated.

enmapotter
December 28th, 2005, 12:07 am
I've been confused about this guy since book 1, I thought he was good but now I'm totally clueless.

I hope he redeems himself somehow because at the moment I really hate him, and it's a shame 'cause I think he's one of the most talented wizards around, he was brilliant since very young (how he invented all those spells and his incredible gift for potions), it would be sad that all that talent turned out to be used for evil.

Harvey
December 28th, 2005, 12:09 am
I am convinced that Snape is on the Order's side and that JKR has left little tidbits throughout the books proving this. One that I didn't realize until just resently when I was rereading Order of the Pheonix. It was in the scene where Snape is giving Harry his first Oclumency lesson, it stated,
ď He [Snape] smirked. ďIt is true, however, that those who have mastered Legilimency are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and to interpret their findings correctly. The Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so utter falsehoods in his presence without detection.Ē ď (OTP 531)
Why would Snape give this example unless it is one that he is familiar with? Why would he specifically state that the Dark Lord can be tricked by someone who can perform Oclumency well? This seems suspicious to me, almost as if Snape has experience in this event, that he is using Oclumency against the Drak Lord.

frizbog
December 28th, 2005, 12:11 am
If Snape were truly evil, and if his cover were already blown, then why didn't he just go ahead and kidnap Harry and take him to Voldemort? I can understand an evil Snape not killing Harry, since Voldemort had ordered him not to, but wouldn't Voldemort have rewarded an evil Snape beyond belief if now that his cover was blown, Snape had hexed Harry with a fully-body-bind curse and a shrinking curse, put him in his pocket, and took him back to Voldemort for torturing and killing?

pensievepeter
December 28th, 2005, 12:37 am
You know, I think you have a very valid point here. I agree with you that in the end, Snape will probably be redeemed no matter what his loyalties are at present. Despite the fact that Snape is a very nasty man (I believe JKR called him a horrible man, or something to that effect), I truly believe that in the end, he will be redeemed if he isn't good already.

To tell you the truth, I'm more and more siding with the position that Snape is neither "good" nor "evil", but simply working for whichever side benefits himself the most. I think this would be in character for Snape, since he is a Slytherin after all. I think it really depends on how you interpret Snape's motives whether you believe he's good (ie working for Dumbledore), evil (working for Voldemort), or neither (working for himself).

Sorry it took me so long to reply. I glad someone else shares my opinion. I don't think that he necessarily on his own side though, its a dangerous game to play at such a dangerous point of time in Potterverse. If you ask me, leaving book 6, Snape lacks direction, and a person thats out for theselves definately would have to have more direction than he does.

I wonder if Rowlings up in her castle now, laughing her billionare *** off, knowing that we would be at each others throats trying to decide what side Snape is on, having given us page upon page upon page of counterintuitive evidence as to which it is...

I think I'll make this my last post in this thread, I'll watch where the arguements going but I don't want my head torn off, I've given my arguement (like Rowling), and I'll just sit back and watch the show....

Just kidding, the arguements getting good because no one's thinking it over anymore, and I just have to join in the melee.

Selene Sedai
December 28th, 2005, 1:13 am
I don't think he's good, and I don't think anyone will even let him come back considering that know they know he is untrustworthy... Well he's sorta good because when Luna and Hermione warned him, he didn't kill them right off...

frizbog
December 28th, 2005, 1:22 am
I don't think he's good, and I don't think anyone will even let him come back considering that know they know he is untrustworthy... Well he's sorta good because when Luna and Hermione warned him, he didn't kill them right off...
Well, I agree that nobody will let Snape come back unless someone discovers proof that Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him. And that could come from at least two reliable sources - the portrait, or the pensieve - if it's true.

And even if accepted back, nobody will ever totally trust him until Dumbledore's reason for trusting Snape comes out, which could come from the same sources. They might accept him back, but grudgingly and always looking over their shoulder.

It seems to me, though, that it doesn't matter how ironclad Dumbledore's reason for trusting Snape is -- without proof that Snape killed Dumbledore because Dumbledore told him to, Snape will never be accepted or trusted again by the Order.

mugglemom22
December 28th, 2005, 3:56 am
I believe that Snape is and always has been a good guy. Dumbledore trusted Severus completely and even though Dumbledore is not perfect he must have had an excellent reason for his unwavering trust. Snape did not betray Dumbledore on the tower that night, he was simply following orders that were arranged in advance.

Nely_Longbottom
December 28th, 2005, 4:31 am
Yeah, Here is one more person who believe that Snape is good. Why he didn't kidnapped Harry in that last moment? This is the one million question for him. I have another one. Why he said Harry about the Occlumency and the Half Blood Prince?

hot_gurl_izzie
December 28th, 2005, 10:18 am
Well..I don't think he ever regret in killing James ACCIDENTALLY.But I think he did regret for the death of Lily.Loads of editorial points out that Snape MIGHT have fallen in love with Lily because she was a quite popular girl at school.It was possible but you see how Snape think of muggleborns.He is just the same with the Malfoys,who thinks muggleborns are all Mudblood.:no: :no:

Xxsnapeh8erxX
December 28th, 2005, 10:35 am
I believe that Snape is and always has been a good guy. Dumbledore trusted Severus completely and even though Dumbledore is not perfect he must have had an excellent reason for his unwavering trust. Snape did not betray Dumbledore on the tower that night, he was simply following orders that were arranged in advance.

you know, i think it would be REALLY interesting if dumbledore was shown to be fallible. that everyone has their weakness, their moment that shows that they misjudged, that they were wrong. dumbledore was an amazing wizard, what with that prodigous brain of his, but he could make a mistake. and perhaps this is also another reason that harry is the one who has to kill voldemort, because he sees things in a different way than dumbledore.

all of this snape will save harry and they will ride off into the sunset together stuff is tired. i personally think that snape isn't serving the dark lord, but using him, much like he did dumbledore, but that is besides the point. i would be dissapointed if JK did something so cheesy and melodramatic as a "big snape reversal" (look everyone! he was really good!). JK isn't a cheesy writer and she makes difficult decisions. while i dont think snape is a cut-and-dry death eater, lets call a spade a spade. he murdered dumbledore. he is a traitor.

Awiana
December 28th, 2005, 11:43 am
I agree with you, Awiana, that it would be quite difficult for Snape to convince Dumbledore he was "good" for over sixteen years if he truly was not.

However, at the same time, I also think it would be extremely hard for Snape to convince Voldemort he is truly a Death Eater if he were really a "good guy." The Dark Lord is a powerful and talented wizard, and he exceeds even Albus Dumbledore in certain areas of magic (Dumbledore told this to McGonnagall in book 1). The Dark Lord is also a very suspicious person, as most evil dictators are, so it would most likely be harder to convince him rather than Dumbledore because unlike Dumbledore, Voldemort does not have to see the good in people. To him, "there is no good or evil, only power and those too weak to seek it."

Yes, youíre right, it would be extremely difficult for Snape to convince Voldemort of his loyalty. Either way, Snape has to fool one of the greatest wizards of the time, or both, if we assume that he is only loyal to himself.

I think Voldemort has too much faith in his own abilities, and that arrogance leads him to believe that itís not possible that anyone could be a better Occlumens than he is a Legilimens. I think that Snape was talking about himself in the Occlumency lessons when he says that
ďThe Dark Lord, for instance, almost always knows when somebody is lying to him. Only those skilled at Occlumency are able to shut down those feelings and memories that contradict the lie, and so can utter falsehoods in his presence without detection.Ē (OotP p.585 UK paperback).
I found it interesting that Snape decides to talk about Voldemort when heís explaining how Occlumency works. He didnít really need to do that, and thatís why I got the impression that he was talking of his own experience.

I think that Snape being loyal to Dumbledore makes sense, it has a thematic purpose, whereas Snape being loyal to Voldemort doesnít (in my opinion, of course). Snape being loyal to Dumbledore means that Dumbledore was right about the importance of choices: Snape made a horribly wrong choice once, but redemption is possible, you can regret your choices and make up for your mistakes. Dumbledore was right to trust people and give them second chances.

But if it turns out that Snape is loyal to Voldemort/only to himself, I just donít see what the point of that would be. What kind of message would it send to readers if Dumbledore dies because he was foolish enough to trust people and give them a second chance? Dumbledore is not infallible, but I donít think it will turn out that he was a dimwit who mistakenly thought that there is anything good in human nature, and that was his weakness that led to his death.

another argument for snapes evilness, I believe, is the look of hatred and disgust as JKR wrote down a sentence before **`s end. That`s the true snape..

Thatís not a very convincing argument, though. We know that there was ďrevulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his faceĒ, but we donít know why. You could say that it was because he hated Dumbledore, but you could just as easily say that he hated what he was forced to do.

hermy_19
December 28th, 2005, 11:56 am
If Snape were truly evil, and if his cover were already blown, then why didn't he just go ahead and kidnap Harry and take him to Voldemort? I can understand an evil Snape not killing Harry, since Voldemort had ordered him not to, but wouldn't Voldemort have rewarded an evil Snape beyond belief if now that his cover was blown, Snape had hexed Harry with a fully-body-bind curse and a shrinking curse, put him in his pocket, and took him back to Voldemort for torturing and killing?

Exactly my point. Why would he be scared of a kid chasing him who doesn't even know half the curses Snape does? Also it must be noted that he didn't harm anyone from the Order or Luna & hermione for that matter.

I TRUST SEVERUS SNAPE.

s0ng0han
December 28th, 2005, 12:54 pm
Posted by hermy 19
Also it must be noted that he didn't harm anyone from the Order or Luna & hermione for that matter.

I TRUST SEVERUS SNAPE.

Me too! :D
And i think its strange that Snape didnt kill Flitwick when he came in to tell Snape what was going on. Why just knock him out? I dont see the point, unless Snape is still with the order. He could have easily killed Hermione and Luna too. A flick of the wand and presto, the interference is out of the way.
Snape knows how smart Hermione is, and he would know after killing Dumbledore the trio would try to get revenge, and do what Voldemort despised Dumbledore for doing -- meddling in his plans. She would be a threat - maybe not a big one, or so Snape might think.

marcko90000
December 28th, 2005, 2:13 pm
If Snape were truly evil, and if his cover were already blown, then why didn't he just go ahead and kidnap Harry and take him to Voldemort? I can understand an evil Snape not killing Harry, since Voldemort had ordered him not to, but wouldn't Voldemort have rewarded an evil Snape beyond belief if now that his cover was blown, Snape had hexed Harry with a fully-body-bind curse and a shrinking curse, put him in his pocket, and took him back to Voldemort for torturing and killing?

I believe that Voldemort has ordered that no one is to touch Harry except for him. Just think about it. If you were the most evil wizard to ever live, and you tried to kill this one year old baby and you lost everything. Your body, your empire, and were reduced to vapour. Then you try to kill him again when he is 11, and he evades you again, messing up your chances at returning to a body and power. He keeps evading you over and over again, this little boy that you just cannot kill, the most evil wizard to live cannot kill one little boy, a little embarrising don't you think? I am thinking that you would not want anyone else to kill him, he is yours.

It seems to me, though, that it doesn't matter how ironclad Dumbledore's reason for trusting Snape is -- without proof that Snape killed Dumbledore because Dumbledore told him to, Snape will never be accepted or trusted again by the Order.

:tu:

Me too! :D
And i think its strange that Snape didnt kill Flitwick when he came in to tell Snape what was going on. Why just knock him out?
Because he had just woken up, and to do anything more to Flitwick at that moment would make it hard for Snape to explain his story at a later date.
I dont see the point, unless Snape is still with the order.
Really? Yet Snape knocking Flitwick out is logical to you? Wouldn't it be nicer to think Snape not doing anything to Flitwick, and letting him get back to the fight to aid the other fighters, would be a more logical stand point for a Good!Snape shipper?
He could have easily killed Hermione and Luna too. A flick of the wand and presto, the interference is out of the way.
I personally believe Felix Felicis played some part under this circumstance.

But if it turns out that Snape is loyal to Voldemort/only to himself, I just donít see what the point of that would be. What kind of message would it send to readers if Dumbledore dies because he was foolish enough to trust people and give them a second chance?
I believe morals have evolved from the story. But at the base we have a story, not a moral. And it could just as easily be, that this whole "we need to give people second chances" is not a moral that this story is going to tell. It's a fact of life that Snape's story might tell and I'm sure it happens quite often. People are given second chances and turn around and murder you. It would be like "Hey, give them a second chance! Look at Snape! He'll turn around and be good, you'll see!

Personally I don't consider trying to "guess" the moral of the story before the story is actually finished.

Exactly my point. Why would he be scared of a kid chasing him who doesn't even know half the curses Snape does?
It's not a matter of bravery. It's a matter of where he needed to go, and what he was ordered to do.
I TRUST SEVERUS SNAPE.
Everyone has trust in Severus Snape. It's what you put the trust towards that makes the difference.

s0ng0han
December 28th, 2005, 3:42 pm
Posted by Marko90000
Because he had just woken up, and to do anything more to Flitwick at that moment would make it hard for Snape to explain his story at a later date.

He wouldnt have to explain anything. He knew after he kills dumbledore they would think he was with voldemort whether he killed Flitwick or not.
Really? Yet Snape knocking Flitwick out is logical to you? Wouldn't it be nicer to think Snape not doing anything to Flitwick, and letting him get back to the fight to aid the other fighters, would be a more logical stand point for a Good!Snape shipper?

ACTUALLY no. If Snape left Flitwick, Flitwick might have followed Snape, or made it really hard for him to carry out his mission without interference. It was better for Snape to just knock him out, and leave him out of it. Also he probably saved Flitwicks life, keeping him out of the battle.
I personally believe Felix Felicis played some part under this circumstance.
Me too, but i dont think it stopped Snape attacking. i think it was lucky hermione didnt realise what snape was really up to. I believe the felix felicis allowed snape to escape, basically.
The same goes for Malfoy getting away from Ron and the gang. They also took felix felicis. I think the felix felicis helped carry out what happened that night.
I believe that Voldemort has ordered that no one is to touch Harry except for him. Just think about it. If you were the most evil wizard to ever live, and you tried to kill this one year old baby and you lost everything. Your body, your empire, and were reduced to vapour. Then you try to kill him again when he is 11, and he evades you again, messing up your chances at returning to a body and power. He keeps evading you over and over again, this little boy that you just cannot kill, the most evil wizard to live cannot kill one little boy, a little embarrising don't you think? I am thinking that you would not want anyone else to kill him, he is yours.
Yes, i agree with this. However, it doesnt mean Snape or the other death eaters couldnt torture him in the meantime. Snape screamed at one of the death eaters to stop crucioing harry. I dont see why, if he really is faithful to voldemort.

pensievepeter
December 28th, 2005, 3:49 pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by s0ng0han
Me too!
And i think its strange that Snape didnt kill Flitwick when he came in to tell Snape what was going on. Why just knock him out?

Because he had just woken up, and to do anything more to Flitwick at that moment would make it hard for Snape to explain his story at a later date.

Quote:
I dont see the point, unless Snape is still with the order.

Really? Yet Snape knocking Flitwick out is logical to you? Wouldn't it be nicer to think Snape not doing anything to Flitwick, and letting him get back to the fight to aid the other fighters, would be a more logical stand point for a Good!Snape shipper?

Snape is covering his tracks very well by knocking out Flitwick, consider:

If he's with the bad guys, (as you suspect he is), you can take this at face value, he's eliminating a good guy that would stop him from completeing his mission.

If he's with the good guys, (as many others suspect), he can claim later that in order to keep his cover as a bad guy, he knocked out Flitwick, so no one would suspect he's really good.

Perfect way of covering his tracks, in a typical Snape manner.

Jus one more example of how all the evidence Rowling gives us can be taken two different ways, meaning we won't figure it out until Book 7.

Here's a thought, is it possible Snape will be killed off by Rowling in Book 7, before we find out whose side he's on, and the arguement and this thread will go on until the end of time...

Awiana
December 28th, 2005, 6:19 pm
Really? Yet Snape knocking Flitwick out is logical to you? Wouldn't it be nicer to think Snape not doing anything to Flitwick, and letting him get back to the fight to aid the other fighters, would be a more logical stand point for a Good!Snape shipper?
I donít think he could have let Flitwick get back to fight the Death Eaters. He knows now the Death Eaters are in the castle, and he also knows that he has to keep his cover. A loyal Death Eater wouldnít have let Flitwick get back to the fight, and thatís why Good!Snape canít do that either.

Because he had just woken up, and to do anything more to Flitwick at that moment would make it hard for Snape to explain his story at a later date.
We donít know if he had just woken up. And I donít quite understand what you mean by Snape having difficulties explaining his story. Do you mean when he explains his story to Voldemort and the Death Eaters? Why would it make it more difficult to explain his story if he had killed Flitwick?

I believe morals have evolved from the story. But at the base we have a story, not a moral. And it could just as easily be, that this whole "we need to give people second chances" is not a moral that this story is going to tell. It's a fact of life that Snape's story might tell and I'm sure it happens quite often. People are given second chances and turn around and murder you. It would be like "Hey, give them a second chance! Look at Snape! He'll turn around and be good, you'll see!

Personally I don't consider trying to "guess" the moral of the story before the story is actually finished.
Youíre right, maybe thatís not the moral that this story is going to tell. But I believe it is. :)

Personally, I believe that when considering a theory you need to look not only at canon, but also the themes of the series, and try to decide whether a theory is consistent with them too.

Iím sure that in real life people are given second chances, and sometimes they betray that trust. But even though that happens in real life, I donít think itís very plausible that it will happen in the HP story. I think we also need to consider what makes for a good story and what doesnít. And in my opinion, evil!Snape betraying and murdering Dumbledore doesnít make for a good story, whereas nasty but good Snape working for the Order does. Or maybe evil!Snape wouldnít make for a bad story either, but I donít think thatís the story JKR is writing.

One of the things I like the most about HP series is that it often breaks stereotypes and genre conventions. Not always of course, but often things arenít what they seem and what we expected them to be. Snape is in many ways the archetype of an evil wizard, he wears black robes and heís nasty and so on. I have to say I would find it very boring if the ugly, mean and nasty wizard who hates the protagonist actually turns out to be evil.

I nattered about this in the previous version of this thread, but in my opinion the HP series is a story about choices. And I think that to prove that itís choices, not abilities or purity of blood that show who a person is, we need a character like Snape, who has first chosen evil, but then regretted that choice and tried to make up for his past mistakes. And we also badly need a good Slytherin, who is actually working against Voldemort. If we donít, Dumbledoreís claim about the importance of choices isnít consistent with what actually exists in the text. Good!Snape is compelling proof that Dumbledoreís idea of the importance of choices is true. If Snape has been evil all along, I think it undermines the idea that itís your choices that show who you are, and it underscores the stereotype that all Slytherins are evil.

Lieke
December 28th, 2005, 7:27 pm
I can't really decide yet on wich side I'm on, allthough I leaning towards the Snape is Good-side...

What I find curious is the following:

Lupin and lots of teachers and ordermember wonder why Dumbledore (may he be on his next great adventure) trusted Snape unconditionally. Rowling gives the explanation! But it's given through Harry, now one of Snapes biggest enemies... Harry is biased, but well... we all know that...
My point is: Harry gives an explanation that doesn't satisfy me. Harry didn't hear that reason (Snape regretting the death of James and Lily) from Dumbledore. Harry just presumed that was the actual reason, because that was the only thing Dumbledore would say to him. I may be wrong, but I don't think it's the actual reason why Dumbledore trusted Snape with his life (!).

I think Rowling intended to leave the actual reason unknown yet, because it might just be the actual reason that might convince US that Snape is trustworthy.
It's as if Rowling made a safetynet: Pretend that SNape is on the bad-side (fooling us and Voldemort), but leaving enough room for him to turn around and say: "Haha! Got Ya!" Without making it unbelievable!

Awiana
December 28th, 2005, 7:38 pm
Lupin and lots of teachers and ordermember wonder why Dumbledore (may he be on his next great adventure) trusted Snape unconditionally. Rowling gives the explanation! But it's given through Harry, now one of Snapes biggest enemies... Harry is biased, but well... we all know that...
My point is: Harry gives an explanation that doesn't satisfy me. Harry didn't hear that reason (Snape regretting the death of James and Lily) from Dumbledore. Harry just presumed that was the actual reason, because that was the only thing Dumbledore would say to him. I may be wrong, but I don't think it's the actual reason why Dumbledore trusted Snape with his life (!).

I think that Dumbledore is considering telling the real reason to Harry in HBP, but decides against it:
ďíProfessorÖ how can you be sure Snapeís on our side?í Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, ĎI am sure. I trust Severus Snape completely.íĒ (HBP p. 513 UK)

Harry tells the others that the reason Dumbledore trusted Snape was that Snape was sorry that James and Lily were dead, but thatís not what Dumbledore actually says.

Lieke
December 28th, 2005, 7:44 pm
I think that Dumbledore is considering telling the real reason to Harry in HBP, but decides against it:
“’Professor… how can you be sure Snape’s on our side?’ Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, ‘I am sure. I trust Severus Snape completely.’” (HBP p. 513 UK)

Harry tells the others that the reason Dumbledore trusted Snape was that Snape was sorry that James and Lily were dead, but that’s not what Dumbledore actually says.

Yeah, that's what I was saying, wasn't I? Forgive me, my english may be a bit confusing. Sometimes I struggle for the right words...

What I was trying to say is: the fact that we still don't know this actual reason, might be on purpose by Rowling. She leaves room for us to wonder whether it is a very good reason or not. It might just be The Reason that convinces us whether Snape is good or bad.

However, the fact that she makes us wonder about this reason is already making me think that he might be good.

indisguise
December 28th, 2005, 7:47 pm
I agree with Lieke. There are definitely many things that Dumbledore will not reveal, not even to Harry. He trusted Snape no matter what, and of course we know Dumbledore is far from stupid. There is probably a much more legitimate reason for Dumbledore to put so much faith in Snape. Um...by the way, I'm new here. HI.

Lieke
December 28th, 2005, 7:51 pm
I agree with Lieke. There are definitely many things that Dumbledore will not reveal, not even to Harry. He trusted Snape no matter what, and of course we know Dumbledore is far from stupid. There is probably a much more legitimate reason for Dumbledore to put so much faith in Snape. Um...by the way, I'm new here. HI.

:welcome:, let this be the first of many posts, especially if you agree more often with me haha. Just kidding, but anyway, Welcome and enjoy!

ps: too bad that you missed the love thread (the shipper-madness) that was on this forum before book 6 came out! That was hot :lol: !

Awiana
December 28th, 2005, 8:18 pm
Yeah, that's what I was saying, wasn't I? Forgive me, my english may be a bit confusing. Sometimes I struggle for the right words...
Oh, yes, that was definitely what you were saying, I was just agreeing with you! :lol: Sorry if my post was confusing!

And welcome, indisguise! :welcome:

random_musing
December 28th, 2005, 8:37 pm
:welcome: indisguise

Yup, though Dumbledore was very vauge about his reason, I believe there is more to it but Snape didn't want Dumbledore to say anything.

BakasterBob
December 28th, 2005, 8:52 pm
I'm pretty sure Snape had no idea what he was doing when he made the Unbreakable Vow, instead he was trying to weasel information out of the sisters, to find out what Draco was up to. And that look of revulsion on his face when he **'d Dumbly-dore? It was the realization of what Draco's mission was and the truth in knowing if he didn't do it, then he, Snape would die.

It was Nigellus Black who stated, verbatim, that Slytherins are brave, yes, but we also ... something about save our own necks first. Die or kill Dumbledore. Hmmm. Now Snape is viewed as a DE by the entire wizarding world, the secondary plot to the 7th book is how Snape will continue to work for the Order, or as I think they'll rechristian themselves, into the DA. How will he continue to spy on Voldemort when his results will be rejected out of hand by the former members of the Order. He'll be so hated by everyone, what will he do, maybe not an actual act, Snape is more intellectual than overtly physical.

Somehow Snape will show his allegiance to Harry, which gives Harry both Snivellus and Wormtail in his favor.

Someone brought up earlier regarding the prophecy that ... one will die by the hand of the other - and mentioned Wormtail as being the "other." Wormtail has the only hand we know about and it gave me chills when I read that post.

Snape is LV's Secret Keeper. Snape is indeed a double agent, as Malfoy claimed, but his allegiance is to the Order (DA).

I bet Fawkes returns to Harry.

random_musing
December 28th, 2005, 8:57 pm
I'm pretty sure Snape had no idea what he was doing when he made the Unbreakable Vow, instead he was trying to weasel information out of the sisters, to find out what Draco was up to.
I really don't think he didn't think it through. He knew what kind of situation he was in and knew he had to make the best decision. Snape is a clever character. He wouldn't just jump into something like that without knowing the consequences and what he would have to do to make it work out best for the Order.

And that look of revulsion on his face when he **'d Dumbly-dore? It was the realization of what Draco's mission was and the truth in knowing if he didn't do it, then he, Snape would die.
I think that look was because of the fact that he had to kill the only person who truely knew the resons for him switching sides and has ultimately protected him for so many years.

Tarragon
December 29th, 2005, 3:01 am
I understand that Dumbledore trusted Severus Snape. I also understand that this is viewed as some of the most substantial evidence in support of Severus Snape being loyal to Albus Dumbledore, as we keep coming back to it. At the same time, however, I think it is difficult to ignore Harry's continued mistrust of Snape since we were first introduced to the character. We know that Harry trusts Dumbledore more than any other adult in his life, believing almost everything his headmaster has ever told him, and yet Harry is unable to accept Dumbledore's judgement of this man for close to six years. I find this almost more difficult to ignore than Dumbledore's staunch support of Severus Snape's character.

And I think it is also important to note that J.K. Rowling has said herself that she is not purposely trying to portray some moral message through the Harry Potter series, therefore saying Snape turning out to be a traitor would send a "bad" message is not really evidence that he is loyal if the book is not meant to portray a message at all. (Though J.K. Rowling has acknowledged that her beliefs, such as the importance of one's choices, are obviously reflected in her writing.) I mean, I could say that the murders of James and Lily Potter is a bad message because it shows that those who stand up for what is right could wind up dead, i.e. "No good deed goes unpunished." Despite that, it is still in the books.

marcko90000
December 29th, 2005, 4:06 am
He wouldnt have to explain anything. He knew after he kills dumbledore they would think he was with voldemort whether he killed Flitwick or not.
So you don't believe he will try explaining himself to the Order if he did have a plan to kill Dumbledore? And if he did, you don't think the Order would bring this detail up? That killing Flitwick, which surely was not part of the plan, as well as killing Dumbledore that night. It will make it harder to explain his reasons, if he ever is going to, having two murders that night instead of one.
ACTUALLY no. If Snape left Flitwick, Flitwick might have followed Snape, or made it really hard for him to carry out his mission without interference.
I am going to be disagreeing with you. I don't believe Flitwick would have followed Snape. Flitwick knew where he had to be and he was obviously getting as much help as possible. After rounding up Professor Snape I'm sure he would have tried either getting others to help or head back to the battle himself.

And what makes you believe that Snape happened to know that nobody else would have tried following him?
Also he probably saved Flitwicks life, keeping him out of the battle.
Surely Flitwick would know whether he was unfit for battle or not. Can't an aged professor make his own decisions?
Me too, but i dont think it stopped Snape attacking. i think it was lucky hermione didnt realise what snape was really up to. I believe the felix felicis allowed snape to escape, basically.
Since when did Snape (and Malfoy) take any Felix Felicis? We have no canon to suggest they had any. I think Hermione and Luna did take (and we have canon that they did have access to some) some and this was the reason they weren't attacked.
Yes, i agree with this. However, it doesnt mean Snape or the other death eaters couldnt torture him in the meantime.
Indeed. They were ordered not to harm Harry. This is why they didn't torture him.

We donít know if he had just woken up.
'Go and wake Severus,' said Dumbledore faintly but clearly. Tell him what has happened and bring him to me. Do nothing else, speak to nobody else and do not remove your Cloak. I shall wait here.'HBP, The Lightning-Struck Tower, pg. 545
Dumbledore seemed to know. If you don't agree with Dumbledore, then that's fine. But it is in canon.

And in regards to the next part (Snape explaining his story) see my reply to s0ng0han.

And thanks for the rest of your post.

snapes_witch
December 29th, 2005, 6:21 am
Since when did Snape (and Malfoy) take any Felix Felicis? We have no canon to suggest they had any. I think Hermione and Luna did take (and we have canon that they did have access to some) some and this was the reason they weren't attacked.



No, it was the Felix Felicis that Hermione and Luna took that kept them from harm.

ProfesorHellCat
December 29th, 2005, 6:22 am
he's good and had good reason for everything that he did. but i thin he wants to take over voldemorts position

marcko90000
December 29th, 2005, 6:24 am
No, it was the Felix Felicis that Hermione and Luna took that kept them from harm.
I'm glad you agree with me.

DarkDaysAhead
December 29th, 2005, 6:38 am
I understand that Dumbledore trusted Severus Snape. I also understand that this is viewed as some of the most substantial evidence in support of Severus Snape being loyal to Albus Dumbledore, as we keep coming back to it. At the same time, however, I think it is difficult to ignore Harry's continued mistrust of Snape since we were first introduced to the character. We know that Harry trusts Dumbledore more than any other adult in his life, believing almost everything his headmaster has ever told him, and yet Harry is unable to accept Dumbledore's judgement of this man for close to six years. I find this almost more difficult to ignore than Dumbledore's staunch support of Severus Snape's character.

Mm, there are two ways of interpreting that. One could say, "Well, Harry trusted Dumbledore more than anyone...why couldn't he trust Dumbledore then?" and take that as pointing towards Snape's true allegiance being with Voldemort.

However, one could also use Sirius and James to point towards him being good. Harry trusted Dumbledore more than anybody but why could he never accept Snape's attempts at redemption? What if he couldn't because, despite trusting Dumbledore, he, like Sirius and James, just couldn't get past his hate of Snape?;)

And I think it is also important to note that J.K. Rowling has said herself that she is not purposely trying to portray some moral message through the Harry Potter series, therefore saying Snape turning out to be a traitor would send a "bad" message is not really evidence that he is loyal if the book is not meant to portray a message at all. (Though J.K. Rowling has acknowledged that her beliefs, such as the importance of one's choices, are obviously reflected in her writing.) I mean, I could say that the murders of James and Lily Potter is a bad message because it shows that those who stand up for what is right could wind up dead, i.e. "No good deed goes unpunished." Despite that, it is still in the books.

Yes, she did say that but I believe you're cutting a part off.:) If I'm not mistaken, she said she isn't purposely putting the lessons in. She didn't sit down and say, "Alright, I've got to put this, this, and that in...". Instead, she said the lessons came themselves because that's the type of story Harry Potter is. If I can find the interview I'll post it but I'm getting ready to pull my hair out over it.:lol:

Found it:

Rogers: Jo, there's lots of fun and fantasy in these books, but there are also life lessons in these stories. What did you intend to write when you started?

Rowling: Initially, I intended to write a story. No more or no less than that. I love stories. We need stories, I think.

Every 'message' - and I put that in heavily inverted commas because I don't set out to teach people specific things... I never sit down at the beginning of a novel and think 'What is today's lesson?'

Those lessons, they grow naturally out of the book and I suppose they come naturally from me.

I am going to be disagreeing with you. I don't believe Flitwick would have followed Snape. Flitwick knew where he had to be and he was obviously getting as much help as possible. After rounding up Professor Snape I'm sure he would have tried either getting others to help or head back to the battle himself.

I suppose that depends upon what Flitwick told Snape. He could have said he was going to continue on gathering people or that he was going up to battle afterwards. He may have gone after Snape because he knew he was an Order member and thought he should be there. Who else would he have gathered? I'm not so sure he had any intentions of running up after Trelawney and Slughorn.:lol: I apologize if I'm forgetting any teachers that would be important enough for him to gather but, at this moment in time, it would seem as though Snape was the last.:agree:

And what makes you believe that Snape happened to know that nobody else would have tried following him?

Now that I think about it, no one could have followed him up those stairs anyways. The barrier. He may have decided to keep Flitwick out of it.

Surely Flitwick would know whether he was unfit for battle or not. Can't an aged professor make his own decisions?

Whether he can or not doesn't make a difference in whether Snape thought he should battle or not. Of course he would decide to battle but if Snape didn't want him to, well...that's the end of that, now isn't it?:lol:

Since when did Snape (and Malfoy) take any Felix Felicis? We have no canon to suggest they had any. I think Hermione and Luna did take (and we have canon that they did have access to some) some and this was the reason they weren't attacked.

They wouldn't have had to have taken any, necessarily. If his escaping had a lucky outcome for Harry and co., and the "Snape is good" shippers would see the good while you wouldn't so just go with me on this for now:lol:, then him escaping would have been because of the Felix Felicis...but only because it was lucky for Harry.

'Go and wake Severus,' said Dumbledore faintly but clearly. Tell him what has happened and bring him to me. Do nothing else, speak to nobody else and do not remove your Cloak. I shall wait here.'HBP, The Lightning-Struck Tower, pg. 545
Dumbledore seemed to know. If you don't agree with Dumbledore, then that's fine. But it is in canon.

Mm, Hermione was outside Snape's office when Flitwick came in for him. He ran out in his clothes too, if I'm not mistaken. I'd say Dumbledore was assuming he was asleep.

"It was nearly midnight when Professor Flitwick came sprinting down into the dungeons. He was shouting about Death Eaters in the castle, I don't think he really registered that Luna and I were there at all, he just burst his way into Snape's office and we heard him saying that Snape had to go back with him and help and then we heard a loud thump and Snape came hurtling out of his room and he saw us and- and- "

Now that I think about it, it was rather odd that he told them to take care of Flitwick. Think it was possible that he knew they were there upon Flitwick entering? Not that Flitwick mentioned them as he had no reason to but think Snape...I don't know...saw or heard them?:shrug: I don't know, I just find it odd that Snape had the perfect chance to get them out of the way too.:shrug:

EDIT: Damn double posting message glitch.:grumble:

marcko90000
December 29th, 2005, 7:38 am
I suppose that depends upon what Flitwick told Snape. He could have said he was going to continue on gathering people or that he was going up to battle afterwards.
:tu:
He may have gone after Snape because he knew he was an Order member and thought he should be there.
And because he was expecting Snape to go.
Who else would he have gathered? I'm not so sure he had any intentions of running up after Trelawney and Slughorn.
Perhaps. I can't remember how many teachers were already fighting.
I apologize if I'm forgetting any teachers that would be important enough for him to gather but, at this moment in time, it would seem as though Snape was the last.Yeah, you're probably right.
They wouldn't have had to have taken any, necessarily. If his escaping had a lucky outcome for Harry and co., and the "Snape is good" shippers would see the good while you wouldn't so just go with me on this for now, then him escaping would have been because of the Felix Felicis...but only because it was lucky for Harry.
:lol: Well fair enough. I will let you Good!Snape shippers stick with this notion.
Now that I think about it, it was rather odd that he told them to take care of Flitwick. Think it was possible that he knew they were there upon Flitwick entering?We can guess it was possible. We really have no canon do we.
I don't know, I just find it odd that Snape had the perfect chance to get them out of the way too.Felix Felicis. :D
EDIT: Damn double posting message glitch.
Yeah I agree. I'm confident that a lot of complaints will go through about this, whatever the hell they put it in for.

chris3
December 29th, 2005, 11:24 am
I Believe that SS is **'s man Through and through.
He is just doing what ** ordered him to do. He will be back to the good side and will help the OOTP a lot to destroy LV and his group.

Awiana
December 29th, 2005, 11:38 am
I understand that Dumbledore trusted Severus Snape. I also understand that this is viewed as some of the most substantial evidence in support of Severus Snape being loyal to Albus Dumbledore, as we keep coming back to it. At the same time, however, I think it is difficult to ignore Harry's continued mistrust of Snape since we were first introduced to the character. We know that Harry trusts Dumbledore more than any other adult in his life, believing almost everything his headmaster has ever told him, and yet Harry is unable to accept Dumbledore's judgement of this man for close to six years. I find this almost more difficult to ignore than Dumbledore's staunch support of Severus Snape's character.

I see the HP series as a bildungsroman. It’s a story of Harry’s growth and development; it’s his story from childhood to adulthood. The themes in the books are tied to Harry’s maturity, when he is 16 he understands things differently than when he was 11. From that perspective I think it would be very odd if Harry’s assessment of Snape that he made when he was 11 turns out to be correct. Harry is the hero of the story, and he is in many ways exceptional. On the other hand, he is in many ways a very normal kid. He doesn’t have superhuman insight into human nature. He was 11 when he first met Snape, and he distrusted and disliked him from the beginning, which is hardly surprising, Snape isn’t exactly the kind of person who inspires trust in 11 year old kids.

Harry’s hatred towards Snape is pretty irrational, he has hated him with a fiery passion long before Snape killed Dumbledore. And Snape hadn’t really done anything evil (apart from killing Dumbledore, that is). He is mean, nasty and unpleasant, but he hadn’t done anything that would show that he isn’t loyal to Dumbledore, and yet Harry continues to distrust him. Harry hates Snape, and therefore he thinks Snape is evil. That’s very understandable, but I think that will have to change in book 7. Thinking that dislike and distrust are the same thing is fine when you are a kid, but as you grow older you should realise that they are two different things.

The difference between Harry’s distrust and Dumbledore’s trust of Snape is that Harry decided to distrust Snape when he was 11, and didn’t really know anything about Snape, whereas Dumbledore has known Snape for years, he knows things about Snape that Harry doesn’t. Harry is convinced that he knows absolutely everything, that he knows more about Snape than Dumbledore does, but we as readers have every reason to suspect that Dumbledore might know a tiny bit more about Snape than Harry does.

I don’t think it’s the other characters and readers who will have to accept that Harry’s first impression of Snape turned out to be correct. I think it’s Harry who has to realise that you can’t always trust first impressions, people might be something else than they seem, and even if you don’t like someone it doesn’t mean that they are evil.

Thank you, DarkDaysAhead, for finding that interview! That’s what I was trying to say, the lessons grow naturally out of the book, even though she doesn’t set out to teach people certain things. She never preaches, but the books do send a message to readers. And I think it is an important message that redemption is possible even if you have made a terribly wrong choice once.

'Go and wake Severus,' said Dumbledore faintly but clearly. Tell him what has happened and bring him to me. Do nothing else, speak to nobody else and do not remove your Cloak. I shall wait here.'HBP, The Lightning-Struck Tower, pg. 545
Dumbledore seemed to know. If you don't agree with Dumbledore, then that's fine. But it is in canon.
You’re right, it is in canon that Dumbledore thinks Snape was asleep, but we don’t know for sure if he actually was. But that’s probably not very important.

s0ng0han
December 29th, 2005, 3:03 pm
Posted by Marko90000
So you don't believe he will try explaining himself to the Order if he did have a plan to kill Dumbledore?
No, why would he? The whole point of Dumbledore and Snape making the plan was because Snape would be the only one who would go through with killing Dumbledore, and obviously because Snape would be closer to voldemort after than anyone has ever been, which is an added bonus.
I believe Dumbledore asked Snape to go through with killing him and purposly kept it a secret. If any order members found out, they would surely interfere and create more problems that Dumbledore really doesnt need. Dumbledore (i believe) had enough trouble making sure Snape kept his word. (the meeting in the forest)
That killing Flitwick, which surely was not part of the plan, as well as killing Dumbledore that night. It will make it harder to explain his reasons, if he ever is going to, having two murders that night instead of one.

What? If Snape is truly evil, he would have killed Flitwick. He wouldnt care about explaining anything to the order, he wouldnt need to. He wouldnt/didnt kill flitwick if he was still with the order, i dont see why you're saying this.
I am going to be disagreeing with you. I don't believe Flitwick would have followed Snape. Flitwick knew where he had to be and he was obviously getting as much help as possible. After rounding up Professor Snape I'm sure he would have tried either getting others to help or head back to the battle himself.

Yes, that may be so, he might not have followed Snape, but he still might have. Snape had no idea what Flitwick was going to do either, but this is beside the point. Snape could have killed Flitwick, but he didnt. There was no reason not to. It is the simplest solution if you're an evil wizard who has an important job to do (like making sure Dumbledore is killed) and cannot risk any interferences.
And what makes you believe that Snape happened to know that nobody else would have tried following him?
I dont think that Snape thought no-one was going to follow him.
Posted by DarkdaysAhead
Now that I think about it, no one could have followed him up those stairs anyways. The barrier.

Snape didnt know about the barrier. He was in his study/office at the time, he had no idea what was going on, so according to Snape anyone could have followed him all the way.
Posted by Marko90000
Surely Flitwick would know whether he was unfit for battle or not. Can't an aged professor make his own decisions?

Sure, he can make his own dicisions, that doesnt mean they'd be the right ones though. Harry believed he could take on voldemort, and one of the worst dicisions he made got sirius killed (kind of)
Since when did Snape (and Malfoy) take any Felix Felicis? We have no canon to suggest they had any. I think Hermione and Luna did take (and we have canon that they did have access to some) some and this was the reason they weren't attacked.
I was not saying Snape and malfoy took any, I just meant that Hermione not realising what Snape really did was luck, also Ron and the gang not catching malfoy/getting hurt was luck. But its strange that while ron and ginny had the luck, they would have been able to stop Malfoy from getting to the astronomy tower. It was the reason they had the luck in the first place. I think the luck helped both snape and malfoy get to the astronomy tower, aswell as keep the gang alive.
Indeed. They were ordered not to harm Harry. This is why they didn't torture him.
I dont think they were ordered not to harm him, just not to kill him.
The quote from snape in HBP UK version: "NO! roared Snapes voice...have you forgotten your orders? Potter belongs to the dark lord.."
This doesnt suggest they cant hurt him in the meantime, just not kill him.

srose2885
December 29th, 2005, 3:13 pm
Snape is extremely important to the whole thing! I am utterly convinced that he is one of the good guys.(in a weird sort of way, but one of the Order) He even has a little compassion way, way, way deep in him. THings will likely happen in 7 that will help the Order along (and Harry) and we won't know until well into it that Snape is behind them. Once Voldy is defeated, Snape will not be celebrating with the good guys he'll just go off by himself, if he lives, but he'll be a good guy, all things figured in.

PoeticHeart
December 29th, 2005, 7:46 pm
When Harry was on his way to the office of dumbeldore and met Professor Trelawny, and him learning the final truth about Snape and his involvement in the death of his parent's. Harry got very angry hearing this and ofcourse went to Dumbeldore to confront him about it. I got the feeling Dumbeldore knew that this day would come that harry would find out the truth. I have a theory that Dumbeldore tried as much as he could to bring Snape and Harry together as much as he could. Always correcting him to say professor Snape, always letting him know that he absolutely trusted Severus.

Through out the years we see that Snape and Harry are drifting apart instead of growing towards eachother. I think Dumbeldore knew that there would come a day that he would not be here anymore, and felt that with all that was going around that it could be soon. And wanted them to not become the best of friends, but wwanted to form a bond of trust and respect. Maybe it was also Dumbeldore fault, for not reinig in Snape a little for the way he treated harry in the classes. I think he wanted to prepare Harry for the truth, and then perhaps harry would have it in his heart to forgive.

In the end things didn't go as Dumbeldore would have liked, and Harry was unwilling to forgive Snape for what he did. And perhaps unable to forgive Dumbeldore for taking him in. And Dumbeldore knew that the time has come to tell him everything. So I got the feeling that Dumbeldore finally after all this time he would finally share with harry why he trust Severus so. Dumbelore almost told him everything and perhaps also the plan, read it again dumbeldore was about to say something, and the way he behaved it was something important. But as we know Harry was furious, emotional, screaming and cutted him of before he could finish what he intented to say.

Then you see that Dumbeldore finally got to his senses after the shock and realized that it would be bad idea to tell him and just say I trust him. He told him everything how it went and happened, so I believe that he also wanted to tell him the rest. But didn't because Harry was to emotional unable to listen and perhaps later would be better when he have calmed down. But as we know there was no later and Dumbeldore died and with him died the rest of the story. I believe that in the last book Severus will finish the story Dumbeldore began (I think he does in his last moments before he dies) and maybe after that Harry can find it in his heart to let the hate go and forgive him.

Paradise713
December 29th, 2005, 9:41 pm
Sorry if this has been said before but I hope I won't be faulted for not wanting to read dozens of pages worth of theories. And if it has been stated, well, I'm just here to support and second it.

I don't believe there is an Unbreakable Vow. When making it, Narcissa just said (something like) "Will you carry out the plan if Draco does not succeed." Suppose Snape does not know of the plan, but lied. That means the Vow could have referred to any plan (including the one where Snape kills Dumbleodre. If Dumbledore did indeed tell Snape to kill him that means that both Voldemort's and Dumbldore's plan were the same, so it would still look as though Snape did Voldemort's plan).

It seems like something the Order would do. Remember, Snape is a very accomplished Occlumens and Legilemens. Remember that moment in Chapter 2 of HBP where he steps over to the window and looks into it and then closes the curtains over it. Sure, he might have been looking for an Auror disguised as a fox, but we must remember that windows are also reflective, and he could have looked in it and used Legilemency against Narcissa, who was crying, making herself vulnerable, her eyes in her hands, making her unaware that he was employing Legilemenes against her so she could have closed her mind, and she was thinking, in full blast, of how Draco would probably die trying to fulfill the Plan. This combination wouldn't exactly have made it hard for a master Legilemens to figure out the plan and then lie about it.

So then Snape told Narcissa he knew the plan, though he lied when he said Voldemort told him. But when the Vow was made, only "the Plan" was stated. Narcissa never said the Plan was to kill Dumbledore, so she only assumed that the Unbreakable Vow would know which plan she was talking about, which it probably couldn't, because, again, it could have been any plan.

So now Snape knows about the plan, and doesn't have to do one thing to help Draco fulfill it, because there is no Unbreakable Vow. And I do think he was offering Draco help just so he could double cross him and tell Dumbledore how Draco was planning to do it. He was obviously unsuccessful.

Then he Stupefies Flitwick. This could just as easily mean he is indeed evil, tyring to get Flitwick, Ron, and Hermione out of the way, but since my theory of why he is good, I will say that only Snape and Dumbledore knew of Dumbleodre's plan, so he made sure that nobody would see him by causing Flitwick to faint and making Ron and Hermione watch out for him.

Now I'll explain my theory of just before Snape said Avada Kedavra. It said hate was etched into his face, or something very similar. That doesn't necessarily means that Snape hates Dumbledore, which Rowling so nicely proved to us by having Harry tipping a dangerous potion into his dying body, hating himself as he did it. She didn't say anything about hate etched into his face at the time, but I think it is safe to assume that he wasn't smiling.

And finally- Nonverbal spells play a large role in this book. Snape, who is also a master of these, might be powerful enough to say one incantation but mean another. This is more of a theory of how Dumbledore isn't dead, that Snape said Avada Kedavra but really meant something else like Stupefy, but I thought I would add it in, because all the same it is another clue that he is not evil.

momOf3wizards
December 30th, 2005, 12:27 am
I came to this site mainly because of my pathetic obbsesion on this topic. I have analyzed and analyzed snapes behavior, and I truly think he is good.

frizbog
December 30th, 2005, 1:57 am
ES: Was Dumbledore planning to die?

JKR: [Pause.] Do you think that's going to be the big theory?

MA & ES: Yes. Itíll be a big theory.

JKR: [Pause.] Well, I don't want to shoot that one down. [A little laughter.] I have to give people hope.
So, what was JKR doing here in her answer to this interview question? It sounds to me like she's patronizing the good!Snape shippers, humoring them, but that they are fundamentally wrong even if they are having a good time and she is enjoying the debate.

If Snape is *really* good!Snape, she was acting and playing dumb (which seems rather unusual for her, from my reading of her interviews), and if Snape is really evil, she was encouraging speculation on an alternative viewpoint (which seems not at all unusual, since she seems to enjoy these ships as long as they aren't really wacky).

It is interesting that she chose to give an answer like this one as opposed to her usual "no comment" or "I really can't comment on that" or "I can't answer that" answer.

random_musing
December 30th, 2005, 2:04 am
JKR does that all the time, frizbog. She especially does it when it hits close to an important bit of the plot. She'll laugh it off and try or answer with a question of her own or something like that. Saying "no comment" is practically a give away (which I sometimes don't think she understands :p)

marcko90000
December 30th, 2005, 2:12 am
No, why would he? The whole point of Dumbledore and Snape making the plan was because Snape would be the only one who would go through with killing Dumbledore...Fair enough. I mistook you for a Redeem!Snape person.
...and obviously because Snape would be closer to voldemort after than anyone has ever been, which is an added bonus.
No, this is not obvious. Dumbledore himself mentions the following:

I trust that you also noticed that Tom Riddle was already highly self-sufficient, secretive and, apparently, friendless? He did not want help or companionship on his trip to Diagon Alley. He preferred to operate alone. The adult Voldemort is the same. You will hear many of the his Death Eaters claiming that they are in his confidence, that they alone are close to him, even understand him. They are deluded. Lord Voldemort has never had a friend, nor do I believe that he has ever wanted one.HBP, The Secret Riddle, ppg. 259-260
Snape WILL NOT be any closer to Voldemort, and Dumbledore knew this.
If any order members found out, they would surely interfere and create more problems that Dumbledore really doesnt need.
I wasn't talking about before Dumbledore died. I was asking you that now Dumbledore is dead, will Snape try to explain himself to the Order?
What? If Snape is truly evil, he would have killed Flitwick.
I believe that would have made it hard for Snape to leave afterwards. Hermione/Luna were outside the door. Snape killing Flitwick would not have been a rash move. But we will never agree with this point.
I dont think they were ordered not to harm him, just not to kill him.
The quote from snape in HBP UK version: "NO! roared Snapes voice...have you forgotten your orders? Potter belongs to the dark lord.."
This doesnt suggest they cant hurt him in the meantime, just not kill him.
That's right. And Snape said this after one of the Death Eaters tried to torture him. So the Death Eaters were, specifically, ordered not to harm Harry.

frizbog
December 30th, 2005, 2:17 am
JKR does that all the time, frizbog. She especially does it when it hits close to an important bit of the plot. She'll laugh it off and try or answer with a question of her own or something like that. Saying "no comment" is practically a give away (which I sometimes don't think she understands :p)
So, you take this to be sort of a dead giveaway that the theory is actually correct and she was trying to throw us off the scent? Because that's what I think she was doing. Am I understanding you correctly?

random_musing
December 30th, 2005, 2:36 am
So, you take this to be sort of a dead giveaway that the theory is actually correct and she was trying to throw us off the scent? Because that's what I think she was doing. Am I understanding you correctly?
Yep. Thats what I'm saying. :agree:

s0ng0han
December 30th, 2005, 12:51 pm
Posted by Marko90000
No, this is not obvious. Dumbledore himself mentions the following:

I trust that you also noticed that Tom Riddle was already highly self-sufficient, secretive and, apparently, friendless? He did not want help or companionship on his trip to Diagon Alley. He preferred to operate alone. The adult Voldemort is the same. You will hear many of the his Death Eaters claiming that they are in his confidence, that they alone are close to him, even understand him. They are deluded. Lord Voldemort has never had a friend, nor do I believe that he has ever wanted one.HBP, The Secret Riddle, ppg. 259-260
Snape WILL NOT be any closer to Voldemort, and Dumbledore knew this.

Yeah, you're quite right. However, i do remember Voldemort saying he always rewards his followers. He rewarded Wormtail even though he did a lousy job, and that was with a silver hand. What Snape has done for Voldemort is quite big, he killed Dumbledore, something i dont even think Voldemort thought would really work. This has never been done before, so we have no idea how Voldemort will react to this.
He may not want a friendship with Snape, but i think he will tell Snape a great deal about what he intends to do in the 7th book. Snape did know about the plan in this book. (though he may have been lying, but i dont think so) So i dont think its unreasonable to suggest that Voldemort will trust and confide in Snape more than he would have done.
I wasn't talking about before Dumbledore died. I was asking you that now Dumbledore is dead, will Snape try to explain himself to the Order?

Oh, sorry :p
To be honest, i dont think so. I think he knew what he would have to sacrifice when he killed Dumbledore. Also, i dont think we'll find out Snapes true intentions until quite far in the book, and Snape going to the order to explain would probably have to be done near the beginning, for them to even begin to listen to his reasons. It wouldnt be right if he left it too late.
That's right. And Snape said this after one of the Death Eaters tried to torture him
Still, who knows how long the death eater would have kept the cruciatus curse on Harry. If Snape hadnt told him to stop, he might have tortured Harry to insanity, which is as good as dead. But i dont think Snape told him to stop so the dark lord can have his revenge, i think it was to make sure harry stays in a fit state to fight Voldemort, like Dumbledore wanted.

Awiana
December 30th, 2005, 4:20 pm
No, this is not obvious. Dumbledore himself mentions the following:

I trust that you also noticed that Tom Riddle was already highly self-sufficient, secretive and, apparently, friendless? He did not want help or companionship on his trip to Diagon Alley. He preferred to operate alone. The adult Voldemort is the same. You will hear many of the his Death Eaters claiming that they are in his confidence, that they alone are close to him, even understand him. They are deluded. Lord Voldemort has never had a friend, nor do I believe that he has ever wanted one.HBP, The Secret Riddle, ppg. 259-260
Snape WILL NOT be any closer to Voldemort, and Dumbledore knew this.
I donít think the fact that Voldemort doesnít want any friends has really much to do with how much he trusts Snape. I think we all agree that Voldemort never trusts anyone as completely as Dumbledore does, but I think he trusts some of his Death Eaters more than others. I believe that he must have had doubts about Snape, and I also think that Wormtail was at Spinnerís End to spy on Snape.

Snape killing Dumbledore would make it absolutely clear to Voldemort that Snape really is loyal to him, since I believe that concepts like self-sacrifice for the greater good are beyond Voldemortís mental grasp.

_tonks_
December 30th, 2005, 5:15 pm
Hi!
I think i realize something... no, actually, i'm sure....
I think snape is good, and there is me proof:
In the 3rd book Snape was a subtitute DADA techer for Lupin, right? And he tought them about warewalfs... why? because he wanted them to realize that Lupin was a warewolf.
O.K... now, in book six what a coincidece, Snape is a DADA teacher and he's teaching them about inferies.
Why?????
Maybe because he knows where the locket is, and he knows what's in the water, and he knows that Dumbledore and Harry are going to find it and he wants Harry to know how to deal with them!
Sounds pretty logical, doesn't it?
Pplleeeaasseee replay me and write what do you think about my theory...!
I think it's complitly true and prooves that Snape is good.

Dawson_Smith
December 30th, 2005, 6:05 pm
_tonks_ may be on to something there. Even as Snape seems like a jerk for chastising Harry (and Seamus) about his "transparent" answer, he's careful to give the real distinctions, and as Snape has pointed out many times before (and rightfully), Harry has little mind for such things, and this is a weakness of his., tied to his rashness. Snape's lessons to Harry, cruel though they may be, all go back to the same thing - Harry doesn't think things through. He goes with his gut, and his gut is often wrong, leading him to his biggest disasters.
It is fitting that Snape would be the professor who pounds this home to Harry so relentlessly, as Harry's blind detest for Snape has led him to form the wrong conlusion so many times. In PS/SS, he assumes that Snape is trying to kill him, even as Snape is counteracting Voldemort's own attempts on his life (through Quirrill, of course.) In PoA, Harry attacks Snape over the James/Severus life debt, refusing to believe Snape's quite accurate interpretation of the events. In GoF, Harry believes Snape a Death Eater due to the confrontation with Karkaroff, but doesn't get it until the end that Snape is using his past for the benefit of the Order. And in OotP, Harry's hatred keeps him from approaching Snape about his dream until it is too late to learn that it was a trap, and yet he blames Snape for Sirius's death. Harry cannot ever feel anything but revulsion for Snape, even though every decision he has made based on this has been in error (save for PoA, in which Snape's efforts were decidedly misinformed, though with an intent to save the trio.)
The evidence of Snape having been the one who relayed to prophecy to Voldemort makes me wonder about the life-debt, and whether Snape, now responsible for James's death, can ever repay, or is forever bound to it. Might this be the reason Dumbledore trusts him so completely?
As a final thought (though I have many more) DUmbledore's words to Harry on the tower instruct him to wake Severus, but speak to no one else and wear the cloak the whole time. This seems to me to jibe with Snape knocking out Flitwick, though of course Harry couldn't possibly see it that way.

BennyJoe
December 30th, 2005, 6:27 pm
Many people had always had their doubts on Snape's turn from a Death-Eater. And Dumbledore always said that he had foolproof evidence of it being true, which is why he gave him a job working at Hogwarts. And in HBP, we get what Harry assumes is the proof and tell the others. About how Snape went to Dumbledore after James and Lily Potter were killed and said how sorry he was that they died. But what if that ISN'T the proof? Mostly likely it isn't. I have a theory on what the real proof might be.

We also find out in HBP, that it was Snape who was the person who overheard half the prophecy about Harry and Voldemort before being thrown out of the bar and didn't hear the last part before going off to send Voldemort to the Potters' home........but what if he really DID hear the whole thing? Perhaps he heard the last of it outside the bar and knew perfectly well that it would defeat Voldemort and create the sole chance to destroy him? And the proof was when Snape went to Dumbledore and told him how sorry he was that the Potters were killed, but can recite the prophecy to him, proving he knew what would happen to him.

What do you all think of this theory?

sqizzer
December 30th, 2005, 8:09 pm
Flitwick not being killed, but instead being knocked out, and then the unexpected Luna and Hermione being sent in to take care of it......

This action, IMO, doesn't support either of the good or evil snape theories. Whether Snape's a good guy or not, I don't see him as being an emotionless, cold-hearted character. Certainly not the kind of character who will now all of a sudden start killing everyone at the drop of a hat because his cover's blown and now he can. Of all the DE's, only Bellatrix, Greyback, Crouch Jr., and Voldemort himself have presented those kinds of unrelenting, remorseless actions - Greyback being the fore-runner of the lot in that respect. The other members only seem to do things when ordered to - of course they enjoy doing it which doesn't really say much for them, but they're not these wreckless point-my-wand-and-kill-everyone-I-don't-like types. They seem to opt for the stuns or torture methods over the killing curses, unless otherwise ordered.

Now we know that Snape was being kept in the dark by Malfoy, and so even though he may have known how it would end, he may not have known the extent to which Malfoy had gone, and could have been shocked that Malfoy had figured out a way to get the DE's into Hogwarts silently (as he did not know about the cabinets and the RoR stunt - Draco would not give him the information). Flitwick running into his room and blurting out all this information wouldn't have given Snape an accurate overview of the extent of what was happening, remembering also (I found) Flitwick was a bit histerical.

Here's a few Good!Snape / Evil!Snape reasons for not killing Flitwick

:td: Evil!Snape::td:
- It would have been a bit dodgy for Snape (if evil) to just assume the DE's were winning and kill everyone only to find that the Order had gunned them all down, and now he has to please explain 1. to the Order for killing or 2. to Voldemort for losing his trusted Order status for nothing
- having been under cover for so many years, it could have been a natural reaction not to hurt but only to hinder
- he may be on the bad side, but it is not in his character to just outright kill unless necessary to do so. It was not necessary to kill Flitwick if a stun would have done the same job
- not hurting Hermione or Luna could have been a safety reaction. He did not expect them there, and so other students could be coming around the corner. It would have slowed him down to have to stop or kill everyone who might have seen him hurting them in order to prevent them letting the Order know ie. they'd stop him when they saw him

:tu: Good!Snape:tu:
- would not kill anyone innocent, or in the Order
- could have found Flitwick histerical, so preventing him from fighting in this state would actually have saved his life
- would want to do the job required of him with the minimal amount of casualties - keeping people out of the way would make it easier to do so
- would not have wanted to stun Luna or Hermione in order for them to get Flitwick help as soon as possible

Remember - the only reason Snape got in, did the job, and left almost completely unhindered, is because both sides believed he was with them. Sacrificing that for anything at that crucial time could have turned out to be a detremental decision either way. Good and Evil Snape had a job to do - and he did it.

The whole "NO! roared Snapes voice...have you forgotten your orders? Potter belongs to the dark lord.." thing, preventing the DE's from hurting Harry works the same way too.Good!Snape :tu: wouldn't have wanted them hurting him at all, and Evil!Snape :td: wouldn't have wanted them to deplete him (Neville's mum and dad ring a bell?) making him a less than worthy opponent to Voldemort, who wants nothing more than to prove to the whole world that he is unmatched.

Sqizz:eyebrows: :eyebrows:

fawnmarie
December 30th, 2005, 8:46 pm
Yeah, Snape is ... if not "good" - he's not evil. I think that Snape thinks that bringing down Voldemort is the most important thing and that it might require killing Dumblydore.

Even if he's been a jerk because of his personal hatred of Harry's dad, he's never hurt any of the children nor allowed them to come to any harm. He's been pretty protective of Harry, and that may be because he knows Harry is the only one that can destroy Voldemort.

frizbog
December 30th, 2005, 9:08 pm
Hi!
I think i realize something... no, actually, i'm sure....
I think snape is good, and there is me proof:
In the 3rd book Snape was a subtitute DADA techer for Lupin, right? And he tought them about warewalfs... why? because he wanted them to realize that Lupin was a warewolf.
O.K... now, in book six what a coincidece, Snape is a DADA teacher and he's teaching them about inferies.
Why?????
Maybe because he knows where the locket is, and he knows what's in the water, and he knows that Dumbledore and Harry are going to find it and he wants Harry to know how to deal with them!
Sounds pretty logical, doesn't it?
Pplleeeaasseee replay me and write what do you think about my theory...!
I think it's complitly true and prooves that Snape is good.Not a bad theory, _tonks_. It does seem pretty logical.

The only problem is motive -- and I am a good!snaper.

I think Snape wanted them to realize Lupin was a werewolf to discredit Lupin because he disliked Lupin, not because he wanted to put the 3rd years on their guard and to prepare them for anything.

As to why Snape covered inferi in year 6, I think it most likely because Voldemort had used them in the past. If, however, it was because he knew Dumbledore would be looking for the locket horcrux in the cave and because inferi were expected there, that would be strong evidence, but not proof (in my opinion), that Snape was on Dumbledore's side.

Tarragon
December 30th, 2005, 10:46 pm
Here's a new take on the matter of Snape knocking Professor Flitwick unconscious:

Perhaps Snape did not knock Flitwick out to keep him from rejoining the fight, but to keep Hermione and Luna out of his way. After all, the year before the combined force of Harry, Neville, Ron, Hermione, Ginny and Luna kept a small squad of Death Eaters from getting the prophesy, so he thought better safe than sorry and created a reason for them to stay behind without actually physically harming them.

So there's my thought for the day. Enjoy.

snapes_witch
December 30th, 2005, 10:58 pm
[QUOTE=BennyJoe]Many people had always had their doubts on Snape's turn from a Death-Eater. And Dumbledore always said that he had foolproof evidence of it being true, which is why he gave him a job working at Hogwarts. And in HBP, we get what Harry assumes is the proof and tell the others. About how Snape went to Dumbledore after James and Lily Potter were killed and said how sorry he was that they died. [QUOTE]

Except Snape became Dumbledore's spy before the Potters were killed and actually warned Dumbledore about who was going to be attacked.

vandal
December 30th, 2005, 11:50 pm
Well, Snape is definitively a traitor. Did he betray Dumbledore or Voldemort? One of them for sure.

_tonks_
December 31st, 2005, 12:00 am
Not a bad theory, _tonks_. It does seem pretty logical.

The only problem is motive -- and I am a good!snaper.

I think Snape wanted them to realize Lupin was a werewolf to discredit Lupin because he disliked Lupin, not because he wanted to put the 3rd years on their guard and to prepare them for anything.

As to why Snape covered inferi in year 6, I think it most likely because Voldemort had used them in the past. If, however, it was because he knew Dumbledore would be looking for the locket horcrux in the cave and because inferi were expected there, that would be strong evidence, but not proof (in my opinion), that Snape was on Dumbledore's side.


HI! THANKS! :)
Aout Snape's motivations- i'm a good!sanper too...!
I know that when he wanted them to realize that Lupin is a warewolf,he was doing it in order to , eventually, kick Lupin out of hogwarts and not in order to prepare them to something...
But what i ment to say is that Snape has reasons for teaching whatever he teaches... there are preticular things that he doesn't teach "for nothing".
No matter if it's because he just want the students to notice Lupin is a warewolf or teaching Harry what to do when confronting an inferi. He is doind it for a reason.
Lets say my theory is right and he did talked about inferies in order to help Harry- we know that he knew about the horcrux and he knew that Dumbledor's death was necessery (in my opinion, Dumbledore knew that too) so he was acting in a good way and not in a death eater way.

Verhur
December 31st, 2005, 12:14 am
Snapes is in he own side.
He ins't good or bad.
I think he tries to get the best from both sides, and that he is sooooooo hot man, he rocks my socks.

However, if he's good, he'll be murdered by Voldemort or any death eaters. If he's bad or he'll die, or he'll end up in Azakaban.

So, he'll die or he'll die.
He doesn't have a choice.

ILuvBellatrix
December 31st, 2005, 2:11 am
I think Snape is good. I thought a while on the part where Narcissa Malfoy asked Snape to make the unbreakable vow. He seemed to be stunned for a couple of seconds. Also, after him and Draco make a run for it after Snampe kills Dumbledore I keep thinking that Snape was shouting helpful things to Harry. He told him that his spells would be blocked again and adian and again untill he learns to keep his mouth shut and his mind closed. I just thought that was interesting.

marcko90000
December 31st, 2005, 6:11 am
Yeah, you're quite right. However, i do remember Voldemort saying he always rewards his followers. He rewarded Wormtail even though he did a lousy job, and that was with a silver hand.
:tu: Pray tell me what you believe Snape's reward is going to be?
What Snape has done for Voldemort is quite big, he killed Dumbledore, something i dont even think Voldemort thought would really work.
No? So now Voldemort knew that Draco wasn't going to be able to kill Dumbledore? Such an interesting idea....
This has never been done before, so we have no idea how Voldemort will react to this.
:tu: I for one won't be believing Voldemort would give him information on the Horcruxes.
He may not want a friendship with Snape, but i think he will tell Snape a great deal about what he intends to do in the 7th book.
I don't. Dumbledore didn't either. Check the quote again. Voldemort operates alone. So, how is Voldemort going to tell Snape what he plans to do in book 7?
I guess I will leave you to believe what you choose to believe.
Still, who knows how long the death eater would have kept the cruciatus curse on Harry. If Snape hadnt told him to stop, he might have tortured Harry to insanity, which is as good as dead.
Indeed.
But i dont think Snape told him to stop so the dark lord can have his revenge, i think it was to make sure harry stays in a fit state to fight Voldemort, like Dumbledore wanted.
Two sides of the coin.
I think we all agree that Voldemort never trusts anyone as completely as Dumbledore does, but I think he trusts some of his Death Eaters more than others.
It would be interesting to see how J.K. Rowling would write it if Snape is good. After all, it's not like he can double spy anymore (from what quite a few people have posted on here), so I wonder what Snape would be good for.
I believe that he must have had doubts about Snape, and I also think that Wormtail was at Spinnerís End to spy on Snape.
Ok.

random_musing
December 31st, 2005, 6:21 am
No? So now Voldemort knew that Draco wasn't going to be able to kill Dumbledore? Such an interesting idea....
Erm, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that implied throughout the book? :huh: Or was that sarcasm?

DarkDaysAhead
December 31st, 2005, 7:07 am
That's an interesting topic...what Voldemort will give Snape. I can't really think of anything besides help with killing off Lupin because of his hatred for him. Not necessarily him physically helping but him giving him something to assist in knocking him off. I'm not convinced that'll happen but that's all I could come up with.:D

snapes_witch
December 31st, 2005, 7:21 am
[QUOTE=marcko90000
It would be interesting to see how J.K. Rowling would write it if Snape is good. After all, it's not like he can double spy anymore (from what quite a few people have posted on here), so I wonder what Snape would be good for.

Ok.[/QUOTE]

Sabotaging Voldemort's plans?

DarkDaysAhead
December 31st, 2005, 7:33 am
Maybe keeping him in Voldemort's inner circle will help Harry during the final battle. Imagine a Buffy-Spike-Angel-Drew thing...3 VS. 1? I think not!:evil: :p

xelm0x
December 31st, 2005, 8:15 am
I've been foaming at the mouth to say this for months! :lol: No one will listen! There has to be something, there just has to be. There has to be a reason why Snape was allowed to 'do what he did' so easily in book 6. My apologies if someone has mentioned these ideas previously, but then I agree :)

In reading book 6, it just seemed too easy! Regardless of the events just prior, it still seemed impossible. My thought is that Dumbledore knew what would happen, what had to happen. He had given Harry the final piece of information he needed to go about destroying Voldemort and pushed Harry out of the nest so to speak. Dumbledore thought he had made mistakes in the past to have coddled Harry and this seemed like a really mental over compensation.

It was a very precarious situation for Harry and Dumbledore to have been alone that night but I got the impression that it all had a purpose- like everything in JK world ;) Ultimately, I think Dumbledore may have placed more value in having Snape on the inside than himself being around to hold Harry's hand. But Harry never trusted Snape and probably never will, so, if Snape is indeed staying true to Dumbledore, will Harry ever trust him enough to accept his help in the end?...

Then there's the possibility I refuse to accept! :lol: Dumbledore had no business trusting Snape and forsaking the counsel of Ron, Harry and Hermione who told him to get Snape to take a hike, and Snape is indeed evil to the core and did everything out of said evil.

s0ng0han
December 31st, 2005, 10:05 am
Posted by Marko90000
Pray tell me what you believe Snape's reward is going to be?
hmmm, i couldnt give you an exact guess, but i dont think it will be like Peters; solid or any object (including a horcrux). I think he will reward him with information. Perhaps the location of a horcrux, or just what he intends to do, either to himself, with harry, or how he intends to lure harry to him, just some sort of information that harry can attain. I mean, Harry is going to have to find out something about what voldemorts doing/horcrux locations , and i think Snape will be able to help a bit.

Aswell as tell ing harry this, i think Snape will also tell Harry what happened to Dumbledores hand. Dumbledore kept saying to harry he will find out, but he never did tell Harry. The only other person who knows anything about what happened that night is Snape. We know that for a fact. I think Snape may tell Harry hoping it will help to convice harry that he really is good. I mean, Snape did Save Dumbledore's life doing that. I dont know what you think about that night Marko90000 or anyone else who thinks Snape is evil. Why did Snape save Dumbledore?
So now Voldemort knew that Draco wasn't going to be able to kill Dumbledore? Such an interesting idea....

Im not quite sure what you mean here. Voldemort gave Draco tho mission partly to get back at Lucius.
I don't. Dumbledore didn't either. Check the quote again. Voldemort operates alone. So, how is Voldemort going to tell Snape what he plans to do in book 7?

Well Voldemort cant not tell anyone, can he? He cant leave all his death eaters in the dark about what he's planning, otherwise they wont be there to help him. Its not like him telling his death eaters about the horcruxes, its not a big secret that he wants harry dead, and that he plans to lure harry to him. He cant do that by himself. I think he will tell a select few about it. just the people he wants/needs anyway.

Awiana
December 31st, 2005, 12:39 pm
It would be interesting to see how J.K. Rowling would write it if Snape is good. After all, it's not like he can double spy anymore (from what quite a few people have posted on here), so I wonder what Snape would be good for.
Thereís a theory floating around that Snapeís patronus has changed after he killed Dumbledore. I like that theory and think it could very well be true, because we learnt in HBP that a patronus can change due to a great shock and emotional upheaval, but the fact that Tonksís patronus had changed didnít seem all that important. It could be that we were introduced to the idea that patronuses can change because it will be important in book 7.

If that theory turns out to be true, Snape could send information to Harry or Order members, because they wouldnít know itís Snape who the messages are coming from.

I also like the idea that Aberforth knows the truth about Snapeís loyalties, and Snape can give information to him, and he can pass it on to the Order.

However, even if Snape isnít in contact with any Order members at all, I think he could still be useful, I think it would be highly useful to have someone who is loyal to Dumbledore in Voldemortís inner circle. And Snape could be of help to Harry when he has to finally face Voldemort.

silverwhisper
December 31st, 2005, 1:53 pm
as my mum always said,broken glass cannot be fixed...

marcko90000
December 31st, 2005, 9:59 pm
For those of you who are in the New Year:

Happy New Year. :New Year:

Erm, correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't that implied throughout the book? :huh: Or was that sarcasm?
It wasn't meant as sarcasm, no. I had a major headache from my New Years Eve party, the effects only wearing off now. I will check the book to see if it was implied, unless you're happy to give the quote(s) straight off.

Sabotaging Voldemort's plans?
Assuming he finds out about some, or all, of them. Or assuming Voldemort would tell him, which I doubt in a way.

It could be that we were introduced to the idea that patronuses can change because it will be important in book 7.
That is interesting.
If that theory turns out to be true, Snape could send information to Harry or Order members, because they wouldnít know itís Snape who the messages are coming from.
But wouldn't the Order be able to deduce that it would be Snape's Patronus? And wouldn't they be wearier then that anyway. Remember Arthur Weasley's quote, "Never trust anything that can think for itself if you can't see where it keeps its brain." The Order would very well become suspicious.

Perhaps if you have the link to the theory. I might try to google it in the meantime.
I also like the idea that Aberforth knows the truth about Snapeís loyalties, and Snape can give information to him, and he can pass it on to the Order.
And if the Order asks where he gets his information?

KATTALNUVA
January 1st, 2006, 2:17 am
One word... No.

marcko90000
January 1st, 2006, 3:18 am
One word... No.
I do agree with you. :D

Zina_x0
January 1st, 2006, 4:39 am
I don't know if he is or not. I originally thought he was not good, but then read this editorial on his possible innocence, and I kind of agree with it too. I don't know, which of course is what JK wants. So anyway, I don't know what to believe. Nobody from the Order is going to want his help or think he's really not evil. But maybe he would help Harry in the final match with Voldie. Or hunt down Horcruxes, who knows?

I'm gonna make a terrible voter one day..

Dawson_Smith
January 1st, 2006, 10:03 am
So I've been known to get belligerent about this subject on other threads... Forgive me if any of this comes off that way.

Everything about Snape (and most notably Hagrid's overheard conversation between Snape and Dumbledore) is left deliberately vague, but not for the purpose of this debate - for some purpose in the books. Now, considering that Snapes moral bearings are still up in the air, after this most horrific events, it seems to me that the only possible payoff for the vagueness of the writing would be for Snape to be truly good, and forced into a bad situation, or for him to be exponentially worse than we know already. So I just have one honest and humble querie for evil snapers: How do you see your scenario playing out in book seven in a satisfying manner?

frizbog
January 1st, 2006, 4:39 pm
Everything about Snape (and most notably Hagrid's overheard conversation between Snape and Dumbledore) is left deliberately vague, but not for the purpose of this debate - for some purpose in the books.
In my opinion the purpose in the books and the purpose of this debate are one and the same. One of the very best features of the entire series is the Snape character, and his moral ambiguity. JKR meant for us to engage in the entire "is he a good guy or is he a bad guy" debate. In GoF, she even did a bit of it for us between Ron and Hermione, with Sirius moderating and saying "they both have a point." It's obviously no accident, and we are meant to wonder about it -- and whenever we come down on one side, there's facts that need to be explained on the other side that make you go "Hmmmm."

daisy5
January 2nd, 2006, 9:27 am
Thereís a theory floating around that Snapeís patronus has changed after he killed Dumbledore. . .

If that theory turns out to be true, Snape could send information to Harry or Order members, because they wouldnít know itís Snape who the messages are coming from.

I also like the idea that Aberforth knows the truth about Snapeís loyalties, and Snape can give information to him, and he can pass it on to the Order.

If Snape's patronus changes, this could be how he proves his loyalty to Dumbledore and the Order. Once he figures out a way to let them know that it's him who is trying to communicate with them.

sqizzer
January 2nd, 2006, 11:34 am
If Snape's patronus changes, this could be how he proves his loyalty to Dumbledore and the Order. Once he figures out a way to let them know that it's him who is trying to communicate with them.

Forgive me, but how could this prove his loyalty? Unless you're talking about once they know it's his patronus - and therefore realised that it has changed because of his feelings about the murder? I just want to make sure on that one.

Otherwise, if he is evil Snape - he could just be hoodwinking them into a trap (being an ex-order member he knows about the communication method). But wouldn't an unknown patronus be ignored? The method works because they know one another's patronus', so what would they do when faced with an unknown one? Just a question.

Awiana
January 2nd, 2006, 12:50 pm
But wouldn't the Order be able to deduce that it would be Snape's Patronus? And wouldn't they be wearier then that anyway. Remember Arthur Weasley's quote, "Never trust anything that can think for itself if you can't see where it keeps its brain." The Order would very well become suspicious.

Yes, youíd think they might find it a bit suspicious if an unknown Patronus starts to bring them messages. Itís definitely a flaw in that theory, but I donít think it completely disproves it. It seems that Dumbledore had several spies, and itís possible Harry and every Order member donít know who exactly they are, they might have given their information directly to Dumbledore instead of announcing it to the whole Order. Now that Dumbledore is gone the Order will probably be in disorder, having no one clear leader anymore. I donít think itís impossible that they would think the messages come from a spy whose identity they donít know. And if Snape gives information to Aberforth or someone else, they donít have to tell the information comes from Snape, since it seems that he is not the only spy Dumbledore had. At least, thatís what Fudge assumes in PoA: ďDumbledore, who was of course working tirelessly against You-Know-Who, had a number of useful spies.Ē (PoA p.222 UK paperback)

Perhaps if you have the link to the theory. I might try to google it in the meantime.
No, I donít have a link, sorry. Itís just an idea that Iíve seen people mention in several threads, and I think itís an interesting possibility.

Iím pretty sure that a Patronus changing form will be important in book 7, because otherwise I donít really understand why we were introduced to the idea in the first place, but of course itís possible that itís somebody elseís Patronus that has changed or will change.

If Snape's patronus changes, this could be how he proves his loyalty to Dumbledore and the Order. Once he figures out a way to let them know that it's him who is trying to communicate with them.

Yes, it's possible that Snapeís new Patronus could prove his loyalty. JKR has said in an interview that she canít tell us what Snapeís Patronus and boggart are, because that would give too much away. Assuming that she wasnít talking about the boggart only, it seems that Snapeís (new) Patronus could reveal his loyalty. If his new Patronus was a Phoenix, for example, that would make it completely obvious that heís loyal to Dumbledore.

Blood_River
January 2nd, 2006, 4:57 pm
If he is good, he can sabotage Voldemort from inside by using other Death Eaters -- getting LV to kill a bunch as traitors, or turning a lot against each other. And he's also in a position to manipulate their reactions to Harry -- to underestimate or fear him, etc...

Plus Snape could send Voldemort in the wrong direction, or give him a false confidence, etc... but I don't see him passing information to the order.

Nass
January 2nd, 2006, 5:11 pm
thing is, we all know to do Avada Kedavra you have to hate the victim a lot. So Snape had to hate Dumbledore a lot. And Dumbledore pretty much stood for everything good, and was the leader of OotP. So I don't think he would pass information back to the Order. Even if he did- who would believe he's good. They'd curse him at the first chance. If he changes his patronus and passes info on anon the Order will probz not trust the info one bit.

winky22
January 2nd, 2006, 5:26 pm
Snape is good. good i tell ye all!

There is so much evidence to prove he is good.
Dumbledore was not affaid of death and in no way would have pleaded for his life! He was pleading for the plan to begin the plan that would give Snape the best cover in the world there would be no doubt to all of the wizarding world that Snape is evil after he had killed Dumbledore and the world now thinks he is the most loyal sevant of Voldie

Except for one person, well this is what i think:

Aberforth Dumbledore knew of this plan and is working with Snape. Maybe Snape is working alone but a helping hand would be better for him, just one person to help him would be an advantage too many and you could get someone that lets it slip.
Also i think Fawkes is with him and now is his, this would be the only way that Harry would believe Snape is on the good side. Dumbledore says in CoS that Harry must have shown him alot of loyalty only that would have called Fawkes to him (something along those lines) So when Harry sees Fawkes with him he will know.

Coments please.:D

Blood_River
January 2nd, 2006, 6:40 pm
we all know to do Avada Kedavra you have to hate the victim a lot

No you don't. Ie: Bellatrix and the Fox in HBP, or Crouch and the Insect, or Wormtail and Cedric in GOF... all these murderers were totally indifferent to their victims. And Wormtail also managed to kill over 10 muggles at once (albeit w/ a different spell). It's probably easier w/ hate & repeated killings because your intentions will waver less.

There is so much evidence to prove he is good.

Not really. There's really only ambiguities that cast doubt on his evilness. Dumbledore could just as easily have been pleading Snape not to become a killer or betray his trust as for Snape to protect himself & Malfoy by killing Dumbledore.

To me, that's the biggest flaw in the Dumbledore-ordered-Snape-to-kill him plan. Killing splits the soul -- as much as Dumbledore would die to protect Snape & even the Malfoys (and I'm sure he would), would he really ask that of Snape? Knowing how little Snape has holding him to the side of good? And how unlikely it is that anyone in the order would understand? That Snape would spend the rest of his life rotting in Azkaban with a severed soul once Voldemort fell?

Dumbledore believes there are worse things than death -- wouldn't he apply that to other people too?

ms_muffin808
January 2nd, 2006, 6:45 pm
Well I think Snape is good, but I won't explain my reasons, since most of them have already been given in this post. But I don't think that the fact that he is good will matter in the last book, because everyone that was once on his side will hate him (the Order). I think he's gonna die whether he's good or evil. Harry is going to kill him since he sees Snape responsible for all his losses. So Snape is going to be killed by Harry, and Harry will eventually learn that he's good, but it's too late.

Snape's going to die either way.

KATTALNUVA
January 2nd, 2006, 9:37 pm
I still find it hard to believe that anyone could still think snape is a good guy.

Zina_x0
January 2nd, 2006, 10:49 pm
I still find it hard to believe that anyone could still think snape is a good guy.

Have you read this one editorial talking about how Snape is good? Someone in a different thread sent me it and it made me question whether he's good or evil. I first thought he was evil, I'm still leaning towards it, but I'm really not sure.

Here's the editorial though, if you're interested :)
http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/editorials/edit-dmcallister01.shtml

frizbog
January 2nd, 2006, 11:09 pm
I still find it hard to believe that anyone could still think snape is a good guy.
I know how you feel. I have only recently been "converted" to a good!snaper. But here's some food for thought for you to consider:

Forget for one moment (if you can) that Snape killed Dumbledore (because we can debate whether that was what it looked like on the surface). What truly evil act have you seen him perform?
Granted, Snape is cruel and unkind to Harry. Aren't/weren't many of the "white hats" cruel and unkind too? Why can the other good guys be cruel and unkind but not Snape?
Before the Lightning-Struck Tower, teenage Harry's impressions about Snape have always been wrong and the great and wise Dumbledore has always been right -- as one would reasonably expect. But this time Harry's right and Dumbledore's wrong, and not only wrong this time, but has actually been wrong about Snape the entire time, and those times when Dumbledore seemd right and Harry seemed wrong, it just looked that way due to circumstances?
Dumbledore knew about the unbreakable vow and was not visibly disturbed by Harry telling him about it.
Hagrid overheard Dumbledore telling Snape he had to do something he didn't want to do but had promised to. That could have been killing him to protect Draco and to save himself.
"Severus...please..." could have been pleading for Snape to do what he had promised...to kill him according to a prior agreement.
The look of hatred and revulsion on Snape's face could have been with himself, just like Harry had while he was forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion in the cave
Dumbledore repeatedtly hinted about his expendability, as if he knew he would die.
Dumbledore was clearly not afraid of death
If Snape were truly evil, once his cover as an evil person was blown during his escape, why didn't he capture Harry and take him back to Voldemort to be tortured and killed? Instead, he left him behind, even almost teaching him about non-verbal spells on his way.

DrAcOs_HuN
January 3rd, 2006, 5:43 am
I wouldn't welcome him back, that's for sure. he can stay on the dark side...the good side can give him the silent treatment and teach that fool a lesson. LOL. I don't think he'd go back to the good side especially since he "did that" once. No one would trust him. he'd be better off on Voldemort's side. And if he ever gets into a deadly situation with Voldemort that's tough luck for him. Becuz the good, bad, and ugly will all want him dead.

random_musing
January 3rd, 2006, 5:56 am
No one would trust him.
I wouldn't say that...but It would take a lot to convince them otherwise. Whatever happens, the order won't think of Snape the same way again.

daisy5
January 3rd, 2006, 6:01 am
Forgive me, but how could this prove his loyalty? Unless you're talking about once they know it's his patronus - and therefore realised that it has changed because of his feelings about the murder? I just want to make sure on that one.

Yep, that's exactly what I meant. Like Tonks' patronus changed and indicated her feelings for Lupin - to those who understood. Snape's could change in a way that indicates he is in fact loyal to Dumbledore and the Order. I'm actually neutral about the idea that Snape's patronus will change. I was just throwing this out there as an idea.

DarkPhoenix72
January 3rd, 2006, 6:23 am
If Snape is "bad", then he will not return to the Order. Why? Because he's "bad"; besides, the Order would cut off his head and put it on the wall if they laid their hands on him.

However, I believe that Snape did not betray Dumbledore.

daisy5
January 3rd, 2006, 6:38 am
I still find it hard to believe that anyone could still think snape is a good guy.

The biggest indication that he is, at least possibly, not evil is that JKR won't say that he is. Snape murdering Dumbledore should have been the great revelation that Snape is in fact a loyal Death Eater - that Dumbledore was wrong and Harry was right - but for some reason, it wasn't. If Snape is loyal to Voldemort, than why won't she just say it since she's already shown us? She wouldn't be spoiling anything if she just said, "I fooled you! He's evil!"

A lot of us just simply love Snape. Yeah, he's mean, but who cares, he's hilarious! Cruelty, when performed with sarcasm and wit, is funny. And let's face it, the man's got nerve. I wish I had the nerve to do and say the things that he does. I wouldn't necessarily act, but it would be nice to know that I could if I ever wanted/needed to. If he were a real person, I would loathe him, but he's not. He's a fictional, literary character and therefore we can indulge in the guilty pleasure of loving Snape!

DarkPhoenix72
January 3rd, 2006, 7:05 am
I did some digging and found some of my previous posts in a Is Dumbledore Dead or Alive thread; they are applicable to this thread.

Malfoy's mission was to kill Dumbledore. This is supported when Narcissa pleaded with Snape to help his son, and when Dumbledore said so.

Snape made an Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa. One of the promises that Snape had to keep was that Snape had to kill Dumbledore for Malfoy if Malfoy couldn't do it.

Now, if Snape didn't kill Dumbledore, then Snape would have died. The Unbreakable Vow causes the person who breaks the vow to die. The vow could not have been fake; Bellatrix performed the spell, and she had every reason to make Snape adhere to his word.

Since Snape is alive, we can conclude that Dumbledore was indeed killed by Snape.

Snape also had a heart, though it's hard to see that.

Here's my theory on why Snape didn't like Harry calling him a coward, though this is based on a few accumptions.

I'm sure there will be many people who disagree with these assumptions, but just assume for a few moments that they are true.

1. Snape is Dumbledore's man
2. Snape is not the stereotypical "evil" character. Snape has a rather nasty personality, and he had been a Death Eater. Other than those two things, he is not "evil".
3. Snape hated James, but never to the point where he would wish death on him.
4. Snape did harbor affection for Lily Evans while at school, this affection lasted even when he was an adult.

Now, after Snape heard the unfinished snippet of the prophecy that Trelawyney made during Dumbledore's visit, he rushed to Voldemort and told him. Voldemort, thinking it over, arrives at the conclusion that the prophecy points to James son. Snape knows Voldemort, enough to correctly predict that he would kill Harry's family too (James and Lily). Snape begs Voldemort to not kill Lily, he might have made a deal with Voldemort prior to telling him, making a deal somewhere on the liens that if Voldemort promises to not kill Lily, Snape would tell him something important.

Voldemort arrives at Godric's Hollow, enters James and Lily's house, and kills James. Snape follows Voldemort, or arrives before him, to Godric's Hollow to make sure that Voldemort keeps his promise. Snape hides. When Voldemort turns his wand on Lily, Lily makes it clear that she would never let Voldemort harm Harry as long as she lived. Snape panics. He fears that Voldemort will kill Lily reagardless of the promise, and he also fears Voldemort's power. So Snape, torn between the two fears, does nothing. So Voldemort kills Lily. And we know the story after that.

If this theory is true, it would explain why Snape felt as he did when Harry called him a coward. Though of course, this theory is based on a few assumptions, half of them without any type of proof, the other half having many dissenters.

Perhaps Snape does hate Harry because of his father; it's pretty normal for a person to hate the person who tormented him. Snape did join the Death Eaters, but that was probably due to familyi problems and peer pressure.

Nass
January 3rd, 2006, 2:06 pm
[QUOTE=Blood_River]No you don't. Ie: Bellatrix and the Fox in HBP, or Crouch and the Insect, or Wormtail and Cedric in GOF... all these murderers were totally indifferent to their victims. And Wormtail also managed to kill over 10 muggles at once (albeit w/ a different spell). It's probably easier w/ hate & repeated killings because your intentions will waver less.

okay- gd points, although I don't think so much with animals, as they don't have souls (my belief). But check out this line which I think proves Snape's hate for Dumbledore ,"Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face." I reckon that shows he hates Dumbledore, and hence will not pass on info to hte Order

winky22
January 3rd, 2006, 2:14 pm
DarkPhoenix72: I like you thoughts and assumptions:tu: What i want to ask you is now that Snape has killed Dumbledore (i assume on Dumbledores order) do you think that anyone else knows of the plan or do you think that Snape is alone in his quest to twart Voldie and his Death Eaters or do you think (like i) that he has help from one other person. I have posted my thoughts on this in a previous post in this thread but disapointingly nobody has comented on it.

Abeforth Dumbledore has not been a major part of the books we know just the fact he is the Hog heads barman and AD's brother with JK saying she is not going to add any new Characters in the last book i can only assume that she may bring characters that have been more into the background into full light and one of them to be Aberforth, i maybe wrong (more than likely:D ) but who else better to help Snape?

Awiana
January 3rd, 2006, 2:23 pm
Aberforth Dumbledore knew of this plan and is working with Snape. Maybe Snape is working alone but a helping hand would be better for him, just one person to help him would be an advantage too many and you could get someone that lets it slip.
Also i think Fawkes is with him and now is his, this would be the only way that Harry would believe Snape is on the good side. Dumbledore says in CoS that Harry must have shown him alot of loyalty only that would have called Fawkes to him (something along those lines) So when Harry sees Fawkes with him he will know.
Iíve been wondering about Aberforth too. I think heís the Order member that we will meet properly in book 7, and I think itís definitely possible that he might know the truth about Snapeís loyalties. And I agree about Fawkes, seeing Fawkes with Snape would prove it to Harry that Snape is loyal to Dumbledore.


okay- gd points, although I don't think so much with animals, as they don't have souls (my belief). But check out this line which I think proves Snape's hate for Dumbledore ,"Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face." I reckon that shows he hates Dumbledore, and hence will not pass on info to hte Order
It doesnít really prove that Snape hated Dumbledore. Sure you can interpret it that way, but it could just as easily mean that Snape hated that he was forced to kill Dumbledore. In the Cave chapter Harry hated himself because he was forced to hurt Dumbledore: ďhating himself, repulsed by what he was doing, Harry forced the goblet back towards Dumbledoreís mouthĒ. (HBP p. 534 UK). There must have been hatred on Harryís face too, but it doesnít mean he hated Dumbledore, he hated what he had to do.

winky22
January 3rd, 2006, 2:45 pm
okay- gd points, although I don't think so much with animals, as they don't have souls (my belief). But check out this line which I think proves Snape's hate for Dumbledore ,"Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face." I reckon that shows he hates Dumbledore, and hence will not pass on info to hte Order

I agree with Awiana just because Snape had the hatred in his face doesn't mean that he hates him. I think he may count D as family in a way and i don't know about you all but i hate my family sometimes and i have been told i give off hate looks, if you all understand me. We can all hate people at sometime even the people that we love most in the world as the saying goes there is a fine line between love and hate.

Awiana: i do believe we will see Aberforth more and i agree with what you say.

sqizzer
January 3rd, 2006, 4:40 pm
:tu: :tu: :lol: Yay me:lol: :tu: :tu:

I found it - it took a while but I found an interview with JKR from very early on where she talks about Snape and kind of gave me a view of where she's heading with him.

J.K. Rowling interview (WBUR Radio), 12 October, 1999

What about Snape?

JKR: Snape is a very sadistic teacher, loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. I think children are very aware and we are kidding ourselves if we donít think that they are, that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher does abuse his power. Heís not a particularly pleasant person at all. However, everyone should keep their eye on Snape, Iíll just say that because there is more to him than meets the eye and you will find out part of what I am talking about if you read Book 4. No, Iím not trying to drum up more sales, go to the library and get it out. Iíd rather people read it.

There's an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape

JKR: He, um, thereís so much I wish I could say to you, and I canít because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that Iím slightly stunned that youíve said that and youíll find out why Iím so stunned if you read Book 7. Thatís all Iím going to say.

I am under the impression that the "keep an eye on Snape" statement refers to his double agent status between the two groups (introduced in GOB) and ultimately building up to his actions in HBP.

The redemptive question and answer made my jaw drop:drool:. I believe Snape WILL redeem himself. Now if I could just figure out how.......

MioneBookworm
January 3rd, 2006, 5:06 pm
I believe Snape WILL redeem himself. Now if I could just figure out how.......

Hmm...I find that hard. How will he redeem himself if you don't really know how he could? He has escaped from Hogwarts after killing Albus Dumbledore...escaped with the Death Eaters. Don't you think that, had this killing been done on Dumbledore's orders, more people would know about it, and besides, he would be able to explain himself??

There is also the fact that he was hiding in Spinner's End with Wormtail, which doesn't say anything good about him either...

...honestly, I don't really see how he could come back to the good side, if he ever was in it.

SiriusSpells
January 3rd, 2006, 5:09 pm
No, Snape is not good. After using Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore you think he is good? And after going back to the Death Eaters? Snape was a very good Occlumist and hid his true thoughts. He also made Dumbledore think he was spying on Voldemort and his Death Eaters when he was really pretending to and is now evil.

scarhead92
January 3rd, 2006, 5:12 pm
I dunno. You either completly believe dumbledores decision of trusting snape and think that he is still good or believe that dumbledore thout too much of someone for the first time. I believe in Dumbledore on how snape is good and that there is a reason for snape killing dumbledore, though i may just be thinking that way because of Harry Potter and the Black Obesidan Room(i think thats what its called. Sorry if im wrong.). Look it up on COS fourms amd read!

Blood_River
January 3rd, 2006, 5:17 pm
Snape begs Voldemort to not kill Lily, he might have made a deal with Voldemort prior to telling him, making a deal somewhere on the liens that if Voldemort promises to not kill Lily, Snape would tell him something important.

Um... this is Voldemort we're talking about. Snape's Master. The man who's name Snape is afraid to say. He wouldn't have the nerve to ask a promise of LV, and wouldn't expect him to keep it if he had. He'd get tortured into giving the info and then killed.

Snape follows Voldemort, or arrives before him, to Godric's Hollow ... .... Snape panics. He fears that Voldemort will kill Lily reagardless of the promise, and he also fears Voldemort's power. So Snape, torn between the two fears, does nothing. So Voldemort kills Lily. And we know the story after that.

That's a really interesting idea. I too thought Snape's reaction to being called a coward in HBP was more likely because he considered himself one than anything else. (But it could just be Dumbledore's death, too)

And if LV & the Potters were really alone that night, how did Wizarding world know what had happened? There must've been a witness. If it was Snape, I can believe him wanting to help and being too afraid to.

sqizzer
January 3rd, 2006, 5:34 pm
How will he redeem himself if you don't really know how he could?I think you misunderstood it a bit. JKR has worked plenty of clues into the books in order for us to piece together bits in order to figure out what might happen. I was referring to the clues leading to an explanation of how it will be done - and whether or not I find it does not affect my opinion.

There is a Good!Snape and an Evil!Snape explanation to every one of your questions, the choice is yours which you believe to be true. You have a right to your opinion.

Blood_River
January 3rd, 2006, 5:38 pm
If Dumbledore had ordered Snape to kill him, I'm sure he would've left evidence of it somewhere, but as in the previous books, it's probably something Harry's going to have to figure out a little -- he probably wouldn't've told them in advance, anyway.

It's just kind of hard to believe that he was only pretending to be good. Mostly because he did a really sucky job of it. I mean, if it's a strain that someone who's so remorseful & penitent about his misadventures with the Death Eaters and grateful for a second chance could be so unforgiving and spiteful, it's even harder to believe that a spy pretending to be remorseful & penitent would risk acting the way he does.

I appreciate that Dumbledore can make mistakes... but Dumbledore's known Snape since he was 11 years old. He's taught him for 7 years at school, and then worked along side him for 16 years starting not that long after. That's waaayyyy beyond mistake.

LilCubanita67
January 3rd, 2006, 6:44 pm
The first time I read the topic of this thread I laughed out loud. Is Snape good? I'm still laughing a little bit. Snape has never been good, even when he was being tortured by the Marauders. I always knew Snape was still serving Voldemort ever since I saw what he put the Gryffindors through in books 1-5. Book 6 just proved it. His hatred towards Harry and other Gryffindors are way beyond normal. It's okay to have some House rivalry but it's not okay to take it to the next level.

I don't think anyone would believe him if he came running back to the good side saying he's done with Voldemort. I wouldn't believe him, I mean, he's tried that trick on Dumbledore once before, keeping his identity a secret. I doubt that McGonagall would allow for him to come back. She seems less forgiving than Dumbledore.

A lot of people loved Dumbledore, it would be hard for him to come over to the good side begging for mercy and actually recieve some sympathy. He's got a huge bounty over his head, and he really can't show himself out in public for a while.

winky22
January 3rd, 2006, 7:42 pm
I don't think anyone would believe him if he came running back to the good side saying he's done with Voldemort. I wouldn't believe him, I mean, he's tried that trick on Dumbledore once before, keeping his identity a secret. I doubt that McGonagall would allow for him to come back. She seems less forgiving than Dumbledore.

I think they would if someone or something was there to prove his loyalty to Dumbledore like say Fawkes. As i have said before if Fawkes is with Snape then there is NO better proof for him to be good because you can't fool a Pheonix and thats how we will find out how loyal Snape really is.

And i can't wait to read it.:tu:

Nass
January 3rd, 2006, 8:13 pm
It doesnít really prove that Snape hated Dumbledore. Sure you can interpret it that way, but it could just as easily mean that Snape hated that he was forced to kill Dumbledore. In the Cave chapter Harry hated himself because he was forced to hurt Dumbledore: ďhating himself, repulsed by what he was doing, Harry forced the goblet back towards Dumbledoreís mouthĒ. (HBP p. 534 UK). There must have been hatred on Harryís face too, but it doesnít mean he hated Dumbledore, he hated what he had to do.

But there is a difference between hating (oneself) and repulsion, and hatred and revulsion.Revulsion mean loathing. Repulsion means not wanting to do something. See what I mean, probz not. Maybe the key is that with Harry JKR used the word himself, and with Snape she didn't.:shrug: My head is spinning now.

marcko90000
January 4th, 2006, 2:01 am
Forget for one moment (if you can) that Snape killed Dumbledore (because we can debate whether that was what it looked like on the surface). What truly evil act have you seen him perform?
We haven't seen him perform anything, but plenty of canon can be used to say he has (seeing as we have no idea if he did or did not).
Granted, Snape is cruel and unkind to Harry. Aren't/weren't many of the "white hats" cruel and unkind too? Why can the other good guys be cruel and unkind but not Snape?
Do you really believe the other white hats are as cruel as Snape? :no:
Before the Lightning-Struck Tower, teenage Harry's impressions about Snape have always been wrong and the great and wise Dumbledore has always been right -- as one would reasonably expect. But this time Harry's right and Dumbledore's wrong, and not only wrong this time, but has actually been wrong about Snape the entire time, and those times when Dumbledore seemed right and Harry seemed wrong, it just looked that way due to circumstances?
I have no problems with whatever you're trying to say here.
Dumbledore knew about the unbreakable vow and was not visibly disturbed by Harry telling him about it.
I personally believe Dumbledore feigned ignorance when Harry told him (assuming he did). He after all knew Harry had a personal vendetta against Snape.
If Snape were truly evil, once his cover as an evil person was blown during his escape, why didn't he capture Harry and take him back to Voldemort to be tortured and killed?
The Death Eaters were ordered to leave Harry.
Instead, he left him behind, even almost teaching him about non-verbal spells on his way.I am not going to be agreeing with you here.

random_musing
January 4th, 2006, 2:16 am
Don't you think that, had this killing been done on Dumbledore's orders, more people would know about it, and besides, he would be able to explain himself??
It may have been in secret. Think about it, how much does the order really know when it comes to Dumbledore's ideas and information? The order probably doesn't know anything about what Dumbledore or Snape may have discussed. Heck, they don't even know why Snape trusts him in the first place. I don't think that Snape getting cozy with the Order is his number one concern right now.No, Snape is not good. After using Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore you think he is good? And after going back to the Death Eaters? Snape was a very good Occlumist and hid his true thoughts. He also made Dumbledore think he was spying on Voldemort and his Death Eaters when he was really pretending to and is now evil.
Thank you, JKR.

Awiana
January 4th, 2006, 9:35 am
But there is a difference between hating (oneself) and repulsion, and hatred and revulsion.Revulsion mean loathing. Repulsion means not wanting to do something. See what I mean, probz not. Maybe the key is that with Harry JKR used the word himself, and with Snape she didn't. My head is spinning now.
I understand that revulsion and repulsion are different words, but I still think thereís a parallel. The thing is, the books are written from Harryís point of view, and therefore JKR can describe Harryís feelings like she did in the Cave chapter, telling us that Harry hated himself because of what he had to do. She canít do the same with Snape, as the books arenít written from Snapeís point of view. She can only describe what Harry sees, she can tell us that there was hatred and revulsion on Snapeís face, but she canít tell us that Snape hated himself, because Harry doesnít know that.

frizbog
January 4th, 2006, 12:08 pm
We haven't seen him perform anything, but plenty of canon can be used to say he has (seeing as we have no idea if he did or did not). What canon? I can't think of any. Not a single evil act since he pledged his loyalty to Dumbledore the year Harry was attacked. When he was a Death Eater, maybe, but he renounced that "at great personal risk."
Do you really believe the other white hats are as cruel as Snape? :no: Harry's dad and Sirius were. Harry is as unforgiving as Snape. Harry is determined to hate Snape regardless of whatever facts are put in front of him, as Lupin pointed out. No, I don't believe they were cruel to the degree that Snape is-- but they are not free of it either, and therefore the cruelty and the ill-will is not the distinguishing feature that makes Snape a bad guy and the good guys good. All of them hate, all of them hate for personal reasons, all of them are vindictive and spiteful, all of them are cruel and harsh.
I personally believe Dumbledore feigned ignorance when Harry told him (assuming he did). He after all knew Harry had a personal vendetta against Snape.Fair enough. Reasonable people can differ. :)
The Death Eaters were ordered to leave Harry.Were they? Only Snape tells us this. I'm not saying you're wrong, I just don't have HBP in front of me and that's my recollection. If Snape is our only source for this, and we're trying to determine whether he is lying or not, we can't really use that as evidence or it would be a circular argument.

Blood_River
January 4th, 2006, 7:51 pm
"The Death Eaters were ordered to leave Harry."
Were they? Only Snape tells us this.
He might've been lying to get them away, but he acted as though they already knew this. And they didn't exactly argue... Still, an ambitious DE would've delivered him bound and gagged to LV so that he could kill Harry at his leisure. I doubt he'd've objected.

Don't you think that, had this killing been done on Dumbledore's orders, more people would know about it...?
No. Not initially, anyway. If Dumbledore did order Snape (in advance) to kill him, I'm sure he left evidence of it somewhere though -- he wouldn't send Snape to Azkaban for a murder he didn't want to commit. Of course, if it was, as some people have argued, a case of sensing Dumbledore's will through Legilimency... he's probably screwed.

What canon? I can't think of any. Not a single evil act since he pledged his loyalty to Dumbledore the year Harry was attacked.
Well, we mostly see him in school so his "evil acts" are confined to taunting orphans about their dead parents (whose death he feels so remorseful for bringing about), nearly killing the pets of less-adept students, and in general bullying children. His job is to inform, besides, and his character has been intentionally kept in the dark loyalty-wise, so there's not a lot we'd know.

He does, however, claim credit for the information leading to the murders of two OP members in Spinner's end. It's possible he's lying to bolster his cover, but... He takes a UV to complete a task that, at the very least, he knows to be evil. But he was a little cornered... He killed Dumbledore, but there could have been mitigating circumstances we don't know about...

"Do you really believe the other white hats are as cruel as Snape?"
Harry's dad and Sirius were.

They were definitely cruel in school, although we don't know what led up to that... I mean, Fred and George got a kid stuck in a toilet for weeks so... it's hard to say how cruel it really was.

However, James & Sirius grew up to be the kind of guys who risked their lives fighting evil and died protecting loved ones. Snape grew up to join the Death Eaters, and -- whether or not there was a justification for killing Dumbledore, an explanation that doesn't include him gaining a man's trust for sixteen years and then betraying him --, Snape grew up to be the kind of guy who bullies children in his power, sometimes horribly. Do you really think that, if Snape had a child and died, Sirius or James would've mocked them about what Snape was like in school? Really?

In book three, Snape reminds Dumbledore of the prank Sirius pulled that could've killed him, when he suspects Dumbledore's going to help Sirius escape. It seemed perfectly normal then, but considering what we know... considering that we now know that he actually was a follower of Voldemort, who has killed and hurt people and actually DID lead to the deaths of James and Lily... isn't the way he treats Sirius insane?

I mean he's actually completely guilty of everything Sirius is accused of, and although he repented and worked to right those wrongs, he got the chance to. He was fortunate enough to have someone to vouch for him, to say that he was sorry and had changed, but Sirius didn't even get a trial -- and I don't believe for a second that he didn't know that. I mean, you'd think that having so narrowly avoided Azkaban himself, and being so repentant of his own past, he'd be a little more understanding of Sirius in the future... a little more forgiving.

I'm not saying this proves he's evil or anything, but it is remarkably immature.

DixieWitch
January 4th, 2006, 10:22 pm
i say: NAY!!

snape had a taste of the good side. he turned it down and killed dumbledore. end of story, goodbye, period.
i won't ever forgive him, even if dumbledore did tell him to do it. he could have refused and disobeyed dumbledore's command. for that reason, i hold an everlasting grudge.

sirius is innocent. he is a good man. he is awesome. he will be missed.

*********************************
"Everyone be excellent to each other....AND PARTY ON, DUDES!!!"
Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure

marcko90000
January 5th, 2006, 12:33 am
What canon? I can't think of any.
When he said he helped dispose of Emmeline Vance.
When it was said that he may have stunned Professor Flitwick.
When there is a possibility he put a curse on Fudge in Book 4......
That's the main three I come across on these boards quite often.
Harry's dad and Sirius were.
We only have canon that shows James and Sirius being bully's to Snape. We do however basically have Snape being a bully in his classes. I really don't believe James nor Sirius were as bad as Snape is now, as you yourself said.
Were they? Only Snape tells us this.
That is what Snape said. They were ordered to leave Harry.
If Snape is our only source for this, and we're trying to determine whether he is lying or not, we can't really use that as evidence or it would be a circular argument.If Snape was lying with making that order, then the Death Eaters are as thick as bricks for not saying or doing anything when Snape said it. I honestly can't imagine Death Eaters being that dumb in falling for such a lie.

KATTALNUVA
January 5th, 2006, 3:11 am
Not to be rude or anything but He's evil, what more proof do you need?

random_musing
January 5th, 2006, 3:15 am
Not to be rude or anything but He's evil, what more proof do you need?
What bothers me is that some don't even try to understand the other side's ideas on Snape's innocence. There could be plenty of reasons why he did what he did and I think there were hints of that throughout HBP. Until JKR says "Yeah, Snape is evil", then there is still reason for many to think otherwise. I believe the proof of Snape's innocence is scattered throughout canon, its just a matter of putting it all together. I also believe we will find out more about our good friend Snape in book 7.

Oceania
January 5th, 2006, 3:45 am
Why is it that, (and please, please don't take this the wrong way, I am sincerely curious) the majority of the Snape-is-evil camp usually end their short, curt explanations with things like "end of story" or "no more to discuss" or "he's evil, period"?

Now, I have seen alot of Snape-is-evil people detail thoughtful, discussion provoking theories and evidence, and I totally respect that. But I see so many from that particular camp act and write as if they are entirely, complaetely, utterly certain of their own assumptions. They do not seem to consider ANY other point of view, evidence, or even canon in some rare cases.

As you have imagined by now, I am a Snape is "good" person---I think he is going to redeem himself, and I think it obvious that what happened in HBP was EXTREMELY fishy. BUT---I am open to all interpretations on the subject, and I am willing to mull and ponder over great evidence given from the Snape is evil camp.

The complete truth of the matter is, I have a pretty good feeling (being that literature is my major, and writing is my career) that Snape isn't what he's exactly painted to be...but I could be totally wrong, and I accept that. Nit only do I accept it, I RELISH it. The fact of the matter is that none of us knows the truth.

So, to the beginning of this post, my real question (meant with respect and sincere curiosity) is why do SOME of the Snape-is-Evil camp refuse to hear any evidence at all? I understand that Snape-is-good people can be just as stubborn; but I aim this question at the evil camp because I see this refusal there more often.

NoNameLeft
January 5th, 2006, 3:47 am
Someone here still doubt Snape is good?


Wt****Zor'S

random_musing
January 5th, 2006, 3:52 am
Now, I have seen alot of Snape-is-evil people detail thoughtful, discussion provoking theories and evidence, and I totally respect that. But I see so many from that particular camp act and write as if they are entirely, complaetely, utterly certain of their own assumptions. They do not seem to consider ANY other point of view, evidence, or even canon in some rare cases.
I was wondering the same...
As you have imagined by now, I am a Snape is "good" person---I think he is going to redeem himself, and I think it obvious that what happened in HBP was EXTREMELY fishy. BUT---I am open to all interpretations on the subject, and I am willing to mull and ponder over great evidence given from the Snape is evil camp.
I agree. Things just didn't add up in my opinion and dwelling on canon in the previous books and JKR's interviews caused me to come up with a number of ideas and reasons for Snape's actions and why his character acts the way he does in general.

I usually listen to what the Snape is bad!people say and find out where they are coming from but thats rather hard when many simply think that him killing Dumbledore is proof enough. I think its okay for someone to beleive that is one of the main reasons but if that is your only reason for thinking that Snape is bad, few are going to take it seriously.

daisy5
January 5th, 2006, 6:25 am
However, James & Sirius grew up to be the kind of guys who risked their lives fighting evil and died protecting loved ones. Snape grew up to join the Death Eaters, and -- whether or not there was a justification for killing Dumbledore, an explanation that doesn't include him gaining a man's trust for sixteen years and then betraying him --, Snape grew up to be the kind of guy who bullies children in his power, sometimes horribly. Do you really think that, if Snape had a child and died, Sirius or James would've mocked them about what Snape was like in school? Really?

If Sirius saw Snape everytime he looked at the kid, yes, I could totally see him being a complete prick. We don't really know enough about James' character to make a judgment on that. We are relying on the judgement of third parties in the case - Dumbledore, Lupin, and Sirius - and they aren't exactly objective.



In book three, Snape reminds Dumbledore of the prank Sirius pulled that could've killed him, when he suspects Dumbledore's going to help Sirius escape. It seemed perfectly normal then, but considering what we know... considering that we now know that he actually was a follower of Voldemort, who has killed and hurt people and actually DID lead to the deaths of James and Lily... isn't the way he treats Sirius insane?

I mean he's actually completely guilty of everything Sirius is accused of, and although he repented and worked to right those wrongs, he got the chance to. He was fortunate enough to have someone to vouch for him, to say that he was sorry and had changed, but Sirius didn't even get a trial -- and I don't believe for a second that he didn't know that. I mean, you'd think that having so narrowly avoided Azkaban himself, and being so repentant of his own past, he'd be a little more understanding of Sirius in the future... a little more forgiving.

I'm not saying this proves he's evil or anything, but it is remarkably immature.

We actually don't know that Snape hurt or killed anyone while he was a Death Eater. We are making an assumption based on what we know of the organization and its leader. A pretty safe assumption, but an assumption none the less. We also don't know that Sirius and James never hurt, killed, or caused the death of anyone - well, after they reached adulthood anyway (personally I find it more alarming that Sirius was trying to kill people when he was a teenager). And honestly, would you really care if they had? The behavior we condemn in our enemies, we often reward in our allies. Let's face it, as long as they were killing "bad" people, we don't really care what they were doing.

I also think there is a difference between the consequences of Snape's actions - telling Voldemort about the prophecy - and what Snape believed were Sirius' actions. If Sirius had been the secret keeper and told Voldemort where the Potters were (which is what Snape believed) then Sirius was far more responsible for the death of the Potters than Snape. I personally don't think that Snape is all that responsible for the death of the Potters. What he did was certainly irresponsible and stupid. Snape should have been able to guess that someone would be killed, but his involvement in the murders is very indirect. Sirius was also believed to have then murdered Pettigrew and a dozen innocent bystanders. From Snape's viewpoint, causing the death of two parents and almost getting their infant killed wasn't enough for Sirius.

Sirius' actions also would have been worse because his relationship with the Potters was very different from that of Snape's. Sirius was their best friend and the godfather of their child. That is a much, much bigger betrayal than Snape relaying a prophecy he overheard about unnamed individuals. It's also very personal between the two. It isn't just the childhood bullying that went on between the two, or the attempted murder, but the fact that Snape would have viewed Sirius as the one who thwarted his plans. Snape worked very hard to save the Potters (if you believe he's good, which I do) and he believes that Sirius is the reason all that hard work failed and they died regardless. This was Snape's big chance to kind of undo everything that he did and the Potters died anyway.

Sirius also showed no signs of remorse. At the end of Prisoner of Azkaban, Snape believes that Sirius is trying to murder Harry, which means Sirius is not repentent about his crimes. After thirteen years in prison, he breaks out for the sole purpose of killing the child who caused the downfall of his great Dark Lord. Hardly the actions of someone who has seen the error of his ways. Sirius also doesn't have anyone to stand up for him because he kept his mouth shut. If he had explained to someone, like Dumbledore, that they had changed secret keepers etc., maybe Dumbledore would have protected him too. Snape can't be held responsible for Sirius' inaction, or be blamed for viewing Sirius the way he does in Prisoner of Azkaban.

I do agree with you that Snape abuses his power and is often immature, but Snape's reaction to Sirius in Prisoner of Azkaban is perfectly reasonable to me and his crimes were not really that similar to Sirius' alleged crimes.

Tonkscat724
January 5th, 2006, 6:34 am
For a long time I believed that Sanpe was good and Dumbledore and him had it all planned out. However, a few days ago, I was thinking about something and realized that it contradicts the Snape is good theory. Now, I can't remember what it was! It's really frustrating me too. It was just one little detail I had over looked and now i forgot what it was.... Wow, what a totally useless post... I'm going to try to remember what it was and share when I get...:sigh:

random_musing
January 5th, 2006, 6:48 am
In book three, Snape reminds Dumbledore of the prank Sirius pulled that could've killed him, when he suspects Dumbledore's going to help Sirius escape. It seemed perfectly normal then, but considering what we know... considering that we now know that he actually was a follower of Voldemort, who has killed and hurt people and actually DID lead to the deaths of James and Lily... isn't the way he treats Sirius insane?
Which is EXACTLY why his behavior towards the Potter's death is so fishy. If was really "Oooo, big bad death eater, rar!", why was he absolutely flipping out at Sirius? Well, at that point (I'm assuming you mean in the shrieking shack), he believed that Sirius was the one who betrayed the Potters. I believe Snape felt a kind of feelings for Lily and thats why he was so angry with Sirius. Wow, what a totally useless post... I'm going to try to remember what it was and share when I get...
Don't worry. :D I hope you can remember and share with us.

Awiana
January 5th, 2006, 10:56 am
In book three, Snape reminds Dumbledore of the prank Sirius pulled that could've killed him, when he suspects Dumbledore's going to help Sirius escape. It seemed perfectly normal then, but considering what we know... considering that we now know that he actually was a follower of Voldemort, who has killed and hurt people and actually DID lead to the deaths of James and Lily... isn't the way he treats Sirius insane?

No, I don’t think the way he treats Sirius was insane at all. The difference between Snape and Sirius is that even though they both have made wrong choices and done stupid things, Snape felt great remorse over his actions, whereas to him it must have seemed like Sirius never regretted anything he has done. I think repentance matters a great deal to Snape, and Sirius's seeming lack of remorse must have absolutely infuriated him.

We also don’t know whether Snape has actually killed anyone except Dumbledore. We don’t have any canon evidence for that, and I think his great remorse over the death of the Potters and his reaction to Sirius being capable of murder suggests that he hadn’t killed before.

i won't ever forgive him, even if dumbledore did tell him to do it. he could have refused and disobeyed dumbledore's command. for that reason, i hold an everlasting grudge.
Yes, he could have refused. But if it turns out that Dumbledore was already going to die, because of the Potion in the cave or the injury to his hand, what would have been accomplished by Snape dying as well? That was a great sacrifice on both Dumbledore’s and Snape’s part, and Snape showed great loyalty to Dumbledore when he trusted Dumbledore’s decision even though he absolutely did not want to kill Dumbledore. Why will you hold an everlasting grudge for him because he was loyal to Dumbledore and respected his wishes and obeyed his orders?

Blood_River
January 5th, 2006, 4:13 pm
1. We don't actually know Snape was the spying tipping Dumbledore off, although I believe he was.

2. Of course what Sirius was accused of doing was worse than what we know Snape did (but we don't actually know much of what Snape did).

My point about his actions in PoA was that after everything he had done and regretted, he wasn't willing to give Sirius (who'd never had a trial) three minutes to attempt to prove his innocence -- wasn't willing to even let him surrender quietly. Of course, if he believed Sirius to be guilty, he was right to be upset--- but generally people who've had his experiences (or what we know of them) are more cautious in judging others.

And when I said "insane," I was refering to his post-GoF behavior, when he knows Sirius is innocent. And I guess insane is the wrong word but... odd. His PoA actions seem more... to me... I guess, incongruent with his history. It was just weird to re-read it after knowing he'd been a Death Eater.

I think his great remorse over the death of the Potters and his reaction to Sirius being capable of murder suggests that he hadnít killed before
And I think the fact that he was so high up in Voldemort's inner circle suggest he has to have killed before. The fact that he was so capable of killing Dumbledore (whereas Malfoy couldn't even manage it), and the fact that he'd given Voldemort info that --- regardless of whether he knew who'd be targeted --- would undoubtedly lead to murder, make it unlikely that he had great problems with causing death. And his reaction to Sirius is more plausibly explained by the fact that he was the nearly-murdered party.

And this great remorse over the Potters deaths? I have a lot of faith in Dumbledore so I'm not going to deny it, but we haven't seen it. And what I want to know is this -- if Snape is so remorseful for indirectly causing their deaths, why does he emotionally torture their son? Why, if it's one of the greatest regrets of his life, does he mock and taunt Harry about his father? Not just in general -- but about his father in particular? And in HBP about James and Sirius?

I mean, that's not really the mark of a sorry person.

Anyway...

i won't ever forgive him, even if dumbledore did tell him to do it.
I sympathize. I wouldn't've done it; many members of the OP would have disobeyed that command, but it still matters. The world isn't divided into Death Eaters and good people. It matters if Snape was loyal to Dumbledore and following his orders, or sincere in wanting to stop Voldemort until faced with certain death, or was deceiving Dumbledore and serving Voldemort the whole entire time.

Awiana
January 5th, 2006, 5:28 pm
And this great remorse over the Potters deaths? I have a lot of faith in Dumbledore so I'm not going to deny it, but we haven't seen it. And what I want to know is this -- if Snape is so remorseful for indirectly causing their deaths, why does he emotionally torture their son? Why, if it's one of the greatest regrets of his life, does he mock and taunt Harry about his father? Not just in general -- but about his father in particular? And in HBP about James and Sirius?
I guess I don’t think that Snape’s treatment of Harry shows that he isn’t remorseful. Snape isn’t really the sort of person who likes to express his emotions freely. He isn’t a particularly nice person either, he dislikes almost all of his students, some more than others. He obviously dislikes Harry immensely, and there’s really no point in hiding that, since he can’t be seen being nice to Harry and showing remorse over his Death Eater days if he wants to keep his cover as a loyal Death Eater.

It’s possible that the only reason Snape dislikes Harry so much is because of James Potter, but personally I don’t think it’s very likely. It seems quite reasonable to me that one of the reasons for his dislike is that Harry is the living reminder of his great mistake. I think that having to see the living reminder of his terribly wrong choices might be a bit hard for Snape sometimes. No, it’s not very rational to hate Harry because of that, but emotions are rarely rational.

And I think the fact that he was so high up in Voldemort's inner circle suggest he has to have killed before. The fact that he was so capable of killing Dumbledore (whereas Malfoy couldn't even manage it), and the fact that he'd given Voldemort info that --- regardless of whether he knew who'd be targeted --- would undoubtedly lead to murder, make it unlikely that he had great problems with causing death. And his reaction to Sirius is more plausibly explained by the fact that he was the nearly-murdered party.
Fair enough. I don’t agree, but there isn’t really canon evidence either way, so I’d say both interpretations are perfectly valid at this point.

I’d like to point out, however, that in PoA he had the perfect chance to kill Sirius, a man who he hated and who he believed to be a murderer and a traitor. However, he didn’t. He did threaten to, yes, but what he ended up doing was to bring Sirius back to the castle. It’s possible that he has killed someone as a Death Eater, but it doesn’t seem very plausible to me that he has no great problems with causing death.

My point about his actions in PoA was that after everything he had done and regretted, he wasn't willing to give Sirius (who'd never had a trial) three minutes to attempt to prove his innocence -- wasn't willing to even let him surrender quietly. Of course, if he believed Sirius to be guilty, he was right to be upset--- but generally people who've had his experiences (or what we know of them) are more cautious in judging others.
He had no reason to suspect that Sirius might have been innocent. The entire wizarding world thought that Sirius was a dangerous murderer, Snape definitely wasn’t the only one who thought that.

Snape enters the Shrieking Shack in time to hear how Lupin betrayed Dumbledore’s trust when he was at school and how he was too cowardly to tell Dumbledore that Sirius was an Animagus. He also hears how Sirius expresses no regret at all for the “hilarious prank” that almost got Snape killed. He doesn’t hear anything about Wormtail, and how it was him and not Sirius who betrayed the Potters. He hears absolutely nothing that would make him think that Sirius might not be guilty at all.

And when I said "insane," I was refering to his post-GoF behavior, when he knows Sirius is innocent. And I guess insane is the wrong word but... odd. His PoA actions seem more... to me... I guess, incongruent with his history. It was just weird to re-read it after knowing he'd been a Death Eater.
Why do you feel that his behaviour in OotP is that odd? He knows Sirius isn’t a murderer, but he knows he’s a bully who isn’t in the least bit sorry about the way he behaved at school. Sure Snape’s not at all nice towards him, but I don’t know why he should be, Sirius isn’t nice at all towards him either. And Snape does shake hands with Sirius at the end of GoF, even though he despises the man, so he does acknowledge that they are on the same side.

Tarragon
January 5th, 2006, 6:46 pm
Why is it that, (and please, please don't take this the wrong way, I am sincerely curious) the majority of the Snape-is-evil camp usually end their short, curt explanations with things like "end of story" or "no more to discuss" or "he's evil, period"?

Now, I have seen alot of Snape-is-evil people detail thoughtful, discussion provoking theories and evidence, and I totally respect that. But I see so many from that particular camp act and write as if they are entirely, complaetely, utterly certain of their own assumptions. They do not seem to consider ANY other point of view, evidence, or even canon in some rare cases.

As you have imagined by now, I am a Snape is "good" person---I think he is going to redeem himself, and I think it obvious that what happened in HBP was EXTREMELY fishy. BUT---I am open to all interpretations on the subject, and I am willing to mull and ponder over great evidence given from the Snape is evil camp.

The complete truth of the matter is, I have a pretty good feeling (being that literature is my major, and writing is my career) that Snape isn't what he's exactly painted to be...but I could be totally wrong, and I accept that. Nit only do I accept it, I RELISH it. The fact of the matter is that none of us knows the truth.

So, to the beginning of this post, my real question (meant with respect and sincere curiosity) is why do SOME of the Snape-is-Evil camp refuse to hear any evidence at all? I understand that Snape-is-good people can be just as stubborn; but I aim this question at the evil camp because I see this refusal there more often.

You have a very good point, and I agree with you on the majority of what you wrote. It is poor form to make posts that say, "Snape is totally evil! I don't even know why you're bothering to debate it!" because it adds absolutely nothing to the discussion. If you think Snape is loyal to the Dark Lord, you should say why you think that (and "just because" is not a good enough reason) and then read the response of other posters who may disagree with you.

Now, I am not an evil!Snape believer (though some of the good!Snape posters will probably testify to what a pain in the butt I have been :p ). Nor do I believe in good!Snape. I am somewhat of a devil's advocate or a skeptic when it comes to this issue. I feel that Snape's loyalties are very ambiguous, and as of right yet, I cannot be sure of who he really serves, thought I do enjoy discussing it :D

Temprano
January 5th, 2006, 9:14 pm
I think Snape is on Voldemorts side, but he could be good. When Dumbledore said 'please' right before Snape killed him, he could be saying 'please kill me' because the potion thing he drank could be killing him..........but its a long shot, all in all Snape is probably bad.

Selene Sedai
January 6th, 2006, 12:01 am
It doesn't really matter because he'll probably just die.

frizbog
January 6th, 2006, 12:53 am
When he said he helped dispose of Emmeline Vance.That's *his* story. If you're a good!snaper, you will generally suspect he was lying to Bellatrix. If you're an evil!snaper, you will tend to think he was telling the truth to Bellatrix. Either way, it's not proof. You can't use Snape's words as proof of Snape's loyalty, because he's definitely lying to somebody. The question is to whom?
When it was said that he may have stunned Professor Flitwick.Instead of killing him. I mean, if he's evil and killing Dumbledore, why not kill Flitwick, or Hermione who was waiting outside? We know why he wasn't killing Harry-- he had orders. Why not snuff Flitwick, McGonagall, Tonks, Hermione, and Mrs. Norris while Avada Kedavra's are flying around?
When there is a possibility he put a curse on Fudge in Book 4......Not quite sure the curse you're mentioning here.
We only have canon that shows James and Sirius being bully's to Snape. We do however basically have Snape being a bully in his classes. I really don't believe James nor Sirius were as bad as Snape is now, as you yourself said.Sounds like we agree here. Same offense, different degree and frequency.

I would point out again, however, that since the day Snape pledged loyalty to Dumbledore, we have no reliable canonical evidence of him casting any unforgivable curses (which our hero, Harry attempted), or even casting any dark spells (which white-hat Harry succeeded with SectumSempra). I do not deny he was a former Death Eater -- that would make me a fool. But since he pledged loyalty to Dumbledore, his worst offense that we know for a fact happened has been to be cruel, unfriendly, unfair, and spiteful -- which several other white-hats (including Harry) have done too (although not quite as much).
That is what Snape said. They were ordered to leave Harry.
If Snape was lying with making that order, then the Death Eaters are as thick as bricks for not saying or doing anything when Snape said it. I honestly can't imagine Death Eaters being that dumb in falling for such a lie.
Here is the exact quote:
"It is time to be gone, before the ministry turns up---"
"Impedi--"
But before he could finish this jinx, excruciating pain hit Harry; he keeled over in the grass. Someone was screaming, he would surely die of this agony, Snape was going to torture him to death or madness --
"No!" roared Snape's voice and the pain stopped as suddenly as it had started; Harry lay curled on the dark grass, clutching his wand and panting; somewhere overhead Snape was shouting, "Have you forgotten our orders? Potter belongs to the Dark Lord -- we are to leave him! Go! Go!"
First -- the Death Eaters were on the run on the way out, so the scene was a bit confused.
Second -- we don't know which Death Eater's cruciatus curse Snape stopped. If it had been Crabbe Sr. or Goyle Sr., it would be very easy to believe they would be that thick, and that Snape could manipulate them. McNair doesn't seem to bright either, although he was in Azkaban at the time.
Third -- "we are to leave him" could mean "we are to leave him here at hogwarts", or it could mean "we are to leave him unharmed."
Fourth -- it's possible that only the "Potter belongs to the Dark Lord" part are the orders, and "we are to leave him" is Snape's interpretation.

I will concede that my counter-arguments are not very strong compared to the quote. The orders as far as we know (since Snape is our only source for what the exact orders were) were to "leave him" and that would suggest that he should be left at school and not kidnapped. However, this only answers my question "why didn't Snape kidnap Harry once his cover was blown if he was truly evil?" It just makes my question not very helpful in shedding light on Snape's loyalties and proves that JKR knows how to cover her bases.

marcko90000
January 6th, 2006, 2:06 am
That's *his* story. If you're a good!snaper, you will generally suspect he was lying to Bellatrix. If you're an evil!snaper, you will tend to think he was telling the truth to Bellatrix.
Why, in your opinion, do you believe Bellatrix and Narcissa are silent on the matter?
Either way, it's not proof. You can't use Snape's words as proof of Snape's loyalty, because he's definitely lying to somebody. The question is to whom?I'm full aware this is the case. You were asking for canon in my reply that shows Snape acting within an evil sense. I gave you the canon. I said this canon "can be used to say he has (seeing as we have no idea if he did or did not)."
Instead of killing him. I mean, if he's evil and killing Dumbledore, why not kill Flitwick, or Hermione who was waiting outside? We know why he wasn't killing Harry-- he had orders. Why not snuff Flitwick, McGonagall, Tonks, Hermione, and Mrs. Norris while Avada Kedavra's are flying around?
Part of the reason I believe Snape did not kill Flitwick is because if he does try to redeem himself it would be a lot harder for Snape to do so when killing Flitwick was not part of the plan.
Part of the reason I believe Snape did not kill Flitwick is because I believe he had just woken up and was discovering his bearings.
Part of the reason I believe would be because it would've been harder for Snape to leave. I don't think Snape would have left as undetected as he did.
I don't believe he killed Hermione or Luna because they had taken Felix Felicis. They were lucky Snape did not do anything to them.
He did not kill any of the other teachers because, quite frankly, it would have been a waste of time. All the other Death Eaters were fighting them. Not to mention that if he did start fighting them then he would have had to ward of their own attacks on him.
Not quite sure the curse you're mentioning here.
Yeah don't worry about it. It is something that isn't foolproof, but just another possibility.
I would point out again, however, that since the day Snape pledged loyalty to Dumbledore, we have no reliable canonical evidence of him casting any unforgivable curses (which our hero, Harry attempted), or even casting any dark spells (which white-hat Harry succeeded with SectumSempra).
Well as regards to the 'dark spell', while you might not think it is, what do you call the curse that Snape performed on Harry as he was leaving the castle?
I do not deny he was a former Death Eater -- that would make me a fool. But since he pledged loyalty to Dumbledore, his worst offense that we know for a fact happened has been to be cruel, unfriendly, unfair, and spiteful -- which several other white-hats (including Harry) have done too (although not quite as much).
Precisely. I believe his worst acts have been in trying to expel Harry. I believe that is all he could do since he was under the eyes of Dumbledore.
The orders as far as we know (since Snape is our only source for what the exact orders were) were to "leave him" and that would suggest that he should be left at school and not kidnappedWell I don't believe so. Snape said to "leave him" after the Crucio curse was performed on him (I think). I don't think it is right to consider that "leave him" meaning to be left at school (this would be the case if someone was trying to bind Harry, or Levicorpus him....); I think it that leave him means to not perform Crucio on him. Something that we will disagree on.

kitsune12
January 6th, 2006, 2:17 am
Good or Evil...Black or White. What about Grey or did we forget that?

Rowling made Tom Riddle, Severus Snape, and Harry Potter similar in some ways and I think it was to make the comparison Evil, Grey (Neither) and Good.
This website gives you quotes by Rowling and she did say that Snape is a deeply horrible person and there is more to him and to keep your eye on him. She will not answer if he is evil......
http://www.madamscoop.org/themes/snape.htm

Severus is one heck of a chess player. Riddle is easy to figure out, he is a poker player, simple, evil (all he does is evil). Severus has had time to calculate his next move and he is about 8 steps ahead of everyone. Why did he agree to the vow to kill Dumbledore? He knew about it (I think he means me to do it, he said when he yanked his curtains shut). HE KNEW. So why? He probably thought Dumbledore was being stupid and not useful anymore. And he pushed him off the tower and did not use that curse.

He PLAYED BOTH SIDES. He is not on Voldemort's side (he wants to bring him down) and he isn't on Dumbledore's side (though he might have leaned more in that direction). What's the best way to know your enemies is to be friends with them so you can defeat them. Severus is on his own side. What exactly that is...we don't know yet.

However, it makes sense he would help Harry to bring down Voldemort...he doesn't see himself above Voldemort. He believes the prediction about Harry. He got rid of Dumbledore....He does see himself superior to Harry and that's where it becomes dangerous. After Voldemort's gone, what is going to happen? Well if he gets rid of Harry, he is one of the most powerful wizards, isn't he.

Has he killed before....hmmmm Harry is right, he is a coward. He goes behind the scenes and creates senarios to bring people down...preferably not his own hand. Dumbledore's death is different in this sense...he pushed him off the tower and he really had no choice in the matter. I see him manipulating people to bring them down. Facing them and killing them really isn't his style.

I hate to shoot the holes in that Severus is good theory.....he is the inbetween. He is one of my favorite characters in the books too. I really like him. Which side is he on....neither. We can only hope....and hope he feels bad he killed his former boss Dumbledore.

frizbog
January 6th, 2006, 2:44 am
Why, in your opinion, do you believe Bellatrix and Narcissa are silent on the matter?
Good question. My opinion, and it is only speculation, is that neither Bellatrix nor Narcissa knew enough about Vance's death to argue with Snape about it. If they already knew, Snape would not have bothered to tell them, seems to me. So, he's apparently filling them in on details of a murder they know a little bit about, but not enough to argue details on. He is taking advantage of this and claiming responsibility for an act that they would not really be able to easily verify, and certainly could not refute.

See, I am of the opinion (again, speculation only), that all these Death Eaters really don't talk to Voldemort that much. Bellatrix claims to be his most loyal, most trusted. Then why hasn't she discussed her misgivings about Snape with Voldemort? Why doesn't she already know the score? Plus, Voldemort clearly gives Death Eaters orders not to discuss matters, even among each other. According to Karkaroff in GoF, they were never allowed to know the names of all the other members. Voldemort also is known not to want friends, and to care about nobody. There is much secrecy and forced ignorance among the Death Eaters. So, I see the Death Eaters as a subculture in which everyone has their own opinion of what's going on but nobody really knows, everyone is afraid to share information, and Snape is able to play on this fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

Part of the reason I believe Snape did not kill Flitwick is because if he does try to redeem himself it would be a lot harder for Snape to do so when killing Flitwick was not part of the plan. Part of the reason I believe Snape did not kill Flitwick is because I believe he had just woken up and was discovering his bearings. Part of the reason I believe would be because it would've been harder for Snape to leave. I don't think Snape would have left as undetected as he did.I don't believe he killed Hermione or Luna because they had taken Felix Felicis. They were lucky Snape did not do anything to them. He did not kill any of the other teachers because, quite frankly, it would have been a waste of time. All the other Death Eaters were fighting them. Not to mention that if he did start fighting them then he would have had to ward of their own attacks on him.Actually, I just thought of the best reason why he didn't kill Flitwick, even if he is evil!snape -- he hadn't killed Dumbledore yet, and was still hadn't blown his cover yet. But once Dumbledore was dead, the "jig was up". If he were evil, he should have been casting Avada Kedavra curses like the other Death Eater(s) were casting (at least one -- the big blonde one -- was definitely casting Avada Kedavra).
Well as regards to the 'dark spell', while you might not think it is, what do you call the curse that Snape performed on Harry as he was leaving the castle?I assume you mean wher Snape waves his wand at Harry and that "white, hot, whip-like something" hits his face - although it might have been Buckbeak that hit him. Since it was basically harmless, and only stunned him, I don't know. But let's call it a hex or jinx for argument's sake. This does not strike me as the work of an evil wizard, of Voldemort's second in command. The jinxes and hexes cast on Malfoy by the good-guys on the Hogwart's express did more damage than that.
Precisely. I believe his worst acts have been in trying to expel Harry. I believe that is all he could do since he was under the eyes of Dumbledore.Do you really think Snape is clever enough to be evil, loyal to Voldemort, and playing Dumbledore for a sap for 16 years; yet is not clever enough to get away with anything more evil than being mean and nasty to Harry and his mates?
Something that we will disagree on.Well, that's cool. It's good when reasonable people can debate, disagree, and still stay civil and on friendly terms.

daisy5
January 6th, 2006, 8:46 am
And I think the fact that he was so high up in Voldemort's inner circle suggest he has to have killed before. The fact that he was so capable of killing Dumbledore (whereas Malfoy couldn't even manage it), and the fact that he'd given Voldemort info that --- regardless of whether he knew who'd be targeted --- would undoubtedly lead to murder, make it unlikely that he had great problems with causing death. And his reaction to Sirius is more plausibly explained by the fact that he was the nearly-murdered party.
I don't think that he had to kill anyone in order to be an important Death Eater. Personally, I don't think he really was that important until he heard the prophecy. After this, he became a spy, which kept him from participating in the particularly nasty stuff. I always imagine Snape as someone who was always indirectly involved in things. He's the guy who helped plan, pass information, act as the lookout etc., but, before Dumbledore, I don't think he killed anyone. Given Snape's young age during the first war, Bellatrix's comment in Spinner's End, and Snape's outburst with Harry in Flight of the Prince, I don't think that he has killed anyone before.



Good question. My opinion, and it is only speculation, is that neither Bellatrix nor Narcissa knew enough about Vance's death to argue with Snape about it. If they already knew, Snape would not have bothered to tell them, seems to me. So, he's apparently filling them in on details of a murder they know a little bit about, but not enough to argue details on. He is taking advantage of this and claiming responsibility for an act that they would not really be able to easily verify, and certainly could not refute.
:tu: I would also like to add that Narcissa isn't the one questioning Snape's loyalty. And since she's there asking an incredibly huge favor of Snape, I don't think she would start, even if she managed to get her wits about her. Remember, she's upset, even hysterical, most of the time. We also don't know whether Narcissa is a Death Eater. She has a lot of family members working for Voldemort, but that doesn't mean she is a Death Eater herself. If she isn't a Death Eater, she would be in no position to argue the point either way, or to expect Snape to share detailed information with her.



See, I am of the opinion (again, speculation only), that all these Death Eaters really don't talk to Voldemort that much. Bellatrix claims to be his most loyal, most trusted. Then why hasn't she discussed her misgivings about Snape with Voldemort? Why doesn't she already know the score? Plus, Voldemort clearly gives Death Eaters orders not to discuss matters, even among each other. According to Karkaroff in GoF, they were never allowed to know the names of all the other members. Voldemort also is known not to want friends, and to care about nobody. There is much secrecy and forced ignorance among the Death Eaters. So, I see the Death Eaters as a subculture in which everyone has their own opinion of what's going on but nobody really knows, everyone is afraid to share information, and Snape is able to play on this fear, uncertainty, and doubt.
:tu: I need to say no more!

Awiana
January 6th, 2006, 11:12 am
Why did he agree to the vow to kill Dumbledore? He knew about it (I think he means me to do it, he said when he yanked his curtains shut). HE KNEW. So why? He probably thought Dumbledore was being stupid and not useful anymore. And he pushed him off the tower and did not use that curse.
I don’t think he knew what Draco’s task was, actually. Sure he says so, but it can’t be used as proof because he might as well be lying. I think he was lying when he said that he knows about the task and Voldemort intends him to do it. Nothing he says in that chapter proves that he has any idea what they’re talking about, either he just repeats what the sisters have said or states the obvious (“the Dark Lord is angry”, “the Dark Lord will not be persuaded” etc).

Rowling made Tom Riddle, Severus Snape, and Harry Potter similar in some ways and I think it was to make the comparison Evil, Grey (Neither) and Good.
I agree that JKR clearly meant us to make this comparison between Snape, Harry and Voldemort. They are very similar in some ways, yet totally different in others, and it’s their choices that make them different. Voldemort chose evil, Harry chose good, and Snape… well, he chose evil first, repented and then chose good. I don’t really buy the idea that Snape is grey in the sense that he’s amoral, doing only what benefits him the most.

I don't think that he had to kill anyone in order to be an important Death Eater. Personally, I don't think he really was that important until he heard the prophecy. After this, he became a spy, which kept him from participating in the particularly nasty stuff. I always imagine Snape as someone who was always indirectly involved in things. He's the guy who helped plan, pass information, act as the lookout etc., but, before Dumbledore, I don't think he killed anyone. Given Snape's young age during the first war, Bellatrix's comment in Spinner's End, and Snape's outburst with Harry in Flight of the Prince, I don't think that he has killed anyone before.

:agree: I agree. I don’t see Snape being a very important Death Eater during VoldWar 1, at least not before he became a spy, and when that happened he had to maintain his cover and not participate in the particularly nasty things. And Bellatrix’s comments in Spinner’s End definitely suggest that Snape hasn’t been participating in whatever the Death Eaters did: “you were once again absent while the rest of us ran dangers” (p. 34) and “Oh, he’ll try, I’m sure… the usual empty words, the usual slithering out of action…” (HBP p.40 UK).

marcko90000
January 6th, 2006, 11:55 am
Actually, I just thought of the best reason why he didn't kill Flitwick, even if he is evil!snape -- he hadn't killed Dumbledore yet, and was still hadn't blown his cover yet. But once Dumbledore was dead, the "jig was up". If he were evil, he should have been casting Avada Kedavra curses like the other Death Eater(s) were casting (at least one -- the big blonde one -- was definitely casting Avada Kedavra).
Well, Snape could have done a lot of things. I certainly feel that he had somewhere to go.....you however can believe whatever Snape should have done.
Do you really think Snape is clever enough to be evil, loyal to Voldemort, and playing Dumbledore for a sap for 16 years; yet is not clever enough to get away with anything more evil than being mean and nasty to Harry and his mates?
Yes, if he wanted to stay on Dumbledore's good books. What do you think he could have done?

I would also like to add that Narcissa isn't the one questioning Snape's loyalty. And since she's there asking an incredibly huge favor of Snape, I don't think she would start, even if she managed to get her wits about her.
So why do you believe Snape made the Vow?

nini
January 6th, 2006, 12:15 pm
i believe Snape isnt really on anyone's side. Things in the Wizard world, as in the real world, aren't just black and white. Snape is neither good or bad. He's in the grey area in between, I believe. He does what suits him best. He actually only cares for himself and his own safety. I dont think Snape was ever after power or glory, i believe all he ever wanted was to be safe and stay out of trouble (as much as possible). So, I cant really say that Snape is bad or good. However I believe in the 6th book he did what Dumbledore wanted (or would have wanted) him to do, and I'm not just talking about the murder of Dumbledore, but everything Snape did from the very beggining, ie protecting Draco. The question is though, in the next book, what will be best for Snape? Being on the good side now that Dymbledore is gone (and being hated by everyone for killing him)? Or being on the bad side now that Voldemord is back to his full power (and being praised for killing Dumbledore)?

frizbog
January 6th, 2006, 3:36 pm
What do you think he could have done?
If Snape were so clever as to fool Dumbledore for 16 years into thinking he was on his side when he really wasn't, I am certain that Snape could have caused serious injuries or deaths of certain students or staff members and made it look like an accident. I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one too.
So why do you believe Snape made the Vow?This whole Vow business is sketchy. We don't know how it works, what kind of time limit you have, when it kicks in, whether Ron really understood how it worked, etc. But since you asked what I believe, my view is that Snape made the Vow because he was cornered into it by Narcissa and didn't have a choice at that point. If he didn't he would have to tip his hand, and was hoping that the vow he'd have to make would have some loophole he could wriggle out of.

marcko90000
January 6th, 2006, 3:48 pm
I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this one too.
Well, I will admit it is odd of Snape. And I'm not surprised we agree to disagree. :lol:
But since you asked what I believe.....
Well, I didn't actually. But thanks for your thoughts all the same:tu: (even though I don't agree with them).

FantasyFairy
January 6th, 2006, 4:26 pm
Posted by Nini
He does what suits him best. He actually only cares for himself and his own safety.
I agree with you here, Snape is a true slytherin therefore he is bent on self preservation. However, i do not think that this means Snape has no alleigance, (In my opinion LV's side) i think that this means Snape will be able to lie effectively to each side to enable him to remain safe. E.g. Snape was able to lie to Dumbledore for 16 years to keep him safely out of Azkaban etc.

winky22
January 6th, 2006, 10:46 pm
It doesn't really matter because he'll probably just die.

So you think we should not discuss it because of something that might not even happen:rolleyes:

For a long time I believed that Sanpe was good and Dumbledore and him had it all planned out. However, a few days ago, I was thinking about something and realized that it contradicts the Snape is good theory. Now, I can't remember what it was! It's really frustrating me too. It was just one little detail I had over looked and now i forgot what it was.... Wow, what a totally useless post... I'm going to try to remember what it was and share when I get...:sigh:

Lol. i do that all the time it will come back to you soon, i sure:D

Why is it that, (and please, please don't take this the wrong way, I am sincerely curious) the majority of the Snape-is-evil camp usually end their short, curt explanations with things like "end of story" or "no more to discuss" or "he's evil, period"?

Now, I have seen alot of Snape-is-evil people detail thoughtful, discussion provoking theories and evidence, and I totally respect that. But I see so many from that particular camp act and write as if they are entirely, complaetely, utterly certain of their own assumptions. They do not seem to consider ANY other point of view, evidence, or even canon in some rare cases.

As you have imagined by now, I am a Snape is "good" person---I think he is going to redeem himself, and I think it obvious that what happened in HBP was EXTREMELY fishy. BUT---I am open to all interpretations on the subject, and I am willing to mull and ponder over great evidence given from the Snape is evil camp.

The complete truth of the matter is, I have a pretty good feeling (being that literature is my major, and writing is my career) that Snape isn't what he's exactly painted to be...but I could be totally wrong, and I accept that. Nit only do I accept it, I RELISH it. The fact of the matter is that none of us knows the truth.

So, to the beginning of this post, my real question (meant with respect and sincere curiosity) is why do SOME of the Snape-is-Evil camp refuse to hear any evidence at all? I understand that Snape-is-good people can be just as stubborn; but I aim this question at the evil camp because I see this refusal there more often.

People who are like that shouldn't really voice there opinions without disscusing it, i agree that evreyone has the right to there own opinions and i love that here.
The truth is we can never say Snape is evil Or Snape is good because we don't know either way yet (if we did we wouldn't have this thread) he has done somethings that make him seem evil and then somethings that make him see good. Discussing things can make you sit up and think about a situation that you thought was one thing and change your mind to another as i have done many times.

When i read HBP i thought Snape is evil and it upset me because i thought he was good but then i came on here and there were so many people to point out the things that i had missed and that changed my mind and i believe Snape is good at this point in time. People who choose not to discuss and just say blah are spoiling it for thereselfs because it is fun and i feel sorry for them.

So CoS members if you are reading this post and are just going to blurt in one post that Snape is Bad think again read what everyone else has to say and coment about it! Give you views and have fun doing it! Because if you don't why are you here?

Snape (in my eyes) is good. Dumbledore would have never pleaded for his life, he was pleading for Snape to do his mission. He may have been Saying... "Severus ....Please do it now.....you know it needs to be done and look after Harry"
I can't hear "Severus....please...don't kill me i want to live to be 200" coming out of D's mouth can you?

He stoped he DE's from torturing Harry, i am sure Voldie wouldn't have minded them tourturing him as long as they didn't kill him if he was still for V. Now i do think about a senerio if snape is bad which is if harry is a Horcrux (which i am not sure of yet but thats for another thread) (and Snape knows) If he was then voldie (maybe) would want to tread a bit more carefully around him for a while maybe make a few more Horcrux's before killing Harry and the Horcrux inside him, i don't know just a thought running around my tiny brain.

I'd like to post a bit more but i am getting a bit sleepy so off i trott:D

Tarragon
January 6th, 2006, 11:22 pm
:agree: I agree. I donít see Snape being a very important Death Eater during VoldWar 1, at least not before he became a spy, and when that happened he had to maintain his cover and not participate in the particularly nasty things. And Bellatrixís comments in Spinnerís End definitely suggest that Snape hasnít been participating in whatever the Death Eaters did: ďyou were once again absent while the rest of us ran dangersĒ (p. 34) and ďOh, heíll try, Iím sureÖ the usual empty words, the usual slithering out of actionÖĒ (HBP p.40 UK).

Hmm....But I thought we could not believe anything Bellatrix said? Because I distinctly remember referencing her as a back-up for my statement that Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite, and everyone jumped down my throat and told me that Bellatrix is probably lying and they wouldn't believe it unless they heard it from the Dark Lord himself. So, perhaps I could say Bellatrix is exaggerating Snape's supposed lack of participation and that I would not believe he was unimportant until he overheard part of the prophesy and did not take part in any Death Eater activities unless I heard it from the Dark Lord himself.

The sword cuts both ways. If we are to disregard a statement a character makes because she is percieved liar by those who post here, then we must disregard everything she says as a lie. So if we are to accept the above-mentioned quotes from Bellatrix as truth, then we must also accept she was telling the truth when she said Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite. You cannot have it both ways. So which is it?

Phoenix_Valor
January 6th, 2006, 11:42 pm
Why is it that, (and please, please don't take this the wrong way, I am sincerely curious) the majority of the Snape-is-evil camp usually end their short, curt explanations with things like "end of story" or "no more to discuss" or "he's evil, period"?

Now, I have seen alot of Snape-is-evil people detail thoughtful, discussion provoking theories and evidence, and I totally respect that. But I see so many from that particular camp act and write as if they are entirely, complaetely, utterly certain of their own assumptions. They do not seem to consider ANY other point of view, evidence, or even canon in some rare cases.

As you have imagined by now, I am a Snape is "good" person---I think he is going to redeem himself, and I think it obvious that what happened in HBP was EXTREMELY fishy. BUT---I am open to all interpretations on the subject, and I am willing to mull and ponder over great evidence given from the Snape is evil camp.

The complete truth of the matter is, I have a pretty good feeling (being that literature is my major, and writing is my career) that Snape isn't what he's exactly painted to be...but I could be totally wrong, and I accept that. Nit only do I accept it, I RELISH it. The fact of the matter is that none of us knows the truth.

So, to the beginning of this post, my real question (meant with respect and sincere curiosity) is why do SOME of the Snape-is-Evil camp refuse to hear any evidence at all? I understand that Snape-is-good people can be just as stubborn; but I aim this question at the evil camp because I see this refusal there more often.


Meesa knows people like that. Yesterday at school, I sighed and told one of my friends at the lunch table that I trusted him, and this is basically how the conversation went:

Me:*sigh*Look, I've read some theories on the internet and um, well, I *boldvoice*trust Snape.*waits for explosion*

Friend: WHAT!!!???!!! You TRUST him!? He killed Dumbldore!

Me: Yes I know that-

Friend: So why do you trust him!?

Me: Look, there is this theory I saw on the Mugglenet editorials....*explains the theory*

Friend: I don't care! He killed Dumbldore! He can't be trusted!

Me: We'll see who's right! *points* I'll bet you 50 bucks that I'm right.

Friend: I don't gamble, besides, I don't want you having to hand over 50 dollars to me when I'm right.

Me: *rollseyes**turns to friend who's a slash fan* Steave, will you take the bet? 50 bucks to you if I'm wrong, 50 bucks to me if I'm right.

Steve(who is a slash fan): Sure.

The rest of the day, my friend and I passed eachother in the hallway, me saying, "Snape's good!" and her yelling back, "He's EVILL!!" What's really frusterating is that no matter how much canon evidence I use to support the editorial theory, she dissregards it and uses the last page in 'The lightning struck tower' as her canon evidence. Actually, seeing as she's using only a parragraph for evidence, it's more like a pistol than a canon. If this girl were on a debate team, she'd be laughed off the stage. Before you get into a debate, you need to look at other points of veiws and do your research.

frizbog
January 7th, 2006, 12:55 am
If Snape was truly evil, why didn't he let it just "slip" to Fenrir Greyback that Lupin was in the Order? Or at least couldn't be trusted so Greyback would kill him? If he was clever enough to fool Dumbledore for 16 years, he could have pulled that off.

marcko90000
January 7th, 2006, 1:32 am
If Snape was truly evil, why didn't he let it just "slip" to Fenrir Greyback that Lupin was in the Order? Or at least couldn't be trusted so Greyback would kill him? If he was clever enough to fool Dumbledore for 16 years, he could have pulled that off.If J.K. Rowling is a clever writer, what makes you think you would have to see it written in the books? What happens if he has told Fenrir?

frizbog
January 7th, 2006, 1:52 am
If J.K. Rowling is a clever writer, what makes you think you would have to see it written in the books? What happens if he has told Fenrir?
Of course she's a clever writer, and neither of us need to have everything spelled out. It's not that hard.

Putting two and two together, it's reasonable to conclude that by the time of Dumbledore's funeral, Greyback still did not suspect that Lupin was spying on him, or Lupin would have been dead. Since Snape and Greyback were both working for Voldemort, Snape could have gotten that information to Greyback with extreme ease if he were truly evil. We also know that an evil!Snape had motive to rat out Lupin beyond just being evil, what with his personal dislike of Lupin.

So, why did Snape not tell Greyback about Lupin? Loyalty to Dumbledore is one plausible explanation.

Selene Sedai
January 7th, 2006, 1:59 am
winky22-So you think we should not discuss it because of something that might not even happen:rolleyes:

no, not exactly, it is fun to discuss things, just there is always that possibility. If he has told Frenrir then Lupin is in danger. yes i know that Snape might not die and i'm not stopping anyone from discussing anything anyhow.

arithmancer
January 7th, 2006, 2:38 am
First -- the Death Eaters were on the run on the way out, so the scene was a bit confused.
Second -- we don't know which Death Eater's cruciatus curse Snape stopped. If it had been Crabbe Sr. or Goyle Sr., it would be very easy to believe they would be that thick, and that Snape could manipulate them. McNair doesn't seem to bright either, although he was in Azkaban at the time.
Third -- "we are to leave him" could mean "we are to leave him here at hogwarts", or it could mean "we are to leave him unharmed."
Fourth -- it's possible that only the "Potter belongs to the Dark Lord" part are the orders, and "we are to leave him" is Snape's interpretation.

:tu:
And I would add a fourth point. The spell cut off the moment Snape yelled. Perhaps this is not because the Death Eater casting the curse jumped to obey this order, but because Snape countered the curse nonverbally. In which case the Death Eater might accept Snape's 'order' out of a desire to avoid a confrontation.

He actually only cares for himself and his own safety. I dont think Snape was ever after power or glory, i believe all he ever wanted was to be safe and stay out of trouble (as much as possible). So, I cant really say that Snape is bad or good.

I find this view puzzling. If Snape really cared most about staying out of trouble and his own personal safety, shouldn't he have graduated Hogwarts with his NEWT in Potions and gone to work somewhere as a Potions Maker? An apothecary? Joining the Death Eaters seems a rather more dangerous proposition, seeing as it means being wanted by the Aurors (not to mention having regular contact with Voldemort...)

And if that was a youthful mistake...Dumbledore seems to think Snape 'returned' before the Potters' death.Thus, at the height of Voldemort's power. A rather risky move, especially since he then apparently launched a career as a double-agent...

And within the books themselves (not in the backstory, which we after all only hear about), why in PoA did Snape go out to the Shrieking Shack alone to confront what he believed at the time was a mass-murderer and his (about to transform) werewolf accomplice? (Sirius and Lupin...) And (most telling, to me) WHY did he agree to go back to Voldemort at the end of GoF? Not to mention the UV. UVs are not safe...

To me either evil or good Snape seems to make more sense. The man takes too many risks not to have some sort of agenda or goal he wants to achieve.

ss365
January 7th, 2006, 5:07 am
I think Snape is definitely good. He's in league with Dumbledore, they planned D's death, etc... I won't repeat it all since I'm sure you've all read it all already...

Awiana
January 7th, 2006, 9:18 am
Hmm....But I thought we could not believe anything Bellatrix said? Because I distinctly remember referencing her as a back-up for my statement that Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite, and everyone jumped down my throat and told me that Bellatrix is probably lying and they wouldn't believe it unless they heard it from the Dark Lord himself. So, perhaps I could say Bellatrix is exaggerating Snape's supposed lack of participation and that I would not believe he was unimportant until he overheard part of the prophesy and did not take part in any Death Eater activities unless I heard it from the Dark Lord himself.
Yes, you could definitely do that. She could be exaggerating Snape’s lack of participation for some reason. You absolutely don’t have to believe that he didn’t take part in the nastiest Death Eater stuff and that he was an unimportant Death Eater. That’s what I believe, but that’s just my opinion, of course. That’s why I said that her comments suggest that Snape didn’t take part in the nastiest Death Eater activities, not that it proves it. Maybe I should have written that it’s only my opinion, not gospel truth, but I guess I assumed that it’s clear that it’s only my opinion and people are welcome to disagree with me.

The sword cuts both ways. If we are to disregard a statement a character makes because she is percieved liar by those who post here, then we must disregard everything she says as a lie. So if we are to accept the above-mentioned quotes from Bellatrix as truth, then we must also accept she was telling the truth when she said Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite. You cannot have it both ways. So which is it?

Yes, you’re absolutely right. We can’t accept something Bellatrix says as gospel, because she might be lying and, well, she isn’t exactly mentally stable. But I guess I don’t really accept the idea that we must disregard everything she says as a lie. I mean, it’s not like a character either always tells the truth or always lies. I’d say we have to at least consider the possibility that she might have been lying when she says something, but of course everyone can have different opinions on whether she actually was lying or not.

Personally, I take Narcissa’s claim that Snape was Voldemort’s favourite and most trusted advisor with a grain of salt, because she had good reason to exaggerate Snape’s importance because she wanted to get him to try to persuade Voldemort. And the impression I’ve gotten of Voldemort is that he manipulates and lies. He might have given the impression that Snape is his favourite, but that’s not necessarily what he thinks, since he might not share his thoughts with everyone. And I believe that Wormtail was in Spinner’s End to spy on Snape, and that doesn’t really suggest that Voldemort trusts Snape that completely. But of course it’s just my interpretation that Wormtail was there to spy on Snape, there is no absolute canon proof for that, so everyone is of course free to disagree with me.

If your opinion is that Bellatrix was lying when she complained about Snape not actually doing anything, but Narcissa was telling the truth when she said that Snape is Voldemort's favourite, that’s absolutely fine. We all interpret the text in different ways and come to different conclusions, and that’s part of the reason why this discussion forum is such a nice place – it would be pretty boring if we all had the same opinions.

To me either evil or good Snape seems to make more sense. The man takes too many risks not to have some sort of agenda or goal he wants to achieve.
I agree, the idea that all Snape wants to do is to be safe has never seemed that plausible to me. If he wanted to be safe then joining the Death Eaters wasn’t a very bright idea. Also, it’s probably difficult enough to fool either Voldemort or Dumbledore, but if he’s not loyal to either of them, he has to fool them both, and that seems a bit challenging.

daisy5
January 7th, 2006, 10:11 am
So why do you believe Snape made the Vow?
You would ask me a tough question like that :grumble: . This is how I see the situation. Narcissa comes to Snape asking for help. Her first request is that Snape attempt to change Voldemort's mind about having Draco perform his task. Snape says it can't be done. Then Narcissa asks Snape to perform Draco's task for him. Snape's response to this is, "I'm probably gonna have to do it, but Draco has to at least try." He's pretty much telling her no, he's not going do it. When the woman starts freaking out, he says that he will try to help Draco. When he agrees to take the vow, he thinks he is going to vow to protect &/or aid draco in his mission. Narcissa pretty much throws in the third part of the vow without his knowledge - remember, as I interpret the chapter, Snape has already said he wouldn't do Draco's mission for him.

I think Snape agreed to take the vow because he felt bad for Narcissa and he wanted to actually protect Draco. He has some kind of relationship with this family. Narcissa describes Snape as being Lucius' "old friend." Given the circumstances, this may be an exaggeration, but the mere fact that she would say this suggests that Snape has some type of a social relationship with these people. They are also on a first name basis with each other, which shows some level of familiarity. Not to mention that Snape has been Draco's teacher and head of house for five years at this point. Harry and pals describe Draco as Snape's favorite student - Snape really knows this kid and doesn't want to see him, or his family, dead. Basically, he was guilted into it - of course, Bellatrix' obnoxious comments didn't help matters. There also isn't any real reason for Snape not to agree to the first two clauses of the vow. Voldemort gets what he wants, the Malfoys stay alive (and probably unharmed), and Snape gets the further trust of his fellow Death Eaters and Voldemort. It's a win-win situation really.

It's only the third part of the vow that really causes any problems. First, as I said previously, I don't think that Snape knew from the get-go that completing Draco's task was going to be a clause. To be totally honest, I have no clue why Snape agreed to this. He's definitely not thrilled about it - he gets all twitchy and hesitant - but I don't know of any reason why he couldn't back out of it. Some people think that Snape did not know what Draco's mission was, that he knew Dumbledore was already dying (and therefore it was no big deal), or that he was just maintaining his cover as a Death Eater. The only one of these that sounds plausible to me is that Snape didn't know what the mission was and he had been bluffing previously.



Snape (in my eyes) is good. Dumbledore would have never pleaded for his life, he was pleading for Snape to do his mission. He may have been Saying... "Severus ....Please do it now.....you know it needs to be done and look after Harry"
I can't hear "Severus....please...don't kill me i want to live to be 200" coming out of D's mouth can you?
I also have a hard time believing that Dumbledore was begging for his life. One of the things I don't understand is why Dumbledore would have been begging Snape for his life at that point. He has no reason to suspect that Snape is a loyal Death Eater. When Snape arrives on the tower, nothing he does or says (which is nothing) should lead Dumbledore to believe that Snape is going to kill him. I suppose Dumbledore could have used legilimency, but I find it hard to believe that Snape fooled him for 16 years, but at this moment Snape lets all his feelings out and Dumbledore realizes his mistake. Dumbledore does seem to know about the unbreakable vow, but then he should have realized that it would be futile for him to beg. Dumbledore should have known that Snape would choose his own life. I have no clue what Dumbledore was begging for, but I don't think it was his life.



Hmm....But I thought we could not believe anything Bellatrix said? Because I distinctly remember referencing her as a back-up for my statement that Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite, and everyone jumped down my throat and told me that Bellatrix is probably lying and they wouldn't believe it unless they heard it from the Dark Lord himself. So, perhaps I could say Bellatrix is exaggerating Snape's supposed lack of participation and that I would not believe he was unimportant until he overheard part of the prophesy and did not take part in any Death Eater activities unless I heard it from the Dark Lord himself.

The sword cuts both ways. If we are to disregard a statement a character makes because she is percieved liar by those who post here, then we must disregard everything she says as a lie. So if we are to accept the above-mentioned quotes from Bellatrix as truth, then we must also accept she was telling the truth when she said Snape is the Dark Lord's favourite. You cannot have it both ways. So which is it?
I personally can't recall ever having said that everything Bellatrix said was a lie and I would disagree with anyone who said as such. For me, her statement is just one of a few reasons why I think that Snape was not an important Death Eater (before the prophecy and becoming a spy), or has not been directly involved in anyone's death . . . I would also like to add to that list the fact that he was half muggle.

I think that once Snape told Voldemort of the prophecy and became a spy, he became very important - probably as trusted as any Death Eater can be. The reason I think that her statement about Snape's lack of involvement in anything dangerous is fairly accurate (she may very well be exaggerating) is the fact that Snape said nothing. If it were a lie, or at least had little basis in reality, I think he would have piped up. Especially as he had previously spent much of his time explaining that he was in fact a loyal and trustworthy Death Eater, even going so far as to give examples of some of the things he has done.

LionHart
January 7th, 2006, 10:57 am
Dumbledore didn't know about the Unbreakable Vow.

"I tried, Draco. Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders--"
"He hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother--"
"Of course that is that he would tell you, Draco, but--"

This conversation takes place on top of the Astronomy tower, as I'm sure you know, right before Dumbledore's death. So if Dumbledore didn't know about the Vow, how did he and Snape "plan" the former's death? All the ways of explaining away Snape's guilt hinge on the fact that Dumbledore knew about the Vow and the two then came up with the elaborate planned death of Dumbledore to save Snape from death and Draco from splitting his soul with murder.

I don't think Snape is completely evil (Voldemort-style), but I do think he flat-out murdered Albus, making him a very, very dark shadow of gray, with a strangely powerful interest in Draco's well-being.

george101
January 7th, 2006, 11:04 am
i think that snape will end up being good ... snd he will repay his debt that he owed james to harry ... and i think the severus snape was told to kill him ... but i beleive that there is two spells that send out a jet of green light (1 for blasting and 1 for killing) there is a thread on it somewhere but i cant find it .. so i just think that snape didnt realli kill dumbledore he blasted him off the guilding and (because somehow he knew that dumbledore had drunken the draught of living death possibly legilimens) and will come back and wake dumbledore up ... hopefully :D

oh i found the thread ... its called something like the potion in the lake "water or not"?? something like that so hope you find it

gertiekeddle
January 7th, 2006, 4:00 pm
JK wrote that Harry told 'all' about the conversation between Draco and Snape so I assume he told him about the Unbreakable Vow.

LionHart, I would say we can't be sure. But as JK showed us how Harry told Lupin and Ron about the conversation, I just can't imagine that he didn't tell Dumbledore about the vow.

The conversation between Dumbledore and Draco on the Astronomy tower is excactly in the same way written: JK wanted to hide something for us. Actually this conversation on the tower in one of the hints I count for Dumbledore's knowledge about all. At least he knew that Draco tried to kill him. Why didn't he tell Harry and why didn't he prevent himself? It should have been easy for the biggest wizard ever to prevent himself, but he didn't. That's why I'm thinking Dumbledore had his own plans.

Snape on the other hand didn't hurt Harry. He blocked his spells (eight times) and we can't be sure, too, if the last one, which threw Harry to the ground really was Snape's spell or Whetherwings by accidently hiting Harry. Even if Snape loosed his patience at the end, I doubt we can see evil plans in it. He's no nice person, like he always wasn't, but in my opinion he did something on the tower, he didn't want to do.

Nass
January 7th, 2006, 4:09 pm
I understand that revulsion and repulsion are different words, but I still think thereís a parallel. The thing is, the books are written from Harryís point of view, and therefore JKR can describe Harryís feelings like she did in the Cave chapter, telling us that Harry hated himself because of what he had to do. She canít do the same with Snape, as the books arenít written from Snapeís point of view. She can only describe what Harry sees, she can tell us that there was hatred and revulsion on Snapeís face, but she canít tell us that Snape hated himself, because Harry doesnít know that.

I guess. I just don't think you can murder someone in cold blood and then say you were on his side all along, no matter all vow theories

arithmancer
January 7th, 2006, 11:04 pm
To be totally honest, I have no clue why Snape agreed to this. He's definitely not thrilled about it - he gets all twitchy and hesitant - but I don't know of any reason why he couldn't back out of it. Some people think that Snape did not know what Draco's mission was, that he knew Dumbledore was already dying (and therefore it was no big deal), or that he was just maintaining his cover as a Death Eater. The only one of these that sounds plausible to me is that Snape didn't know what the mission was and he had been bluffing previously.


Nice summary! I do think that Snape did not know the task, but I also think his decision was based on his liking of and talent for logic (as we saw from his puzzle in PS/SS). He decided, in my opinion, that Narcissa's conditional wording (should it prove necessary, if Draco seemed to fail) made it likely that Snape would never have to do the task. Probably by talking Draco out of it, and then hiding him away from Voldemort. And takin the third clause had the added benefit of convincing Bella, who would hopefully spread the word.

Dumbledore didn't know about the Unbreakable Vow.

This conversation takes place on top of the Astronomy tower, as I'm sure you know, right before Dumbledore's death. So if Dumbledore didn't know about the Vow, how did he and Snape "plan" the former's death? All the ways of explaining away Snape's guilt hinge on the fact that Dumbledore knew about the Vow and the two then came up with the elaborate planned death of Dumbledore to save Snape from death and Draco from splitting his soul with murder.


Dumbledore's quote is unfinished. He never says he does not know about the Vow, nor does he claim there was no Vow. The unfinished sentence could equally well have ended with the explanation that Snape must use the Vow as a reason for why he is watching Draco when talking to Draco, even though his real reason for doing so is Dumbledore's orders.

There is a theory (and a perfectly reasonable one IMO, though not my personal favorite) that Snape and Dumbledore may have discussed Draco's task before Cissy and Bella came to visit. Snape does claim to know the task. After all, IF Snape is loyal to Dumbledore he could not have failed to report Draco's task to Dumbledore as soon as he learned of it. In which case he may have had orders to get closer to the Malfoys, in order to learn more details and perhaps gain their trust in fortherance of Dumboledore's plan to hide Draco. Which could be another reason why Snape would agree to the general idea of an Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa. In which case, the sentence could have ended, "Of course that is that he would tell you, Draco, but--I ordered him to gain your mother's trust before she ever approached him."

I guess. I just don't think you can murder someone in cold blood and then say you were on his side all along, no matter all vow theories

Agreed. I (and most who suspect Snape is on Dumbledore's side) would disagree with your characterization of Snape's action as 'murder in cold blood'.

scd
January 8th, 2006, 12:31 am
I can see it falling either way, so I am undecided if Snape is good or not.

Blood_River
January 8th, 2006, 12:45 am
Dumbledore's quote is unfinished. He never says he does not know about the Vow, nor does he claim there was no Vow.

Furthermore, why would he tell Draco about the Vow? He's trying to talk the boy out of committing murder. If Draco's refusal to murder means that
a) his favorite teacher will be sentenced to death by UV, or
b) someone else is just going to kill Dumbledore anyway
wouldn't that, you know, taint his decision-making process a tad?

And ITA to what people are pointing out now -- Narcissa says "should it be necessary... if it seems he will fail," which creates even more loopholes -- namely, that if Draco decided not to, or if it didn't seem necessary to protecting him, then Snape might not've had to kill Dumbledore at all. But then why didn't he find some way to separate Draco & Dumbledore from the other Death Eaters?

When the big one said there was a problem because Draco didn't seem able to do it, couldn't he have said that Draco had to do it, and that they should leave him alone until it had been finished -- that they could all go back up and fight the order and Draco would join them when he had managed it?

I don't know... maybe it didn't occur to him any more than saying, "No, Narcissa -- I'll protect him, but completing the task for him would violate the Dark Lord's orders, and put Draco in even more danger of punishment" to the last clause did.

Still... If he is good, I think Fawkes will probably prove it to Harry by going to him. And speaking of which, do you think his behavior in CoS shines some light on his good/ evil status?

I was re-reading it this morning, and I noticed two things in particular:

1. He not only mentions polyjuice potion to his second years, but tells them the exact book its recipe can be found in, even though they're not allowed to make them or even check out the book. Why? Mentioning the potion itself in passing, maybe in answer to a question, makes sense -- but why tell them where they can find out how to make it?

2. He suggests & teaches Draco to conjure a snake at the duel -- which causes Harry to learn (along w/ the rest of the school) that he's a parselmouth. Why would Snape suggest a snake-conjuring spell? That's really a bizarre move in a child wizard duel -- there must be a dozen better jinxes, blocks, attacks, and chields.

I just thought it was odd.

daisy5
January 8th, 2006, 12:54 am
Nice summary! I do think that Snape did not know the task, but I also think his decision was based on his liking of and talent for logic (as we saw from his puzzle in PS/SS). He decided, in my opinion, that Narcissa's conditional wording (should it prove necessary, if Draco seemed to fail) made it likely that Snape would never have to do the task. Probably by talking Draco out of it, and then hiding him away from Voldemort. And takin the third clause had the added benefit of convincing Bella, who would hopefully spread the word.
:D Thank you! I agree with you that it is very possible Snape thought he could get out of the vow - all or some of it.




There is a theory (and a perfectly reasonable one IMO, though not my personal favorite) that Snape and Dumbledore may have discussed Draco's task before Cissy and Bella came to visit. Snape does claim to know the task. After all, IF Snape is loyal to Dumbledore he could not have failed to report Draco's task to Dumbledore as soon as he learned of it. In which case he may have had orders to get closer to the Malfoys, in order to learn more details and perhaps gain their trust in fortherance of Dumboledore's plan to hide Draco. Which could be another reason why Snape would agree to the general idea of an Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa. In which case, the sentence could have ended, "Of course that is that he would tell you, Draco, but--I ordered him to gain your mother's trust before she ever approached him."

This is plausible too. It would make sense for Snape to agree to help/protect Draco in order to get more information about Draco's plans.

Caro_line
January 8th, 2006, 1:19 am
it would be interesting if one charactor is a traitor and one is redeemed. i like the idea of Snape being good. but 'should it be necessary?' that means that he has to do Draco's task (thought it wasn't said what it was at the time) if it proved necessary. Snape was trying to find out what Draco's task was when Harry overheard them arguing during Slughorns party. He was supposed to be watching over Draco as well.

rubyslippahs
January 8th, 2006, 4:10 am
My take is this:

I think that Snape's as of yet unrevealed patronus is a spider; "Spinner's End" in HBP as one possible clue. Also, we don't know his worst fear. If his patronus is indeed a spider, we learn in CoS that spiders flee from the basilisk. I'm still totally cloudy on what his actual worst fear is, but in a very rough nutshell, I think that Snape is still on the protagonists' side, and that revealing his patronus would therefore reveal his allegiance to some degree. I can't say that I think he'll have a necessarily happy ending in 7, though. He used to be one of my least favorite characters, but I like any person who can act that well under duress and still maintain the charade perfectly.

YukiVamp
January 8th, 2006, 4:11 am
Okay, I've never thought Snape was a good guy, and I don't think he'll be one in the seventh book either. I'd be very surprised if he was, but...it's possible, eh?

rubyslippahs
January 8th, 2006, 4:16 am
2. He suggests & teaches Draco to conjure a snake at the duel -- which causes Harry to learn (along w/ the rest of the school) that he's a parselmouth. Why would Snape suggest a snake-conjuring spell? That's really a bizarre move in a child wizard duel -- there must be a dozen better jinxes, blocks, attacks, and chields.

I think that Snape somehow knew that Harry was a Parselmouth. He has always enjoyed causing Harry public humiliation, and what better way to make him more of a stigma than to make sure his classmates know a dark little secret that Harry doesn't even realize? Harry knows he can speak to snakes, but he assumes up to that point that it's common in the wizarding world (Hermione sets him straight later). Anything to barb the kid who looks like James Potter...

Tarragon
January 8th, 2006, 6:11 am
I think that Snape somehow knew that Harry was a Parselmouth. He has always enjoyed causing Harry public humiliation, and what better way to make him more of a stigma than to make sure his classmates know a dark little secret that Harry doesn't even realize? Harry knows he can speak to snakes, but he assumes up to that point that it's common in the wizarding world (Hermione sets him straight later). Anything to barb the kid who looks like James Potter...

From a literary perspective, J.K. Rowling made Snape tell Malfoy the snake spell as a means of showing the significance of Harry's ability to speak with snakes, as we already knew he could, and because it was important to the plot of Chamber as well as later books. She knew what would happen when Harry spoke to the snake; Snape, however, did not because he looked genuinely disturbed.

I honestly doubt anyone, except for perhaps Dumbledore, knew about Harry's ability, and had he known he would not have divulged the information to Snape because there would be no reason to. And in the off chance he was aware of Harry being a Parseltongue, Snape would have known better than to purposely send a snake after Harry in a hall full of students with all eyes on them because we know Dumbledore kept this ability very quiet and would probably have throttled Severus for doing it. Well, the Dursleys knew Harry could talk to snakes because of the zoo incident, but I do not think they knew the significance of it, and if Petunia and Vernon did know, I am sure, taking their fear of the abnormal into consideration, they would have spoken of it at all to anyone.

(And please, please, please do not respond to this post telling me he was 'pretending' to be shocked because I have heard that all-purpose argument before; I know all of its particulars and I tire of having to respond to responses of my posts containing that argument.)

Why a snake, then? I think it was a symbolic dig at Harry. Snape chose a snake because it is the mascot of Slytherin house and the Dark Lord's favourite animal. Also, a snake is a very dangerous animal if it is venomous, as this one was, I believe. It makes sense that Snape would vicariously sic it on Harry to get some sadistic thrill out of watching a twelve-year-old boy panic for his life before vanishing the snake after the kid practically went into cardiac arrest for fear.