Is Snape good? If not, will he come back to the good side? v4

I suspect a lot of theories will turn out to be wrong in the end. The CoS canteen will be serving Humble Pie to anyone who is ready to eat it! ;)

Yep, I agree... hopefully I won't be one of the ones who have to eat it :p :lol:...

I'm pretty much mentalized with the Humble cake :lol: But a good way to prevent big deception is to not have one big theory that one defend fervently.
I for instance (and on topic) think that Snape is on Dumbledores side, but that he is in essence a nasty person. Nontheless I see the arguments for evil!Snape and can understand them and will certainly not be angry if he is a bad Voldemort follower.
I also think that the big reason Dumbledore trusts Snape is somehow related to the James life depht, but if it turns out to be some other reason, I can live with that :lol:

The main reason for me thinking that Snape is on the right side is because I trust Dumbledore. But if Snape turnes out to be his big mistake, well, that's quite allright too.

The main reason for me thinking that Snape is on the right side is because I trust Dumbledore. But if Snape turnes out to be his big mistake, well, that's quite allright too.

Me too. If Dumbledore was wrong, it's his mistake, not ours, right? :lol:

Seriously, I will enjoy the book regardless of whether I'm right or wrong about things. Last time there were a few moments when I put the book down and said out loud, "I KNEW IT!!!" but there were also plenty of "I DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING!" moments. The biggest one, of course, was Snape killing Dumbledore. Then I realised there might be more to it than that ...

Being wrong about something isn't a catastrophe! It's "only" a book!

Me too. If Dumbledore was wrong, it's his mistake, not ours, right?
Indeed :lol: And he warned us about that possibilitiy.

Actually the fun thing about the whole Snape issue is that there are strong hints for both theories. This is why I am part minded on that. Spinners end is very convincing, but Dumbledore is very convincing too.

As for DH, I am sure that regardless of what happens with good or not Snape, I will enjoy the book, because until now, I have enjoyed all the books and I don't think that JKR will deceive us. :D

(anabel, do you realise that if Harry happens to die on page 582 that you will be immediately banned? :elaugh: )

(anabel, do you realise that if Harry happens to die on page 582 that you will be immediately banned? )

Yeah, someone did point that out. :scared: I don't think he will, though. And since I can prove I made the sig long before the page numbers were actually set, it can't possibly be a real spoiler even if it turns out to be true! But the book has to have more than 582 pages, and there would be no point in killing Harry before the end ... unless ... Snape is the true hero after all and the rest of the book is just about him! :wow:

Me too. If Dumbledore was wrong, it's his mistake, not ours, right? :lol:

Seriously, I will enjoy the book regardless of whether I'm right or wrong about things. Last time there were a few moments when I put the book down and said out loud, "I KNEW IT!!!" but there were also plenty of "I DIDN'T SEE THAT COMING!" moments. The biggest one, of course, was Snape killing Dumbledore. Then I realised there might be more to it than that ...

Being wrong about something isn't a catastrophe! It's "only" a book!

*gasp* only a book?? (oh yeah, sarcasm doesn't transfer well online :relax: )

I agree! I'll be the first one to applaud anyone who manages to reason out what ends up being a correct theory, but for me its the journey that's the fun part.

Till then, I'll put my trust in the trustworthy (Dumbledore) and bank on idealism to rule the day :)

Mostly we talk about if Snape is actually 'good' or 'bad', but what about the thread line...If Snape is in fact 'bad' will he come back to the good side?
I don't think it's very likely personally. If he had the coldness to kill Dumbledore without our fancy extenuating circumstances, then not only is it doubtful he'd ever want to return to the good--the good would never accept him back! IMO, if Snape is evil he's almost worse than Voldemort. Voldy has never really lied about his goals and purposes, while Snape has lied, manipulated, and debased the minds of Order members, colleagues, and students alike.

I agree! I'll be the first one to applaud anyone who manages to reason out what ends up being a correct theory, but for me its the journey that's the fun part.
Actually, nothing would ruin the book more for me than being right about everything! How boring would that be! I'm confident Jo will be able to surprise us all, though.If he had the coldness to kill Dumbledore without our fancy extenuating circumstances, then not only is it doubtful he'd ever want to return to the good--the good would never accept him back! IMO, if Snape is evil he's almost worse than Voldemort. Voldy has never really lied about his goals and purposes, while Snape has lied, manipulated, and debased the minds of Order members, colleagues, and students alike.
It's certainly hard to see Snape ever being accepted back into "good" society no matter what his motivation was. I think the only way he can be "redeemed" is to die for the cause.

It's certainly hard to see Snape ever being accepted back into "good" society no matter what his motivation was. I think the only way he can be "redeemed" is to die for the cause.
True, I'm pretty much convinced that Snape will die, one way or another, in Deathly Hallows. He's just so wrapped up in the whole plot, that I can't imagine him having much of a future after Voldemort is dead and his spy role is no longer needed.
He's not like Harry who has the chance at a bright future after the battle :shrug:

IMO, Dumbledore knew for some time that destroying the horcrux in the middle of the lake would require two people and that it was likely that his efforts would be fatal to him in some way. He made Snape sware to him that he would kill him if there was no hope of recovery ("that was no health potion"), just as he made Harry swear to do as he asked no matter what (continuing to make him drink the deathly potion). Dumbledore knew that his death would also make You Know Who more reckless and thus more vulnerable to be killed by Harry.

Snape is good and loyal, even to the point of killing Dumbledore if Dumbledore wished it. Snape also knows what Harry is and his importance. I think that is partly why Snape was so hard on him mentally; Harry had to grow up quickly and learn to be mentally tough to overcome adversity.

True, I'm pretty much convinced that Snape will die, one way or another, in Deathly Hallows. He's just so wrapped up in the whole plot, that I can't imagine him having much of a future after Voldemort is dead and his spy role is no longer needed.
He's not like Harry who has the chance at a bright future after the battle


Well if Snape has to get out neat, it would require too much of back ground information on him and a lot of plot stuff, meaning that a large part of the book would go into that, and since Jo has to answer many question in DH, I don't think she will be doing that, meaning that Snape will not be proven innocent....unless of course if he dies, I think he will be proven innocent in death. ;)

i dont know
i imagined that if snape is good he will help harry without harry realising its him
i just cant make up myimnd whether hes good, bad or hasnt made up his own mind

IMO, Dumbledore knew for some time that destroying the horcrux in the middle of the lake would require two people and that it was likely that his efforts would be fatal to him in some way. He made Snape sware to him that he would kill him if there was no hope of recovery ("that was no health potion").

He was weak, but there was no reason to beleive the potion was fatal. After he retreived the horcrux ring, he said that he was in bad shape but snape and m.pomfrey patched him up. if the best efforts of the hogwarts professors or even st.mungos were put to work on DD, he could likely have survived. even if he couldn't, there is no way snape would know that from a quick once over.

It's certainly hard to see Snape ever being accepted back into "good" society no matter what his motivation was. I think the only way he can be "redeemed" is to die for the cause.

I always thought that, too, until recently, when I re-read PoA and was struck by how quickly and easily Dumbledore, Lupin, Hagrid etc accept Sirius back into "good" society, after twelve years of thinking him a mass-murderer. Admittedly, (1) they liked him BEFORE he appeared to be a mass-murderer, while nobody much liked Snape even before he killed Dumbledore (or should that be "killed" Dumbledore?) (2) PoA is probably the most sloppily plotted book in the series. I still think Snape will die, but I don't think it's the only plausible outcome.

Originally posted by guad
As for DH, I am sure that regardless of what happens with good or not Snape, I will enjoy the book, because until now, I have enjoyed all the books and I don't think that JKR will deceive us.

You're all so much nicer and more tolerant people than me. If Snape turns out to be bad, I'll be furious!

I always thought that, too, until recently, when I re-read PoA and was struck by how quickly and easily Dumbledore, Lupin, Hagrid etc accept Sirius back into "good" society, after twelve years of thinking him a mass-murderer. Admittedly, (1) they liked him BEFORE he appeared to be a mass-murderer, while nobody much liked Snape even before he killed Dumbledore (or should that be "killed" Dumbledore?) (2) PoA is probably the most sloppily plotted book in the series. I still think Snape will die, but I don't think it's the only plausible outcome.

There is a difference here, though. Sirius never actually killed the people he was accused of killing, so it was a simple matter of wrongful accusation. Snape, no matter what his motive was, did actually cast an AK at Dumbledore, and Dumbledore died. Also, Dumbledore wasn't just a wizard - he was an icon! It wasn't like killing anyone else! So I think it will be practically impossible for Snape to "return to the fold" after this.

There is a difference here, though. Sirius never actually killed the people he was accused of killing, so it was a simple matter of wrongful accusation.

He appeared to have killed them, though (although admittedly Pettigrew turning up alive is cast-iron proof that it wasn't the way it looked, and JKR appears to have precluded the possibility of DD showing up alive).

Also, Dumbledore wasn't just a wizard - he was an icon! It wasn't like killing anyone else!

Ah, true.

I just finished reading GOF again, the first thing that hit me when I was reading the end, knowing what is coming later is that it is possible that Dumbledore and Snape had his death prearranged even at that point, and the whole conversation with "Severus you know what you have to do, are you sure you are willing yadda yadda yadda" may have been cementing the fact.

The other thing that jumped out at me was why Snape was in Barty Jr's foe glass??? I know he was mad at all the death eaters for not looking for Volde but he never said he was affraid of them or considered them enemies. I consider this a huge hint, a death eater looking in the a "Foe" glass and seeing someone who may or may not be a double agent is pretty significant.

Finally, Voldemort may look over some things from time to time and is extremely arrogant, but when has he ever been wrong (except of course with the little love thing that ended his first physical bodies being)? Saying that Snape left him forever is probably what he thought at the time because he had a pretty good idea, so I dont think he is too far off the mark. Look at it this way, Dumbledore trusts him, and Voldemort thought he was gone for ever, the two most powerful wizards of their time having the same view is nothing to shake a stick at either. I know Snape explained himself to Bellatrix in HBP but when you look at it this way, how can the two most powerful wizards of their time both be so mistaken???

Wrong board sorry

He was weak, but there was no reason to beleive the potion was fatal. After he retreived the horcrux ring, he said that he was in bad shape but snape and m.pomfrey patched him up. if the best efforts of the hogwarts professors or even st.mungos were put to work on DD, he could likely have survived. even if he couldn't, there is no way snape would know that from a quick once over.

Why would You Know Who put anything but a deadly potion inside that pot, especially as it guarded a horcrux. No, IMHO, Dumbledore knew that drinking that potion was a one way trip. That's why he brought Harry along...he knew it would take two. He knew that because he knew what was in the pot!

This makes me want to ask WHO helped R.A.B. to steal the horcrux before Dumbledore and Harry could???

:hmm:

This makes me want to ask WHO helped R.A.B. to steal the horcrux before Dumbledore and Harry could???

You will find this thread interesting for that---> If R.A.B. isn't Regulus A. Black, then who is s/he? And who helped them? v9 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=94150)
or its sister thread---> Assuming R.A.B. is Regulus A. Black v4 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=100507)

You will find this thread interesting for that---> If R.A.B. isn't Regulus A. Black, then who is s/he? And who helped them? v9 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=94150)
or its sister thread---> Assuming R.A.B. is Regulus A. Black v4 (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=100507)

Thanks...I did a quick search but nothing came up. Ugh! My bad...

Well as much as I want to be able to say.. "I knew it" while reading DH it'll be soo much more fun if we came across things that never of us had even dreamed of..
But since we seem to be straying was off topic..
It's simple and clear..
Snape is good. :p

Yep, I agree... hopefully I won't be one of the ones who have to eat it :p :lol:...

I will say 50% say he is bad 40% say he is good 10% are undecided(I'm in that 10%). That means 50% of readers better be hungry if he is good, 40% of readers better be hungry if he is bad and use 10% are going to smart enough to choose which everside it turns out to be and say thats what we thought all along....but if you do get some pie I would appreciate a slice.

I will say 50% say he is bad 40% say he is good 10% are undecided(I'm in that 10%). That means 50% of readers better be hungry if he is good, 40% of readers better be hungry if he is bad and use 10% are going to smart enough to choose which everside it turns out to be and say thats what we thought all along....but if you do get some pie I would appreciate a slice.

Ok :p :lol: , If I do get some I'll share :).

Why would You Know Who put anything but a deadly potion inside that pot, especially as it guarded a horcrux.

:
actually, dumbledore gave a variety of possible results of the potion. he said it might immobilize him, or cause him a lot of pain. he did not, however, think LV wanted the potion to kill, he merely wanted it to stall the person so LV could find out how they got there.

Snape is good. Rowling wants everyone to believe he is bad and has only showed us the apparent Death Eater side of him (his whole explanation to Bella in Spinners End shows how his loyalty to the Dark Lord never wavered). But we never hear an explanation from him as to how all his actions point to his loyalty never wavering for Dumbledore. The twist is going to be when he find out he betrays the Death Eaters, and his actions were all to help The Order and bring down Voldemort.

Snape is good. Rowling wants everyone to believe he is bad and has only showed us the apparent Death Eater side of him (his whole explanation to Bella in Spinners End shows how his loyalty to the Dark Lord never wavered). But we never hear an explanation from him as to how all his actions point to his loyalty never wavering for Dumbledore. The twist is going to be when he find out he betrays the Death Eaters, and his actions were all to help The Order and bring down Voldemort.


as the action on the COS boards shows, a ton of people beleive him to be good. it was not at all difficult to read between the lines and see a possibility of Snape being good. If she makes him good or bad, it will not be suprising either way. She needs to do something trickier, and make him more complex. Snape is working for himself, but not as an antaganist to harry, just as a confused guy who's not sure what side he's on.

The other thing that jumped out at me was why Snape was in Barty Jr's foe glass??? I know he was mad at all the death eaters for not looking for Volde but he never said he was affraid of them or considered them enemies. I consider this a huge hint, a death eater looking in the a "Foe" glass and seeing someone who may or may not be a double agent is pretty significant.
I agree - that is a powerful scene. :agree: And good evidence that Snape is on Harry's side.

I recently read it again for a signature picture I was making of the foe glass, and it struck me that Snape is mentioned in the glass not once but three times! And each time he is mentioned with McGonagall and Dumbledore.


Harry, still staring at the place where Moody's face had been, saw Albus Dumbledore, Professor Snape, and Professor McGonagall looking back at him out of the Foe-Glass. He looked around and saw the three of them standing in the doorway, Dumbledore in front, his wand outstretched.

At that moment, Harry fully understood for the first time why people said Dumbledore was the only wizard Voldemort had ever feared. The look upon Dumbledore's face as he stared down at the unconscious form of Mad-Eye Moody was more terrible than Harry could have ever imagined. There was no benign smile upon Dumbledore's face, no twinkle in the eyes behind the spectacles. There was cold fury in every line of the ancient face; a sense of power radiated from Dumbledore as though he were giving off burning heat.

He stepped into the office, placed a foot underneath Moodys unconscious body, and kicked him over onto his back, so that his face was visible. Snape followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was still visible, glaring into the room. Professor McGonagall went straight to Harry.

. . . "Severus, you have the potion?"

Snape handed Dumbledore a small glass bottle of completely clear liquid: the Veritaserum with which he had threatened Harry in class. Dumbledore got up, bent over the man on the floor, and pulled him into a sitting position against the wall beneath the Foe-Glass, in which the reflections of Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall were still glaring down upon them all



Three times - it's as if JKR is impressing that upon Harry's mind - look, look, look!

He will come back to the good side, but a major plot line in the book will be Snape attempting to convince everyone that his actions were justified. He will provide some magical assistance in the end, or prove to be a deciding factor in some way or another.

He will come back to the good side, but a major plot line in the book will be Snape attempting to convince everyone that his actions were justified. He will provide some magical assistance in the end, or prove to be a deciding factor in some way or another.
It would be impossible to convince everyone. But if he could just convince Harry and then help him win - that's all he needs to do.

Remember - Dumbledore told Harry not to speak to anyone else in the Order that night of the Tower, except Snape. And Harry is the only one who knows that - he never told the Order that in the Hospital Wing - he only said negative things about Snape. But surely after thinking about what happened and his initial reaction - to get Snape and Dumbledore back together somehow - Harry will realize there are more questions than answers, and it isn't all cut and dried about Dumbledore's death.

I recently read it again for a signature picture I was making of the foe glass, and it struck me that Snape is mentioned in the glass not once but three times! And each time he is mentioned with McGonagall and Dumbledore.

GoF
Harry, still staring at the place where Moody's face had been, saw Albus Dumbledore, Professor Snape, and Professor McGonagall looking back at him out of the Foe-Glass. He looked around and saw the three of them standing in the doorway, Dumbledore in front, his wand outstretched.

At that moment, Harry fully understood for the first time why people said Dumbledore was the only wizard Voldemort had ever feared. The look upon Dumbledore's face as he stared down at the unconscious form of Mad-Eye Moody was more terrible than Harry could have ever imagined. There was no benign smile upon Dumbledore's face, no twinkle in the eyes behind the spectacles. There was cold fury in every line of the ancient face; a sense of power radiated from Dumbledore as though he were giving off burning heat.

He stepped into the office, placed a foot underneath Moodys unconscious body, and kicked him over onto his back, so that his face was visible. Snape followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was still visible, glaring into the room. Professor McGonagall went straight to Harry.

. . . "Severus, you have the potion?"

Snape handed Dumbledore a small glass bottle of completely clear liquid: the Veritaserum with which he had threatened Harry in class. Dumbledore got up, bent over the man on the floor, and pulled him into a sitting position against the wall beneath the Foe-Glass, in which the reflections of Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall were still glaring down upon them all



Three times - it's as if JKR is impressing that upon Harry's mind - look, look, look!

That certainly means that Snape was Crouch Junior's enemy and he wasn't helping him, but he was able to justify being Quirrell's enemy to Voldemort and Bellatrix, so I don't think this alone is conclusive evidence. Very interesting, though!

Remember - Dumbledore told Harry not to speak to anyone else in the Order that night of the Tower, except Snape. And Harry is the only one who knows that - he never told the Order that in the Hospital Wing - he only said negative things about Snape.
Everyone knew that Dumbledore trusted Snape. So it would not make any difference, in my opinion, whether Harry told everyone that Dumbledore sent him to find Snape or not. I don't understand what this detail would have proven.

Everyone knew that Dumbledore trusted Snape. So it would not make any difference, in my opinion, whether Harry told everyone that Dumbledore sent him to find Snape or not. I don't understand what this detail would have proven.

The detail that he sent for Snape is, as you say, not news at all, since everyone knows Snape was trusted by him. The exclusivity is what is odd. His initial insistence on Snape rather than Pomfrey or Slughorn could be attributed to a belief that Snape is more highly skilled in the relevant aspects of Potions and Dark Arts to deal with whatever the green potion was doing to Dumbledore.

His continued, emphatic insistence upon their return to the school that Harry go get Snape, and noone else, tell Snape what happened, and speak to/be seen by noone else, though, is suggestive. By that point Dumbledore (given his character) should not have been thinking about his own health problems alone (which is the boring reason to want Snape). He must have suspected Draco's plan was in motion, and still he wanted Snape and only Snape to deal with it. This could mean he knew about the Vow, that Snape was his source of information on Draco and his task, and certainly suggests the two of them had discussed Draco and how to handle him in detail.

I agree - that is a powerful scene. :agree: And good evidence that Snape is on Harry's side.

I recently read it again for a signature picture I was making of the foe glass, and it struck me that Snape is mentioned in the glass not once but three times! And each time he is mentioned with McGonagall and Dumbledore.


Harry, still staring at the place where Moody's face had been, saw Albus Dumbledore, Professor Snape, and Professor McGonagall looking back at him out of the Foe-Glass. He looked around and saw the three of them standing in the doorway, Dumbledore in front, his wand outstretched.

At that moment, Harry fully understood for the first time why people said Dumbledore was the only wizard Voldemort had ever feared. The look upon Dumbledore's face as he stared down at the unconscious form of Mad-Eye Moody was more terrible than Harry could have ever imagined. There was no benign smile upon Dumbledore's face, no twinkle in the eyes behind the spectacles. There was cold fury in every line of the ancient face; a sense of power radiated from Dumbledore as though he were giving off burning heat.

He stepped into the office, placed a foot underneath Moodys unconscious body, and kicked him over onto his back, so that his face was visible. Snape followed him, looking into the Foe-Glass, where his own face was still visible, glaring into the room. Professor McGonagall went straight to Harry.

. . . "Severus, you have the potion?"

Snape handed Dumbledore a small glass bottle of completely clear liquid: the Veritaserum with which he had threatened Harry in class. Dumbledore got up, bent over the man on the floor, and pulled him into a sitting position against the wall beneath the Foe-Glass, in which the reflections of Dumbledore, Snape, and McGonagall were still glaring down upon them all



Three times - it's as if JKR is impressing that upon Harry's mind - look, look, look!
Just a thought - aren't you supposed to see your foes in the Foe-glass? So wouldn't that mean Dumbledore, McGonagle, and Snape are Harry's foes? :wow:

No, I think it shows the enemies of the one who set it in it's place.

Now I'm wondering...what does fake Moody actually tell Harry about the Foe-glass? Because this could be the most ridiculous twist Jo Rowling ever came up with, if you always saw your foes in the Foe-glass, regardless of who set it up. It would also mean that Snape's worst enemy was himself.

Now I'm wondering...what does fake Moody actually tell Harry about the Foe-glass? Because this could be the most ridiculous twist Jo Rowling ever came up with, if you always saw your foes in the Foe-glass, regardless of who set it up. It would also mean that Snape's worst enemy was himself.
I agree with Emperor that it has to be only the person who set it up, as Dumbledore and McGonagall are obviously not Harry's foes.

But even if you were right and everyone did see their own foes we wouldn't know what Snape saw in the mirror because Harry would see his own foes and Snape would see his own, but as it's Harry's POV we'd only know what Harry's were unless Snape said what he saw. (ie. the Mirror of Erised--Harry didn't see what Ron saw, Ron had to tell him)

I was also wondering why Harry didn't see himself in the Foe-glass. Wouldn't he be a foe of Crouch Jr, even if Harry didn't know that's who fake Moody actually was?

I was also wondering why Harry didn't see himself in the Foe-glass. Wouldn't he be a foe of Crouch Jr, even if Harry didn't know that's who fake Moody actually was?

:D Me too! I just posted the Q in the Little Questions Thread (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=99899) since it doesn't have anything to do with Snape.

I was also wondering why Harry didn't see himself in the Foe-glass. Wouldn't he be a foe of Crouch Jr, even if Harry didn't know that's who fake Moody actually was?

It must have something to do with the magic of the foe-glass. I think that the foe-glass would only show Harry if Harry was after Crouch or hunting him, in other words a threat coming after him. The mirror shows threats getting closer, not only was Harry not a threat (couldn't reach his wand in time) but he didn't even know what was going on, nor was he coming after Crouch, he was sitting there in his office, tired, confused and had no way of reaching his wand in time.

It must have something to do with the magic of the foe-glass. I think that the foe-glass would only show Harry if Harry was after Crouch or hunting him, in other words a threat coming after him. The mirror shows threats getting closer, not only was Harry not a threat (couldn't reach his wand in time) but he didn't even know what was going on, nor was he coming after Crouch, he was sitting there in his office, tired, confused and had no way of reaching his wand in time.That´s a good explanation. Which, if it is the actual explanation of why Harry wasn´t in the Foe glass, does kind of devaluate this argument as a pro Good-Snape. Because Snape was, on orders of Dumbledore, besides McGonagall and Dumbledore himself, about to ruin Fake-Moody´s plan. That is, regardless of inner motives so to speak, Snape would have been considered a foe in Moody´s mind (and glass).

If the Foe glass works more deeply, recognizing people who are really on the opposing side, then it is an argument pro Good-Snape.

Then the explanation as to why Harry didn´t see himself could be much more simple, and admittedly a bit silly: Maybe Harry has seen himself but didn´t bother to mention it. Why mention seeing himself in a mirror.

But JKR keeps us in the dark on how exactly the glass works. Thus it can not really be used as ironclad proof for either side, IMO.

I believe that Snape is neither good or bad, but essentially works for himself. He'll do anything as long as it profits to him or at least gets him out of danger. Telling Voldy only half of the prophecy (when he clearly heard the full version) in order to send him to his downfall and, at the same time exact revenge from James, while requesting to Voldy that he lets Lily (who I think was his romantic interest back in the Hogwarts days) live... all these are actions of a mercenary. At least, that's what I've come to believe via the enlightening posts of CoS forumers. :hmm:

snape is good and i still hate him..i dont think it boils down to good or evil tho...snape is malicious and still holding grudges against his old classmates and Harry (the fruit of his classmates loins).

The reason I think Snape is still against voldemort is because Snape was arguing with Dumbledore by the Forbidden Forest. Harry thinks Snape was backing out of being a spy for the order but i thi nk snape did not want to kill dumbledore.

I think that Snape is evil. I don't think he killed Dumbledore to keep his cover or anything like that. He did it because he is working for Voldemort. Also, I don't think he will come back to the good side. I don't think he was ever part of the good side but was deceiving everyone the whole time.

Severus Snape is not good - no matter on which side he is. He needs to grow up and get over his past. He also needs to stop treating most children like dirt (this quality makes him something I cannot type in this forum). Even if he killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's order and even if he gives Harry vital information to stop Voldemort, he is NOT good. If he puts his life on the line for the good of the wizarding community, then he may have one redeeming characteristic. But, knowing what we know about this man who likes the Dark Arts, I think that would be out of character. It is already bad enough that he ripped his soul, for whatever reason, when he killed Dumbledore.

Would he "go back" to the good side assuming he left it in the first place? Only if it served him in any way. Severus seems to look out for himself above all else (from what we have seen with his treatment of children he doesn't like). If Jo proves me wrong in my thinking, then I will be disappointed in her making such an awful person a "hero."

It will sicken me if, after people read Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, people say "Snape was good" and "Snape is a hero." He is no such person in my book no matter what happens in the seventh book.

Would he "go back" to the good side assuming he left it in the first place? Only if it served him in any way. Severus seems to look out for himself above all else (from what we have seen with his treatment of children he doesn't like). If Jo proves me wrong in my thinking, then I will be disappointed in her making such an awful person a "hero."
I have to agree. Snape treated Harry horribly.

Harry will realize there are more questions than answers, and it isn't all cut and dried about Dumbledore's death.
you know what would be a devestating ending? if harry killed snape, only to find ouy he was on the good side the whole time.


There is not a "plan," as DD would never ask someone to commit AK and split their soul. However, DD would not beg snape for his life, as this implies that DD doesn't trust severus, which he does.

However, DD may have been asking Snape to do some kind of spy thing and protect him from the death eaters. In addition to being in a weakened physical state, DD was in weakened mental state as well. Regardless of if the potion targeted only his body, the effects caused strain on his mental prowess. He didn't know how snape could help him,
but he thought that Snape was the only one in the room he could trust to aide him in some way. He called only for snape because snape is the only one he trusts completely.

i agree Artemis_Fowl, Snape is a jerk, regardless of everything else.

snape is good and i still hate him..i dont think it boils down to good or evil tho...snape is malicious and still holding grudges against his old classmates and Harry (the fruit of his classmates loins).

I won't deny that Snape has a malicious side. One of the reasons he appeals to me as a character is because he has deeply human flaws that make him so psychologically plausible - if everything bad about him is explained away at the end, it will be an unrealistic and unsatisfying ending.

However, it's important to remember that the books are written from Harry's viewpoint, and things do not always turn out to be exactly as Harry perceives them. Certainly, Harry thinks that Snape holds a childish grudge against the Marauders just because he was jealous of them at school and/or they bullied him. The worst malice which he shows towards Lupin and Sirius, though, is in PoA, and throughout that novel he seems genuinely to believe that Sirius is a Death Eater, responsible for the deaths of the adult Potters and currently seeking to kill Harry. I think that anger and vengeance for the Potters' deaths at least partly motivates his malice towards Sirius, not just the schoolboy grudge.

Similarly, although Snape is undoubtedly guilty of being cruel and belittling to Harry on several occasion, I also believe that his behaviour is at times partly motivated by concern for Harry's safety. His eagerness to have Harry expelled from Hogwarts, for example, reminds me oddly of Dobby's attempts to keep Harry away from the school, for hsi own protection.

Harry being at Hogwarts under Dumbledore's protection is the safest place he could possibly be. Snape trying to get Harry expelled is in no way for Harry's protection.

Harry being at Hogwarts under Dumbledore's protection is the safest place he could possibly be.

You would think so, wouldn't you? And yet even Dumbledore doesn't wish Harry to remain at Hogwarts during the summer holidays, feeling that the need for Harry to maintain his blood protection is more important than escape from the cruel Dursleys. And, as I already said, Dobby doesn't trust Dumbledore to protect Harry in CoS - he wants him out of Hogwarts, and he is definitely not motivated by malice.

Moreover, Dumbledore knows that Harry has the strength to take on and defeat Voldemort. I suspect that Snape believes that he isn't up to the task, and would rather he grew up a Muggle, rather than live as the chosen one, marked out for attack by Voldemort - no matter how safe he is with Dumbledore around, if he grows up a wizard, he will have to fulfil the prophecy eventually, which will most definitely not be safe.

This is speculation, I agree, but there is plenty of canonical evidence of Snape acting to protect Harry, from countering Quirrell's curse at the Quidditch match and insisting on refereeing the next one in PS/SS, to his anger when Harry sneaks off to Hogsmeade without permission in PoA.

When I re-read PoA bearing in mind that Snape believes Sirius and Lupin are plotting to kill Harry from p 1, his words and actions seemed a lot less reprehensible. For example, when he comes into Lupin's study with the Wolfsbane on the first Hogsmeade weekend and finds Harry sitting there, he glares unpleasantly- on first read I assumed (as I believe we're misdirected to) he was being a bully to Harry yet again. On second read it seemed obvious that he glares because he's appalled and scared to find Harry alone with a man whom he suspects wants to kill him.

By the way, I'm not saying that Snape is never gratuitously nasty to Harry - he certainly handles things very badly and has zero inter-personal skills. I don't think he will come out of the last book an unambiguous hero.

Dumbledore has Harry return to the Dursleys every summer because of the protection there that lasts until he comes of age. As for Dobby, he wanted Harry away from Hogwarts because he knew about Lucius' plan to use the diary to open the Chamber of Secrets. Dobby was also a bit misguided, if passionate, about protecting Harry (rogue bludger, anyone?).

Snape wanting Harry to grow up as a Muggle would not affect Voldemort's desire to kill Harry, and without the wizarding skills Harry learns at Hogwarts, Harry would be even more vulnerable to attacks. So expelling Harry from the one place where he can learn to defend himself wouldn't be to his benefit.

As for Snape protecting Harry in PS, Dumbledore explains this at the end of the book, that he believed Snape was paying back his debt to James for saving his life, and that Snape felt he had evened by the score by the end of the year.

I think part of the disagreement here is defining Snape as just generally good or bad overall. There is a big difference between being a good person and having served the good side more than the bad when it all comes out in the wash. I believe the latter but definitely not the former.

I think part of the disagreement here is defining Snape as just generally good or bad overall. There is a big difference between being a good person and having served the good side more than the bad when it all comes out in the wash. I believe the latter but definitely not the former.

We moved onto discussing "good" or "bad" in terms of personality because some posters found the definition of "good" or "bad" in terms of loyalty to Voldemort or Dumbledore too restrictive.


I'm not arguing that Snape is generally good or bad overall. I don't believe in the concept of a "good person", anyway - in real life everybody has selfish or malicious moments - and, in my view, what makes JKR vastly superior to a lot of fantasy writers is that her characterisation reflects this. In terms of the way he treats other people, I'd accept that Snape is probably a lot closer to the "bad" end of the continuum than, say, Dumbledore or Hagrid. But I do think that by using an unreliable narrative viewpoint JKR is deliberately tricking us into viewing Snape, as Harry does, as being worse than he actually is.

As for Snape protecting Harry in PS, Dumbledore explains this at the end of the book, that he believed Snape was paying back his debt to James for saving his life, and that Snape felt he had evened by the score by the end of the year.

He does not, however, explain Snape's efforts to protect Harry in PoA and GoF. These efforts are largely ineffectual (in PoA he tries to protect Harry from the wrong people - Sirius and Lupin - and in GoF, despite spending most of the novel skulking around after Harry or "Moody" or both, having accurately detected the villain early on this time, he still fails to prevent Harry from falling into Voldemort's clutches) but in my view the fact that he follows Harry around and tries to prevent him from having adventures in Hogsmeade/after dorm lights out is an attempt to protect Harry, it's not just the senseless harrassment that Harry thinks it is.

So, yes, I think Snape is "good" in the sense of loyal to Dumbledore and the Order since realising he'd betrayed the Potters. I also think he's "good" as in genuinely trying to protect Harry. But I think he's "bad" in terms of being a difficult, spiteful, intimidating character who has limited respect for his students' feelings.

I agree, if you add a qualifier about him still being apt to switch sides again if it looks like Voldemort is winning, and if you consider that his driving force may be more his own well being than the greater good at this point.

I agree, if you add a qualifier about him still being apt to switch sides again if it looks like Voldemort is winning, and if you consider that his driving force may be more his own well being than the greater good at this point.

I don't think his driving force is the universal greater good, either, but I don't see him as being quite as fickle or focused on physical self-preservation as you do. I think his twin driving forces are personal loyalty to a small group of individuals (Dumbledore and at least one of the Potters) and emotional self-preservation (specifically, trying to get revenge for perceived slights and assuage or offload his latent guilt for a couple of very bad choices of his own which led to the Potters' deaths - (1) giving Voldemort the prophecy and (2) - possibly, this is just a theory - persuading DD that Sirius could not be trusted as Secret Keeper).

But I do think that by using an unreliable narrative viewpoint JKR is deliberately tricking us into viewing Snape, as Harry does, as being worse than he actually is.
But we do hear opinions of other characters and we see his treatment of Neville for instance. And we have JKR telling us he is a deeply horrible person and a bully of students among other things.

I do have many problems with the Snape is loyal to Dumbledore theories because they don’t fit with JKR’s moral issues and because they just don’t add up but I can see why people believe a scenario where he is nasty and loyal, even though I don’t believe it.

What I can’t see though is all the theories which somehow mean that the picture JKR paints for 6 books is not the real picture, that JKR for reasons unknown to mankind, somehow thinks that the character she shows is different from the real character in books she herself describes as being character driven. What I also can’t see is the apparent ease with which JKR’s quotes about Snape are disregarded. Deeply horrible, bully of students are not characterisations which indicate that the way Snape is pictured is worse then he actually is.

We are told in the first book that Snape hates Harry but he doesn’t want him dead. His actions and behaviour fit rather well with this. It would be nice if what canon tells us and show us is actually true…


On his current loyalties I still think that the vow is included for a reason. When Snape took the vow he promised to help Draco murder and if that failed to murder himself. He vowed to (help to) fulfil Voldemort’s wishes. There’s premeditated murder in a nutshell.
Could Snape know that Draco would fail for sure? He expected it but could he be certain? And if he wasn’t certain that Draco would fail what does it mean that he vowed to protect and watch over Draco while he fulfilled Voldemort’s wish?

It is all very well to come up with more or less elaborate plans about a deal between Snape and Dumbledore which include Snape killing Dumbledore but what about Draco’s efforts?

Snape could not know for certain that Draco would fail when Narcissa asked to help and protect him while Draco attempted to murder Dumbledore. Yet Snape agreed to do it. What good could possible come out of a scenario where Snape watched and protected Draco if the boy indeed did kill Dumbledore? This scenario is in play the moment Snape took the vow. How is this scenario reconcilable with a loyal to Dumbledore Snape?

But we do hear opinions of other characters

Which are by no means all negative, particularly where adults are concerned (e.g. "I trust Severus Snape", "I neither like nor dislike Severus")

What I also can’t see is the apparent ease with which JKR’s quotes about Snape are disregarded. Deeply horrible, bully of students are not characterisations which indicate that the way Snape is pictured is worse then he actually is.

I wasn't disregarding what JKR has said - I thought I made it clear that I accept that Snape is vindictive and malicious at least some of the time and I am certainly not arguing that his "real" character is totally different from the one that Harry sees. All I am arguing is that some (not all) of his apparently bullying behaviour could plausibly be attributed to less sadistic motives.

We are told in the first book that Snape hates Harry but he doesn’t want him dead. His actions and behaviour fit rather well with this. It would be nice if what canon tells us and show us is actually true…

Please don't be patronising. We are all intelligent adults who are quite capable of reading a book and don't deserve sarcastic comments every time our interpretation of canon slightly differs from yours.

As I recall, it is Quirrell who tells us that Snape hates Harry but doesn't want him dead. As with any statement by an individual character, there is always the possibility that the character is lying or mistaken (in fact, on rereading PoA recently, I found more than one point where even the third-person narrative actually blatantly says something that isn't true, written as it is from Harrry's limited perspective), but, in any case, the scenario which I have offered does not necessarily preclude Snape hating Harry. He could hate him, but still (for reasons yet to be revealed) be very concerned to protect him.

It is all very well to come up with more or less elaborate plans about a deal between Snape and Dumbledore which include Snape killing Dumbledore but what about Draco’s efforts?

From their converation on the tower, Dumbledore seems to have known all about Draco's efforts all along and feels certain, based on his knowledge of Draco's character, that he will not be able to carry them through. I assume that Snape thinks likewise.

But I do think that by using an unreliable narrative viewpoint JKR is deliberately tricking us into viewing Snape, as Harry does, as being worse than he actually is.
There is an old saying, "Actions speak louder than words." Snape's actions throughout the 6 books show that he is not a nice guy. This concept of a "Harry filter" which essentially says that you can't trust the character because Harry has put his own spin on it, can only go so far. Snape's actions are there on the page. What we don't know are his motivations, his intentions, his thoughts and his plans. But his actions show that he is a spiteful bully.

But what exactly makes you think he is evil? what did he do that shows it?
Umm, let me think, I don't know, maybe just a little something called, KILLING DUMBLEDORE!! sheesh, why do people still think he's good anyway? i havn't found one shard of evidence that shows that he's good. Not one. Ever. He sux.

I'm not entirely sure that Snape has really helped Harry in actual life threatening situations. When Harry is staring down death Snape is nowhere to be found. Sometimes he shows up later with an "Aw shucks I missed it, darn I was tring to help, suspend Harry". His help has been little things in the overall scheme. This, I believe, to be just to keep up appearances. Ok, DD wasn't there for some of the life threatening situations either, but in Hogwarts DD doesn't have to be present to help.

The end of HBP has always interested me. He could have just waved Harry's attacks off and fled. He definately wanted to mess with Harry more , but he could have turned around and just displayed his power by waving them off, but he definately showed Harry how important it is to close your mind in a duel. Before then Harry didn't know how much an open mind showed people what you are going to do. He didn't understand it. That was big for Harry. I'm big on Snape's evil, never good, but maybe he does see the danger of Voldy. Maybe he does not want to live under Voldy's rule. Just because he is evil does not mean that he likes Voldy, or wants to be a death eater. He might help Harry defeat Voldy in DH, but that does not make him good or redeem him.

There is an old saying, "Actions speak louder than words." Snape's actions throughout the 6 books show that he is not a nice guy. This concept of a "Harry filter" which essentially says that you can't trust the character because Harry has put his own spin on it, can only go so far. Snape's actions are there on the page. What we don't know are his motivations, his intentions, his thoughts and his plans. But his actions show that he is a spiteful bully.

But I believe his actions DO speak louder than words - which is why I htink he is 'good'. It is possible that he 'returned' and spied on Voldemort 'at great personal risk'. He protected Harry in PS/SS, tried to do so again in PoA and GoFG, did so in OotP when he sent the Order to the Ministry, and saved the lives of Dumbledore, Katie Bell, and Draco Malfoy in HBP. In GoF he resumed his spying. These are good actions.

But I believe his actions DO speak louder than words - which is why I htink he is 'good'. It is possible that he 'returned' and spied on Voldemort 'at great personal risk'. He protected Harry in PS/SS, tried to do so again in PoA and GoFG, did so in OotP when he sent the Order to the Ministry, and saved the lives of Dumbledore, Katie Bell, and Draco Malfoy in HBP. In GoF he resumed his spying. These are good actions.
In my personal opinion if we value strict actions (without the underlying motivations) then his 'bad actions' are more predominant than his 'good actions'.

We have on one side:


Trying to save Harry in PS (but failing)
Trying to save the Trio in PoA (but failing again)
Making wolfsbane potion for Lupin
Helping to catch Barty Jr
Spying for Dumbledore and the Order under great personal risk (assuming that this is the case)
Making fake Veritaserum (assuming he did, we don't know because Harry never drank it)
Warning the Order about Harry in the Ministry in OotP (for me the strongest indicator that he's on the good side)
Curing Draco

So all those are details (except for the orderwarning part) that didn't make a great change.

On the other side we have:


Becoming a Death Eater
Spying on Dumbledore
Delivering the prophecy to Voldemort, which leads indirectly to the Potters death.
Generally unfair treatment of all houses except Slytherin
Frightening Neville
And last but not least: killing Dumbledore.

These actions are major actions with a major consequence on the plot (except the unfair treatment).
So if we look at these things without the motivations and reasons, then Snapes actions are more bad than good.

The reasons are what makes the difference. If there is some reason to kill Dumbledore, if there is a vow, a life depht, anything that justifies those actions, then he will be on the good side. If there is not, or more, if the reasons are those we've already seen (his explanation in Spinners end) then he is a bad guy.

I was over at the local Borders bookstore yesterday and as I approached the double doors I noticed that they had two posters, one on each door, advertising Deathly Hallows. One of them Said Snape as Friend? and the other said Snape as Foe? I guess they are really hyping up the interest around the Half Blood Prince.

I think that Snape will save Harry from Voldemort in the end. Many people would use this action to define Snape as good. And of course it will be a good action. But it doesn't negate the bad things he has done in the past. And therefore lies the biggest controversy. How do you define a person? Do ten bad actions and three good ones make him good? Do ten bad actions and three good ones make him bad? (I just made up those numbers, just to try to illustrate a point).

Draco was put in a difficult situation. Dumbledore had a plan to save him. He could have hid Draco, his mother and possibly his father from Voldemort and therefore sparing their lives. This plan would have taken Draco out of the clutches of Voldemort and may even have delivered Draco from a path of crime. This is what Dumbledore's plan was.

Snape took a different path to saving Draco. His path saved Draco from death. But his plan does not save Draco from Voldemort. Draco is now more firmly entrenched then he ever was before.

No matter what may have transpired between Snape and Dumbledore, Draco is now a criminal and will be punished.

He does not, however, explain Snape's efforts to protect Harry in PoA and GoF. These efforts are largely ineffectual (in PoA he tries to protect Harry from the wrong people - Sirius and Lupin - and in GoF, despite spending most of the novel skulking around after Harry or "Moody" or both, having accurately detected the villain early on this time, he still fails to prevent Harry from falling into Voldemort's clutches) but in my view the fact that he follows Harry around and tries to prevent him from having adventures in Hogsmeade/after dorm lights out is an attempt to protect Harry, it's not just the senseless harrassment that Harry thinks it is.
But Snape explains all this to Bellatrix in Spinner's End.


I think that Snape will save Harry from Voldemort in the end.
I believe Harry will face and defeat Voldemort alone without anybody saving him, although he will receive help from his friends and the Order.

I think that Snape will save Harry from Voldemort in the end. Many people would use this action to define Snape as good. And of course it will be a good action. But it doesn't negate the bad things he has done in the past. And therefore lies the biggest controversy. How do you define a person? Do ten bad actions and three good ones make him good? Do ten bad actions and three good ones make him bad? (I just made up those numbers, just to try to illustrate a point).

To me, it is the underlying intention of the actions. When Snape, motivated by whatever reasons that have not been revealed, became a Death Eater, and did whatever evil things he did, including reporting the prophecy, I would have labelled him 'bad'.

When he woke up one morning and realized he truly regretted this (yes, I am assuming here, but it is what I believe) and went on to try and make up for it (which I believe to be his motivation since then, in the broadest terms), that changed. Being mean to Harry and Neville is not a good thing, (and does not further what I believe to be Snape's primary goal) but saving lives, or trying to, sometimes at the risk of one's own, just strikes me as a much bigger deal.

Obviously, this sort of judgment is not objective - it reflects what I value and consider important, and other people may disagree with me.

But Snape explains all this to Bellatrix in Spinner's End.

So what we have, basically, is an agreement that Snape has done good things, and a disagreement as to motive. If as you say he did the bare minimum to keep Dumbledore's trust and is happy to be back serving the revived Voldemort, he's bad. If he lied to Bella and his motive was actually to protect Harry because of his guilt and desire to make restitution, less so. The problem is that he could not say that to Bella, it would get him killed, so we can't assume he was telling the truth. (Or lying, naturally.:D )

Just curious - what is your expectation regarding Snape's role and fate in DH?

This discussion reminds me of a movie I saw the other day, where on the commentary the director was explaining that the main villian actually believed his actions were right, and didn't see himself as a villian or his actions as being wrong (the villian kidnapped a doctor's daughter, believing that the doctor had been responsible for the death of the kidnapper's daughter).

Just an example of how a character can do the wrong thing for what they believe are the right reasons, maybe that's somehow related to Snape?

I think Snape's going to end up being a good guy, and I really hate that!! Snape has been a great villian. I personally think that Snape is going to kill Draco...to keep him from killing someone else - maybe Ron or Hermione? I think that with the upcoming book we will learn a lot more about Snape's tragic past, and why being called a coward about pushed him over the edge.

It's interesting how Snape is so good at controlling his emotions, but when he does lose control, look out: his tantrum at the end of PoA when Sirius got free, and at the end of HBP when Harry called him a coward. Sanpe seems to live from one extreme to the other.

I would add OotP to your list, Daemon_in_a_Box, when he finds Harry in his Pensieve memory.

I think Snape is an emotional person who has gotten himself into bad situations as a result of this in his life. So he's decided the way to deal with this is to suppress all of his emotions, which is actually not possible, hence the outbursts.

In all three incidents, though, he is not completely out of control. In the HBP one, we see he could have done any spell at all to Harry at that moment - Harry was unarmed and defenseless. For whatever reason, Voldemort's orders or a motive of his own, he refrains from an Unforgivable.

In the end of PoA, I believe he also stays in control. WHen Dumbledore clues him in that he approved Harry's rescue of Sirius, he leaves the room. He could have explained it to Fudge, in my opinion, but did not because he was still in some control of himself. (I've given no thought for his bad Snape motive here, but don't doubt someone could come up with one.)

"Well, there you have it, Severus," said Dumbledore calmly. "Unless you are suggesting that Harry and Hermione are able to be in two places at once, I'm afraid I don't see any point in troubling them further."

Snape stood there, seething, staring from Fudge, who looked thoroughly shocked at his behavior, to Dumbledore, whose eyes were twinkling behind his glasses. Snape whirled about, robes swishing behind him, and stormed out of the ward.


And in OotP, I believe he throws Harry bodily away from himself because he recognizes the danger that if he doesn't, he might do something even more regrettable.

In my personal opinion if we value strict actions (without the underlying motivations) then his 'bad actions' are more predominant than his 'good actions'.

We have on one side:


Trying to save Harry in PS (but failing)
Trying to save the Trio in PoA (but failing again)
Making wolfsbane potion for Lupin
Helping to catch Barty Jr
Spying for Dumbledore and the Order under great personal risk (assuming that this is the case)
Making fake Veritaserum (assuming he did, we don't know because Harry never drank it)
Warning the Order about Harry in the Ministry in OotP (for me the strongest indicator that he's on the good side)
Curing Draco

So all those are details (except for the orderwarning part) that didn't make a great change.
I would make a few modifications here. For example, there's good reason to believe he never told Voldemort that Dumbledore has a pensieve. Also, according to Quirrellmort, Snape's counterjinx during Harry's first Quidditch match saved Harry's life, it wasn't just a detail. In GoF, Snape showed his Dark Mark to Fudge, which should have been certain proof that Voldemort was back and which would almost certainly make Voldemort very angry at Snape if Voldemort knew. There's also a lot of indication that he warned Dumbledore and the Potters that Voldemort was after Harry, though we don't know that for sure. There's a lot of things that Dumbledore knows and that seem like he could only know them through Snape spying. And don't forget that he saved Katie Bell and Dumbledore's lives too.

I would also add that getting all the DEs out of Hogwarts ASAP is a very good thing.

Teaching Harry Occlumency could go on either side, but given that Dumbledore ordered it, I think it makes sense to go on the good side.

On the other side we have:


Becoming a Death Eater
Spying on Dumbledore
Delivering the prophecy to Voldemort, which leads indirectly to the Potters death.
Generally unfair treatment of all houses except Slytherin
Frightening Neville
And last but not least: killing Dumbledore.

These actions are major actions with a major consequence on the plot (except the unfair treatment).
So if we look at these things without the motivations and reasons, then Snapes actions are more bad than good.
I don't think it's fair to include the 1st 3 as arguments that he's bad since everyone agrees that at the time he did all 3 of those things.

It would also be fair to add to the list of bad things that he spied on the Order for Voldemort (post GOF), most significantly supposedly giving Voldemort information that led to the death of Emmeline Vance.

The reasons are what makes the difference. If there is some reason to kill Dumbledore, if there is a vow, a life depht, anything that justifies those actions, then he will be on the good side. If there is not, or more, if the reasons are those we've already seen (his explanation in Spinners end) then he is a bad guy.
Interestingly, I personally think that some of these actions make his reasons pretty clear. Most everything on both lists can be explained by his role as a double agent or his psychological issues that make him mean even if he's on the good side, etc. All the things on the bad list, though, with the possible exception of the Emmeline Vance stuff, are known to the good guys. Some of the things on the good list are not apparently known to the bad guys. For example, there's no indication that Voldemort and Bellatrix know that Snape sent the Order to the Ministry in OotP. The bad guys don't seem to know that needs to be explained. The bad guys don't seem to know that Dumbledore has the means to show Harry the exact prophecy (i.e. that Dumbledore has a pensieve). I can't reasonably explain those things if Snape is loyal to Voldemort. To me, sending the Order to the Ministry has to mean that his motivation is to help Harry and/or stop Voldemort from obtaining the prophecy, which is Voldemort's top goal at the time.

Draco was put in a difficult situation. Dumbledore had a plan to save him. He could have hid Draco, his mother and possibly his father from Voldemort and therefore sparing their lives. This plan would have taken Draco out of the clutches of Voldemort and may even have delivered Draco from a path of crime. This is what Dumbledore's plan was.
And given that Dumbledore knew about the Unbreakable Vow and all, I think it's fair to assume that it was Snape's plan as well, before the Tower scene happened.

Snape took a different path to saving Draco. His path saved Draco from death. But his plan does not save Draco from Voldemort. Draco is now more firmly entrenched then he ever was before.
I feel like we must have discussed this before. Given the situation that Snape came upon, how could he have acted differently on the tower in order to benefit Draco more? I think he had no choice but to do what he did in order to save Draco and get the Death Eaters out of Hogwarts ASAP.

No matter what may have transpired between Snape and Dumbledore, Draco is now a criminal and will be punished.
What's to stop Draco from following a course like Snape or Karkaroff, striking a deal to help the good guys and thus avoiding punishment? The actual concept of "turning state's evidence," etc seems to be applicable in wizarding law too. I think it's fair to assume that what Karkaroff did as a DE in the first war was at least as bad as what Draco's done now.

at this point, I have no idea..i want to believe that he is good, but at th same time i don't think that he is..very tragic...all the same, if he is good, then yeah, he will come back to the good side...

I would also add that getting all the DEs out of Hogwarts ASAP is a very good thing.
But Snape was fleeing the castle as the Order continued their battle with the Death Eaters. Snape seemed more interested in escaping than making sure all the Death Eaters had left.


What's to stop Draco from following a course like Snape or Karkaroff, striking a deal to help the good guys and thus avoiding punishment? The actual concept of "turning state's evidence," etc seems to be applicable in wizarding law too. I think it's fair to assume that what Karkaroff did as a DE in the first war was at least as bad as what Draco's done now.
I don't know if Draco has enough to offer in exchange for a deal. He led Death Eathers into Hogwarts and was indirectly responsible for Dumbledore's death. That boy is in deep trouble, and if Scrimgeour is willing to toss Stan Shunpike into Azkaban for doing nothing, imagine what he would do to Draco to make the Ministry look good.

But Snape was fleeing the castle as the Order continued their battle with the Death Eaters. Snape seemed more interested in escaping than making sure all the Death Eaters had left.
Except maybe Greyback (was he arrested? did he leave?) Snape was the last to leave. He prevented the others from attacking Harry and urged them on their way before leavoing himself. This could be, if he's bad, simply his confidence that he's the guy best suited to take the rearguard, but the fact remains that he left last. It could be for 'good' motives as well.

That boy is in deep trouble, and if Scrimgeour is willing to toss Stan Shunpike into Azkaban for doing nothing, imagine what he would do to Draco to make the Ministry look good.

I would expect Draco to seek the protection of Harry/the Order in DH, not the Ministry. After the war, he can go to jail, or make the duress defense (it is apparently true that at the end, Voldemort was threatening to kill his mother). He was also a minor for most of the year, unlike Stan.

I keep thinking about Snape.

The key points I can't shake are these:

[] Dumbledore trusted Snape, even when repeatedly challenged
[] Snape never attacked Harry, much less tried to kill him or even capture him
[] Snape was clearly provoked by the Marauders

but also

[] Snape loves to torment Harry and his friends
[] Snape never treated Dumbledore as if he was a friend
[] We have yet to meet a noble Slytherin


** sigh **

And given that Dumbledore knew about the Unbreakable Vow and all, I think it's fair to assume that it was Snape's plan as well, before the Tower scene happened. This is where we differ. I don't think that Dumbledore knew about the third part of the Unbreakable Vow. But that discussion belongs elsewhere.

I feel like we must have discussed this before. Given the situation that Snape came upon, how could he have acted differently on the tower in order to benefit Draco more? We have had this discussion before, or at least I have addressed this before. Snape was forced to act as he did on the Tower because he took the unbreakable vow in Spinners End. Even if there was not a single death eater on the tower, he would still have to kill Dumbledore at that point. What's to stop Draco from following a course like Snape or Karkaroff, striking a deal to help the good guys and thus avoiding punishment? The actual concept of "turning state's evidence," etc seems to be applicable in wizarding law too. I think it's fair to assume that what Karkaroff did as a DE in the first war was at least as bad as what Draco's done now. Draco could certainly do that.

Even if there was not a single death eater on the tower, he would still have to kill Dumbledore at that point.

No, he would have to do that or die, with no other consequences to anyone else.

Except maybe Greyback (was he arrested? did he leave?) Snape was the last to leave. He prevented the others from attacking Harry and urged them on their way before leavoing himself. This could be, if he's bad, simply his confidence that he's the guy best suited to take the rearguard, but the fact remains that he left last. It could be for 'good' motives as well.
Greyback wasn't the only Death Eater fighting the Order as Harry chased Snape through the castle. Also, I believe the brother/sister Death Eaters were well behind Snape, and Harry took a short cut to get past them and catch up with Snape. The only reason Snape was the last to leave was because he stopped to confront Harry, while the other Death Eaters passed them. If Harry hadn't caught up with Snape, he would have left the grounds long before the other Death Eaters.


This is where we differ. I don't think that Dumbledore knew about the third part of the Unbreakable Vow. But that discussion belongs elsewhere.
I think it's very questionable what Dumbledore really knew about the Vow. He refused to discuss it with Harry, and we really don't know what exactly Snape told Dumbledore, if anything (although someone apparently told Dumbledore something).

No, he would have to do that or die, with no other consequences to anyone else.
Why did Snape stun Flitwick?

We have had this discussion before, or at least I have addressed this before. Snape was forced to act as he did on the Tower because he took the unbreakable vow in Spinners End. Even if there was not a single death eater on the tower, he would still have to kill Dumbledore at that point.

But assume for a moment that there was no vow. What could Snape have done on the tower that would be better for Draco? Dumbledore's almost certainly about to be killed. If Dumbledore could have fought off the Death Eaters, he should have done it by the time Snape arrived. The DEs on the tower are waiting around for Draco to kill him, but that's not going to happen and good-side Snape would want to prevent Draco from becoming a murderer. Downstairs, DEs are using Avada Kedavra all over the place and children are in danger. Vow or no vow, given the situation that Snape came upon, he did what was best for everyone except himself.

Given the vow, his course of action has the added advantage of preserving his life.

The point you made to which I was responding was that Dumbledore and Snape took different approaches to protecting Draco, and Dumbledore's plan was better in that Draco would live AND be separated from Voldemort. My point is that for all we know, before the tower scene, Snape was trying to accomplish the same thing as Dumbledore despite the vow. Once Snape arrived on the tower, separating Draco from Voldemort was no longer possible, and Snape took the course of action that was best for Draco.

Similarly, I believe that the vow was an effort to look out for Draco's best interest and that Dumbledore and Snape were each prepared to give up their lives for Draco and that Snape knew it. Taking the vow seemed like it would provide Snape with the necessary trust from Draco so that Dumbledore (and Snape) could fully protect Draco (and everyone else who might be hurt in Draco's plan).

I think it's interesting that Snape surveyed the scene (very briefly) and Dumbledore had the chance to say, "Severus, please" before Snape did it. I haven't thought much about what evil Snape would be thinking about, but I think the slight pause amounts to Snape making sure there was no other way out of the situation. It seems to me that evil Snape would have cursed Dumbledore instantly and without a moment's hesitation, particularly because it's not completely clear to me how long Snape could have waited before the vow would kill him for not acting.

Assuming for a moment that there is no vow, Snape killing Dumbledore doesn't help Draco one bit. He had other options. He could have tried stalling for time. Perhaps use a spell that would somehow incapacitate or distract the other Death Eaters long enough to at least get Draco out of there. Maybe even try to save Dumbledore; anything but simply kill him. The only way to truly keep Draco safe is to hide him from Voldemort, and Snape can still do this with or without Dumbledore's help (although it would have been easier with Dumbledore alive). By killing Dumbledore, Snape did what was best for himself; otherwise he probably would have been forced to fight the other Death Eaters.

So with or without the Vow, Snape acted in his own best interest by killing Dumbledore.

Evil Snape would also have surveyed the scene before acting, considering he was about to blow the cover that he had maintained for so many years. So it wouldn't make sense for Snape to simply curse Dumbledore the instant he saw him. He would have to be completely sure that Dumbledore would not be able to fight back. It was a huge decision that would forever change his life.

What I also can’t see is the apparent ease with which JKR’s quotes about Snape are disregarded. Deeply horrible, bully of students are not characterisations which indicate that the way Snape is pictured is worse then he actually is.
Yes, I think Jo makes it quite clear what she thinks of Snape's personality and his behaviour with the students. She's very cagey about his loyalties, but definite enough about him being a "deeply horrible" person. JKR: OK. Snape is the - er - very sadistic teacher loosely based on a teacher I myself had, I have to say. Erm .. I think it ... Children are very aware - and we ... we're kidding ourselves if we don't think that they are - that teachers do sometimes abuse their power and this particular teacher /does/ abuse his power. He is not a - he is not a particularly pleasant person at all. /However/, everyone should keep their eye on Snape, I'll just say that, because there's more to him than meets the eye, and you will find out part of what I'm talking about if you read book four. And no, I am not trying to drum up more sales; go to the library and get it out, I'd rather people read it.

Lydon: Er - one of our connec- ... one of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love?

JKR: Yeah? Who on earth would want Snape in love with them, that is a very horrible idea. Erm ...

Lydon: But you'd get an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape

JKR: It is, isn't it ... I got ... There's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it'd ruin ... I promise you ... whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm - I'm slightly stunned that you've said that - erm - and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read book 7. And that's all I'm going to say.

link (http://www.accio-quote.org/articles/1999/1099-connectiontransc2.htm#p13)This quote proves that Snape is more than just a sadistic bully. In book 4 we find out he was a Death Eater, but the "redemptive pattern" remains to be revealed. I really, really, really can't wait for book 7!

He could have tried stalling for time.
How? What good would that do?

Perhaps use a spell that would somehow incapacitate or distract the other Death Eaters long enough to at least get Draco out of there.
Assuming such a spell exists, why didn't we see anything like it in the battle at the Ministry or at the bottom of the tower? Is Snape that much more powerful than McGonagall, Lupin, Sirius, Mad Eye, Tonks, Bill, and Kingsley, etc? And that doesn't improve Draco's situation any, since Draco apparated away himself as it is, so anywhere he could have gone that way, he could have gone as it is. He'd be no better off than if Draco had just given up on the task -- Voldemort would have killed him and Narcissa.

Maybe even try to save Dumbledore; anything but simply kill him.
Does anyone else believe it would have made sense for Snape, absent the vow, to try to save Dumbledore? I think that would have been completely pointless and counterproductive. The DEs would win and he and Dumbledore would both die. Who knows what would happen to Draco? Greyback might have been inclined to stick around and bite more people.

The only way to truly keep Draco safe is to hide him from Voldemort, and Snape can still do this with or without Dumbledore's help (although it would have been easier with Dumbledore alive).
Given the situation on the tower, I still don't see how you think this is possible.

By killing Dumbledore, Snape did what was best for himself; otherwise he probably would have been forced to fight the other Death Eaters.
Can we at least agree that if good Snape were to fight the DEs and lose, it's worse for the good side? So you're saying you think Snape could win or at least hold off the DEs long enough to save Draco and himself?

So with or without the Vow, Snape acted in his own best interest by killing Dumbledore.
Is it better to be dead or to be a murderer? I tend to think it's better to be dead, and I think Dumbledore would agree with that. We know Voldemort doesn't...

Evil Snape would also have surveyed the scene before acting, considering he was about to blow the cover that he had maintained for so many years. So it wouldn't make sense for Snape to simply curse Dumbledore the instant he saw him. He would have to be completely sure that Dumbledore would not be able to fight back. It was a huge decision that would forever change his life.
I don't think I completely agree, but that's reasonable enough.

But assume for a moment that there was no vow. What could Snape have done on the tower that would be better for Draco? Dumbledore's almost certainly about to be killed. If Dumbledore could have fought off the Death Eaters, he should have done it by the time Snape arrived. The DEs on the tower are waiting around for Draco to kill him, but that's not going to happen and good-side Snape would want to prevent Draco from becoming a murderer. Downstairs, DEs are using Avada Kedavra all over the place and children are in danger. Vow or no vow, given the situation that Snape came upon, he did what was best for everyone except himself.I almost hate to even answer this, since we are so far apart on this issue. But, many things would have been different if there wasn't a vow. If Spinner's End had never happened and Draco had been trying all year to kill Dumbledore, a good Snape, upon hearing that Death Eaters were in the castle, would certainly not have stunned Flitwick. After all, he was the Charms teacher. He may be short, but he certainly knows a few charms to use in battle. A good Snape may even had called Hermione and Luna to the battle. After all, they are seasoned veterans. A good Snape who didn't take the vow may even have helped McGonagel and the other Order members. A good Snape who had not taken the vow would have stunned a few Death Eaters on his way to the tower. He may even have taken some reinforcements. A good Snape would not have killed Dumbledore. He would have used the element of surprise to his advantage. A little levicorpus, a few expelliarmus, and then some other nasty things, and he could have been in charge.

But it is all moot point anyway. Snape took the unbreakable vow. He acted accordingly.

Oh, and most importantly, Snape didn't have to save Draco. Draco was perfectly safe on the Tower with the Death Eaters.

Yes, I think Jo makes it quite clear what she thinks of Snape's personality and his behaviour with the students. She's very cagey about his loyalties, but definite enough about him being a "deeply horrible" person.This quote proves that Snape is more than just a sadistic bully. In book 4 we find out he was a Death Eater, but the "redemptive pattern" remains to be revealed. I really, really, really can't wait for book 7!
I think JKR's quotes make it pretty clear that Snape isn't just pretending to be mean. His actions in the shrieking shack in POA are very telling to me--ignoring reason, festering grudge, desire for glory, etc.

True Death Eater or not I do not think Snape's a fantastic guy who I'd love to know! I don't think that Snape will turn out to be a "hero", but I think he will have a pivotal 'move' to make.


I almost hate to even answer this, since we are so far apart on this issue. But, many things would have been different if there wasn't a vow. If Spinner's End had never happened and Draco had been trying all year to kill Dumbledore, a good Snape, upon hearing that Death Eaters were in the castle, would certainly not have stunned Flitwick. After all, he was the Charms teacher. He may be short, but he certainly knows a few charms to use in battle. A good Snape may even had called Hermione and Luna to the battle. After all, they are seasoned veterans. A good Snape who didn't take the vow may even have helped McGonagel and the other Order members. A good Snape who had not taken the vow would have stunned a few Death Eaters on his way to the tower. He may even have taken some reinforcements. A good Snape would not have killed Dumbledore. He would have used the element of surprise to his advantage. A little levicorpus, a few expelliarmus, and then some other nasty things, and he could have been in charge.

But it is all moot point anyway. Snape took the unbreakable vow. He acted accordingly.
It makes me wonder about Jo's train of reasoning.
If it started with: Dumbledore needs to die so Harry can go it alone...then, who would Voldemort have kill DD?... well, Draco needs to be 'tested'... But Snape would find a way to thwart his efforts... Thus, Snape needs something to tie his hands (:) literally) to move the plot along and retains the element of surprise for his true loyalty.

I almost hate to even answer this, since we are so far apart on this issue.
Yeah, wow, we are...

If Spinner's End had never happened and Draco had been trying all year to kill Dumbledore, a good Snape, upon hearing that Death Eaters were in the castle, would certainly not have stunned Flitwick.
Yeah, that one I'm not sure about. Didn't McGonagall specifically send Flitwick to get Snape, though? It's conceivable that both of them were trying to protect Flitwick, since he wasn't part of the Order and shouldn't be expected to risk his life against Voldemort's forces. That's a weak argument, but I doubt it would have made much difference.

Another possibility is that Snape thought it'd be necessary for Draco's safety, not knowing yet that Draco was relatively safe on the tower. Assuming he is on the bad side, why not use the element of surprise on, say, McGonagall on the way up to the tower? Why not stun Hermione and Luna?

A good Snape may even had called Hermione and Luna to the battle. After all, they are seasoned veterans.
I suppose that's conceivable, but it seems to me he'd want children far from the battle...

A good Snape who didn't take the vow may even have helped McGonagel and the other Order members. A good Snape who had not taken the vow would have stunned a few Death Eaters on his way to the tower. He may even have taken some reinforcements.
Half the point of the theory that Snape is good and killed Dumbledore on Dumbledore's orders is that Snape has to maintain his cover as a Death Eater. He's useless and almost sure to be killed if he attacks the Death Eaters because any that escape or get word out from Azkaban will know he's really a good guy.

Besides, he couldn't have taken any good side reinforcements up the tower because of the Dark Mark invisible wall thing.

A good Snape would not have killed Dumbledore.
I hardly think I need to re-explain why I disagree with this, but the fundamentally important point is that it's essentially certain that Dumbledore's going to die anyway.

He would have used the element of surprise to his advantage. A little levicorpus, a few expelliarmus, and then some other nasty things, and he could have been in charge.
And McGonagall's incapable of using stuff like that in the battle at the bottom of the tower? And Lupin and Tonks? The element of surprise only goes so far.

Oh, and most importantly, Snape didn't have to save Draco. Draco was perfectly safe on the Tower with the Death Eaters.
I would argue that part of the reason Draco got out safely is that Snape was escorting him, and the Order didn't know what had happened. If Snape hadn't gone up to the tower, Draco would be up there with 4 (was it 4?) DEs, unable to bring himself to kill Dumbledore. The battle would have gone on longer. Who knows what would have happened to Draco and everyone else.

And the bottom line for me is that none of these points you make explain why Draco's better off if Snape takes some other line of action, especially given the vow. And if the vow had allowed Snape to find out what Draco's plan was, it would have helped protect Draco. Snape seemed surprised that Draco wasn't trusting him, don't you think?

And the bottom line for me is that none of these points you make explain why Draco's better off if Snape takes some other line of action, especially given the vow. And if the vow had allowed Snape to find out what Draco's plan was, it would have helped protect Draco.

How did making the vow help snape help draco? If Snape had found out about Draco's plan, he certainly didn't tell dumbledore. The only time Snape helped Draco was at the end in taking him off to whereever, which he could've done without the vow. And the killing DD thing? Perhaps Snape could've told the DEs that it was draco or no one according to Voldemort. The vow did not in any way help draco.

This quote proves that Snape is more than just a sadistic bully.
He may turn out to be a lot worse.


How? What good would that do?
There were quite a few Order members trying to get the through the barrier on the stairs. Interesting that Snape didn't dispel the barrier (assuming he could) to allow the other Order members to join him on the Tower. Either way, stalling would have given Snape time to at least try to think of a solution, or give the others time to join him. Simply killing Dumbledore elimated both of these options.

Assuming such a spell exists, why didn't we see anything like it in the battle at the Ministry or at the bottom of the tower? Is Snape that much more powerful than McGonagall, Lupin, Sirius, Mad Eye, Tonks, Bill, and Kingsley, etc? And that doesn't improve Draco's situation any, since Draco apparated away himself as it is, so anywhere he could have gone that way, he could have gone as it is. He'd be no better off than if Draco had just given up on the task -- Voldemort would have killed him and Narcissa.
You can't think of a single spell that incapacitates or distracts? I mean, really? :relax:

As for improving Draco's situation, the only thing Snape could do is separate him from the other Death Eaters, which is exactly what Snape did. Now he can hide Draco from Voldemort if he chooses, as well as Narcissa. Otherwise, Voldemort will indeed probably kill both of them.


Does anyone else believe it would have made sense for Snape, absent the vow, to try to save Dumbledore? I think that would have been completely pointless and counterproductive. The DEs would win and he and Dumbledore would both die. Who knows what would happen to Draco? Greyback might have been inclined to stick around and bite more people.
Absent the vow, why not try to save Dumbledore? He's a powerful ally, as well as the only friend who trusted Snape. Why would Snape simply kill him if he didn't have to? Allies usually fight together, even if the odds are against them. Snape had many other options besides killing Dumbledore right off the bat. As for Draco, there's no reason to think the Death Eaters would kill him simply because Snape decided to fight them, unless Draco joined in on Snape's side.


Given the situation on the tower, I still don't see how you think this is possible.
Why do you think Snape is not capable of hiding Draco from Voldemort?


Can we at least agree that if good Snape were to fight the DEs and lose, it's worse for the good side? So you're saying you think Snape could win or at least hold off the DEs long enough to save Draco and himself?
Killing Dumbledore was definitely worse for the good side. And I think Snape is an excellent duelist. With the element of surprise, he might even hold his own for a while. Either way, I'd rather see an Order member fight Death Eaters and go down swinging instead of choosing to kill Dumbledore and then run away.


Is it better to be dead or to be a murderer? I tend to think it's better to be dead, and I think Dumbledore would agree with that. We know Voldemort doesn't...
Snape chose to be a murderer, so clearly he prefers that to being dead. He didn't have to take the Vow forcing him to kill Dumbledore. He didn't have to kill Dumbledore, but he did.


I hardly think I need to re-explain why I disagree with this, but the fundamentally important point is that it's essentially certain that Dumbledore's going to die anyway.
This is in no way certain. Dumbledore may have been dying from the potion he drank in the cave, or he may not. But Snape killed him, which took care of the matter.


And the bottom line for me is that none of these points you make explain why Draco's better off if Snape takes some other line of action, especially given the vow. And if the vow had allowed Snape to find out what Draco's plan was, it would have helped protect Draco. Snape seemed surprised that Draco wasn't trusting him, don't you think?
All the Vow did was make sure Snape died if Dumbledore didn't. Taking it was a huge mistake for Snape, if he is good. And I think Snape was more frustrated than surprised that Draco wouldn't confide with him.

Killing Dumbledore was definitely worse for the good side. And I think Snape is an excellent duelist. With the element of surprise, he might even hold his own for a while. Either way, I'd rather see an Order member fight Death Eaters and go down swinging instead of choosing to kill Dumbledore and then run away.

Snape chose to be a murderer, so clearly he prefers that to being dead. He didn't have to take the Vow forcing him to kill Dumbledore. He didn't have to kill Dumbledore, but he did.
.

exactly. In HBP Harry thinks:
It was the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high.
Dumbledore and Harry know the difference, but Snape doesn't seem to. KIlling Dumbledore, rather than fighting for DUmbledore's life, is not taking to low road, it seems to be a cowardly way of dealing.

It was the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high.
Awesome quote! :tu:

I see that as the difference between Snape and any other Order member, who would definitely do whatever they could to help Dumbledore on the Tower. While Snape's role as a double agent may be valuable, it only goes so far. Dumbledore's life was much more valuable than any information Snape might pick up as an informant.

And the bottom line for me is that none of these points you make explain why Draco's better off if Snape takes some other line of action, especially given the vow. And if the vow had allowed Snape to find out what Draco's plan was, it would have helped protect Draco. Snape seemed surprised that Draco wasn't trusting him, don't you think?The bottom line for me is that Dumbledore's death could not save Draco from Voldemort. Draco is now a Death Eater (according to JK Rowling, July 17, 2005). Dumbledore has no more control over Voldemort's Death Eaters than he does over Mundungus. Snape had no control over Draco. Voldemort does what he wants. Draco is at his mercy now.

The bottom line for me is that Dumbledore's death could not save Draco from Voldemort. Draco is now a Death Eater (according to JK Rowling, July 17, 2005). Dumbledore has no more control over Voldemort's Death Eaters than he does over Mundungus. Snape had no control over Draco. Voldemort does want he wants. Draco is at his mercy now.

Yes, yes. VERY good point. Voldemort's mind works one way: there's him and there's his inferiors. Dumbledore could hide Draco, and for a while, protect him. But eventually something would happen.

And if the vow had allowed Snape to find out what Draco's plan was, it would have helped protect Draco.

Also, Voldemort had supposedly told Severus the plan...

All in all, it was a much worse defeat for the Good side. The question is not, "will he come back?" it's "Will they let him?"

It was the difference between being dragged into the arena to face a battle to the death and walking into the arena with your head held high.
Dumbledore and Harry know the difference, but Snape doesn't seem to. KIlling Dumbledore, rather than fighting for DUmbledore's life, is not taking to low road, it seems to be a cowardly way of dealing.

I think Snape knows all about that.

"Severus," said Dumbledore, turning to Snape, "you know what I must ask you to do. If you are ready . . . if you are prepared ..."

"I am," said Snape.

He looked slightly paler than usual, and his cold, black eyes glittered strangely.

"Then good luck," said Dumbledore, and he watched, with a trace of apprehension on his face, as Snape swept wordlessly after Sirius.

I just don't see him as motivated by self-preservation. If he did change sides, it was when the side he was on was losing. In PoA, regardless of his motives (revenge, or whatever) he went into the tunnel and the Shack by himself, though he was outnumbered. He could have waited and contacted the Ministry/Dementors, but he wanted to do it himself, this was more important to him than his personal safety.

I think he is naturally a JERK but i think if he is GOOD than I figure he would have to maintain a HIGH level of hatred toward Harry, to keep his "allegiance" to LV. BUT I think that something seems fishy to me because everyone in the wizarding community completly belived that Voldie was dead.....soooo why would he have to keep up his hatred toward Harry if he truly was not evil. OR does he naturally hate Harry because he is the product of the women he could have possibly loved and the man that he "hated"????? OR did he along with DD know that LV was alive all along and knew what their future roles would be in this Saga? OR is he just plain Evil.......WELL MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS... hee hee

The bottom line for me is that Dumbledore's death could not save Draco from Voldemort. Draco is now a Death Eater (according to JK Rowling, July 17, 2005). Dumbledore has no more control over Voldemort's Death Eaters than he does over Mundungus. Snape had no control over Draco. Voldemort does what he wants. Draco is at his mercy now.
I absolutely agree, but the problem is that given the situation on the tower when Snape arrived, there's no way to avoid Dumbledore's death and there's no way to save Draco from Voldemort anymore. The best solution left for Draco is to keep him alive and get him out of Hogwarts ASAP.

I see that as the difference between Snape and any other Order member, who would definitely do whatever they could to help Dumbledore on the Tower. While Snape's role as a double agent may be valuable, it only goes so far. Dumbledore's life was much more valuable than any information Snape might pick up as an informant.
I tend to think that Dumbledore must have disagreed with you here, but I guess we'll find out in DH whether Dumbledore or Snape is going to be more valuable. Regardless, though, of course any other Order member would have fought the Death Eaters. No other Order member would have the option to do what Snape did. Any other Order member would be attacked and presumably killed on the spot.

There were quite a few Order members trying to get the through the barrier on the stairs. Interesting that Snape didn't dispel the barrier (assuming he could) to allow the other Order members to join him on the Tower.
Assuming that's possible (and I don't think it is) it could easily be argued that such an action would immediately result in Snape's death because it'd probably make things much worse for Draco.

You can't think of a single spell that incapacitates or distracts? I mean, really? :relax:
I'm saying no spell that incapacitates or distracts that we've seen would be enough to get Snape past all 4 (?) Death Eaters (and Draco?). If there were a spell that Snape could use for such a purpose, surely at least McGonagall would know it and things would have gone much better for the Order in the battle at the Ministry and at the bottom of the tower. I can't see why you think there's reason to believe that Snape could defeat 4 Death Eaters on his own when McGonagall seems to have made no headway against all the Death Eaters downstairs and so on. Besides, given the vow, Snape wouldn't stand a chance because he'd die from the vow if he attacked the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore.

Absent the vow, why not try to save Dumbledore?
1) Because he didn't stand a chance.
2) Because Dumbledore had told him not to.
3) Because it would jeopardize Draco's life.
4) Because his spying is going to be very valuable, and would no longer be possible even if he defeated the Death Eaters.

As for Draco, there's no reason to think the Death Eaters would kill him simply because Snape decided to fight them, unless Draco joined in on Snape's side.
There's the fact that if Dumbledore didn't die, Voldemort was going to kill Draco and Draco had just discovered he couldn't bring himself to kill Dumbledore. What do you think Voldemort's reaction would have been?

Why do you think Snape is not capable of hiding Draco from Voldemort?
Because if Snape had attacked the Death Eaters, he'd be dead. And if he tries to hide Draco from Voldemort after Dumbledore's death, he wouldn't be able to do it alone and wouldn't have support from the Order. There'd be no reasonable explanation to explain Draco's faked death, which was a key part of Dumbledore's plan to hide Draco.

With the element of surprise, he might even hold his own for a while.
I still don't get why you think this. Could McGonagall have held her own for a while, given the same element of surprise? Could Sirius or Lupin? Heck, even when Dumbledore arrived at the battle in the veil room in OotP, he couldn't just jump in and immediately defeat all the Death Eaters. It took him a while to swing the balance even with several other Order members there fighting with him.

And of course there's 0 chance given the vow.

Either way, I'd rather see an Order member fight Death Eaters and go down swinging instead of choosing to kill Dumbledore and then run away.
I only agree if the Order member stands a chance at saving Dumbledore.

This is in no way certain. Dumbledore may have been dying from the potion he drank in the cave, or he may not. But Snape killed him, which took care of the matter.
I don't actually even think Dumbledore was dying from the potion. I'm saying he's going to die anyway because he's wandless against 4 Death Eaters and apparently either unwilling or unable to defeat them. It's essentially certain, particularly given the vow, that Dumbledore cannot avoid being hit by a killing curse from a Death Eater.

And I think Snape was more frustrated than surprised that Draco wouldn't confide with him.
Frustrated or surprised or both, it's pretty clear that he expected Draco to confide in him, right?

Absent the vow, why not try to save Dumbledore?

1) Because he didn't stand a chance.
/agree
2) Because Dumbledore had told him not to.
We don't KNOW this for sure. We can guess from the "you know what you must do" passage (which I believe was talking about the double-agent role as a whole, and not specific to whether or not it would be necessary to kill DD to protect that role), from the discussion Hagrid overheard (much more likely to be a discussion of DD's possible death), and DD's "Severus please" on the tower.

I think it is likely that DD knew he was a goner, and told snape to keep the vow (I believe DD knew about it, even though we don't KNOW that either) and protect his double agent role no matter what.
3) Because it would jeopardize Draco's life.
Hmmm... Draco and/or his father are at the mercy of LV (what mercy?!?! that's a scary thought!) I suppose by getting Draco out of there, it gives him a chance at future repentance.
4) Because his spying is going to be very valuable, and would no longer be possible even if he defeated the Death Eaters.

Here's the real rub. How valuable is information from someone you don't trust? What is the liklihood that Harry will ever TRUST Snape?!?! Currently, Harry would like to KILL him if he could. Any information Snape gets will only be trusted if Snape can PROVE to the good guys which side he is on.

So, here's the question of the day: What would Snape have to do in order to PROVE to Harry and the others that he is still on their side? Is it even possible?

So, here's the question of the day: What would Snape have to do in order to PROVE to Harry and the others that he is still on their side? Is it even possible?

There are certainly ways in canon this can be achieved. Snape could, for example, take an Unbreakable Vow to tell Harry the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
That said, it would be a boring solution to the problem. I don't think it was the basis for Dumbledore's trust in Snape. And so I believe that if Harry does for whatever reason decide to trust something SNape says or does in Book 7, he will arrive at this decision using Dumbledore's methods, not Narcissa Malfoy's. :D

Daemon_in_a_Box -just so you know - Idabomb333 said all those things, not me. I think Snape is bad, not good. Maybe you can go back and correct your post :lol:
Oopsy. :lol:


I just don't see him as motivated by self-preservation. If he did change sides, it was when the side he was on was losing. In PoA, regardless of his motives (revenge, or whatever) he went into the tunnel and the Shack by himself, though he was outnumbered. He could have waited and contacted the Ministry/Dementors, but he wanted to do it himself, this was more important to him than his personal safety.
I think Snape was motivated by revenge and a chance to catch Black single-handedly.


Assuming that's possible (and I don't think it is) it could easily be argued that such an action would immediately result in Snape's death because it'd probably make things much worse for Draco.
If it was possible for Snape to dispel the barrier, he wouldn't have been standing alone when he reached the Tower, since the Order members would have been able to follow him. It would have made for a fair fight and Dumbledore might have been saved.

I'm saying no spell that incapacitates or distracts that we've seen would be enough to get Snape past all 4 (?) Death Eaters (and Draco?). If there were a spell that Snape could use for such a purpose, surely at least McGonagall would know it and things would have gone much better for the Order in the battle at the Ministry and at the bottom of the tower. I can't see why you think there's reason to believe that Snape could defeat 4 Death Eaters on his own when McGonagall seems to have made no headway against all the Death Eaters downstairs and so on. Besides, given the vow, Snape wouldn't stand a chance because he'd die from the vow if he attacked the Death Eaters instead of Dumbledore.
With the element of surprise, Snape could have probably taken out at least two. Maybe Draco would have helped him. Maybe Dumbledore could have done some wandless magic. Who knows? And again, Snape could have stalled for time, maybe lie that Voldemort had changed his plans, and wanted them to wait until Voldemort showed up to kill Dumbledore himself. He possibly could have dispelled the barrier. The point is that Snape had more options than simply killing Dumbledore. As for the Vow, it has nothing to do with Snape attacking Death Eaters, it just says he has to complete Draco's task if Draco fails. Was there a time limit on Draco's task? He had already failed several times to kill Dumbledore, but Snape didn't drop dead because of this. Why would Draco's failure on the Tower be any different? As long as Draco is alive, he can always try again to kill Dumbledore.

1) Because he didn't stand a chance.
Dumbledore had a chance, no matter how small. But Snape killing him gave Dumbledore 0% chance.

2) Because Dumbledore had told him not to.
We don't know this.

3) Because it would jeopardize Draco's life.
The Death Eaters werem't interested in killing Draco, and Snape trying to save Dumbledore's life would not make them want to kill Draco, unless Draco joined with Snape and attacked them.

4) Because his spying is going to be very valuable, and would no longer be possible even if he defeated the Death Eaters.
Dumbledore's life is more important. And speaking of Snape spying, have we actually seen any of the valuable information Snape is gathering for the Order? Just wondering.

There's the fact that if Dumbledore didn't die, Voldemort was going to kill Draco and Draco had just discovered he couldn't bring himself to kill Dumbledore. What do you think Voldemort's reaction would have been?

Because if Snape had attacked the Death Eaters, he'd be dead. And if he tries to hide Draco from Voldemort after Dumbledore's death, he wouldn't be able to do it alone and wouldn't have support from the Order. There'd be no reasonable explanation to explain Draco's faked death, which was a key part of Dumbledore's plan to hide Draco.
So according to your argument, Draco is dead no matter what. Voldemort will kill Draco because he couldn't bring himself to kill Dumbledore, and now that Dumbledore is dead, Snape lacks the ability to hide Draco. So Snape killing Dumbledore and running off with Draco accomplished nothing for Draco. Looks like the only person Snape saved was himself.

I only agree if the Order member stands a chance at saving Dumbledore.
So if one of the Order members appeared on the Tower, you wouldn't expect them to attack the Death Eaters? What would you suggest they do, turn tail and run? I seriously doubt anybody in the Order (besides Snape) would even think to do that, not even one of the students. They wouldn't leave Dumbledore to die, no matter what the odds were.

I don't actually even think Dumbledore was dying from the potion. I'm saying he's going to die anyway because he's wandless against 4 Death Eaters and apparently either unwilling or unable to defeat them. It's essentially certain, particularly given the vow, that Dumbledore cannot avoid being hit by a killing curse from a Death Eater.
Again, I don't see anybody in the Order (besides Snape) running away from a fight simply because they're outnumbered, especially if Dumbledore's life is on the line.

Frustrated or surprised or both, it's pretty clear that he expected Draco to confide in him, right?
Maybe not. It looks like Draco no longer sees Snape as a Mentor, which would probably frustrate Snape to no end.

We don't KNOW this for sure. We can guess from the "you know what you must do" passage (which I believe was talking about the double-agent role as a whole, and not specific to whether or not it would be necessary to kill DD to protect that role), from the discussion Hagrid overheard (much more likely to be a discussion of DD's possible death), and DD's "Severus please" on the tower.
Oh, I agree. I should have said it in my post, but I would not say we know for sure that Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill Dumbledore. I meant my list as POSSIBLE reasons that would explain Snape's actions.

So, here's the question of the day: What would Snape have to do in order to PROVE to Harry and the others that he is still on their side? Is it even possible?
I personally think it'll suffice when Harry learns the real reason why Dumbledore trusted Snape.

Here's the real rub. How valuable is information from someone you don't trust? What is the liklihood that Harry will ever TRUST Snape?!?! Currently, Harry would like to KILL him if he could. Any information Snape gets will only be trusted if Snape can PROVE to the good guys which side he is on.
That's an excellent point. Snape's days as a spy are over, because the Ministry and Order will probably kill him on sight, and not trust any information he might give. A spy has to have someone to report back to who trusts them, and in Snape's case that someone (Dumbledore) is dead.

I personally think it'll suffice when Harry learns the real reason why Dumbledore trusted Snape.

Hmmm... So now we have two more questions:

1) Why did DD trust Snape?

2) How could Harry find out?

Voldemort doesn't trust 16 year-olds, Draco follows the Death Eaters because they have Narcissa. And there are plenty of inmates in Azkaban that will kill Lucius if the boy should run for it. Draco is stuck and as such, so is Snape.

1) Why did DD trust Snape?
Well that's the million dollar question, n'est pas? :cool:

2) How could Harry find out?
I'm thinking Pensieve.

I think Snape was motivated by revenge and a chance to catch Black single-handedly.
I disagree but was not challenging the point (my post mentioned revenge as a motive). My point was that he was perfectly willing to confront his enemies two to one, which is inconsistent with a dominating interest in self-preservation. He cuold get his revenge in other, safer ways.


Dumbledore's life is more important. And speaking of Snape spying, have we actually seen any of the valuable information Snape is gathering for the Order? Just wondering.
In the first war, I believe that he was the 'useful spy' (Fudge, PoA) of Dumbledore's who warned him the Potters were in danger. (We know of no others by name). I believe that the reason most of the Death Eaters Karkaroff names in his hearing (GoF, "The Pensieve") were already dead or captured was because Snape had secretly denounced them and provided information leading to their apprehension or death.

In the second war, I believe that the reason the Order knew to guard the DoM was because of information Snape brought. I also believe him to be the source of Dumbledore's information on Lucius Malfoy, the Riddle diary, and Voldemort's terrible wrath, (Dumbledore states by Harry that he 'was told' about this, without saying by whom). And I believe Snape was the source of Dumbledore's information on Draco's assignment in HBP and the threat to his family.

I seriously doubt anybody in the Order (besides Snape) would even think to do that, not even one of the students. They wouldn't leave Dumbledore to die, no matter what the odds were.

I think it would depend on the individual and their knowledge of Dumbledore's wishes. Certainly, I cannot see Hagrid doing this. But Moody, if Dumbledore asked him to and he understood the reasons for the request and recognized their validity, I could see. Possibly even Harry, judging from his performance in the Cave. (Which was totally to his credit, in my opinion). That's really the crux of the matter, to me. I don't think it was Snape's idea alone.

Again, I don't see anybody in the Order (besides Snape) running away from a fight simply because they're outnumbered, especially if Dumbledore's life is on the line. You have made an excellent point here. McGonagel, Lupin, Bill, Neville, Ron, Tonks, shall I name more people, would not have killed Dumbledore just because they were outnumbered on the Tower. Draco was the safest person on the Tower. The Death Eaters weren't going to attack him. Snape wouldn't have attacked him. I doubt if McGonagel et al. would have attacked Draco, either. Now Harry, if he got unfrozen, might have been the most likely to attack Draco. But all in all, Draco did not need saving on the Tower. So that excuse doesn't work at all.

Dumbledore's death does not stop Voldemort from turning Draco into a murderer. Do you think that Voldemort wants a Death Eater around who can't murder people? Voldemort probably gives his Death Eaters more than one assignment during their terms of service - which is a life time commitment, by the way.

I seriously doubt anybody in the Order (besides Snape) would even think to do that, not even one of the students. They wouldn't leave Dumbledore to die, no matter what the odds were.
I think it would depend on the individual and their knowledge of Dumbledore's wishes. Certainly, I cannot see Hagrid doing this. But Moody, if Dumbledore asked him to and he understood the reasons for the request and recognized their validity, I could see. Possibly even Harry, judging from his performance in the Cave. (Which was totally to his credit, in my opinion). That's really the crux of the matter, to me. I don't think it was Snape's idea alone.

But that's why no one else could be an effective double agent as well. Snape is cold-hearted enough to do what he MUST for the sake of his mission. And you are right -- the big question is whether he was working under DD's direction.

In the first war, I believe that he was the 'useful spy' (Fudge, PoA) of Dumbledore's who warned him the Potters were in danger. (We know of no others by name). It is true that we have no other names of spies. But Fudge used the words "a number of useful spies", which means more than one. We know from OotP that Aberforth was a spy for Dumbledore because he told Harry that he knew about their meeting in the Hog's Head. I would bet that Aberforth also was a spy during Voldy War I. It is a rather common thing to place a spy in a place like a pub, where the combination of alcohol and shady characters could lead to a wealth of secret information. And I just thought about Mundungus. Didn't Dumbledore keep him around because he hung out with low lives and was a good source of information.

Although I agree that it is most likely that Snape was the spy who told Dumbledore that Voldemort was after the Potters.

But all in all, Draco did not need saving on the Tower. So that excuse doesn't work at all.
I disagree that no one would have attacked Draco. For example, Ron knew Draco was responsible for bringing in the DEs and wouldn't hesitate to attack him. But in any case, the point isn't so much that Draco needed protection ON THE TOWER, but that he'd need protection from Voldemort after the tower scene if the other Death Eaters waited and were sure that he wasn't going to do it.

Dumbledore's death does not stop Voldemort from turning Draco into a murderer. Do you think that Voldemort wants a Death Eater around who can't murder people? Voldemort probably gives his Death Eaters more than one assignment during their terms of service - which is a life time commitment, by the way.
You're right that it doesn't exclude the possibility that Draco will murder, or be forced to murder, in the future. But it keeps him alive and keeps Voldemort happy with him. And there's no other course of action Snape could have taken that would have prevented Draco from continuing as a Death Eater, given the way things panned out. If Snape had managed to get information out of Draco, the situation on the tower wouldn't have happened and Draco and Narcissa would be hidden by the Order. The best chance Dumbledore and Snape had, according to Dumbledore's conversation with Draco, was to wait for Draco to strike. They could have done so much more easily if they knew what his plan was. The vow was a very clever way for Snape to increase his chances of finding out Draco's plan, but it didn't work. If Snape hadn't taken the vow, there's no way Bellatrix would have let Draco tell Snape the plan. The vow didn't really effectively change anything before the tower scene, but it could have and if it had it would have been worth it to Dumbledore and good Snape to trade one of their lives to protect Draco, if it in fact came to that.

I disagree but was not challenging the point (my post mentioned revenge as a motive). My point was that he was perfectly willing to confront his enemies two to one, which is inconsistent with a dominating interest in self-preservation. He cuold get his revenge in other, safer ways.
But Snape was confronting two unarmed opponents with the advantage of surprise. He also didn't expect three students would think of attacking a teacher. So I don't see this as a very good example.

In the first war, I believe that he was the 'useful spy' (Fudge, PoA) of Dumbledore's who warned him the Potters were in danger. (We know of no others by name). I believe that the reason most of the Death Eaters Karkaroff names in his hearing (GoF, "The Pensieve") were already dead or captured was because Snape had secretly denounced them and provided information leading to their apprehension or death.

In the second war, I believe that the reason the Order knew to guard the DoM was because of information Snape brought. I also believe him to be the source of Dumbledore's information on Lucius Malfoy, the Riddle diary, and Voldemort's terrible wrath, (Dumbledore states by Harry that he 'was told' about this, without saying by whom). And I believe Snape was the source of Dumbledore's information on Draco's assignment in HBP and the threat to his family.
I was thinking more along the lines of the second war, since Snape's value as a spy is central to the theory that Dumbledore willingly sacrficed himself to allow Snape to continue to be trusted by Voldemort (although Snape now has nobody to report his valuble information to, since he killed the only person who trusted him). If Snape was indeed the source of information regarding Lucius and the diary, it didn't prove very valuable, and sounds like it was after the fact. As for guarding the Department of Mysteries, Snape may have indeed alerted them that Voldemort was after the Prophesy, but he told them nothing of Voldemort's plan to lure Harry (information that Lucius and the other Death Eaters had). Snape was also indirectly responsible for Sirius leaving Grimmauld Place and going to the Ministry, constantly goading him about doing nothing helpful for the Order. As for Draco's assignment, based on the argument between Snape and Draco, it didn't sound like Snape had very much information to begin with.

I think it would depend on the individual and their knowledge of Dumbledore's wishes. Certainly, I cannot see Hagrid doing this. But Moody, if Dumbledore asked him to and he understood the reasons for the request and recognized their validity, I could see. Possibly even Harry, judging from his performance in the Cave. (Which was totally to his credit, in my opinion). That's really the crux of the matter, to me. I don't think it was Snape's idea alone.
But what Dumbledore's actual wishes were is very questionable. With his death, Harry loses a valuable ally in finding and destroying the Horcruxes, which must be done before Voldemort can be defeated. I haven't seen any really valuable spy information produced by Snape, so I can't see Dumbledore sacrificing himself for that to continue. As for Draco, unless he goes into hiding he's dead meat, and Dumbledore's death only hurts Draco's chances of hiding from Voldemort.

The only reason I can see for Dumbledore wanting to die on the Tower was that he was already dying from the potion he drank from the cave (which is possible but also highly questionable). So I don't see him planning this beforehand with Snape or anyone. I also don't think Snape knew about the potion in the cave, so when he arrived on the Tower he had no way of knowing that Dumbledore was dying from the potion. So Snape kills Dumbledore and lives, while the Order loses a powerful ally and gains nothing.

I disagree that no one would have attacked Draco. For example, Ron knew Draco was responsible for bringing in the DEs and wouldn't hesitate to attack him. But in any case, the point isn't so much that Draco needed protection ON THE TOWER, but that he'd need protection from Voldemort after the tower scene if the other Death Eaters waited and were sure that he wasn't going to do it.
But you also argued that Snape does not have the ability to hide Draco from Voldemort without Dumbledore's help. So nothing Snape does will protect Draco.

You're right that it doesn't exclude the possibility that Draco will murder, or be forced to murder, in the future. But it keeps him alive and keeps Voldemort happy with him. And there's no other course of action Snape could have taken that would have prevented Draco from continuing as a Death Eater, given the way things panned out. If Snape had managed to get information out of Draco, the situation on the tower wouldn't have happened and Draco and Narcissa would be hidden by the Order. The best chance Dumbledore and Snape had, according to Dumbledore's conversation with Draco, was to wait for Draco to strike. They could have done so much more easily if they knew what his plan was. The vow was a very clever way for Snape to increase his chances of finding out Draco's plan, but it didn't work. If Snape hadn't taken the vow, there's no way Bellatrix would have let Draco tell Snape the plan. The vow didn't really effectively change anything before the tower scene, but it could have and if it had it would have been worth it to Dumbledore and good Snape to trade one of their lives to protect Draco, if it in fact came to that.
Voldemort was never happy with Draco to begin with. He used Draco as a pawn to punish Lucius. And while Bellatrix may be Draco's aunt, I'm not sure she controls what he chooses to tell Snape. She certainly wasn't at Hogwarts helping Draco complete his task, so I'm not sure how close they really are.

The only reason I can see for Dumbledore wanting to die on the Tower was that he was already dying from the potion he drank from the cave (which is possible but also highly questionable). So I don't see him planning this beforehand with Snape or anyone. I also don't think Snape knew about the potion in the cave, so when he arrived on the Tower he had no way of knowing that Dumbledore was dying from the potion. So Snape kills Dumbledore and lives, while the Order loses a powerful ally and gains nothing.
I think Snape may have known that Harry was there on the tower, and DD's plea was that Snape NOT reveal Harry's presence. (Did Snape know where DD was returning from, or the fact that Harry had gone with him? Even if he didn't, Draco saw the second broom, and Snape is FAR more observant and clever than Draco ... I think he knew Harry was there.)

Even though Harry's butt belonged to LV, and maybe the DEs would not have killed Harry on the tower, DD certainly believed Harry was in danger. Why else would DD have sacrificed his own defense to ensure that Harry was unable to do anything dumb and make himself visible. So, one could also conclude that a good Snape was trying to get everyone off the tower to protect Harry.

But then good Snape left Harry to the mercy of Greyback and the other Death Eaters while he was fleeing from the castle with Draco. I didn't see Snape going back to make sure Greyback didn't attack Harry (which he did).

But then good Snape left Harry to the mercy of Greyback and the other Death Eaters while he was fleeing from the castle with Draco. I didn't see Snape going back to make sure Greyback didn't attack Harry (which he did).

Well... that wasn't very nice then, was it?

No, it wasn't. ;)

I just find too many problems with the Good Snape theory. Too much has to be assumed to make it work. But we will definitely know if Snape is good in about 5 months.

No, it wasn't. ;)

I just find too many problems with the Good Snape theory. Too much has to be assumed to make it work. But we will definitely know if Snape is good in about 5 months.

You have to admit, Good Snape certainly fits JKR's "things are not always what they seem" pattern. Who thought Sirius Black was a good guy in the first half of PoA?

I think there's a pretty strong possiblity that Snape will be the series ending whopper of a "not what they seem."

That's very possible, but for me personally it would be a little anticlimactic if Snape ends up saving the day and proving every character but Dumbledore wrong about him. And Sirus's innocence was established in a single book, while with Snape we're given evidence both ways for 5 books, shown he's really evil and betrays Dumbledore's trust (if you take what Snape says in Spinners End as truth and add his murder of Dumbledore) in the 6th book, then have a complete turnaround as he explains to everyone that Dumbledore wanted to die and that Snape really is a good guy. I just think that JK Rowling revealed Snape's true nature in Half Blood Prince, and now we'll see the consequences of Snape's actions in Deathly Hallows.

That's very possible, but for me personally it would be a little anticlimactic if Snape ends up saving the day and proving every character but Dumbledore wrong about him.

Would you be satisfied if 'Deathly Hallows' proved that everyone was partly right and partly wrong?

Deathly Hallows is a long way off. Until then, let's get back to discussing 'Is Snape Good?', please.

OK, what I was getting at, is that we are getting a lot of mixed information from JKR on Snape.

Most folks figure it's to hide his 'true' allegiance, but what if Snape himself is not sure?

But Snape was confronting two unarmed opponents with the advantage of surprise. He also didn't expect three students would think of attacking a teacher. So I don't see this as a very good example.

They were not unarmed. Lupin had his wand with him, and Snape would have assumed this would be the case. Lupin was also about to transform into a dangerous XXXXX (wizard-killer) magical creature. And yes, the presence of the kids complicates things, but rather more for Snape, who might actually care, than for Black (who, Snape and the rest of the world believe, is there to kill Harry anyway).

If Snape was indeed the source of information regarding Lucius and the diary, it didn't prove very valuable, and sounds like it was after the fact.
Dumbledore presents Voldemort's wrath as part of his reasoning that the Diary was a Horcrux.

As for guarding the Department of Mysteries, Snape may have indeed alerted them that Voldemort was after the Prophesy, but he told them nothing of Voldemort's plan to lure Harry (information that Lucius and the other Death Eaters had).

Dumbledore was aware that this was a danger - I believe this is the reason he wanted Harry to learn Occlumency. Snape says as much to Harry in the first lesson, when they are discussing why Harry shoudl learn it.

Harry asks whether Voldmeort 'might try to make him do things', and Snape answers, 'yes'.

Snape was also indirectly responsible for Sirius leaving Grimmauld Place and going to the Ministry, constantly goading him about doing nothing helpful for the Order.

One conversation months before the incident is not 'always', and Sirius was equally rude to Snape. Also, do you really believe Sirius would have stayed behind knowing Harry was in danger?

As for Draco's assignment, based on the argument between Snape and Draco, it didn't sound like Snape had very much information to begin with.

Based on Spinner's End, Snape knew in the summer that the goal was to kill Dumbledore. Dumbledore claims to Draco that he knew this all along. I think this is because Snape told him, possibly even before he took the Unbreakable Vow.

But what Dumbledore's actual wishes were is very questionable.

As are Snape's loyalties, they are more or less the same question, actually.

The only reason I can see for Dumbledore wanting to die on the Tower was that he was already dying from the potion he drank from the cave (which is possible but also highly questionable). So I don't see him planning this beforehand with Snape or anyone.

I agree, it was not planned. It could have been discussed as a contingency, or not.

I also don't think Snape knew about the potion in the cave, so when he arrived on the Tower he had no way of knowing that Dumbledore was dying from the potion.
You forget Snape is an expert at Dark Arts/Potions. He might recognize the symptoms.

However, this is not what I think happened. Snape's action upon hearing Dumbledore call him by name is to move Draco out of his way and get a clear view of Dumbledore. He then 'gazes' at Dumbledore for a moment, before Dumbledore says "Severus, please". Only then, Snape raises his wand and kills him. Characters making eye contact and gazing, in the Potterverse, can mean Legilimency. Dumbledore could have showed what happened, or what he wanted done, during that moment, leaving Snape with little doubt what "Severus, please" was about.

I don't think it was a choice between Snape and Dumbledore as to who would live. It was a choice between Dumbledore dying, or both of them dying. Weighing who is more useful is irrelevanmt in that situation, a living person is more useful than two dead ones.

You forget Snape is an expert at Dark Arts/Potions. He might recognize the symptoms.

However, this is not what I think happened. Snape's action upon hearing Dumbledore call him by name is to move Draco out of his way and get a clear view of Dumbledore. He then 'gazes' at Dumbledore for a moment, before Dumbledore says "Severus, please". Only then, Snape raises his wand and kills him. Characters making eye contact and gazing, in the Potterverse, can mean Legilimency. Dumbledore could have showed what happened, or what he wanted done, during that moment, leaving Snape with little doubt what "Severus, please" was about.

I don't think it was a choice between Snape and Dumbledore as to who would live. It was a choice between Dumbledore dying, or both of them dying. Weighing who is more useful is irrelevanmt in that situation, a living person is more useful than two dead ones.


That's what I thought as well... him being able to recognize when a person his taken a poison or a potion. I also agree with you about what happened on the Tower...

That's very possible, but for me personally it would be a little anticlimactic if Snape ends up saving the day and proving every character but Dumbledore wrong about him. And Sirus's innocence was established in a single book, while with Snape we're given evidence both ways for 5 books, shown he's really evil and betrays Dumbledore's trust (if you take what Snape says in Spinners End as truth and add his murder of Dumbledore) in the 6th book, then have a complete turnaround as he explains to everyone that Dumbledore wanted to die and that Snape really is a good guy. I just think that JK Rowling revealed Snape's true nature in Half Blood Prince, and now we'll see the consequences of Snape's actions in Deathly Hallows.

I can see where you're coming from here, but I think if JKR really had revealed Snape's true nature at the end of HBP and considered the "Is-he-or-isn't-he?" story closed, she would have said so, unambiguously, as she has with the question of whether or not DD is really dead (and she'd have used language a lot less slippery and open to interpretation than "Severus, please" and "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" in the denouement of HBP!). I think, whether Snape is good or bad, JKR actively wants to keep the debate going, and we're going to carry on getting evidence both ways in the final book, until close to the end, when the truth will be revealed.

But, if I could go back to Spinner's End - a lot of the bad Snapers argue that Snape reveals his true colours and motives here. I would argue that he is demonstrably lying to Bellatrix in at least two places:

1. He tells her that he didn't initially attack Harry when he came to Hogwarts because he was intrigued and wondered if Harry could become a new figurehead behind whom the dark forces could rally (although he quickly decided that the boy was useless and this wouldn't work).

This is demonstrably untrue. Snape appeared to hate and belittle Harry from the day he stepped over the Hogwarts threshold. There was no initial period where Snape treated Harry with respect or treated him neutrally while he tried to suss out whether or not he could be a new Dark Lord.

2. He appears to confirm the old Hogwarts rumour that DD has always refused to give him the DADA job because he doesn't trust him, on account of his DE past.

We can deduce that this is untrue, though. (a) DD knows (and so do we by the end of HBP) that the DADA job is cursed and that the person doing it will be out of Hogwarts within a year. Why would he worry about somebody untrustworthy taking the post for a year? He'd far more likely worry about appointing a trustworthy member of staff, whom he wanted to keep, to that role - which I think is the case with Snape. (b) More significantly, we know that DD trusts Snape with the far more dangerous (I mean for the Order, not for Snape) job of OotP spy in Voldemort's camp. That job holds far more temptations to an ex-DE to revert to his old loyalties than the DADA job.
(c) the fact that later in HBP DD appears to have entrusted Snape with the secret that he is hunting down horcruxes (he goes to him for help in healing his hand and asks Harry to fetch Snape, not Madam Pomfrey, when they return from the cave), when he asks Harry to withhold this information from the rest of the teachers and Order also suggests that Snape is lying to Bellatrix - DD trusts him MORE, not less, than the other Hogwarts teachers.

Of course, Snape lying to Bellatrix doesn't prove he's good. It could be a case of petty in-fighting amongst DEs, or he could be lying to her because he's out for himself and taking both DD and Voldy for a ride. But if we can't trust what Snape says to her on these two points, it casts doubt on the other things he says at Spinner's End - including the way he explains away evidence which had pointed to his being good.

Another point where I though Snape was lying to Bellatrix..
He says that in the first book he saw only Quirrel trying to steal the stone and not his master..
But yet Snape asks Quirrel where his loyalties lie??
It seems as if he is questioning Quirrel as to whetehr his loyalties lie with Dumbledore or another master??
We know that the dark mark grows stronger as Voldemort regains more power. I am positive that Snape would have felt something being so close to Quirrel A.K.A Voldemort just like Harry's scar twinged every time he loooked directly at Quirrel.
Snape, we know is a brilliant occlumist. Becuase he is managing to fool the greatest legilimins alive-Voldmeort and if it works the other way Dumbledore..
Thus Snape would have easily peered into Quirrels mind and known what was in there.
He knew or atleast suspected Voldemort using Quirrel and helped thwarth him..

Another point where I though Snape was lying to Bellatrix..
He says that in the first book he saw only Quirrel trying to steal the stone and not his master..
But yet Snape asks Quirrel where his loyalties lie??
It seems as if he is questioning Quirrel as to whetehr his loyalties lie with Dumbledore or another master??
We know that the dark mark grows stronger as Voldemort regains more power. I am positive that Snape would have felt something being so close to Quirrel A.K.A Voldemort just like Harry's scar twinged every time he loooked directly at Quirrel.
Snape, we know is a brilliant occlumist. Becuase he is managing to fool the greatest legilimins alive-Voldmeort and if it works the other way Dumbledore..
Thus Snape would have easily peered into Quirrels mind and known what was in there.
He knew or atleast suspected Voldemort using Quirrel and helped thwarth him..


in ootp snape says: Only muggles talk of mind reading. the mind is not a book, to be opened at will. Thoughts are not etched on the inside of skulls. It is true However,that those who have mastered legilemens are able, under certain conditions, to delve into the minds of their victims and interpret their findings correctly.
We do not know exactly how occulemency works, but it is possible that Snape could have been unable to know that quirrel was really LV. ALso, i'm sure LV is also a master occulemens, and could have blocked Snape from seeing who he really was.

Also--where is LV getting his info on the order? He has, we know from hearing draco talk, found out not only about sirius, but about what hagrid's mission was as well. The only reason LV hasn't ordered snape to kill the order is so he can remain a spy. And apparently, he is spying and telling LV truthful information, because LV has gotten these things somewhere. Why doesn't Snape just lie to him?

Also--where is LV getting his info on the order? He has, we know from hearing draco talk, found out not only about sirius, but about what hagrid's mission was as well. The only reason LV hasn't ordered snape to kill the order is so he can remain a spy. And apparently, he is spying and telling LV truthful information, because LV has gotten these things somewhere. Why doesn't Snape just lie to him?
Voldemort got the information about Sirius being at Grimmauld Place, and also being the one Harry cared about most from Kreacher, who left the house on Sirius's order at Christmastime (he shouted "get out" and Kreacher obliged). Kreacher ran to Narcissa Malfoy and told her everything. That is what Dumbledore finds out from looking into Kreacher's mind on the night the kids went to the DoM in OotP.

Hagrid's mission was known because there were also Death Eaters hanging around the giants when Hagrid and Olympe got there. Also Hagrid said they had to travel there slowly because they were being watched and followed. So Snape isn't Voldemort's only source of information about the Giants.

We can deduce that this is untrue, though. (a) DD knows (and so do we by the end of HBP) that the DADA job is cursed and that the person doing it will be out of Hogwarts within a year. Why would he worry about somebody untrustworthy taking the post for a year? He'd far more likely worry about appointing a trustworthy member of staff, whom he wanted to keep, to that role - which I think is the case with Snape. (b) More significantly, we know that DD trusts Snape with the far more dangerous (I mean for the Order, not for Snape) job of OotP spy in Voldemort's camp. That job holds far more temptations to an ex-DE to revert to his old loyalties than the DADA job.
(c) the fact that later in HBP DD appears to have entrusted Snape with the secret that he is hunting down horcruxes (he goes to him for help in healing his hand and asks Harry to fetch Snape, not Madam Pomfrey, when they return from the cave), when he asks Harry to withhold this information from the rest of the teachers and Order also suggests that Snape is lying to Bellatrix - DD trusts him MORE, not less, than the other Hogwarts teachers.
Great post! I think all of your points are valid - and I love the conclusion! :)

I think Snape doesn´t lies to Voldy because Voldemort is better at occlumency and legilimency so he just can´t lie, besides it´s perhaps the fact that Snape knows he would die if he try something againts voldy, this is too obvious, it has been posted everywere, so I guess a lot of people thinks that too

on the Quirrel case I don´t think Deathly Hallows is going to go that far back on that story, not many people are exactly waiting to know about Quirrell and how he fool Snape on PS, I guess most people are waiting for something bigger than that, I think it would be wrong to have that explain on the book instead of something more interesting you know what I mean, so I don´t know... it´s just a thought :p

in ootp snape says:
We do not know exactly how occulemency works, but it is possible that Snape could have been unable to know that quirrel was really LV. ALso, i'm sure LV is also a master occulemens, and could have blocked Snape from seeing who he really was.


Voldemort is a master occlumence but in the first book, he was no mere than a spirit and depended on Quirrel for just about anything.
At that state he would have been in no condition to prevent Snape from seeing into Quirrel's mind.

Voldemort got the information about Sirius being at Grimmauld Place, and also being the one Harry cared about most from Kreacher, who left the house on Sirius's order at Christmastime (he shouted "get out" and Kreacher obliged). Kreacher ran to Narcissa Malfoy and told her everything. That is what Dumbledore finds out from looking into Kreacher's mind on the night the kids went to the DoM in OotP.
:)
I am referring to, at platfrom 9 3/4, when Malfoy makes a comment about "dogging" Harry's footsteps, a clear referance to Sirius, who was with them. Kreacher had not yet left grimmauld place.

But then good Snape left Harry to the mercy of Greyback and the other Death Eaters while he was fleeing from the castle with Draco. I didn't see Snape going back to make sure Greyback didn't attack Harry (which he did).

Yes he did. But he was focused on leaving the castle and getting away with Draco... so he didn't have told Fenrir to leave him alone - not exact wording -pg. 598 - HBP.

I'm not saying that what he did was right in anyway, just saying that he was already in a hurry to get out of Hogwarts as soon as he and Draco could.

I think Snape's a good guy because he gave Harry a few tips on how to defeat Voldemort while fleeing with the 'other' DE after he killed dumbledore
1 practice non-verbal spells
2 no Unfogiveable Curses for you Potter as if hinting the avada kedavra is not the right way of defeating LV because as Dumbledore allready said that Harrys abillity to love is the key and you can't exactly combine the killing curse with love ,can you

I think Snape's a good guy because he gave Harry a few tips on how to defeat Voldemort while fleeing with the 'other' DE after he killed dumbledore
1 practice non-verbal spells
2 no Unfogiveable Curses for you Potter as if hinting the avada kedavra is not the right way of defeating LV because as Dumbledore allready said that Harrys abillity to love is the key and you can't exactly combine the killing curse with love ,can you

Agrees :agree:, I feel the same way... I used to have the exact quote that he said in my sig.

I think Snape's a good guy because he gave Harry a few tips on how to defeat Voldemort while fleeing with the 'other' DE after he killed dumbledore
1 practice non-verbal spells
2 no Unfogiveable Curses for you Potter as if hinting the avada kedavra is not the right way of defeating LV because as Dumbledore allready said that Harrys abillity to love is the key and you can't exactly combine the killing curse with love ,can you
He wasn't giving Harry tips he was taunting him. This is seen on many occasions throughout the series and every time it is clear that it is taunting and not trying to help another wizard.

For example Bella taunts Harry in OotP by pointing out why Harry couldn't perform an unforgivable curse. It could be viewed that Bella is trying to give Harry tips for future use of unforgivable curses but it's not the case.

Another example from OotP is Dumbledore taunting Voldemort about his greatest weakness while dueling. It could be viewed that Dumbledore is trying to help Voldemort out by showing him where he is weak and needs improvement, but the reality is that it's common for wizards to taunt this way (point out the others weakness) while dueling.

Snape taunts Harry by pointing out his weakness. Just as Bella did to Harry and Dumbledore did to Voldemort. So Snape using this same form of taunting cannot be viewed as an intention of giving tips in my opinion.

If we use this to determine Snape is a good guy then it can also be used to determine Bella is good (as she gave Harry tips while dueling), Voldemort is good (as he gave Harry tips while dueling)), and Dumbledore is evil (as he gave Voldemort tips while dueling). But as we know it's just the opposite.

So actually, if you look at whats happened in the past, Snape is evil by giving tips to Harry while dueling.

<<Snape taunts Harry by pointing out his weakness. Just as Bella did to Harry and Dumbledore did to Voldemort. So Snape using this same form of taunting cannot be viewed as an intention of giving tips in my opinion.>>

You are taking things way too literal. Are you telling me that you feel that on the escape from castle in HBP that Snape was only taunting Harry saying "blocked again and again until you learn to shut your mouth and open your mind"?????? Snape does dislike Harry, and even DD overestimated the dislike Snape had for James, but he has helped him out through every turn. While your evidence does make your point for you, I would point out that Bella is super arrogant, and thinks her self deep down that she is equal to voldy. Dumbledore on the other hand was not taunting. He was arrogant, but being a teacher myself, I know he is just doing what every teacher strives to do, and that is to get the message across. Dumbledore was being the quentessential teacher who never gives up and believes in his message... nothing more.

Snape is in the same vein. He was teaching Harry unitl the last moment, and will continue to do so. Believe it or not.

<<Snape taunts Harry by pointing out his weakness. Just as Bella did to Harry and Dumbledore did to Voldemort. So Snape using this same form of taunting cannot be viewed as an intention of giving tips in my opinion.>>

You are taking things way too literal. Are you telling me that you feel that on the escape from castle in HBP that Snape was only taunting Harry saying "blocked again and again until you learn to shut your mouth and open your mind"?????? Snape does dislike Harry, and even DD overestimated the dislike Snape had for James, but he has helped him out through every turn. While your evidence does make your point for you, I would point out that Bella is super arrogant, and thinks her self deep down that she is equal to voldy. Dumbledore on the other hand was not taunting. He was arrogant, but being a teacher myself, I know he is just doing what every teacher strives to do, and that is to get the message across. Dumbledore was being the quentessential teacher who never gives up and believes in his message... nothing more.

Snape is in the same vein. He was teaching Harry unitl the last moment, and will continue to do so. Believe it or not.

Besides what has happened with other characters in similar situations, Snape has shown that it's his belif that Harry will never be able to close his mind etc., which further indicates that he was taunting him. I disagree that Snape has been doing everything possible to teach Harry as much as he can. I also find Snape to be arrogant when it comes to Harry, so that fits as well.

I think snape taunts Harry in a whole other way than Bella did to Harry . Harry doesn't learn anything from Bellas taunts while Snape actually tries to learn him something he realises that Harry will hate his guts after that night and if Harry wants to defeat Snape ,Harry will have to follow his pointers (non verbal spells,...)
Do you really think Dumbledore would be so naive to trust Snape just because he believes in 'the essential good in all of men'? I think Dumbledore had a more than solid reason to trust Snape and Dumbledores 'gueses' usualy prove to be acurate

Besides what has happened with other characters in similar situations, Snape has shown that it's his belif that Harry will never be able to close his mind etc., which further indicates that he was taunting him. I disagree that Snape has been doing everything possible to teach Harry as much as he can. I also find Snape to be arrogant when it comes to Harry, so that fits as well.

If someone told me I'd never be able to achieve something (especialy someone I loathe) I'd do my best to achieve this goal whatever it takes just to prove him wrong. It's called reverse psychology people

I am referring to, at platfrom 9 3/4, when Malfoy makes a comment about "dogging" Harry's footsteps, a clear referance to Sirius, who was with them. Kreacher had not yet left grimmauld place.

I'm pretty sure it also says in OotP that the assumption is Wormtail, who obviously knows Sirius is an animagus, told Voldemort.

I don't know what you meant about the DEs knowing about Hagrid's mission, but it really couldn't have been hard to deduce. Dumbledore didn't need a spy to know that Voldemort would recruit the giants, and I think the same idea works the other way around.

The bit of potential spying on the good guys for the bad guys that I think is really important is when Snape says in Spinner's End that he gave Voldemort information that led to the murder of Emmeline Vance.

<<Snape taunts Harry by pointing out his weakness. Just as Bella did to Harry and Dumbledore did to Voldemort. So Snape using this same form of taunting cannot be viewed as an intention of giving tips in my opinion.>>

You are taking things way too literal. Are you telling me that you feel that on the escape from castle in HBP that Snape was only taunting Harry saying "blocked again and again until you learn to shut your mouth and open your mind"?????? Snape does dislike Harry, and even DD overestimated the dislike Snape had for James, but he has helped him out through every turn. While your evidence does make your point for you, I would point out that Bella is super arrogant, and thinks her self deep down that she is equal to voldy. Dumbledore on the other hand was not taunting. He was arrogant, but being a teacher myself, I know he is just doing what every teacher strives to do, and that is to get the message across. Dumbledore was being the quentessential teacher who never gives up and believes in his message... nothing more.

Snape is in the same vein. He was teaching Harry unitl the last moment, and will continue to do so. Believe it or not.

I agree with you on this Snapeisgood23 :agree:. Snape has been doing that for the most part thoughout the whole series for the most part, only it has become more visible per se during the last 2 books.

Something was still bothering me about Snape if Snape is a good guy why was he so furious with Harry when he calls Snape a coward(I think he actualy considered doing serious harm to Harry) . Then I tought about he had just preformed an unforgiveable curse wich gave him a lifelong ticket to azkaban even if the ministry would acknowlidge he wasn't a death eater . I wouldn't like to be called a coward after making such a sacrifice for the good cause

Something was still bothering me about Snape if Snape is a good guy why was he so furious with Harry when he calls Snape a coward

I've always assumed that it's because, on DD's orders, he's just had to do the bravest thing he's ever done.

I've always assumed that it's because, on DD's orders, he's just had to do the bravest thing he's ever done.

I also think Snape is good, but that's not what I thought that was about. That seemed too intense to be only about what he'd just done. I think it was something historical and deeply rooted. It seems possible to me that Sirius questioned his bravery in order to convince him to see what would happen to Lupin (you know, the time James saved Snape's life) or that Sirius and James always called him a coward. Or maybe he feels like it's been cowardly of him to stay in the double agent role instead of joining in the actual fighting. Or maybe he's deeply afraid of what Voldemort will ask him to do now that, from Voldemort's perspective, he won't have to keep up his cover as a good guy.

I actually the most likely thing is that he thinks it was cowardice that made him become a death eater originally, or that made him give Voldemort the prophecy or something. It seems to me that it's really huge to him and so I have a feeling it's closely related to his greatest regrets, and Dumbledore seems to think his greatest regret is that he caused Voldemort to go after the Potters.

Wow, lots of posts while I was gone.

Okay, here goes...

Would you be satisfied if 'Deathly Hallows' proved that everyone was partly right and partly wrong?
Put it this way: whether or not Dumbledore was wrong or partly wrong, look where it got him.

OK, what I was getting at, is that we are getting a lot of mixed information from JKR on Snape.

Most folks figure it's to hide his 'true' allegiance, but what if Snape himself is not sure?
Oh, I think Snape knows exactly what he's doing.


Dumbledore was aware that this was a danger - I believe this is the reason he wanted Harry to learn Occlumency. Snape says as much to Harry in the first lesson, when they are discussing why Harry shoudl learn it.

Harry asks whether Voldmeort 'might try to make him do things', and Snape answers,'yes'.
But that isn't the point. Snape is supposedly gathering valuable information for the Order, yet failed to tell anyone about Voldemort's plan to lure Harry to the Ministry and get the Prophesy for him, a plan that involved several other Death Eaters. It's of course possible that Snape was kept out of the loop, but he is supposed to be a spy, and this would be the sort of vaulable information he would be expected to get back to the Order.

One conversation months before the incident is not 'always', and Sirius was equally rude to Snape. Also, do you really believe Sirius would have stayed behind knowing Harry was in danger?
The point is that Snape wasn't helping the situation by goading Sirius and making him feel basically worthless.

Based on Spinner's End, Snape knew in the summer that the goal was to kill Dumbledore. Dumbledore claims to Draco that he knew this all along. I think this is because Snape told him, possibly even before he took the Unbreakable Vow.
What all Snape actually told Dumbledore is very questionable.

As are Snape's loyalties, they are more or less the same question, actually.
Depends on Snape's loyalties. If he is not loyal to Dumbledore, Dumbledore's wishes wouldn't matter to him.

You forget Snape is an expert at Dark Arts/Potions. He might recognize the symptoms.
But that's a huge decision based on a moment's glance. There simply wasn't time for Snape to analyze the situation so thoroughly, figuring out that Dumbledore had taken an unknown potion at some unknown time, and immediately decide that he was incurable. I think he simply saw Dumbledore unarmed and unable to defend himself, and took advantage of the situation.

However, this is not what I think happened. Snape's action upon hearing Dumbledore call him by name is to move Draco out of his way and get a clear view of Dumbledore. He then 'gazes' at Dumbledore for a moment, before Dumbledore says "Severus, please". Only then, Snape raises his wand and kills him. Characters making eye contact and gazing, in the Potterverse, can mean Legilimency. Dumbledore could have showed what happened, or what he wanted done, during that moment, leaving Snape with little doubt what "Severus, please" was about.That's a lot of assuming.

I don't think it was a choice between Snape and Dumbledore as to who would live. It was a choice between Dumbledore dying, or both of them dying. Weighing who is more useful is irrelevanmt in that situation, a living person is more useful than two dead ones.
I still think Good Snape would not have immediately killed Dumbledore. He may not have attacked the Death Eaters knowing he was outnumbered, but I still think he would have at least stalled or try to figure out a plan where Dumbledore might somehow be saved. Anything but kill Dumbledore as his first move.


I can see where you're coming from here, but I think if JKR really had revealed Snape's true nature at the end of HBP and considered the "Is-he-or-isn't-he?" story closed, she would have said so, unambiguously, as she has with the question of whether or not DD is really dead (and she'd have used language a lot less slippery and open to interpretation than "Severus, please" and "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" in the denouement of HBP!). I think, whether Snape is good or bad, JKR actively wants to keep the debate going, and we're going to carry on getting evidence both ways in the final book, until close to the end, when the truth will be revealed.
I was really surprised JKR answered the Dumbledore question, because that debate was almost as juicy as the Snape one. But not answering the Snape debate doesn't tell us one way or the other. And yes, I think she enjoys the debate very much.

But, if I could go back to Spinner's End - a lot of the bad Snapers argue that Snape reveals his true colours and motives here. I would argue that he is demonstrably lying to Bellatrix in at least two places:

1. He tells her that he didn't initially attack Harry when he came to Hogwarts because he was intrigued and wondered if Harry could become a new figurehead behind whom the dark forces could rally (although he quickly decided that the boy was useless and this wouldn't work).

This is demonstrably untrue. Snape appeared to hate and belittle Harry from the day he stepped over the Hogwarts threshold. There was no initial period where Snape treated Harry with respect or treated him neutrally while he tried to suss out whether or not he could be a new Dark Lord.
This is in no way demonstrably untrue. Snape never told Bellatrix he "treated Harry with respect or treated him neutrally." He simply explained why he didn't kill Harry the first chance he got. Harry had no way of knowing if Snape was "intrigued and wondered if Harry could become a new figurehead behind whom the dark forces could rally," and since the books are 99% from Harry's perspective, we as readers had no way of knowing what Snape was really thinking back in Year 1.


2. He appears to confirm the old Hogwarts rumour that DD has always refused to give him the DADA job because he doesn't trust him, on account of his DE past.We can deduce that this is untrue, though. (a) DD knows (and so do we by the end of HBP) that the DADA job is cursed and that the person doing it will be out of Hogwarts within a year. Why would he worry about somebody untrustworthy taking the post for a year? He'd far more likely worry about appointing a trustworthy member of staff, whom he wanted to keep, to that role - which I think is the case with Snape. (b) More significantly, we know that DD trusts Snape with the far more dangerous (I mean for the Order, not for Snape) job of OotP spy in Voldemort's camp. That job holds far more temptations to an ex-DE to revert to his old loyalties than the DADA job.
(c) the fact that later in HBP DD appears to have entrusted Snape with the secret that he is hunting down horcruxes (he goes to him for help in healing his hand and asks Harry to fetch Snape, not Madam Pomfrey, when they return from the cave), when he asks Harry to withhold this information from the rest of the teachers and Order also suggests that Snape is lying to Bellatrix - DD trusts him MORE, not less, than the other Hogwarts teachers.
Too much assumption here. As for the curse, what do we really know about it? Is it ever specifically said that "the person doing it will be out of Hogwarts within a year?" Or does the curse only cause the person to not have the DADA job at the end of the year? Can the person choose a different job afterwards? Even Dumbledore may not be sure how exactly the curse works, since all he tells Harry is that after Voldemort got turned down for the job, nobody else has been able to keep it for more than a year. That doesn't sound like Dumbledore knows any details about the curse, and indeed seems to be guessing based on what happened. So we really don't have enough information to use this to determine if Snape was lying about anything. We also don't know why Dumbledore decided to appoint Snape to DADA in Year 6. We don't know exactly why Dumbledore trusts Snape when nobody else does. As for the Horcruxes, there's no evidence that Dumbledore trusted anybody besides Harry, Ron and Hermione with that information. We also have no evidence that Dumbledore trusts Snape more than the other Hogwarts teacher. In fact, he says he trusts Hagrid with his life. That's a lot of trust.

Of course, Snape lying to Bellatrix doesn't prove he's good. It could be a case of petty in-fighting amongst DEs, or he could be lying to her because he's out for himself and taking both DD and Voldy for a ride. But if we can't trust what Snape says to her on these two points, it casts doubt on the other things he says at Spinner's End - including the way he explains away evidence which had pointed to his being good.
That's true. But you run into trouble when you assume a character is lying, yet have no concrete evidence to back up that assumption. Because then, as you pointed out, it casts doubt on any other thing they have said, at any time. And not only them, but any other character. So I think it's better to assume that any character is telling the truth at any given time, unless there's solid evidence to the contrary, rather than only assumptions which may or may not be true. Otherwise, any dialogue cannot be used as canon, since there's always a chance that character was actually lying, which unnecessarily complicates things.


Another point where I though Snape was lying to Bellatrix..
He says that in the first book he saw only Quirrel trying to steal the stone and not his master..
But yet Snape asks Quirrel where his loyalties lie??
It seems as if he is questioning Quirrel as to whetehr his loyalties lie with Dumbledore or another master??
We know that the dark mark grows stronger as Voldemort regains more power. I am positive that Snape would have felt something being so close to Quirrel A.K.A Voldemort just like Harry's scar twinged every time he loooked directly at Quirrel.
Snape, we know is a brilliant occlumist. Becuase he is managing to fool the greatest legilimins alive-Voldmeort and if it works the other way Dumbledore..
Thus Snape would have easily peered into Quirrels mind and known what was in there.
He knew or atleast suspected Voldemort using Quirrel and helped thwarth him..
The problem with this is that if Snape is good and he knew Quirrell was possessed by Voldemort, then Snape would have told Dumbledore. And I truly doubt Dumbledore would allow a teacher possessed by Voldemort to roam Hogwarts freely.


I think snape taunts Harry in a whole other way than Bella did to Harry . Harry doesn't learn anything from Bellas taunts while Snape actually tries to learn him something he realises that Harry will hate his guts after that night and if Harry wants to defeat Snape ,Harry will have to follow his pointers (non verbal spells,...)
Do you really think Dumbledore would be so naive to trust Snape just because he believes in 'the essential good in all of men'? I think Dumbledore had a more than solid reason to trust Snape and Dumbledores 'gueses' usualy prove to be acurate
Actually, Harry did learn from Bella's taunting, that he can't perform an Unforgivable Curse unless he really, really means it. So I see the parallel between Bella and Snape taunting Harry a valid one. As to why Dumbledore trusted Snape, we just don't know that yet.


The bit of potential spying on the good guys for the bad guys that I think is really important is when Snape says in Spinner's End that he gave Voldemort information that led to the murder of Emmeline Vance.
Which pretty much settles it for Snape. He's not a very valuable spy if he's going to give Order members over to Voldemort.


I've always assumed that it's because, on DD's orders, he's just had to do the bravest thing he's ever done.
Killing someone in cold blood who is defenseless is hardly brave.


I actually the most likely thing is that he thinks it was cowardice that made him become a death eater originally, or that made him give Voldemort the prophecy or something. It seems to me that it's really huge to him and so I have a feeling it's closely related to his greatest regrets, and Dumbledore seems to think his greatest regret is that he caused Voldemort to go after the Potters.
If Snape's greatest regret is causing Voldemort to go after the Potters, he certainly has a funny way of showing it, considering the way he treats their orphaned son.

Do you really think Dumbledore would be so naive to trust Snape just because he believes in 'the essential good in all of men'? I think Dumbledore had a more than solid reason to trust Snape and Dumbledores 'gueses' usualy prove to be acurate
Dumbledore makes mistakes just like the next man. Dumbledore admits that when he makes a mistake it's usually a big one. Being wrong about Snape is just that, a huge mistake.

Killing someone in cold blood who is defenseless is hardly brave.

Actually, the quotation you ascribe to IdaBomb was mine.

I was, of course, writing in the belief that DD was not killed in cold blood, but at DD's request, with extreme personal reluctance (with reference to the snatch of conversation that Hagrid overheard). If, come July, it turns out I'm wrong about this and about Snape being good, I will be the first to acknowledge he wasn't being brave.

Dumbledore makes mistakes just like the next man. Dumbledore admits that when he makes a mistake it's usually a big one. Being wrong about Snape is just that, a huge mistake.

Dumbledore may make big mistakes, but he doesn't tend to make stupid, naive mistakes or mistakes based on total and utter misjudgement of character. He may be wrong about Snape (I doubt it, personally, but admit it's possible) but if he is, I can't think he will be wrong in such an obvious way as to simply take Snape's word on trust without any other evidence, or to misread a totally evil character with no scruples at all as being a deeply remorseful character with an acute conscience. If Snape is on the bad side, I think it is more likely that DD was absolutely right in detecting Snape's remorse, but that Voldemort managed to use that to re-recruit Snape in a way that DD didn't expect.

In my view, the biggest mistake he's made in the series so far was believing that Sirius betrayed the Potters - that was an error caused by trusting too little, not too much.

And let's not forget that it was Dumbledore alone, out of all the Hogwarts staff when Tom Riddle was a pupil, who rumbled him, and he was a lot more plausible than Snape.

Do you really think Dumbledore would be so naive to trust Snape just because he believes in 'the essential good in all of men'? I think Dumbledore had a more than solid reason to trust Snape and Dumbledores 'gueses' usualy prove to be acurate
Dumbledore makes mistakes just like the next man. Dumbledore admits that when he makes a mistake it's usually a big one. Being wrong about Snape is just that, a huge mistake.

Both very good points. That's why we're here discussing the topic in version four. :)

That's actually the whole thing: there are clues for both theories:

For example:

Snape warns the Order about Harry going to the DoM. According to Dumbledore he told Sirius to stay back.
Possibility one: He said so because Dumbledore wanted Sirius protected.
Possibility two: He wanted Sirius dead and knew that Sirius would do the opposite as told by him.

Both work well.

Also:

Dumbledore trusts Snape because he 'spun him a tale of great remorse' and Dumbledore's greatest weakness is to 'always believe in the best of people' = BadSnape

or

Dumbledore has an ironclad reason (we will find out in book 7) why he trusts Snape. Until book 7 we will not know which one.

Also:

Snape lasted two hours to get back to Voldemort in GoF because he wanted to ensure his spying in Hogwarts for Voldemort.

or

Snape lasted two hours to get back to Voldemort in GoF because he wanted to wait for Dumbledores indications.

Yeah, I'm curious to see what JKR makes of ol' Sevy ;)

I also believe that Dumbledore had asked Snape to kill him if necessary. I believe the poisin Dumbledore drank to get the Horcrux was fatal. When Dumbledore said,"Severus, please," I believe he was asking Snape to take him out of his misery and save the others.
I think that Dumbledore had good reason to trust Snape. Maybe, Dumbledore had saved Snape's life or vice versa. I believe Snape must have shown extreme loyalty to Dumbledore in the past, perhaps at his own risk. And less likely, but a possiblity none the less maybe Dumbledore had Snape make an Unbreakable Vow to ensure his loyalty.

I think that Deathly Hallows will tell a story of redemption for Snape, not justification.

I tend to believe that whatever reason Dumbledore had to trust Snape, it was, A. ironclad, and 2. non-magical - that is, I don't think Snape earned Dumbledore's trust by making and Unbreakable Vow. I don't think it was anything extra-personal, on the contrary - I think the reason was connected with something very intimate, human, about Snape that made Dumbledore trust him. And I sure as can be that Dumbledore was right to do so. I've always believed that, however unpleasant and unfair Snape is, he has always been loyal to Dumbledore, and not because of some obligation, but because of his character.

What all Snape actually told Dumbledore is very questionable.
Of course it is, but are you conceding Zgirnius's good reasons to believe that Snape told Dumbledore the particular things Zgirnius mentioned? There are all sorts of Order Members whose role we haven't really seen in action, and in some cases we have no particular reason to believe that they're actually doing anything beneficial to the Order. With Snape, we have several times when there's good reason to believe he gave Dumbledore important information and no specific reason to believe anyone else in particular could have provided that information. In other words, sure it's possible that someone else told Dumbledore that Voldemort was after the Potters, but there's good reason to believe Snape was the source and there's no other person X such that there's good reason to believe X was the source. If Snape isn't the source, we have to assume that someone else is good enough at Occlumency to hide the spying, close enough to Voldemort to get the information, and unknown to Harry. In particular, if there's such a person, why not have them try to teach Occlumency to Harry instead of Snape?

And yes, I think she enjoys the debate very much.
How do you reconcile that with the position that she shut the door on the Snape good argument by having him kill Dumbledore?

Which pretty much settles it for Snape. He's not a very valuable spy if he's going to give Order members over to Voldemort.
There was an editorial a year or two ago about this, called "The Burning Question of Emmeline," I think. I thought it was pretty good. The thesis was that Dumbledore, Snape, Emmeline, and probably Kingsley Shacklebolt conspired to fake Emmeline's death so that Voldemort would believe Snape's on his side. In particular, the author proposed that that was a big reason for the inclusion of the section of the tower dialogue where Dumbledore says he can fake Draco's death.

Beyond that, though, Snape just says that his information led to Emmeline's death, which doesn't at all mean that he gave the information with that intention. And note that that's really the only thing he says in Spinner's End that sounds like it was something that actually benefited the Death Eaters. Everything else he says there is a justification for something he did that at least seemed like it meant he was on the good side. In particular, note that he didn't bring up teaching Harry Occlumency, which in the Snape bad theory has to be explained as Snape actually trying to leave Harry's mind more vulnerable to Voldemort. If it were actually Snape's goal in the lessons, on Voldemort's orders, to open Harry's mind up more to help with the plan to get the prophecy, he could certainly have said that to Bellatrix. Instead, he doesn't mention it at all, which implies he doesn't think the lessons are a reason the bad guys should trust him.

Killing someone in cold blood who is defenseless is hardly brave.
First, that quote wasn't from me. Also, it's your opinion that it was in cold blood. And being willing to kill probably his only friend, forcing Snape to be a fugitive like the other Death Eaters and more often in the company of evil, in a way that will cause no pain, according to the friend's orders, in order to save more lives could be considered brave. I'm not sure if I consider it brave, but I can certainly see why someone would. So if the assumptions of the Snape good side are correct, it's arguably brave. If the assumptions of the Snape bad side are correct, it's obviously not brave. I'm not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with that statement because everyone obviously agrees with it, some of us just disagree that it applies to this case.

Also, how would you characterize Harry's behavior in forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion in the cave? I think it was commendable, and I think it must have been very difficult for him to know he was hurting someone whom he cared a lot about. If Snape's actions are similarly in line with Dumbledore's orders, then it's a similar case of hurting the victim on the victim's orders for the greater good and should be similarly commended, I would think. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it "brave," but I would consider it a positive thing.

If Snape's greatest regret is causing Voldemort to go after the Potters, he certainly has a funny way of showing it, considering the way he treats their orphaned son.
Keep in mind that he also saved the son's life multiple times, and thought he was saving his life at least one other time.
-Quirrell says Snape's counter-jinx saved Harry's life at the first Quidditch match.
-Alerting the Order in OotP saved Harry's life at the Ministry.
-Snape thought Lupin and Sirius were about to kill Harry in PoA.

The "contradiction" can easily be explained if we assume Snape cared about Lily and hated James, but felt indebted to him. He sees James in Harry because Harry mostly looks like James, and Snape's twisted head sees Harry as acting like James did, and he has trouble controlling his hatred.

The most important point here is, though, that Dumbledore is perfectly well aware that Snape hates Harry and so on, and still says in HBP that he believes that was Snape's greatest regret. So is Dumbledore both too trusting and too stupid to see that Snape's treatment of Harry means he doesn't really regret his role in the Potters' deaths?

I think that Deathly Hallows will tell a story of redemption for Snape, not justification.
That's a very interesting idea and an important distinction. So all along he's been evil, and killing Dumbledore and so on was because he's evil, but he'll redeem himself by saving Harry or something?

Snape is everything that is key to the story, none of the story would exist if Snape didn't. DD was fully aware of the unbreakable vow Snape made, and in fact both he and Snape were fully aware of it, before it was even made. He's a Slytherin, he does by definition anything he must do to gain advantage and power over others. DD understands this and it is pre-agreed by them (whether verbally or just through pre-understanding each other's motivations) that this must possibly take place.

It's all part of a destny that doesn't eventuate if key things don't take place.

In CoS, Ron and Harry steal the car and fly to Hogwarts. It's so stupid and idiotic and unthought out of them that you have to question why they are the heroes of the story when they can be this idiotic (me, at least!!!) and then VOILA later in the book if they hadn't have taken those actions then Aragon's family would hacve eaten them alive.

It's the same with Snape. He and DD have certain understandings of what must take place - these are the actions that are going to cause book 7 to work out (mostly) ok in the end.

I would bet everything I own and my own life thrown into the bargain, that if DD didn't die at the end of Book 6, and if he didn't die specifically at the hand of Snape, then none of the eventual wonderful outcomes of Book 7 could ever take place.

That's a very interesting idea and an important distinction. So all along he's been evil, and killing Dumbledore and so on was because he's evil, but he'll redeem himself by saving Harry or something? You have gotten one out of three things right about the comment I made. I do not believe that Snape has been evil all along. I do not believe that he killed Dumbledore because he is evil, but I do believe he will redeem himself by helping to vanquish Voldemort in some way. I don't like generalities and I don't like labels. Things are far more complicated than that.

We all know that JK adds in little things that we are never
sure whether they are:
1) just color (e.g., every flavor beans "Alas! Earwax!" lol)
2) red herring
3) set up for more significant event (e.g., vanishing cabinets)

So why did she put in the bit about Tonks' patronus changing in HBP? Which
of these is it? Personally I believe it's 3) and a set up for why Dumbledore
trusts Snape - Snape's patronus changed when Lily was killed.
It's also a credible reason for Snape to give Tonks such a hard time
about it and wearing her heart on her sleeve - it hits him just a bit too
close to home.

So Snape is good and his patronus has Lily's brillant green eyes (or some
other obvious feature)(although a green eyed patronus would solve the
significance of Lily's eye thing as well, no?).

Waddya think? ;-) (Likely an old theory already discarded, but I could not
find discussion of it anywhere...)

Actually, the quotation you ascribe to IdaBomb was mine.
Sorry.

I was, of course, writing in the belief that DD was not killed in cold blood, but at DD's request, with extreme personal reluctance (with reference to the snatch of conversation that Hagrid overheard). If, come July, it turns out I'm wrong about this and about Snape being good, I will be the first to acknowledge he wasn't being brave.
The fact is that Snape killed a defenseless old man, rather than try to help him, so I'd call that in cold blood and in no way brave. While the theory that Dumbledore actually ordered Snape to do this, which meant he would no longer be able to help Harry hunt and destroy the Horcruxes, is interesting, it simply doesn't hold water.

Dumbledore may make big mistakes, but he doesn't tend to make stupid, naive mistakes or mistakes based on total and utter misjudgement of character. He may be wrong about Snape (I doubt it, personally, but admit it's possible) but if he is, I can't think he will be wrong in such an obvious way as to simply take Snape's word on trust without any other evidence, or to misread a totally evil character with no scruples at all as being a deeply remorseful character with an acute conscience. If Snape is on the bad side, I think it is more likely that DD was absolutely right in detecting Snape's remorse, but that Voldemort managed to use that to re-recruit Snape in a way that DD didn't expect.
Snape betraying Dumbledore doesn't necessitate Dumbledore making stupid, naive mistakes, or to take Snape's word on trust without any other evidence. If Snape is capable of fooling Voldemort, there's no reason to think he couldn't fool Dumbledore.


I also believe that Dumbledore had asked Snape to kill him if necessary. I believe the poisin Dumbledore drank to get the Horcrux was fatal. When Dumbledore said,"Severus, please," I believe he was asking Snape to take him out of his misery and save the others.
I think that Dumbledore had good reason to trust Snape. Maybe, Dumbledore had saved Snape's life or vice versa. I believe Snape must have shown extreme loyalty to Dumbledore in the past, perhaps at his own risk. And less likely, but a possiblity none the less maybe Dumbledore had Snape make an Unbreakable Vow to ensure his loyalty.
I also think it's very possible that Dumbledore was dying from the poison in the cave, but I don't think he would have been able to communicate this to Snape in the brief moment before he died. I also don't think Dumbledore would ever ask someone to make an Unbreakable Vow, since failure to comply would result in their death. That just doesn't sound like Dumbledore.


I think that Deathly Hallows will tell a story of redemption for Snape, not justification.
I'm thinking Snape is beyond redemption. He had a choice to help the Order, but instead betrayed them. So perhaps Deathly Hallows will be more a story of consequences for Snape.


Of course it is, but are you conceding Zgirnius's good reasons to believe that Snape told Dumbledore the particular things Zgirnius mentioned? There are all sorts of Order Members whose role we haven't really seen in action, and in some cases we have no particular reason to believe that they're actually doing anything beneficial to the Order. With Snape, we have several times when there's good reason to believe he gave Dumbledore important information and no specific reason to believe anyone else in particular could have provided that information. In other words, sure it's possible that someone else told Dumbledore that Voldemort was after the Potters, but there's good reason to believe Snape was the source and there's no other person X such that there's good reason to believe X was the source. If Snape isn't the source, we have to assume that someone else is good enough at Occlumency to hide the spying, close enough to Voldemort to get the information, and unknown to Harry. In particular, if there's such a person, why not have them try to teach Occlumency to Harry instead of Snape?
But no other Order member killed Dumbledore, which forces us to question why Snape killed him. If Dumbledore indeed decided to sacrifice himself so that Snape could continue his role as a spy, with the unfortunate consequence that Dumbledore will no longer be able to help Harry hunt and destroy the Horcruxes, then we need to see evidence that Snape's role as a spy is beneficial enough to cause Dumbledore to make that decision. Snape's failure to tell anybody about Voldemort's plot to lure Harry to the Ministry by making him think Sirius was in trouble is a really bad mark against Snape's value as a spy. I just don't see any evidence that his spying is producing any real results. So why would Dumbledore feel the need to sacrifice himself, especially when he'd be better off helping Harry with the Horcruxes. While an interesting theory, it just doesn't add up.

As for Snape teaching Harry Occlumency, Dumbledore admitted that was a mistake, and also hints that perhaps he overestimated Snape in that regard. What else did Dumbledore get wrong about Snape?

How do you reconcile that with the position that she shut the door on the Snape good argument by having him kill Dumbledore?
I think it's obvious that door hasn't been shut.

There was an editorial a year or two ago about this, called "The Burning Question of Emmeline," I think. I thought it was pretty good. The thesis was that Dumbledore, Snape, Emmeline, and probably Kingsley Shacklebolt conspired to fake Emmeline's death so that Voldemort would believe Snape's on his side. In particular, the author proposed that that was a big reason for the inclusion of the section of the tower dialogue where Dumbledore says he can fake Draco's death.
But that's all theory and a lot of assumption. There's no real evidence that her death was faked. I think we're better off sticking with what we know to be true from the books, and working from there.

Beyond that, though, Snape just says that his information led to Emmeline's death, which doesn't at all mean that he gave the information with that intention. And note that that's really the only thing he says in Spinner's End that sounds like it was something that actually benefited the Death Eaters. Everything else he says there is a justification for something he did that at least seemed like it meant he was on the good side. In particular, note that he didn't bring up teaching Harry Occlumency, which in the Snape bad theory has to be explained as Snape actually trying to leave Harry's mind more vulnerable to Voldemort. If it were actually Snape's goal in the lessons, on Voldemort's orders, to open Harry's mind up more to help with the plan to get the prophecy, he could certainly have said that to Bellatrix. Instead, he doesn't mention it at all, which implies he doesn't think the lessons are a reason the bad guys should trust him.
Keep in mind that an evil Snape has a cover to uphold at Hogwarts. He's not going to do anything under Dumbledore's nose to make him suspicious, so it's quite easy to argue that he made sure Harry wouldn't learn anything. Either way, Voldemort's plan worked.

First, that quote wasn't from me. Also, it's your opinion that it was in cold blood. And being willing to kill probably his only friend, forcing Snape to be a fugitive like the other Death Eaters and more often in the company of evil, in a way that will cause no pain, according to the friend's orders, in order to save more lives could be considered brave. I'm not sure if I consider it brave, but I can certainly see why someone would. So if the assumptions of the Snape good side are correct, it's arguably brave. If the assumptions of the Snape bad side are correct, it's obviously not brave. I'm not sure what you were hoping to accomplish with that statement because everyone obviously agrees with it, some of us just disagree that it applies to this case.
I meant exactly what I said. Snape killed a defenseless man in cold blood. If Snape was Dumbledore's friend he would not have done it. According to what Bellatrix told Harry, you can't curse someone with an Unforgivable Curse unless you really mean it (forget the exact wording), so I don't think Snape would have been able to kill Dumbledore with an AK unless he hated him.

Also, how would you characterize Harry's behavior in forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion in the cave? I think it was commendable, and I think it must have been very difficult for him to know he was hurting someone whom he cared a lot about. If Snape's actions are similarly in line with Dumbledore's orders, then it's a similar case of hurting the victim on the victim's orders for the greater good and should be similarly commended, I would think. I don't know if I'd necessarily call it "brave," but I would consider it a positive thing.
The difference is that we know Dumbledore ordered Harry to force him to drink the potion. We don't know Dumbledore ordered Snape to kill him. Harry also had no idea what would happen, and was trusting Dumbledore blindly. Although he could tell the potion was causing Dumbledore enourmous distress, he didn't know if Dumbledore would die from drinking it. As far as he knew, Dumbledore might have recovered. There's a big difference between that and Snape cursing Dumbledore with an AK.

Keep in mind that he also saved the son's life multiple times, and thought he was saving his life at least one other time.
-Quirrell says Snape's counter-jinx saved Harry's life at the first Quidditch match.
-Alerting the Order in OotP saved Harry's life at the Ministry.
-Snape thought Lupin and Sirius were about to kill Harry in PoA.
Snape explains his behavior at Hogwarts in Spinners End. I'm satisfied with the explanation JK Rowling gives us in that chapter. Also remember that Snape tried several times to have Harry expelled, which would have left Harry defenseless against Voldemort, not being given the opportunity to learn what he has over the years at Hogwarts.

The "contradiction" can easily be explained if we assume Snape cared about Lily and hated James, but felt indebted to him. He sees James in Harry because Harry mostly looks like James, and Snape's twisted head sees Harry as acting like James did, and he has trouble controlling his hatred.
But this is all theory based on assumption. There's nothing in the books to suggest Snape ever cared about Lily, although there is ample evidence that he hated James.

The most important point here is, though, that Dumbledore is perfectly well aware that Snape hates Harry and so on, and still says in HBP that he believes that was Snape's greatest regret. So is Dumbledore both too trusting and too stupid to see that Snape's treatment of Harry means he doesn't really regret his role in the Potters' deaths?
Until JK Rowling tells us why Dumbledore trusts Snape when nobody else would, we'll just have to guess.


Snape is everything that is key to the story, none of the story would exist if Snape didn't. DD was fully aware of the unbreakable vow Snape made, and in fact both he and Snape were fully aware of it, before it was even made. He's a Slytherin, he does by definition anything he must do to gain advantage and power over others. DD understands this and it is pre-agreed by them (whether verbally or just through pre-understanding each other's motivations) that this must possibly take place.
I think Dumbledore would have rather helped Harry hunt and destroy the Horcruxes. I can't see Dumbledore leaving that responsiblity to Harry by choice.

It's all part of a destny that doesn't eventuate if key things don't take place.

In CoS, Ron and Harry steal the car and fly to Hogwarts. It's so stupid and idiotic and unthought out of them that you have to question why they are the heroes of the story when they can be this idiotic (me, at least!!!) and then VOILA later in the book if they hadn't have taken those actions then Aragon's family would hacve eaten them alive.

It's the same with Snape. He and DD have certain understandings of what must take place - these are the actions that are going to cause book 7 to work out (mostly) ok in the end.

I would bet everything I own and my own life thrown into the bargain, that if DD didn't die at the end of Book 6, and if he didn't die specifically at the hand of Snape, then none of the eventual wonderful outcomes of Book 7 could ever take place.
Well, yeah, it is after all a book we're talking about. Everything happens according to the plot.


We all know that JK adds in little things that we are never
sure whether they are:
1) just color (e.g., every flavor beans "Alas! Earwax!" lol)
2) red herring
3) set up for more significant event (e.g., vanishing cabinets)

So why did she put in the bit about Tonks' patronus changing in HBP? Which
of these is it? Personally I believe it's 3) and a set up for why Dumbledore
trusts Snape - Snape's patronus changed when Lily was killed.
It's also a credible reason for Snape to give Tonks such a hard time
about it and wearing her heart on her sleeve - it hits him just a bit too
close to home.

So Snape is good and his patronus has Lily's brillant green eyes (or some
other obvious feature)(although a green eyed patronus would solve the
significance of Lily's eye thing as well, no?).

Waddya think? ;-) (Likely an old theory already discarded, but I could not
find discussion of it anywhere...)
Or it could simply be related to Tonk's love for Lupin and nothing more. Not everything that happens is necessarily foreshadowing something else.

I think that Deathly Hallows will tell a story of redemption for Snape, not justification.

I agree, but through exposition of backstory.

Beyond that, though, Snape just says that his information led to Emmeline's death, which doesn't at all mean that he gave the information with that intention.

I would add that he takes credit for providing this information at the same time as he takes credit for providing the information that led to the death of Sirius Black. We know his involvement in that was indirect, because we know Kreacher was the one directly helping to set up the DoM trap for Harry. Snape provided at most information tangentially related to Sirius and Harry. The inclusion of these two deaths in the same argument suggests to me the situation sare parallel in some way - if Vance is indeed dead, then the information Snape provided was not expected to lead to her death, just as Snape did not expect the death of Sirius Black to result from anything he did in OotP.

You have gotten one out of three things right about the comment I made. I do not believe that Snape has been evil all along. I do not believe that he killed Dumbledore because he is evil, but I do believe he will redeem himself by helping to vanquish Voldemort in some way. I don't like generalities and I don't like labels. Things are far more complicated than that.
Then I'm clearly pretty confused about what you meant.

I thought you were saying that Snape's actions so far have not been justified, which implied to me that they were evil. I thought you were saying that his actions/dialogue in DH would not explain that his actions so far have been ok things to do, but rather that they would redeem him and make up for his earlier evil. Do you think Snape was justified in killing Dumbledore? Do you think he was justified in taking the vow? Do you think he was not justified, but also not evil? Was his motivation from stupidity or something else negative, but not evil?

Do you think Snape has ever been on Dumbledore's side? Do you think Dumbledore was right to trust him?

I agree, but through exposition of backstory.



I would add that he takes credit for providing this information at the same time as he takes credit for providing the information that led to the death of Sirius Black. We know his involvement in that was indirect, because we know Kreacher was the one directly helping to set up the DoM trap for Harry. Snape provided at most information tangentially related to Sirius and Harry. The inclusion of these two deaths in the same argument suggests to me the situation sare parallel in some way - if Vance is indeed dead, then the information Snape provided was not expected to lead to her death, just as Snape did not expect the death of Sirius Black to result from anything he did in OotP.

I agree with you on that zgirnus, along with the fact that he took credit for providing the information that led to both Sirius's and Vance's death, and that most likely that they do share some sort of paralell.

While the theory that Dumbledore actually ordered Snape to do this, which meant he would no longer be able to help Harry hunt and destroy the Horcruxes, is interesting, it simply doesn't hold water.

Much of DD's behaviour throughout HBP suggests that DD knows that he won't be around much longer and that capturing the cave Horcrux is likely to finish him off. Maybe someone else can help me out here with quotations and examples, because I'm too tired/lazy to go and get my copy of HBP, but I certainly got an impression of D handing over the baton to Harry, not a DD who expects to carry on helping Harry in year 7.

Also, DD knows at the beginning of the year thta Snape will have to leave hogwarts, because he, at long last, gives him the cursed DADA job. this also suggests to me that he was already planning a scene similar to the one on the Tower.

I meant exactly what I said. Snape killed a defenseless man in cold blood. If Snape was Dumbledore's friend he would not have done it. According to what Bellatrix told Harry, you can't curse someone with an Unforgivable Curse unless you really mean it (forget the exact wording), so I don't think Snape would have been able to kill Dumbledore with an AK unless he hated him.

But I don't think the emphasis in HBP on non-verbal spells was just meaningless background colour, which is why I suspect that the apparent AK wasn't really a hate-filled, truly-intended AK - what blasted DD off the Tower was the simultaneous non-verbal spell.

As for Snape teaching Harry Occlumency, Dumbledore admitted that was a mistake, and also hints that perhaps he overestimated Snape in that regard. What else did Dumbledore get wrong about Snape?

From an alternative perspective, Snape is demonstrably lying at at least 3 points at Spinner's end (see earlier post on this topic). What else did Voldemort get wrong about Snape?

Snape explains his behavior at Hogwarts in Spinners End. I'm satisfied with the explanation JK Rowling gives us in that chapter. Also remember that Snape tried several times to have Harry expelled, which would have left Harry defenseless against Voldemort, not being given the opportunity to learn what he has over the years at Hogwarts.

Even though Snape lies at several points at Spinner's End? If he's not telling the truth about DD's alleged fear that he'll revert to the dark side if he teaches DADA or his feelings about Harry when Harry first arrived at Hogwarts, why should he be telling the truth when he explains why he didn't supprt Quirrell?

And if Harry had never learnt he was a wizard and had never learnt to use his magical powers, would Voldemort have bothered to come after him? Surely he wouldn't have seen him as a threat, perceiving him as having no powers worth bothering about. Of course, Harry would still have had the power of love, but as that is the power the Dark Lord knows not, Voldemort, er...wouldn't have known about it. So from his perspective, Harry would have been a meaningless muggle boy, not a wizard with powers to match the Dark Lord.

Perversely, Snape's determination to have Harry expelled is one of the things that convinces me that, like Dobby, he's an over-enthusiastic but terribly misguided would-be protector of Harry.

Dumbledore may make big mistakes, but he doesn't tend to make stupid, naive mistakes or mistakes based on total and utter misjudgement of character. He may be wrong about Snape (I doubt it, personally, but admit it's possible) but if he is, I can't think he will be wrong in such an obvious way as to simply take Snape's word on trust without any other evidence, or to misread a totally evil character with no scruples at all as being a deeply remorseful character with an acute conscience. If Snape is on the bad side, I think it is more likely that DD was absolutely right in detecting Snape's remorse, but that Voldemort managed to use that to re-recruit Snape in a way that DD didn't expect.

In my view, the biggest mistake he's made in the series so far was believing that Sirius betrayed the Potters - that was an error caused by trusting too little, not too much.

And let's not forget that it was Dumbledore alone, out of all the Hogwarts staff when Tom Riddle was a pupil, who rumbled him, and he was a lot more plausible than Snape.

I don't think Snape supports Voldemort's views. But Snape has always loved the Dark Arts and from the looks of it he had a poor childhood. So I can see how he was easily seduced into becoming a DE. But like many DE once in he may have felt in over his head and continued to serve Voldemort out of fear more than anything else.

At some point Voldemort gave Snape orders to become a spy, so out of fear of Voldemort Snape fed Dumbledore a story of great remorse and Dumbledore bought it. I don't blame Dumbledore for buying into Snape's story because in the chance that Snape was sincere it presented an opportunity for a spy within Voldemort's circle. It must have been very tempting for Dumbledore to want to believe Snape especially since Dumbledore likes to believe the best in people as it is.

Once Voldemort lost his powers this probably came as a relief to Snape as he no longer had to live with the fear of his master. He no longer had to live a double life. I think he rather enjoyed teaching at Hogwarts and had respect for Dumbledore.

But once Voldemort returned to power so did Snape's fear of his master. I think Snape sees Voldemort and the Dark Arts as a greater power than what Dumbledore and the good side believe in. So in Snape's mind Voldemort is who he must satisfy. Therefore Snape's loyalties have switched back to serving his master.

To me this makes Snape a coward who jumps ship to whichever situation suites him best. Will he redeem his cowardly acts in DH remains to be seen.

Then I'm clearly pretty confused about what you meant.

I thought you were saying that Snape's actions so far have not been justified, which implied to me that they were evil. I thought you were saying that his actions/dialogue in DH would not explain that his actions so far have been ok things to do, but rather that they would redeem him and make up for his earlier evil. Do you think Snape was justified in killing Dumbledore? Do you think he was justified in taking the vow? Do you think he was not justified, but also not evil? Was his motivation from stupidity or something else negative, but not evil?

Do you think Snape has ever been on Dumbledore's side? Do you think Dumbledore was right to trust him?
The problem is with the black and white label of evil. I will answer your questions and maybe it will clarify things.

Do you think Snape has ever been on Dumbledore's side?
Yes. I believe he was totally on Dumbledore’s side from the time he left the Death Eaters in VWI until Voldemort’s return at the end of GoF. Once Dumbledore sent Snape back to Voldemort, Snape had to play both sides, giving and retaining information on both sides. Evidence for this is the fact that both Voldemort and Dumbledore trust Snape. He had to be providing both of them with valuable information.

Do you think Dumbledore was right to trust him? Yes. Dumbledore believed in Snape, plus I think there was an ironclad reason, as McGonagal said. I believe it involved protecting Harry, which Snape has continued to do. JK Rowling agreed with Emerson (July 17, 2005) that Dumbledore has been trusting to the point of recklessness, so I am not going to argue with the author. Dumbledore should have paid a little more attention to the fact that so many people mistrusted Snape.


Do you think Snape was justified in killing Dumbledore? No, I don’t. Killing Dumbledore cannot save Draco from Voldemort’s control. Voldemort cannot be killed until the horcruxes are destroyed. Dumbledore has been hunting them for years and only found two of them. I can’t believe he would turn that job over to Harry to solve for himself.

Do you think he was justified in taking the vow? No. The vow came too early in the story. It came before Dumbledore even told Harry about horcruxes. The vow could have been triggered at any time. I don’t believe Dumbledore would have agreed to be murdered. It would leave the Order in turmoil, the school in danger of closing, make Voldemort and his followers more ruthless and daring, and it would endanger Harry. The horcruxes need to be destroyed first.

Was his motivation from stupidity or something else negative, but not evil? His motivation was to stay alive. He feared Voldemort more than he feared Dumbledore. I guess the word I would use is selfish. He also may have thought that he would be able to motivate Draco to go into hiding, and thereby avoid triggering the vow.

The point that I was trying to make with my comment, that Deathly Hallows will be a story of redemption, it that the things that would have to be justified in order to excuse Snape’s action of killing Dumbledore are very difficult issues to defend.

I would add that he takes credit for providing this information at the same time as he takes credit for providing the information that led to the death of Sirius Black. We know his involvement in that was indirect, because we know Kreacher was the one directly helping to set up the DoM trap for Harry. Snape provided at most information tangentially related to Sirius and Harry. The inclusion of these two deaths in the same argument suggests to me the situation sare parallel in some way - if Vance is indeed dead, then the information Snape provided was not expected to lead to her death, just as Snape did not expect the death of Sirius Black to result from anything he did in OotP.
There's no reason to assume Snape didn't provide information in addition to Kreacher's. There's also the fact that Snape didn't tell the Order about Voldemort's plan to lure Harry to the Ministry by making him think Sirius was in trouble.


Much of DD's behaviour throughout HBP suggests that DD knows that he won't be around much longer and that capturing the cave Horcrux is likely to finish him off. Maybe someone else can help me out here with quotations and examples, because I'm too tired/lazy to go and get my copy of HBP, but I certainly got an impression of D handing over the baton to Harry, not a DD who expects to carry on helping Harry in year 7.
Dumbledore had just recently began hunting for the Horcruxes, so this was something new that he was still learning how to go about doing. He didn't even have full knowledge of the situation until Harry retrieved Slughorn's memory, so I'd hardly think Dumbledore was planning on passing the baton to Harry so soon, but rather had decided that Harry was now capable of helping him. Although Dumbledore had injured his hand, there was no evidence that he was dying because of it, so I see no particular reason why Dumbledore thought he wouldn't be around much longer.

Also, DD knows at the beginning of the year thta Snape will have to leave hogwarts, because he, at long last, gives him the cursed DADA job. this also suggests to me that he was already planning a scene similar to the one on the Tower.
I don't see how Dumbledore giving Snape the DADA job relates to the Tower scene. Perhaps Dumbledore had decided it was time for Snape to go. There are a lot of possible reasons why Dumbledore may have given Snape the DADA job that have nothing to do with Dumbledore sacrficing himself.

But I don't think the emphasis in HBP on non-verbal spells was just meaningless background colour, which is why I suspect that the apparent AK wasn't really a hate-filled, truly-intended AK - what blasted DD off the Tower was the simultaneous non-verbal spell.
There's a big difference between performing a non-verbal spell and doing it while uttering a completely different spell. We don't even know if it's possible. And non-verbal spells aren't necessarily "meaningless background colour" just because Snape didn't perform this questionable feat. Harry is obviously going to need to learn how to perform non-verbal spells.

From an alternative perspective, Snape is demonstrably lying at at least 3 points at Spinner's end (see earlier post on this topic). What else did Voldemort get wrong about Snape?
If you're referring to this post (http://www.cosforums.com/showpost.php?p=4363078&postcount=919) you weren't very convincing. I've already addressed those points and explained how there is no solid evidence that Snape was lying.

And if Harry had never learnt he was a wizard and had never learnt to use his magical powers, would Voldemort have bothered to come after him? Surely he wouldn't have seen him as a threat, perceiving him as having no powers worth bothering about. Of course, Harry would still have had the power of love, but as that is the power the Dark Lord knows not, Voldemort, er...wouldn't have known about it. So from his perspective, Harry would have been a meaningless muggle boy, not a wizard with powers to match the Dark Lord.
The Prophecy convinced Voldemort that Harry is a threat. That's why he tried to kill Harry when he was a little baby, before he ever had a chance to learn to use his magical powers. Harry being a meaningless muggle boy would in no way change this. If that was so, Dumbledore himself would have kept Harry out of Hogwarts in order to keep him safe. But he explains to Harry that Voldemort will keep coming after him no matter what, because of the Prophesy. This is why Dumbledore has kept a close watch over Harry over the years, doing what he can to prepare Harry for his inevitable confontation with Voldemort. Snape attempting to have Harry expelled is working directly against Dumbeldore's plans, so I'm not sure how this would help Harry.


I don't think Snape supports Voldemort's views. But Snape has always loved the Dark Arts and from the looks of it he had a poor childhood. So I can see how he was easily seduced into becoming a DE. But like many DE once in he may have felt in over his head and continued to serve Voldemort out of fear more than anything else.

At some point Voldemort gave Snape orders to become a spy, so out of fear of Voldemort Snape fed Dumbledore a story of great remorse and Dumbledore bought it. I don't blame Dumbledore for buying into Snape's story because in the chance that Snape was sincere it presented an opportunity for a spy within Voldemort's circle. It must have been very tempting for Dumbledore to want to believe Snape especially since Dumbledore likes to believe the best in people as it is.

Once Voldemort lost his powers this probably came as a relief to Snape as he no longer had to live with the fear of his master. He no longer had to live a double life. I think he rather enjoyed teaching at Hogwarts and had respect for Dumbledore.

But once Voldemort returned to power so did Snape's fear of his master. I think Snape sees Voldemort and the Dark Arts as a greater power than what Dumbledore and the good side believe in. So in Snape's mind Voldemort is who he must satisfy. Therefore Snape's loyalties have switched back to serving his master.

To me this makes Snape a coward who jumps ship to whichever situation suites him best. Will he redeem his cowardly acts in DH remains to be seen.
:tu: Excellent analysis, thanks for posting that.


Yes. Dumbledore believed in Snape, plus I think there was an ironclad reason, as McGonagal said. I believe it involved protecting Harry, which Snape has continued to do. JK Rowling agreed with Emerson (July 17, 2005) that Dumbledore has been trusting to the point of recklessness, so I am not going to argue with the author. Dumbledore should have paid a little more attention to the fact that so many people mistrusted Snape.
Interesting quote about Dumbledore trusting to the point of recklessness, and it backs the idea that he made a mistake trusting Snape.

No, I don’t. Killing Dumbledore cannot save Draco from Voldemort’s control. Voldemort cannot be killed until the horcruxes are destroyed. Dumbledore has been hunting them for years and only found two of them. I can’t believe he would turn that job over to Harry to solve for himself.

No. The vow came too early in the story. It came before Dumbledore even told Harry about horcruxes. The vow could have been triggered at any time. I don’t believe Dumbledore would have agreed to be murdered. It would leave the Order in turmoil, the school in danger of closing, make Voldemort and his followers more ruthless and daring, and it would endanger Harry. The horcruxes need to be destroyed first.
I agree that Dumbledore would consider the destruction of the Horcruxes to be the most important thing to be done. There's simply no reason for him to take himself out of the game when only two have been destroyed.

I don't see how Dumbledore giving Snape the DADA job relates to the Tower scene. Perhaps Dumbledore had decided it was time for Snape to go.

Despite the fact that he relies on Snape to heal the Horcrux wounds and tells Harry that it is beyond Madam Pomfrey's art? I would argue that, if he were planning to stay on himself the following year and continue the quest for horcruxes (which, as I said, I don't believe he was), he would need Snape's healing art. Even if he didn't know exactly how the curse worked, I don't think he would take the risk of losing his healer just when he most needed him.

There's a big difference between performing a non-verbal spell and doing it while uttering a completely different spell. We don't even know if it's possible.

Nor do we know it's not possible.

If you're referring to this post you weren't very convincing. I've already addressed those points and explained how there is no solid evidence that Snape was lying.

And I wasn't at all convinced by your explanation. there is enough solid evidence to convince me that snape was lying, although i accept, as different people interpret the books in different ways, it won't be enough to convince everybody. (And, incidentally, I prefer to say "I wasn't convinced" [= I personally don't agree with your argument] rather than "you weren't very convincing" [= your argument was rubbish], which seems to me to violate the "no rudeness" rule of this forum)

The Prophecy convinced Voldemort that Harry is a threat. That's why he tried to kill Harry when he was a little baby, before he ever had a chance to learn to use his magical powers. Harry being a meaningless muggle boy would in no way change this. If that was so, Dumbledore himself would have kept Harry out of Hogwarts in order to keep him safe.

Not necessarily. Dumbledore is also mindful of the fact that it is imperative for the safety of the entire wizarding world that Harry has the chance to face Voldemort. While concerned for Harry's safety, he's also anxious that Voldemort should be defeated, and this can only be achieved by Harry placing himself in danger.

Despite the fact that he relies on Snape to heal the Horcrux wounds and tells Harry that it is beyond Madam Pomfrey's art? I would argue that, if he were planning to stay on himself the following year and continue the quest for horcruxes (which, as I said, I don't believe he was), he would need Snape's healing art. Even if he didn't know exactly how the curse worked, I don't think he would take the risk of losing his healer just when he most needed him.
You didn't include my last sentence: "There are a lot of possible reasons why Dumbledore may have given Snape the DADA job that have nothing to do with Dumbledore sacrficing himself." My point is we don't know why Dumbledore gave Snape the DADA job. There's still no explanation as to why Dumbledore would sarcifice himself when the Horcruxes need to be found and destroyed.

Nor do we know it's not possible.
The fact that it hasn't been demonstrated in the first six books would suggest it's probably not.

And I wasn't at all convinced by your explanation. there is enough solid evidence to convince me that snape was lying, although i accept, as different people interpret the books in different ways, it won't be enough to convince everybody. (And, incidentally, I prefer to say "I wasn't convinced" [= I personally don't agree with your argument] rather than "you weren't very convincing" [= your argument was rubbish], which seems to me to violate the "no rudeness" rule of this forum)
Sorry if you're offended, but I stand by my original statement. We had no way of knowing what Snape was thinking back in Book 1, and we don't know why Dumbledore gave Snape the DADA job. Until we know this for sure, there is no solid evidence that Snape was lying. Ignoring my arguments and simply repeating your claim that Snape lied accomplishes nothing. If you don't feel my argument is convincing, feel free to explain why, rather than simply saying you weren't convinced.

Not necessarily. Dumbledore is also mindful of the fact that it is imperative for the safety of the entire wizarding world that Harry has the chance to face Voldemort. While concerned for Harry's safety, he's also anxious that Voldemort should be defeated, and this can only be achieved by Harry placing himself in danger.
I'm merely paraphrasing what Dumbledore himself said, it's not my interpretation. I believe he says it at the end of OotP when he explains the Prophesy and how it influenced Voldemort's actions to Harry (I referred to this in the part of my statement you didn't include). And again, Snape attempting to expel Harry would be working directly against Dumbeldore's plan, even in the example you just gave.

Also, DD knows at the beginning of the year thta Snape will have to leave hogwarts, because he, at long last, gives him the cursed DADA job. this also suggests to me that he was already planning a scene similar to the one on the Tower.
We don’t know this. A DADA teacher can only remain as a DADA teacher for one year but could he take on a different position the next year? This is what JKR had Ron saying in HBP. Did she have Ron saying this for no reason? And if not what is the reason that JKR put this in the book? And story wise it could make sense if Dumbledore’s plan was to get Slughorn to Hogwarts and as a result moved Snape for one year. Snape moving to DADA does not need to have anything to do with some plan with Snape. We have no canon on Dumbledore wishing that Snape leaves Hogwarts but we have plenty of canon that Dumbledore needed Slughorn at Hogwarts.
If he's not telling the truth about DD's alleged fear that he'll revert to the dark side if he teaches DADA or his feelings about Harry when Harry first arrived at Hogwarts, why should he be telling the truth when he explains why he didn't supprt Quirrell?
But Snape is telling at least part of the truth. We have a JKR quote in which she gives precisely this answer: Snape doesn’t get the DADA job because Dumbledore fears it brings out the worst of Snape. She adds that it is not the complete reason but it is a reason none-the-less. Snape did not lie when he made this statement.
And if Harry had never learnt he was a wizard and had never learnt to use his magical powers, would Voldemort have bothered to come after him? Surely he wouldn't have seen him as a threat, perceiving him as having no powers worth bothering about.
Voldemort was bothered enough about Harry to come after him when he was one year old (and had not learned his magical powers) so I think it is safe to assume that he would come after Harry anyway. Better learn some magic.

I've never understood how Dumbledore can repeatedly emphasize how much he trusts Snape, and then deny him the DADA job because he think it will lead him back to the Dark side or something. I do think Snape is good, but I don't understand why he would repeatedly apply for the job if he knows it's cursed (unless maybe he plans to go back to potions after one year, and why Dumbledore and Jo used this reason. I don't see what benefit it would be to him to be a DE after Voldemort's near-death and before his return. Why is it he wanted the job so badly, and is that the real reason he wasn't given it?

I think Snape is bad.
He killed Dumbledore
I don't think he could fool Voldemort and act like he's on his side. Voldemort would find out that Snape is betraying him. Since Snape's not dead, obviously Voldemort is sure of his loyalty.
Plus, he totally screams evil anyway.

But he was fooling DD much longer than he had to fool Voldemort, and Dumbledore is probably as powerful, and as good a legilimens, as LV is.
He does "scream evil," but I'm hoping JKR will take this opportunity to show us that things are not always what they seem. I think it will be like the first book, where we believe Snape is evil the whole time and suddenly we find out he was "good" after all.

He does "scream evil," but I'm hoping JKR will take this opportunity to show us that things are not always what they seem. I think it will be like the first book, where we believe Snape is evil the whole time and suddenly we find out he was "good" after all.
That’s true but he was good with a twist: he tried to save Harry because he wanted to be even with his father. This I always found rather peculiar: normally one should expect that a teacher doesn’t need an additional reason to try to save an 11 year old boy.

But Snape did need an additional reason which makes him being good without showing us he supported Dumbledore’s stance against evil. He had his own reasons for helping Harry and those reasons didn’t point to unwavering loyalty to Dumbledore but to issues with Snape’s past.

It was about Snape himself, his own peace of mind. The greatest remorse thing also points to Snape turning for “selfish” reasons. We don’t see Snape regretting that he played a part in making Harry an orphan seeing how he treats Harry. Yet this, according to Dumbledore, is a source of great remorse and regret. What remorse if he even can’t find it in himself to treat the victim of his telling with something like normality? It seems that he regrets it for personal reason, something like the debt he felt he owed or other more forbidden reasons. In POA we see the same: Snape is acting in a way which goes against the grain of Dumbledore’s feelings. He is in favour of the dementors kiss where we know that Dumbledore’s abhors dementors. Once again we see that Snape is not loyal to the things Dumbledore stands for.

But none of these things point to unwavering loyalty to Dumbledore. It points to something for or with Harry.

Given this lack of standing for Dumbledore’s principles it is in line with Snape to actual betray Dumbledore. We have been shown that Dumbledore trusts Snape but have we see Snape standing up for Dumbledore’s principles? Is taking a vow really in line with Dumbledore’s way of dealing with matters? Is promising someone to help him to become a murderer really something which Dumbledore could possible approve of?

How can he return to Voldemort if he acts for Harry is something which might have crossed Dumbledore’s mind. Only a fool could think he can get away with that. But maybe Snape is such a fool. It would make for an interesting last book: Snape betrayed Dumbledore and is still bound to Harry in some way.

That’s true but he was good with a twist: he tried to save Harry because he wanted to be even with his father. This I always found rather peculiar: normally one should expect that a teacher doesn’t need an additional reason to try to save an 11 year old boy.

That's actually ironic when you think about it, isn't it? Dumbledore or Hagrid would have done the same thing in a heartbeat, and in fact have saved Harry's live. However, they have gotten no especial credit. Snape does it (with help from Hermione), however, and all of a sudden all the nasty things he's done to Harry don't matter and he's heroic.

But Snape did need an additional reason which makes him being good without showing us he supported Dumbledore’s stance against evil. He had his own reasons for helping Harry and those reasons didn’t point to unwavering loyalty to Dumbledore but to issues with Snape’s past.

Exactly. His concern was to be rid of his debt to James. Harry was just a means to an end.

It was about Snape himself, his own peace of mind. The greatest remorse thing also points to Snape turning for “selfish” reasons. We don’t see Snape regretting that he played a part in making Harry an orphan seeing how he treats Harry. Yet this, according to Dumbledore, is a source of great remorse and regret. What remorse if he even can’t find it in himself to treat the victim of his telling with something like normality?

That bothers me, too. It can't have been regret about any of the Potters' deaths, because he doesn't treat Harry like the orphaned son of one he cared a bit about. Maybe we'll find out that an unpaid life debt has severe consequences if the debtee dies- and especially if the death was the debtor's fault in any way.

It seems that he regrets it for personal reason, something like the debt he felt he owed or other more forbidden reasons. In POA we see the same: Snape is acting in a way which goes against the grain of Dumbledore’s feelings. He is in favour of the dementors kiss where we know that Dumbledore’s abhors dementors. Once again we see that Snape is not loyal to the things Dumbledore stands for.

No, and Dumbledore had to use the Trio to keep him from de-souling Sirius in his desire for revenge. I saw him taking Snape down a peg there.

But none of these things point to unwavering loyalty to Dumbledore. It points to something for or with Harry.

Given this lack of standing for Dumbledore’s principles it is in line with Snape to actual betray Dumbledore. We have been shown that Dumbledore trusts Snape but have we see Snape standing up for Dumbledore’s principles? Is taking a vow really in line with Dumbledore’s way of dealing with matters? Is promising someone to help him to become a murderer really something which Dumbledore could possible approve of?

Dumbledore would agree to let anyone kill him if he thought it was the only way to save their world- that I believe.

How can he return to Voldemort if he acts for Harry is something which might have crossed Dumbledore’s mind. Only a fool could think he can get away with that. But maybe Snape is such a fool. It would make for an interesting last book: Snape betrayed Dumbledore and is still bound to Harry in some way.

I think he may well be. I think as always, Snape is capable of good- he just hasn't particularly done any yet. I think his unpaid debt to James and the truth about that will be what eventually drives him to abandon his self interest and finally chose what's right.

It would make for an interesting last book: Snape betrayed Dumbledore and is still bound to Harry in some way.
That's a totally interesting thought :D I mean, usually we assume that Snape is good means that he is loyal to Dumbledore. But what if he is not loyal to Dumbledore, but in fact has to do good because of Harry?

I personally am more on the 'loyal to Dumbledore' side, but of course there is this thing on the tower that happened...:hmm:

I think what's important to have in mind that most actions by Snape can be seen from two sides, out of two motivations. There is (until now) not one single truth, but a serie of actions which can be motivated by 'evil' or by 'good'.

Except of one though: how he treats Neville. That's just nasty.

We don’t know this. A DADA teacher can only remain as a DADA teacher for one year but could he take on a different position the next year? This is what JKR had Ron saying in HBP. Did she have Ron saying this for no reason? And if not what is the reason that JKR put this in the book? And story wise it could make sense if Dumbledore’s plan was to get Slughorn to Hogwarts and as a result moved Snape for one year. Snape moving to DADA does not need to have anything to do with some plan with Snape. We have no canon on Dumbledore wishing that Snape leaves Hogwarts but we have plenty of canon that Dumbledore needed Slughorn at Hogwarts.
So if Ron is correct, Dumbledore giving Snape the DADA job really doesn't amount to all that much, if Snape could simply take up potions again the following year. Dumbledore apparently needed Slughorn at Hogwarts, presumably to give Harry a chance to get the memory Dumbledore needed.

Voldemort was bothered enough about Harry to come after him when he was one year old (and had not learned his magical powers) so I think it is safe to assume that he would come after Harry anyway. Better learn some magic.
:cool: Exactimundo. This would seem to point towards Snape not really caring about Harry's welfare, if he's so eager to have Harry expelled.

I've never understood how Dumbledore can repeatedly emphasize how much he trusts Snape, and then deny him the DADA job because he think it will lead him back to the Dark side or something. I do think Snape is good, but I don't understand why he would repeatedly apply for the job if he knows it's cursed (unless maybe he plans to go back to potions after one year, and why Dumbledore and Jo used this reason. I don't see what benefit it would be to him to be a DE after Voldemort's near-death and before his return. Why is it he wanted the job so badly, and is that the real reason he wasn't given it?
That's a good question: why does Snape want the DADA job so badly if he knows he can only have it for one year? What would that accomplish? Perhaps it's just a matter of pride for Snape? Being continually turned down for the position also points towards a bit of friction between Snape and Dumbledore.

But he was fooling DD much longer than he had to fool Voldemort, and Dumbledore is probably as powerful, and as good a legilimens, as LV is.
He does "scream evil," but I'm hoping JKR will take this opportunity to show us that things are not always what they seem. I think it will be like the first book, where we believe Snape is evil the whole time and suddenly we find out he was "good" after all.
But Snape didn't kill anyone in the first book. We suspected him through Harry's eyes, but it turned out Quirrell was the villian instead. That's not the case in HBP, where Harry actually sees Snape in action on the Tower.

Except of one though: how he treats Neville. That's just nasty.
I completely agree. Snape may treat Harry badly because of his hatred for James, but what did poor Neville or his family ever do to him? The kid's parents were tortured into insanity, yet Snape chooses to constantly belittle him and treat him like dirt. That is nasty.

We all know he's nasty and unpleasant, but this is no guide to his loyalties. He could be just as ansty and still loyal to Dumbledore and the Order.

Here's another thought. Snape has been glaringly shown to be evil - we have a whole chapter of him explaining all the details of his terms with Voldemort to a Death Eater and being absolutely convincing, leaving no doubt about his loyalty; then he killed Dumbledore. Jo couldn't have found a more obvious way to show him being as evil as hell. Apart from Dumbledore's trust, practically nothing points to Snape being faithful to the good side. So after all this effort to make him as bad as he can get, do you thing he'll turn out to be, well, evil in the end? I don't know about you, but that will be a hell of a disappointment to me. He's all evil and Death Eater-ish and in the end all we recieve is a confirmation. And Dumbledore's trust is explained by his naive belief in the story that Snape "spun" him. :no:

It's obvious that's something's missing, and whatever it is, it can hardly make a contribution to the "Snape is evil" bag of arguments. It has enough of them as it is. I'm certain it will be the reason for his alliance with Dumbledore and will show him as a Dumbledore's man through and through.

The way I see it, JK Rowling deliberately kept things ambiguous about Snape for the first five books, then, as you put it, showed him being evil as hell in the sixth. So now the question of Snape's loyalty has been answered, setting the stage for his actions in the last book. I don't find that disappointing because the last book will concentrate on Harry's hunt for the Horcruxes and his eventual showdown with Voldemort. Snape is not the main character, so revealing his true loyalty doesn't have to be the climax to the series. In fact, it makes a perfect climax to Half Blood Prince, which in many ways was Snape's book (it's even named after him).

The Deathly Hallows will be Harry's book through and through. Snape, although important and interesting, is still only a secondary character.

As for why Dumbledore trusted Snape when no one else would, that will be answered in the last book. We don't know if it was simply "his naive belief in the story that Snape "spun" him; indeed it will probably be much more than that. Snape doesn't have to be good for the explanation of Dumbledore's trust in him to be clever and surprising.

The way I see it, JK Rowling deliberately kept things ambiguous about Snape for the first five books, then, as you put it, showed him being evil as hell in the sixth. So now the question of Snape's loyalty has been answered, setting the stage for his actions in the last book. I don't find that disappointing because the last book will concentrate on Harry's hunt for the Horcruxes and his eventual showdown with Voldemort. Snape is not the main character, so revealing his true loyalty doesn't have to be the climax to the series. In fact, it makes a perfect climax to Half Blood Prince, which in many ways was Snape's book (it's even named after him).
I never thought about it that way but yes it does make sense. HBP is Snape's book and his role in it were probably the biggest we'll see from him in the series. I think it'd take too much away from Harry in DH if Snape came through in the end to save the day for him or give Harry some kind of crucial advantage over Voldemort.

The way I see it, JK Rowling deliberately kept things ambiguous about Snape for the first five books, then, as you put it, showed him being evil as hell in the sixth. So now the question of Snape's loyalty has been answered, setting the stage for his actions in the last book. I don't find that disappointing because the last book will concentrate on Harry's hunt for the Horcruxes and his eventual showdown with Voldemort. Snape is not the main character, so revealing his true loyalty doesn't have to be the climax to the series. In fact, it makes a perfect climax to Half Blood Prince, which in many ways was Snape's book (it's even named after him).

Snape is one of the lead characters. He's of the highest importance to the books, along with Harry, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Lily, I think this much has been made clear. So I think thre will be a lot of Snape in DH, and significant appearances, too.

It's obvious that something's missing about Snape. A revelation has not been made yet - he is still ambiguous. If he weren't, things would not have been open to interpretation in both directions and this thread wouldn't exist. So the actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. We haven't seen everything about him yet, or at least I feel that things are very far from settled.

Snape is one of the lead characters. He's of the highest importance to the books, along with Harry, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Lily, I think this much has been made clear. So I think thre will be a lot of Snape in DH, and significant appearances, too.

It's obvious that something's missing about Snape. A revelation has not been made yet - he is still ambiguous. If he weren't, things would not have been open to interpretation in both directions and this thread wouldn't exist. So the actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. We haven't seen everything about him yet, or at least I feel that things are very far from settled.

I agree with you on this Yoana, from what I remember there was a scene in HBP where Harry asks Dumbledore whether he was sure about trusting Snape -- he ended up taking his time in thinking about it... so in my opinion, like what you said, there's more to Snape than what we already know. Dumbledore obviously was thinking over something that he hasn't told anyone, Harry and the Order included. He's done this before -- with Professor Dippet. Since Dippet was so fond of Tom Riddle and he trusted him, Dumbledore told him different reasons why he shouldn't be allowed to come back and be a Hogwarts Professor, than what he told Harry. It seems as if he's doing the same thing again with Snape ;).

The books are told from Harry's point of view for the vast majority of the chapters. I don't expect to see a lot of Snape in person in DH because of the friction between Harry and Snape. I hope we see a chapter that is similiar to Spinners End, in which Voldemort confronts Snape and Draco. There may a lot of conversation about Snape, but not too many appearances. JK Rowling said that Voldemort was going to finally play a bigger role in this book. So it will be interesting to see how much she deviates from the Harry perspective to show what is happening with Voldemort and Snape.

Snape is one of the lead characters. He's of the highest importance to the books, along with Harry, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Lily, I think this much has been made clear. So I think thre will be a lot of Snape in DH, and significant appearances, too.

It's obvious that something's missing about Snape. A revelation has not been made yet - he is still ambiguous. If he weren't, things would not have been open to interpretation in both directions and this thread wouldn't exist. So the actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. We haven't seen everything about him yet, or at least I feel that things are very far from settled.

I agree that Snape is of high importance and there is still some things to be learned about him. I think there should be some kind of confrontation that takes place with Snape and Harry.

I agree that Snape is of high importance and there is still some things to be learned about him. I think there should be some kind of confrontation that takes place with Snape and Harry.

I think that there should be some kind of confrontation as well. Harry needs to get past his bias against Snape before he goes off to face Voldemort. If he doesn't do that -- than he won't have a chance.

I agree with you on this Yoana, from what I remember there was a scene in HBP where Harry asks Dumbledore whether he was sure about trusting Snape -- he ended up taking his time in thinking about it... so in my opinion, like what you said, there's more to Snape than what we already know. Dumbledore obviously was thinking over something that he hasn't told anyone, Harry and the Order included. He's done this before -- with Professor Dippet. Since Dippet was so fond of Tom Riddle and he trusted him, Dumbledore told him different reasons why he shouldn't be allowed to come back and be a Hogwarts Professor, than what he told Harry. It seems as if he's doing the same thing again with Snape .
Dumbledore's hesitation there is somewhat ambiguous. It could mean that he is thinking over his reason for trusting Snape and wondering if he is right, or it could mean he's wondering just how much he ought to tell Harry. You're right - he didn't tell Harry everything!

I think that there should be some kind of confrontation as well. Harry needs to get past his bias against Snape before he goes off to face Voldemort. If he doesn't do that -- than he won't have a chance.
You know, I don't really see why Harry should need to work though anything with Snape in order to have a chance against Voldemort. It's all about Harry and Voldemort here. While it would be great fun if a twist about Snape came up, it's not really Snape's battle, and Harry's attitude to Snape is pretty much irrelevant as far as I can see. Snape may well play an important role, but I certainly don't see him making his peace with Harry first. Snape's actions in DH are what will define his character, not his words, or Harry's opinion of him.

I never thought about it that way but yes it does make sense. HBP is Snape's book and his role in it were probably the biggest we'll see from him in the series. I think it'd take too much away from Harry in DH if Snape came through in the end to save the day for him or give Harry some kind of crucial advantage over Voldemort.
Exactly. Harry will be the one who defeats Voldemort, and I don't believe anyone is going to be saving the day for Harry. Harry will be the one saving the day for everyone else. :)

I also believe it will be Ron and Hermione who give Harry the most help.


Snape is one of the lead characters. He's of the highest importance to the books, along with Harry, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Lily, I think this much has been made clear. So I think thre will be a lot of Snape in DH, and significant appearances, too.
I see Harry as the lead character, and Ron and Hermione as the other two lead characters. Snape, while important, is simply not on the same level as these three. I'd place him on a secondary level with Dumbledore and Voldemort. As for Lily, she died before the series started. She obviously played a key role by casting the spell protecting Harry, but she's in no way a lead character.

It's obvious that something's missing about Snape. A revelation has not been made yet - he is still ambiguous. If he weren't, things would not have been open to interpretation in both directions and this thread wouldn't exist. So the actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. We haven't seen everything about him yet, or at least I feel that things are very far from settled.
Snape killing Dumbledore was a revelation, whether or not you think he is good or evil. Dumbledore's death was a huge turning point in the plot, and will affect everything that happens in Deathly Hallows.

And this thread exists only because not everyone agrees about Snape. But readers' opinions don't have any impact on the plot. For example, if JK Rowling had not announced that Dumbledore was indeed dead, there would still be a lot of discussion and arguments over whether or not he really was dead. But that wouldn't change the fact that he's dead. So the existence of this thread doesn't necessarily mean an actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. It either will or it won't. JK Rowling made that decision long ago.


I agree with you on this Yoana, from what I remember there was a scene in HBP where Harry asks Dumbledore whether he was sure about trusting Snape -- he ended up taking his time in thinking about it... so in my opinion, like what you said, there's more to Snape than what we already know. Dumbledore obviously was thinking over something that he hasn't told anyone, Harry and the Order included. He's done this before -- with Professor Dippet. Since Dippet was so fond of Tom Riddle and he trusted him, Dumbledore told him different reasons why he shouldn't be allowed to come back and be a Hogwarts Professor, than what he told Harry. It seems as if he's doing the same thing again with Snape;).
I think the main thing we'll find out in Deathly Hallows is why Dumbledore trusted Snape when nobody else would. But it won't change the fact that Snape killed Dumbledore. That's something he can't take back.


The books are told from Harry's point of view for the vast majority of the chapters. I don't expect to see a lot of Snape in person in DH because of the friction between Harry and Snape. I hope we see a chapter that is similiar to Spinners End, in which Voldemort confronts Snape and Draco. There may a lot of conversation about Snape, but not too many appearances. JK Rowling said that Voldemort was going to finally play a bigger role in this book. So it will be interesting to see how much see deviates from the Harry perspective to show what is happening with Voldemort and Snape.
:agree: Yes indeedy. Unless Snape spends a lot of time in Harry's company, it's doubtful we'll be seeing very much of him in Deathly Hallows. And at the moment it doesn't appear that Snape is on Harry's Christmas card list.


You know, I don't really see why Harry should need to work though anything with Snape in order to have a chance against Voldemort. It's all about Harry and Voldemort here. While it would be great fun if a twist about Snape came up, it's not really Snape's battle, and Harry's attitude to Snape is pretty much irrelevant as far as I can see. Snape may well play an important role, but I certainly don't see him making his peace with Harry first. Snape's actions in DH are what will define his character, not his words, or Harry's opinion of him.
Yep. Harry's hunt for the Horcruxes and his confrontation with Voldemort will be the focus of Deathly Hallows.

Dumbledore would agree to let anyone kill him if he thought it was the only way to save their world- that I believe.
That’s not what I meant though. I was referring to Snape’s choice to make the vow, if such a thing is in line with Dumbledore’s principles.
Snape promised to help Draco to become a murderer or protect him of the consequences if he failed. This taking of the vow, this way of helping Draco is not in Dumbledore’s line. We know what Dumbledore’s stance on the matter is: help Draco not becoming a murderer. We also see how Snape deals with the same problem: let’s help Draco becoming a murderer. This total different approach shows Snape who doesn’t stand for the things Dumbledore stands for.

So after all this effort to make him as bad as he can get, do you thing he'll turn out to be, well, evil in the end? I don't know about you, but that will be a hell of a disappointment to me.Arguments like this go two ways. It will also be disappointing if Snape is just a one trick pony, not being evil in the end like in PS. Bit repetitive isn’t it?

Snape is one of the lead characters. He's of the highest importance to the books, along with Harry, Dumbledore, Voldemort and Lily, I think this much has been made clear. So I think thre will be a lot of Snape in DH, and significant appearances, too.

The main characters are Harry, Ron and Hermione. JKR has set it up for DH: those three will go horcrux hunting. JKR has also separated Snape from Harry’s vicinity. This means we won’t see much of Snape in DH. A few powerful scenes in which all is revealed, but not much more. I think JKR has Snape removed from Harry for a reason and that reason doesn’t mean she will bring Snape back in the main story now she has removed him from the main storyline.

It's obvious that something's missing about Snape. A revelation has not been made yet - he is still ambiguous. If he weren't, things would not have been open to interpretation in both directions and this thread wouldn't exist. So the actual revelation about Snape is yet to come. We haven't seen everything about him yet, or at least I feel that things are very far from settled

Actually I think it is more about connecting the dots. Life debt and murder of Dumbledore go well together. In that case Snape has to protect Harry one more time and then he will be killed by Voldemort or offered a life long, government paid, stay at a seaside resort.

I think Snape is bad.
He killed Dumbledore
I don't think he could fool Voldemort and act like he's on his side. Voldemort would find out that Snape is betraying him. Since Snape's not dead, obviously Voldemort is sure of his loyalty.
Plus, he totally screams evil anyway.


In response to your earlier post hermione52, besides SS’s personality, there are five additional reasons to suggest why SS might be evil.

One: SS was part of LV DE.
Two: SS has a rough past with HP’s dad and his gang.
Three: SS takes an unbreakable vow to protect Malfoy (a DE)
Four: SS tries to turn in Sirius regardless that HP tries to convince SS that Sirius really is innocent
Five: SS kills DD.

Although it is hard to say whether the reason three served as a catalyst for reason five, the fact still remains that SS nonetheless killed DD. What this suggests to the audience is that considering SS’s past (reason one), it is plausible that SS might have returned to the LV as a DE and proved his loyalty through reason five. If reason five is not convincing enough the fact that people’s past play a huge role in JKR’s books, as evidenced with the horocrux’s, highly suggests that SS’s past plays a huge a role in the DH as well. If this is the case then looking at reason two and four gives reason to believe that SS might be evil after all. What reason four reveals is that ultimately SS holds revenge in a higher light than truth, because if it were the other way around SS would have believed HP as well as Sirius’s innocence. Yet it is reason two that truly gives motive for SS to seek revenge. Separately, reason two and four do not seem to indicate anything but in combination reasons two and four, highly suggests that SS might be evil after all.

Arguments like this go two ways. It will also be disappointing if Snape is just a one trick pony, not being evil in the end like in PS. Bit repetitive isn’t it?

I don't see it this way. Him being a red herring once makes everything even more ambiguous - is he going to be the biggest red herring, like he was the first one? Or since he already played that part, he'll turn out to be exactly as he was shown in HBP?

The main characters are Harry, Ron and Hermione. JKR has set it up for DH: those three will go horcrux hunting. JKR has also separated Snape from Harry’s vicinity. This means we won’t see much of Snape in DH. A few powerful scenes in which all is revealed, but not much more. I think JKR has Snape removed from Harry for a reason and that reason doesn’t mean she will bring Snape back in the main story now she has removed him from the main storyline.

I'm sorry, I should've been clearer. I meant in terms of arranging the puzzles - as I see it, Dumbledore, Lily and Snape hold the missing pieces. So he's bound to play a major role in DH, and I'm sure he will. I respect your opinion, and everyone else's, but I'm just certain that Snape's biggest part was reserved for the end, because he'll be a key figure in resolving the puzzle.

What reason four reveals is that ultimately SS holds revenge in a higher light than truth, because if it were the other way around SS would have believed HP as well as Sirius’s innocence. Yet it is reason two that truly gives motive for SS to seek revenge. Separately, reason two and four do not seem to indicate anything but in combination reasons two and four, highly suggests that SS might be evil after all. Your post was a little hard to understand, but you bring up an interesting point about revenge. It will be interesting to see how many of Snape's activities had an element of revenge to them.

Your post was a little hard to understand, but you bring up an interesting point about revenge. It will be interesting to see how many of Snape's activities had an element of revenge to them.

I think I follow mitchk's logic - correct me if I'm wrong: (1) we know Snape is a very vengeful character, largely through the Shrieking Shack episode in PoA (2) we know he hated James and perceived himself to have been wronged by him (3) therefore it seems likely that he still has a score to settle with James and his house and is thus likely to do something equally as nasty and vindictive to Harry and his side as try to feed Sirius to the dementors. it's a fair argument.

I agree that Snape is frequently motivated by revenge and prejudice, and his treatment of Sirius in PoA was probably coloured by both (my take on it is that he genuinely believed that Sirius was guilty as hell, he wasn't consciously trying to frame an innocent man, but he was blinded by petty hatred and prejudice in reaching that conclusion. I could be wrong, it's just one interpretation).

I think, though that he can overcome his feelings, albeit reluctantly and with very bad grace, to do good acts if it's for some higher moral reason or at DD's request (e.g. trying to protect Harry, making wolfsbane for Lupin).

If you look at Snape's vengeful character from another angle, though, I think the fact that he's quick to seek passionate revenge could actually be a motivation for him to genuinely ally himself with the Order. Dumbledore believes that Snape was strongly emotionally affected by Voldemort's targetting of the Potters. Since Dumbledore, Lupin and Quirrell all tell us that Snape hated James, I'm assuming it's Lily's death that affected him so much, and that it's her death he seeks to avenge by spying for Dumbledore.

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. "Severus, please" seems to me to be suspiciously slippery, as does "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" (hatred and revulsion for what/whom?).

Usually in the past when JKR has been this ambiguous (e.g. Snape's question about Quirrell's loyalties) it's a trick - the obvious surface meaning of the words has turned out to be misleading. In the light of this, I tend to the view that the obvious meaning (that DD is pleading for Snape to save him and that Snape feels hatred and revulsion for DD) is probably misleading. However, I do concede that this could be a double bluff, and JKR could be tricking us this time by making us think she's tricking us, if you see what I mean, and he might still be bad.

My other big reason for thinking he's good is that I admire the moral complexity of the books so far - they're not just another fantasy series with a two-dimensional, fairy-tale schema of good and evil. I love the fact that JKR's world is NOT divided into good people and Death Eaters. Snape has been the prime example of a believable human character who has both admirable and despicable traits. If he turns out to be a straight-from-central-casting pantomime villain who has only ever been pretending when he appeared to do good things and is actually 100% evil, I'll find him very disappointing as a character.

I also like the idea that people are not irredeemable and that they can change, despite terrible mistakes and crimes in their past. I know that we still have a bit of potential for this in DH with Pettigrew and Regulus Black, but if Snape turns out to have been only shamming when he convinced DD that he regretted the Potters' deaths and it is revealed he hadn't actually changed at all, I again think it will remove another morallly complex strand from the story.

Daemon-in-a-box, i've been offline for a day or two so have only just seen your reply to my last post. Briefly, I'm not convinced by the argument that we don't know what Snape was thinking in Book 1, and that even though he was blatantly aggressive and picked on Harry from his very first lesson (indeed, glaring at him the first time he even set eyes on him), he could still have been intrigued and sussing out his potential as a new Dark Lord. True, the books are never from Snape's viewpoint, so his real thoughts and feelings are hidden from us. The fact is, though, he ACTS like he hates Harry already, he doesn't ACT like he's interested in him or is hoping he's a great dark wizard. This could be an act, he could be disguising his real thoughts and feelings, but since one of the bases for your argument is the fact that he ACTS as if he hates Harry throughout most of the series means that we must assume that his claims to be remorseful for the Potters' deaths are a lie, and you seem to accept unquestioningly there that his outward actions represent his inner feelings, it seems inconsistent to say that actions speak louder than words there, but in cases where it doesn't support your viewpoint argue that we don't know his real thoughts or motivation.

I think I follow mitchk's logic - correct me if I'm wrong: (1) we know Snape is a very vengeful character, largely through the Shrieking Shack episode in PoA (2) we know he hated James and perceived himself to have been wronged by him (3) therefore it seems likely that he still has a score to settle with James and his house and is thus likely to do something equally as nasty and vindictive to Harry and his side as try to feed Sirius to the dementors. it's a fair argument.

I agree that Snape is frequently motivated by revenge and prejudice, and his treatment of Sirius in PoA was probably coloured by both (my take on it is that he genuinely believed that Sirius was guilty as hell, he wasn't consciously trying to frame an innocent man, but he was blinded by petty hatred and prejudice in reaching that conclusion. I could be wrong, it's just one interpretation).

I think, though that he can overcome his feelings, albeit reluctantly and with very bad grace, to do good acts if it's for some higher moral reason or at DD's request (e.g. trying to protect Harry, making wolfsbane for Lupin).

If you look at Snape's vengeful character from another angle, though, I think the fact that he's quick to seek passionate revenge could actually be a motivation for him to genuinely ally himself with the Order. Dumbledore believes that Snape was strongly emotionally affected by Voldemort's targetting of the Potters. Since Dumbledore, Lupin and Quirrell all tell us that Snape hated James, I'm assuming it's Lily's death that affected him so much, and that it's her death he seeks to avenge by spying for Dumbledore.

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. "Severus, please" seems to me to be suspiciously slippery, as does "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" (hatred and revulsion for what/whom?).

Usually in the past when JKR has been this ambiguous (e.g. Snape's question about Quirrell's loyalties) it's a trick - the obvious surface meaning of the words has turned out to be misleading. In the light of this, I tend to the view that the obvious meaning (that DD is pleading for Snape to save him and that Snape feels hatred and revulsion for DD) is probably misleading. However, I do concede that this could be a double bluff, and JKR could be tricking us this time by making us think she's tricking us, if you see what I mean, and he might still be bad.

My other big reason for thinking he's good is that I admire the moral complexity of the books so far - they're not just another fantasy series with a two-dimensional, fairy-tale schema of good and evil. I love the fact that JKR's world is NOT divided into good people and Death Eaters. Snape has been the prime example of a believable human character who has both admirable and despicable traits. If he turns out to be a straight-from-central-casting pantomime villain who has only ever been pretending when he appeared to do good things and is actually 100% evil, I'll find him very disappointing as a character.

I also like the idea that people are not irredeemable and that they can change, despite terrible mistakes and crimes in their past. I know that we still have a bit of potential for this in DH with Pettigrew and Regulus Black, but if Snape turns out to have been only shamming when he convinced DD that he regretted the Potters' deaths and it is revealed he hadn't actually changed at all, I again think it will remove another morallly complex strand from the story.

Daemon-in-a-box, i've been offline for a day or two so have only just seen your reply to my last post. Briefly, I'm not convinced by the argument that we don't know what Snape was thinking in Book 1, and that even though he was blatantly aggressive and picked on Harry from his very first lesson (indeed, glaring at him the first time he even set eyes on him), he could still have been intrigued and sussing out his potential as a new Dark Lord. True, the books are never from Snape's viewpoint, so his real thoughts and feelings are hidden from us. The fact is, though, he ACTS like he hates Harry already, he doesn't ACT like he's interested in him or is hoping he's a great dark wizard. This could be an act, he could be disguising his real thoughts and feelings, but since one of the bases for your argument is the fact that he ACTS as if he hates Harry throughout most of the series means that we must assume that his claims to be remorseful for the Potters' deaths are a lie, and you seem to accept unquestioningly there that his outward actions represent his inner feelings, it seems inconsistent to say that actions speak louder than words there, but in cases where it doesn't support your viewpoint argue that we don't know his real thoughts or motivation.
that was an interesting read. I totally agree that Snape is 1. not pleasant, 2. not 100% evil, and 3. a highly ambiguous character.

If you look at Snape's vengeful character from another angle, though, I think the fact that he's quick to seek passionate revenge could actually be a motivation for him to genuinely ally himself with the Order. Dumbledore believes that Snape was strongly emotionally affected by Voldemort's targetting of the Potters. Since Dumbledore, Lupin and Quirrell all tell us that Snape hated James, I'm assuming it's Lily's death that affected him so much, and that it's her death he seeks to avenge by spying for Dumbledore.
The problem I have with Snape/Lily is that this is never hinted at in the first six books. The only evidence we have of Snape's feelings towards Lily is in Snape's Worst Memory, where he calls her a Mudblood. I just don't think something this big would be revealed in the last book without at least some foreshadowing.

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. "Severus, please" seems to me to be suspiciously slippery, as does "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" (hatred and revulsion for what/whom?).
But accoring to Bellatrix, you can't cast an Unforgivable without meaning it. So I think the "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" would have to refer to Snape's feelings for Dumbledore, if he was able to cast AK.

And there a lot of things Dumbledore may have been pleading about. By killing Dumbledore, Snape would seriously weaken the Order and Harry's ability to find the Horcruxes. It would lessen the chances of hiding Draco. Dumbledore's death would lessen the security of Hogwarts and all the students. Dumbledore may also have been pleading with Snape not to betray his trust and go to the bad side. So Dumbledore may have been pleading for much more than his life.

My other big reason for thinking he's good is that I admire the moral complexity of the books so far - they're not just another fantasy series with a two-dimensional, fairy-tale schema of good and evil. I love the fact that JKR's world is NOT divided into good people and Death Eaters. Snape has been the prime example of a believable human character who has both admirable and despicable traits. If he turns out to be a straight-from-central-casting pantomime villain who has only ever been pretending when he appeared to do good things and is actually 100% evil, I'll find him very disappointing as a character.
Snape can betray the Order, but not be 100% evil. It may be that he's fighting an inner conflict, and decided that Voldemort was going to win no matter what. There are a lot of possible reasons for what he did.

Daemon-in-a-box, i've been offline for a day or two so have only just seen your reply to my last post. Briefly, I'm not convinced by the argument that we don't know what Snape was thinking in Book 1, and that even though he was blatantly aggressive and picked on Harry from his very first lesson (indeed, glaring at him the first time he even set eyes on him), he could still have been intrigued and sussing out his potential as a new Dark Lord. True, the books are never from Snape's viewpoint, so his real thoughts and feelings are hidden from us. The fact is, though, he ACTS like he hates Harry already, he doesn't ACT like he's interested in him or is hoping he's a great dark wizard. This could be an act, he could be disguising his real thoughts and feelings, but since one of the bases for your argument is the fact that he ACTS as if he hates Harry throughout most of the series means that we must assume that his claims to be remorseful for the Potters' deaths are a lie, and you seem to accept unquestioningly there that his outward actions represent his inner feelings, it seems inconsistent to say that actions speak louder than words there, but in cases where it doesn't support your viewpoint argue that we don't know his real thoughts or motivation.
I don't necessarily think Snape's outward actions always represent his inner feelings; in fact Snape is notorious for hiding his feelings and being very difficult to read. So my point was that if Snape told Bellatrix what he was thinking, there's no way to prove he was lying, since he never did or said anything in Book 1 to contradict his explanation. That's why I argued that we can't assume a character is lying unless we have solid evidence to back it up.

As for Snape's actions towards Harry, these cannot be ignored. His attempts to expel Harry would have placed Harry in serious jeopardy if successful, so I don't see how these actions could come from a Snape who actually cared about Harry's welfare, and in fact they directly contradict this. They're also in conflict with Dumbledore's plans to have Harry educated at Hogwarts so he'll be able to defeat Voldemort when the time comes. If Harry is expelled and remains uneducated, Voldemort will kill him and win.

So there is the difference. Snape actively did something to contradict the idea that he cared about Harry's welfare. But Snape never actively did anything to contradict his claim that he considered at the beginning that Harry might be a great dark wizard. In fact, Snape's actions in Harry's first Potion class may even verify his claim. After wondering if Harry might be the next Voldemort, Snape finally meets him and discovers that Harry knows next to nothing about the Wizarding World. He's not a particulary good student (unlike Tom Riddle). He can't answer questions that Hermione (a lowly Mudblood) knows the answers to. He's a pathetic Gryffindor. If Snape was expecting a great dark wizard, he must have been sorely disappointed and undoubtedly disgusted. So in that sense Snape's actions towards Harry at the beginning would seem to verify what he told Bellatrix.

Dumbledore's hesitation there is somewhat ambiguous. It could mean that he is thinking over his reason for trusting Snape and wondering if he is right, or it could mean he's wondering just how much he ought to tell Harry. You're right - he didn't tell Harry everything!

Yep, he didn't and I bet (in my humble opinion) that he'll learn the truth from Snape in book 7. I can't wait to see what it is :clap:!!

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. I have to agree with you about how skilled JKR has been in keeping Snape's motives ambiguous. I once again read Spinners End in an attempt to catch some hint of what was really going on, and I came away just as confused as I usually am.
I love the fact that JKR's world is NOT divided into good people and Death Eaters. Snape has been the prime example of a believable human character who has both admirable and despicable traits. She has done a wonderful job with Snape. To think that she has carried us along for 6 books, and upteen years of writing them, with no hint which way the wind blows, may be unprecedented. At least nothing comes to mind.
If he turns out to be a straight-from-central-casting pantomime villain who has only ever been pretending when he appeared to do good things and is actually 100% evil, I'll find him very disappointing as a character. I will feel the same way if he turns out to be an angel :lol: I firmly believe he will have been both.

I think I follow mitchk's logic - correct me if I'm wrong: (1) we know Snape is a very vengeful character, largely through the Shrieking Shack episode in PoA (2) we know he hated James and perceived himself to have been wronged by him (3) therefore it seems likely that he still has a score to settle with James and his house and is thus likely to do something equally as nasty and vindictive to Harry and his side as try to feed Sirius to the dementors. it's a fair argument.

I agree that Snape is frequently motivated by revenge and prejudice, and his treatment of Sirius in PoA was probably coloured by both (my take on it is that he genuinely believed that Sirius was guilty as hell, he wasn't consciously trying to frame an innocent man, but he was blinded by petty hatred and prejudice in reaching that conclusion. I could be wrong, it's just one interpretation).

I think, though that he can overcome his feelings, albeit reluctantly and with very bad grace, to do good acts if it's for some higher moral reason or at DD's request (e.g. trying to protect Harry, making wolfsbane for Lupin).

If you look at Snape's vengeful character from another angle, though, I think the fact that he's quick to seek passionate revenge could actually be a motivation for him to genuinely ally himself with the Order. Dumbledore believes that Snape was strongly emotionally affected by Voldemort's targetting of the Potters. Since Dumbledore, Lupin and Quirrell all tell us that Snape hated James, I'm assuming it's Lily's death that affected him so much, and that it's her death he seeks to avenge by spying for Dumbledore.

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. "Severus, please" seems to me to be suspiciously slippery, as does "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" (hatred and revulsion for what/whom?).

Usually in the past when JKR has been this ambiguous (e.g. Snape's question about Quirrell's loyalties) it's a trick - the obvious surface meaning of the words has turned out to be misleading. In the light of this, I tend to the view that the obvious meaning (that DD is pleading for Snape to save him and that Snape feels hatred and revulsion for DD) is probably misleading. However, I do concede that this could be a double bluff, and JKR could be tricking us this time by making us think she's tricking us, if you see what I mean, and he might still be bad.

My other big reason for thinking he's good is that I admire the moral complexity of the books so far - they're not just another fantasy series with a two-dimensional, fairy-tale schema of good and evil. I love the fact that JKR's world is NOT divided into good people and Death Eaters. Snape has been the prime example of a believable human character who has both admirable and despicable traits. If he turns out to be a straight-from-central-casting pantomime villain who has only ever been pretending when he appeared to do good things and is actually 100% evil, I'll find him very disappointing as a character.

I also like the idea that people are not irredeemable and that they can change, despite terrible mistakes and crimes in their past. I know that we still have a bit of potential for this in DH with Pettigrew and Regulus Black, but if Snape turns out to have been only shamming when he convinced DD that he regretted the Potters' deaths and it is revealed he hadn't actually changed at all, I again think it will remove another morallly complex strand from the story.

Daemon-in-a-box, i've been offline for a day or two so have only just seen your reply to my last post. Briefly, I'm not convinced by the argument that we don't know what Snape was thinking in Book 1, and that even though he was blatantly aggressive and picked on Harry from his very first lesson (indeed, glaring at him the first time he even set eyes on him), he could still have been intrigued and sussing out his potential as a new Dark Lord. True, the books are never from Snape's viewpoint, so his real thoughts and feelings are hidden from us. The fact is, though, he ACTS like he hates Harry already, he doesn't ACT like he's interested in him or is hoping he's a great dark wizard. This could be an act, he could be disguising his real thoughts and feelings, but since one of the bases for your argument is the fact that he ACTS as if he hates Harry throughout most of the series means that we must assume that his claims to be remorseful for the Potters' deaths are a lie, and you seem to accept unquestioningly there that his outward actions represent his inner feelings, it seems inconsistent to say that actions speak louder than words there, but in cases where it doesn't support your viewpoint argue that we don't know his real thoughts or motivation.


Wow, just wow Melaszka:clap:!! Nicely written thoughts, I agree with them for the most part, especially when you mentioned that if Snape was just fooling DD and was really evil, that it would remove part of the moral fiber that was part of the series to begin with.

But the books are primarily about Harry's journey, not Snape's, so I believe any "moral fiber" of the series is going to center around Harry and his decisions. As for Snape fooling Dumbledore, the same goes for fooling Voldemort; if he can fool one, he can certainly fool the other. If Snape has indeed betrayed Dumbledore's trust, then the consequences he faces in Deathly Hallows can be just as morally complex as if he turns out to be Mr. Goodbar.

The problem I have with Snape/Lily is that this is never hinted at in the first six books.

I can appreciate your reasoning. I would argue that there are some (admittedly very slight and highly ambiguous) hints, but I'd better not say any more about this, as the staff don't like this topic being raised.

But accoring to Bellatrix, you can't cast an Unforgivable without meaning it. So I think the "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" would have to refer to Snape's feelings for Dumbledore, if he was able to cast AK.

As I said before, I'm not convinced he did.



And there a lot of things Dumbledore may have been pleading about.[...]Dumbledore may also have been pleading with Snape not to betray his trust and go to the bad side. So Dumbledore may have been pleading for much more than his life.



Sure, but I think if JKR wanted to make it clear, she would have done, and there would be no need to hide the precise meaning from the reader in this elliptical way. The fact that she chose to word it in this way suggests to me that it's trick wording, (or she at least wants us to think it may be trick wording so that, if Snape IS bad, she can offer Snape fans a straw to clutch at, so we're still in suspense for a bit longer.)

Snape can betray the Order, but not be 100% evil. It may be that he's fighting an inner conflict, and decided that Voldemort was going to win no matter what. There are a lot of possible reasons for what he did.

True, and I'd find that psychologically interesting and plausible, but I think that if his reasons were explained to the reader in DH, it would make the book too focused on Snape's psyche, because an inner conflict would be entirely in his head. His turning out to have been good all along (well, since the Potters' deaths - I don't believe he was never a DE!)would involve action and plot mechanisms that affect all the dramatis personae, so could more economically be slotted into the book without distracting focus from the central characters.

As for Snape's actions towards Harry, these cannot be ignored. His attempts to expel Harry would have placed Harry in serious jeopardy if successful, so I don't see how these actions could come from a Snape who actually cared about Harry's welfare, and in fact they directly contradict this. They're also in conflict with Dumbledore's plans to have Harry educated at Hogwarts so he'll be able to defeat Voldemort when the time comes. If Harry is expelled and remains uneducated, Voldemort will kill him and win.

I understand what you're saying here, but I still feel that if Snape's attempts to have Harry expelled are such obvious evidence of his bad character, why do Dumbledore, Hagrid and Lupin fail to see this? They all, at various points, knwoing full well how Snape behaves to Harry, tell him to ignore his suspicions. I admit that this could, however, be another example of JKR sacrificing realism to the plot.

It also just occurs to me that, for all the noise he makes about wanting Harry's expulsion, Snape must know that Dumbledore is the one with the final say, so if he knows that DD's plan is to have Harry stay at Hogwarts, he must know that his attempts at expulsion will never succeed, so can they really be ascribed to a desire to have Harry left vulnerable to Voldemort? Is there any evidence that, on the two occasions when DD is suspended from the post of headmaster, Snape tries to exploit his absence to have Harry expelled? I don't recall him putting pressure on Umbridge, who would probably have happily expelled Harry. I know this sabotages my Snape-wants-Harry-expelled-for-his-own-protection theory, but surely a man who really wanted Harry expelled would have jumped at the chance of exploiting Umbridge's headship to boot Harry out the door?

Snape actively did something to contradict the idea that he cared about Harry's welfare. But Snape never actively did anything to contradict his claim that he considered at the beginning that Harry might be a great dark wizard. In fact, Snape's actions in Harry's first Potion class may even verify his claim. After wondering if Harry might be the next Voldemort, Snape finally meets him and discovers that Harry knows next to nothing about the Wizarding World. He's not a particulary good student (unlike Tom Riddle). He can't answer questions that Hermione (a lowly Mudblood) knows the answers to. He's a pathetic Gryffindor. If Snape was expecting a great dark wizard, he must have been sorely disappointed and undoubtedly disgusted. So in that sense Snape's actions towards Harry at the beginning would seem to verify what he told Bellatrix.

This is a good point. I still think that the aggression of the questioning and the hateful glare he gives Harry at the opening feast aren't quite explained, and I still doubt that an intelligent teacher, knowing that Harry had been raised as a muggle, would reject the idea that he had the potential to be a great wizard simply because he knew so little about such obscure topics as the draught of living death and wolfsbane (the text makes it clear that Hermione is the exception and it is highly surprising that a first year student knows these things). But, yes, I do think this is quite a plausible explanation.

Posted by susanBones111
I will feel the same way if he turns out to be an angel

Oh, me too! But, luckily, we already have the facts that he joined the DE in the first place, gave Voldemort the prophecy and regularly abuses his students to testify to his dark side.

Fawkesfan1, only just seen your post. Thanks!

As I said before, I'm not convinced he did.
I don't really like the argument that Snape didn't really cast the killing curse. It just seems wrong to me that the Death Eaters wouldn't realize it. I also think it's an important part of the moral story of Snape for him to actually do it, but that's not really what I want to discuss.

I also disagree with the idea that Snape's look of revulsion, since he cast the killing curse, must have been expressing hatred of Dumbledore. For starters, we've seen other uses of the killing curse, and I don't think the user's face is ever described as having a look of revulsion and hatred. Did fake Moody hate the spider he killed in the class demonstration? Did Voldemort actually hate a baby he'd never interacted with? It seems he didn't hate Lily, since he would have let her live. He actually LAUGHED when he killed her. Pettigrew almost certainly felt nothing resembling hate for Cedric. I can't remember the description of the huge Death Eater who was casting it all over the place enough to guess at what he was feeling. So why should we assume that hatred of the victim is necessary or even helpful to cast the spell?

Bella says you have to mean the Unforgivables, that you have to really want to cause pain, etc. She says Harry's righteous anger is not enough for the Cruciatus curse. To me, she's saying that one must get some sort of sick pleasure from casting the Unforgivables in order to use them. I think it's perfectly fair to apply it to Snape's case and say that he had to muster this sick pleasure to cast the spell correctly, and what showed on his face was his revulsion to what he was doing. That's very much enhanced by the analogy to Harry forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion in the cave.

I understand what you're saying here, but I still feel that if Snape's attempts to have Harry expelled are such obvious evidence of his bad character, why do Dumbledore, Hagrid and Lupin fail to see this? They all, at various points, knwoing full well how Snape behaves to Harry, tell him to ignore his suspicions. I admit that this could, however, be another example of JKR sacrificing realism to the plot.
I think it's very important to note what Dumbledore and Voldemort each knew and didn't know about Snape's actions and motivations. Based on Spinner's End, I think it's fair to say that we, the readers, know everything Voldemort does about Snape's actions and motivations except for the details of the information he gave Voldemort that led to the death of Emmeline Vance. Based on what's left out of Spinner's End, I think it's fair to say that Voldemort doesn't know about Snape's Occlumency lessons with Harry, Snape alerting the Order to go to the MoM in OotP, and the real reason Dumbledore trusts Snape. (Incidentally, as I argued a few pages back, Voldemort also appears to be unaware that Dumbledore has a pensieve).

Dumbledore seems to know everything that we, the readers know, plus his reason for trusting Snape. He may or may not know the whole truth about the Emmeline Vance information, but it's a good bet he knows more than the readers do.

Given all that, Dumbledore trusts him completely and Voldemort believed at the end of GoF that Snape had gone to Dumbledore's side. Other Death Eaters don't trust Snape, but most Order members do. To me, that's compelling evidence.

I can appreciate your reasoning. I would argue that there are some (admittedly very slight and highly ambiguous) hints, but I'd better not say any more about this, as the staff don't like this topic being raised.



As I said before, I'm not convinced he did.





Sure, but I think if JKR wanted to make it clear, she would have done, and there would be no need to hide the precise meaning from the reader in this elliptical way. The fact that she chose to word it in this way suggests to me that it's trick wording, (or she at least wants us to think it may be trick wording so that, if Snape IS bad, she can offer Snape fans a straw to clutch at, so we're still in suspense for a bit longer.)



True, and I'd find that psychologically interesting and plausible, but I think that if his reasons were explained to the reader in DH, it would make the book too focused on Snape's psyche, because an inner conflict would be entirely in his head. His turning out to have been good all along (well, since the Potters' deaths - I don't believe he was never a DE!)would involve action and plot mechanisms that affect all the dramatis personae, so could more economically be slotted into the book without distracting focus from the central characters.



I understand what you're saying here, but I still feel that if Snape's attempts to have Harry expelled are such obvious evidence of his bad character, why do Dumbledore, Hagrid and Lupin fail to see this? They all, at various points, knwoing full well how Snape behaves to Harry, tell him to ignore his suspicions. I admit that this could, however, be another example of JKR sacrificing realism to the plot.

It also just occurs to me that, for all the noise he makes about wanting Harry's expulsion, Snape must know that Dumbledore is the one with the final say, so if he knows that DD's plan is to have Harry stay at Hogwarts, he must know that his attempts at expulsion will never succeed, so can they really be ascribed to a desire to have Harry left vulnerable to Voldemort? Is there any evidence that, on the two occasions when DD is suspended from the post of headmaster, Snape tries to exploit his absence to have Harry expelled? I don't recall him putting pressure on Umbridge, who would probably have happily expelled Harry. I know this sabotages my Snape-wants-Harry-expelled-for-his-own-protection theory, but surely a man who really wanted Harry expelled would have jumped at the chance of exploiting Umbridge's headship to boot Harry out the door?



This is a good point. I still think that the aggression of the questioning and the hateful glare he gives Harry at the opening feast aren't quite explained, and I still doubt that an intelligent teacher, knowing that Harry had been raised as a muggle, would reject the idea that he had the potential to be a great wizard simply because he knew so little about such obscure topics as the draught of living death and wolfsbane (the text makes it clear that Hermione is the exception and it is highly surprising that a first year student knows these things). But, yes, I do think this is quite a plausible explanation.



Oh, me too! But, luckily, we already have the facts that he joined the DE in the first place, gave Voldemort the prophecy and regularly abuses his students to testify to his dark side.

Fawkesfan1, only just seen your post. Thanks!


No problem Melaszka, you did a great job on what you posted!!

Keep up the good work :tu: :)!

Guys and girls... could it be possible that we have all just read way too much into this thing? The more I read through our theories and qoutes from the books (my own included) the more it makes me wonder if we should just take it at face value. I mean couldn't it be possible that Snape really was bad. That was the twist. We went through the whole series; good snape/bad snape, one moment he was helping Harry the next he was giving him a hard time. And then finally in HBP (a book technically titled after him) we learn that he really is bad. Once again that was it, that was the twist. Everyone debated through six books on this, and it was a great mystery till the very end but boom there it was. So now in the seventh book DH Harry will have a Snape that is darker (I still dont really think evil just dark) to deal with.

Having said all this I would also like to state I think Severus is just out for himself thru all this. Not for DD or for Voldy but for whom ever can better him the most. That is why I said darker, not nessasarily evil. Please don't shoot me this is just an idea and question. Feel free to comment as you wish. :tu:

Guys and girls... could it be possible that we have all just read way too much into this thing?
Nope. :no: :p

:lol:

Guys and girls... could it be possible that we have all just read way too much into this thing? The more I read through our theories and qoutes from the books (my own included) the more it makes me wonder if we should just take it at face value. I mean couldn't it be possible that Snape really was bad. That was the twist. We went through the whole series; good snape/bad snape, one moment he was helping Harry the next he was giving him a hard time. And then finally in HBP (a book technically titled after him) we learn that he really is bad. Once again that was it, that was the twist. Everyone debated through six books on this, and it was a great mystery till the very end but boom there it was. So now in the seventh book DH Harry will have a Snape that is darker (I still dont really think evil just dark) to deal with.

Having said all this I would also like to state I think Severus is just out for himself thru all this. Not for DD or for Voldy but for whom ever can better him the most. That is why I said darker, not nessasarily evil. Please don't shoot me this is just an idea and question. Feel free to comment as you wish. :tu:


I can see where you are coming from on this mactabard_25... he could be in for himself, but it's kinda fun trying to figure out what side he's on.

I understand what you're saying here, but I still feel that if Snape's attempts to have Harry expelled are such obvious evidence of his bad character, why do Dumbledore, Hagrid and Lupin fail to see this? They all, at various points, knwoing full well how Snape behaves to Harry, tell him to ignore his suspicions. I admit that this could, however, be another example of JKR sacrificing realism to the plot.
I'd say Hagrid and Lupin trust Snape only because Dumbledore does. And why Dumbledore trusts Snape...who knows?

It also just occurs to me that, for all the noise he makes about wanting Harry's expulsion, Snape must know that Dumbledore is the one with the final say, so if he knows that DD's plan is to have Harry stay at Hogwarts, he must know that his attempts at expulsion will never succeed, so can they really be ascribed to a desire to have Harry left vulnerable to Voldemort? Is there any evidence that, on the two occasions when DD is suspended from the post of headmaster, Snape tries to exploit his absence to have Harry expelled? I don't recall him putting pressure on Umbridge, who would probably have happily expelled Harry. I know this sabotages my Snape-wants-Harry-expelled-for-his-own-protection theory, but surely a man who really wanted Harry expelled would have jumped at the chance of exploiting Umbridge's headship to boot Harry out the door?
Good point. Snape attempting to expel Harry is similar to his repeatedly asking for the DADA job. With Dumbledore in charge, they do both seem rather pointless (until he gets the job in Half Blood Prince, although that was probably because Dumbledore needed Slughorn at Hogwarts), but Snape keeps trying anyway. And why he wanted the DADA job so badly when he could only keep it for a year really makes no sense, so I'm not sure what JK Rowling is doing there. But in OotP, Voldemort wanted to lure Harry to the Ministry, so if evil Snape is taking orders from Voldemort, I can see him telling Snape to leave Harry alone so it wouldn't complicate his plan. Plus it looked like Umbridge was working on getting Harry expelled, or at least making his life miserable.


Bella says you have to mean the Unforgivables, that you have to really want to cause pain, etc. She says Harry's righteous anger is not enough for the Cruciatus curse. To me, she's saying that one must get some sort of sick pleasure from casting the Unforgivables in order to use them. I think it's perfectly fair to apply it to Snape's case and say that he had to muster this sick pleasure to cast the spell correctly, and what showed on his face was his revulsion to what he was doing. That's very much enhanced by the analogy to Harry forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion in the cave.
I don't think Snape could actually muster sick pleasure at killing Dumbledore, but at the same time be revulsed by it. That just seems a bit iffy. Either he enjoyed it and meant it, or he didn't, I can't see him doing both at the same time. I would think the two emotions would cancel each other out, leaving the curse ineffective. And Harry didn't enjoy forcing Dumbledore to drink the potion, he hated the entire experience. He didn't have to enjoy it or mean it.

Given all that, Dumbledore trusts him completely and Voldemort believed at the end of GoF that Snape had gone to Dumbledore's side. Other Death Eaters don't trust Snape, but most Order members do. To me, that's compelling evidence.
But the Order members trust Snape mainly because Dumbledore does. I don't think any of them have a separate reason, just their loyalty to Dumbledore.


Guys and girls... could it be possible that we have all just read way too much into this thing? The more I read through our theories and qoutes from the books (my own included) the more it makes me wonder if we should just take it at face value. I mean couldn't it be possible that Snape really was bad. That was the twist. We went through the whole series; good snape/bad snape, one moment he was helping Harry the next he was giving him a hard time. And then finally in HBP (a book technically titled after him) we learn that he really is bad. Once again that was it, that was the twist. Everyone debated through six books on this, and it was a great mystery till the very end but boom there it was. So now in the seventh book DH Harry will have a Snape that is darker (I still dont really think evil just dark) to deal with.

Having said all this I would also like to state I think Severus is just out for himself thru all this. Not for DD or for Voldy but for whom ever can better him the most. That is why I said darker, not nessasarily evil. Please don't shoot me this is just an idea and question. Feel free to comment as you wish.
Well that's the way I try to interpret the books, at face value. I don't think JK Rowling is trying to trick us into thinking Snape is bad by having him kill Dumbledore, only to turn around in the last book and say "Surprise! He's really good, and here's the reason." That just doesn't sound like her. While the story as a whole is interesting and filled with fascinating characters, it's still a simple story at its heart. I don't think we'll be seeing a whole lot of complicated twists and turns in Deathly Hallows, but rather a resolution of Harry's problems and how he will choose to solve them.

But the Order members trust Snape mainly because Dumbledore does. I don't think any of them have a separate reason, just their loyalty to Dumbledore.
My point was Dumbledore trusts Snape so much that the Order members do too. Voldemort's trust in Snape is not similarly strong enough to spread.

Well that's the way I try to interpret the books, at face value. I don't think JK Rowling is trying to trick us into thinking Snape is bad by having him kill Dumbledore, only to turn around in the last book and say "Surprise! He's really good, and here's the reason." That just doesn't sound like her. While the story as a whole is interesting and filled with fascinating characters, it's still a simple story at its heart. I don't think we'll be seeing a whole lot of complicated twists and turns in Deathly Hallows, but rather a resolution of Harry's problems and how he will choose to solve them.


Well put! I agree.

I also agree with Fawkesfan1 that it is fun to speculate even though I believe this straight foward aproach to be true.

My point was Dumbledore trusts Snape so much that the Order members do too. Voldemort's trust in Snape is not similarly strong enough to spread.
But Voldemort's trust in someone only extends to how far he can use them. I doubt there's very much trust among any of the Death Eaters.

1) Why did DD trust Snape? I still say they took their own type of Unbreakable Vow or Oath. This was LONG before Severus and Narcissa made their own U.V. concerning Draco. There's something more to the story here.

2) How could Harry find out? Harry will find out through penseives, possibly reading a contract of some sort or some sort of Journal. He will also probably talk to Dumbledore's portrait or maybe Aberford. I still say he and Snape will have a run-in or some sort where Snape will explain things to Harry. As to whether or not Harry believes him is another story completely.

I think, though that he can overcome his feelings, albeit reluctantly and with very bad grace, to do good acts if it's for some higher moral reason or at DD's request (e.g. trying to protect Harry, making wolfsbane for Lupin).

My main reason for believing that Snape is good (in the broadest sense of the word - I admit he's not a pleasant man in many respects) is the ambiguity of the language that JKR uses in the denouement of HBP. This seems to me to be carefully and consciously introduced. "Severus, please" seems to me to be suspiciously slippery, as does "hatred and revulsion etched on his face" (hatred and revulsion for what/whom?).

In respone to your earlier post Melaszka, though you do seem to possess an understanding as to the flow of logic in my earlier post, I still a few questions as to what exactly you meant in some of your writing. In your original posting, I had some discrepancies between this quote especially. In the top one (referrred to as Quote T) you point out that SS will "do good acts if it's for higher moral reason or at DD's request. Yet in your bottom quote (referred to as Quote Q) the scene that is taking place is SS killing DD. When comparing Quote T and Quote Q side by side, there is a level of contradiction present. If SS only acts if its for higher moral reason or at DD's request, the fact that he kills DD, even though DD pleads "Severus, please" (assumption that he is pleading), is very disproving of both.

In your original posting, I had some discrepancies between this quote especially. In the top one (referrred to as Quote T) you point out that SS will "do good acts if it's for higher moral reason or at DD's request. Yet in your bottom quote (referred to as Quote Q) the scene that is taking place is SS killing DD. When comparing Quote T and Quote Q side by side, there is a level of contradiction present. If SS only acts if its for higher moral reason or at DD's request, the fact that he kills DD, even though DD pleads "Severus, please" (assumption that he is pleading), is very disproving of both.

My assumption is that DD is actually pleading for Snape to kill him.