Underground Lake #38 - What If We're Wrong?

Discussion for The Underground Lake #38 - What If We're Wrong? (http://www.mugglenet.com/editorials/theundergroundlake/tul38.shtml) by Brandon Ford.

Oh yeah, first!

Thought-provoking, though you're not the first one to come up with this, all though I haven't thougth about the mechanisms on obvious and simple versus unprobable and complex concerning this, you might just be right..

However, this is a such a central topic, that I at least see one curveball such as him betraying Voldemort or something like that, as Snape really doesn't seem like a conformist, only a pragmatist who on the surface conforms.

Thanx for the link. I coun't find it on the main underground lake page and wondered where it was.
I thought it was a really good editorial and really thought provoking. I have no idea whether Snape is good or evil or on his own side. The simplest usually the best and right answer. i also don't see how Snape could redeem himself but then again i do believe he does not want to be on Voldemorts side but is scared of him enough to do anything and say publicly that he doesn't support Voldemort even if publicly is just doing something against Voldemort that olny Voldemort will know who it was.
he could redeem himself by helping Harry find the Horcruxes but i don't think he would do that or even know of them.

Fabulous editorial! As always. ^^

The only thing I disagree with is that Hermione is the only one who could believe TFP is still on the good side - there's always Remus Lupin. He fought for TFP against Harry and others many times, and once the grief for Dumbledore starts to ebb away, I think Remus will realize the main issue in the TFP-is-Evil thing.

The reason Harry gave for Dumbledore trusting TFP, was that TFP regretted James and Lily dying.

Yet TFP was working at Hogwarts for over a year BEFORE they died.

I'm holding onto the hope that Remus will see this, and realize - they are still missing a huge piece of the puzzle. WHY did Dumbledore trust TFP ? If given a chance to learn this by speaking to TFP directly, I think Remus would give him time to explain.

But back to what was said . . . I support TFP back, forth, and back again, but I've wondered the same thing. What if I AM wrong? Well, to start, my entire highschool would come find me and rub it in my face. I would be heart-broken - but of course, the story belongs to JKR. And in the same way she killed the H/Hr ship, she's writing the story the way she wants. I'd just have to accept that.

But maybe we won't!

I also agree that Hermione is not the only one who would believe in Snape's loyalty to DD. In fact, I had an idea last night (in the shower, as usual): what if LUNA, in one of her imaginative tagents, comes out with the "Snape-is-not-evil" theory. Everyone else would just give her the *stunned-rodent look* and forget about it. Later on, heliopaths turn up to fight the Big Battle, or something, and.......well, anyway, you get the idea. If you happen to stumble across something like that in Book Seven, it MIGHT just be a clue.....

As to the main idea of the wonderful editorial, I have had that question in my head for one year, three months, and two days. And I keep it in my head, so as not to take a stand on the loyalty issue, because the last thing I want to do is be proven WRONG.

Hey everyone. I havent posted since the release of book 6, but im back and have a few things to say. First Brandon, great job as always. And whoever told u your editorials were to long can keep it to themselves. U help keep the HP spirit alive, so the longer the better.

K so now to my thoughts. I have always thought of snape as the character i love to hate. After getting over the shock of DD dieing, i have reread the book tring to peice some things together. And one thing that i havent seen anyone talking about (srry havent read everyones post since book six release so someone might have alrdy said this) is the unbreakable vow. NOT with narcissa and Snape however, I believe that Snape made a vow to Dumbledore. I believe dd told snape that if it came Between harry's life and dd, to make sure harry was safe. Think about it. There is a very breif couple of seconds between the time snape walks out the door pushes draco aside and then kills dd. It says somewhere in there that snape looked into the eyes of dd with the upmost discust (or something like this i dont have my book handy for refrence). This last statement should open some eyes, What are both Snape and DD masters of? Get my point yet? Ok, for the stragglers, they are both masters of legenimenz ( or however its spelled(reading of eachothers minds)). I think within the 2 maybe 3 second glance dd told snape where harry was, and that he was to weak to keep harry safe for much longer. So what does snape do? the only thing he can. He upholds his vow with dracos mother, he kills dd (which i believe dd knew it had to be done way before it happened), and hurries to get Draco and all the other Death eaters away from harry. Snape knew that as soon as dd was dead the spell holding harry would be broken, and that to make sure harry doesnt remove the cloak and revill himself to the DE that he needed to be quick on getting everyone off the tower.

Well, srry its long but theres a summed up version of my theory ive had. But i also want to say one quick side note. I did read a post of someone from prob a while ago about what voldemorts main goal is, now the poster put world domination. Now im not disagreeing because one thing voldemort is obsessed with is power, however if u go back to HBP, it says that voldemorts main goal in life is life itself. His goal is to become immortal. Death is voldemorts greatest weakness, dd always said it was. Voldemort believes that death is a muggle burden and anyone that dies is to weak. And since he believes himself to be the most powerful wizard in the world, he believes himself to strong for death, so he goes to great measure to make sure he cannot and willnot die.

Excellent editorial. I like your reasoning, especially since it supports my camp as well - the smaller, or at least less vocal camp that is convinced 'TFP' isn't on anyone's side, except his own. :clap:

Brilliant editorial! You were able to write down what I couldn´t. Since reading book six I struggled to solve the mystery that is TFP. On the one hand it is obvious that HE is "evil", I mean it is staring at our faces, he KILLED Dumbledore!!! But on the other hand it is that same fact that convinces me again that TFP is "good" - just because otherwise it would be too easy...

JK Rowling really is a genious...

*brain asplodes* Wow... Snape is... still as complicated as ever, it appears. It's too obvious one way, but then it's obvious the other way, too. He killed Dumbledore, like you said. It should be obvious. But at the same time, it's far too easy.

Urm *has nothing intelligent to say* But a big "word" from me on the subject of Snape and how there is absolutely nothing he could say which could explain what he did to the OotP. I'd hate to be in his position, whatever side he's on.

My problem with your too obvious reasoning is that to begin with I thought it was too obvious that he was ultimately good. There are only a few things that are repeated in every single book, only a few things that just about every single adult wizard has said "Dumbledore trusts snape" is one of those (along with "Dumbledore was the only one Voldemort ever feared, something deffinately shown to be true). Also if we're talking plot formats; it's okay for the old guy with the beard to die - but it's not okay for him to be wrong, or for him to die because of a mistake he made.

I agree, however, that Snape will never be redeemed in his lifetime, and I believe he will die before the end of the series. He will not die trying to save Harry. Harry himself swore that the period of his life in which people died to help/save him was over. Snape will die, and after his death some form of diary, or agreement between him and Dumbledore, or maybe even a memory left somewhere (how better to keep a memory from Voldemort but remove it and store it in a crystal bottle?) will be uncovered...

As far as I can see the simplest solution to the problem is that Dumbledore was right, Snape wants to help Harry et al.
Brillaint editorial though, and I prefer a long, welll argued read.
I've never seen Rickman's portrayal of Snape. Snape is still one of the most impressive characters in the series.

Excellent piece, as always. As a fairly agnostic-leaning-toward-Snape-is-good person, there is one main sticking point not mentioned here: Jo's response during an interview, in which she's asked about the pattern of "redemption" in Snape:

Questioner: There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape.
Rowling: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book Seven. That's all I’m going to say.

Of course she doesn't answer the question, but her "stunned" reaction makes it seem as if the idea of redemption will be incredibly important, and is on target.

On the other hand, what in the world is Snape doing that's so important that it's worth Dumbledore being killed?

Ooooeerr! Excellent editorial as always! I'm pretty sure this thoery was one thrown out with all the others.. But point taken - it could be simple.

One hopes though, that after a 6-book buildup, there's more to it than "yes he is irrevocably evil, he's not redeemable" and all that! :lol: The charactor of Snape that we've all come to know may just seem mysterious because he hasn't been laid bare like Voldemort was in book 6, like Harry has been through all the books. I mean, until we get to see what a person's been through in life, background and home life, don't we wonder what might have made a person go bad?

Umm anyway, I dunno, I think there are three obvious possibilities:
1)He's all for Dumbledore
2)He's all for Voldemort
3)He's all for himself

Of course, those could be broken down into many different possible scenario's (vows, promises, love for Lily etc...).

I hope JK manages to weave it into something interesting... i mean after all these rumours, if it isn't a good story, it's going to be disappointing. (maybe that's why I stay away from all the fantastical sounding ideas when i'm thinking... then again, fat lot of good that did for me with the horcruxes!:p) Thank god JK's a fantastic writer!

At the end of all of that... nothing intelligent to add!:D Hope the theories continue anyway!

I've never seen Rickman's portrayal of Snape. Snape is still one of the most impressive characters in the series.

Wait... What????
You have NEVER seen a HP movie???

I always love the Underground Lake, Brandon. I read HP through the Order of the Phoenix and liked it, but never gave it much thought. But after I was floored by the ending of HBP I got on the ol' internet to see what people thought about it and discovered Mugglenet and those "world famous" editorials. Underground Lake is definitely one of the best - I even love the writing style. Quick and engaging, but very thoughtful and thought-provoking.
I've got to jump in with my thoughts on TFP, though. Based on what Rowling has said in several different interviews (especially the one in NYC where she said Dumbledore is definitely dead) I'm convinced that TFP is not good but also not on Voldemort's side. I think he is meant to be one of the most complicated characters in the series and that he is very important for the overall message Rowling is trying to communicate.
As you read the comments Rowling's has made over the years one thing comes through very clearly: she is not interested in writing "childrens' stories" where nothing bad really happens. This especially comes out in her attitude towards death. Death is the one of the worst "bad" things that can happen - it is the absolute end of the possiblity of being physically in the presence of someone or being able to communicate with them. Even before Rowling announced it, I was sure that Dumbledore was really dead and I knew that Sirius was not coming back (but I might still be wrong!), because in real life no one can come back to life (at least not recently) after dying - I just couldn't imagine that Rowling was going to "cheapen" death by going against that rule in her books. That's not to say that Rowling does not admit some possibility of life after death - remember Dumbledore's comments about death being a great adventure and Luna's about hearing the voices from beyond the veil - but the living cannot know anything certain about it.
What does all this have to do with the FP? He killed Dumbledore, which, whatever the reason, is a horribly violent act that tears the soul in two. He did not, however, kill or capture Harry while escaping from Hogwarts. Despite his lame attempt to explain why he left Harry behind, I feel like he is not truly in allegiance with Voldemort. He is only in allegiance with himself. TFP is not a good person - he is spiteful and small and vindictive - but he is also not interested in being some Dark Lord's lackey. Remember, when he was fighting with Harry on the way out from Hogwart's, the one thing that really riled him up was when Harry called him a coward. TFP has a rather large sense of himself. But if he doesn't serve Dumbledore or Voldemort, what drives him? I think we'll all be surprised by that. Rowling has done an excellent job of hiding his true thoughts and intentions from us as well as the other characters in the book.
I think that TFP as not-good but not in league with Voldemort actually gives him the most depth and interest. Remember, he's in some ways worse than Voldemort, as Rowling says, because he was loved but he still turned out pretty selfish. Will he be redeemed? I honestly don't know. In keeping with Rowling's remarks about how some people really are just bad, he may not. He may just chose to continue to be selfish and spiteful. But maybe not.
Sorry about the length of the comment, once I started I really got in to it.

Excellent piece, as always. As a fairly agnostic-leaning-toward-Snape-is-good person, there is one main sticking point not mentioned here: Jo's response during an interview, in which she's asked about the pattern of "redemption" in Snape:

Questioner: There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape.
Rowling: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book Seven. That's all I’m going to say.

Of course she doesn't answer the question, but her "stunned" reaction makes it seem as if the idea of redemption will be incredibly important, and is on target.

On the other hand, what in the world is Snape doing that's so important that it's worth Dumbledore being killed?

Hi
I had a thought on this....
Jk also said in another interview (can't remember which sorry, read way too many!) that Snape has been loved so that makes him more... umm something... for his actions. The gist of it was that he's felt loved, been touched by that good feeling, knows wrong from right, has a moral compass (of sorts - it's questionable if it's snape) so when he does something wrong, he knows it. That's one thing about Snape that's made very clear. He's very accurate and perceptive, very deliberate. So when he makes a mistake, he does it knowingly. My point is, maybe this is what he did, kept doing in the past... until it cost him something he didn't intend on losing. [loved-lily shippers insert loved/lost lily here]

He's been given many chances and he blew them until Dumbledore took him in and BELIEVED in him.

Bravo Gre_Magus! :clap:and yay i'm not the only one!:D

Oh boy made it long again..
right, gonna sit back and watch now:cool::lol:

Im glad you pondered the other side of the coin as I have done several times because I too believe that Snape is good, but I dont like surprises. And I agree that Alan Rickman's portrayal of Snape is so good, I believe it influences how I think of him. However, I believe that Snape, whether good or evil, will have a CONVINCING redemption at the end. Yes, I believe he dies, and yes, I believe that he will die saving Harry. I believe Jo has singled him out to be the big redemption message. I believe it will become a moot point whether he is actually good or evil. I think he is mostly a survivor, trying to do the best for himself in a world in which he has never truly found a niche. Not totally good, not totally evil, playing both sides, never at rest. He is a sad character. Ok, he is mean to little children, that makes him a little less sympathetic but overall, a sad character.

Wait... What????
You have NEVER seen a HP movie???

Nope. Never. I'll make up my own mind about the books before I watch one. I won't be able to do that until well after the last book.

On slightly different note - I was looking for quotes, when I came across what is possibly the best hint ever;

"Severus Snape was pulling off the Invisibility Cloak, his wand pointing directly at Lupin.

(opposite page)
-CHAPTER NINETEEN-
The Servant of Lord Voldemort"

Am I the only one who likes a good juxtaposition?

Oh and Dariel, I agree with your theory completely, and mellilot, Alan Rickman is awesome as Snape!

I believe it will become a moot point whether he is actually good or evil. I think he is mostly a survivor, trying to do the best for himself in a world in which he has never truly found a niche. Not totally good, not totally evil, playing both sides, never at rest. He is a sad character. Ok, he is mean to little children, that makes him a little less sympathetic but overall, a sad character.

Good point, especially about him being a sad character. I think of Snape as someone who is very powerful and has a high opinion of himself but when it comes down to it is actually a spiteful and mean (in the sense of miserly and narrow-minded) person. But rather than hating him, I kind of feel pity for him. Which is exactly what he DOESN'T want other people to do. Remember how he reacted to Lily standing up to James for him?

Oh and Dariel, I agree with your theory completely, and mellilot, Alan Rickman is awesome as Snape!

Alan Rickman got me through the first two movies! He is awesome.. sometimes i think he might have some Snapish characteristics to be able to play him so well... :huh:

Good point, especially about him being a sad character. I think of Snape as someone who is very powerful and has a high opinion of himself but when it comes down to it is actually a spiteful and mean (in the sense of miserly and narrow-minded) person. But rather than hating him, I kind of feel pity for him. Which is exactly what he DOESN'T want other people to do. Remember how he reacted to Lily standing up to James for him?

He is a sad pitiable character.. but that's what's so annoying about him - he could have done so much better - he chose to wallow in bitterness and regret - damn him!

LS

Once again, as always, good thoughts, Brandon! :tu: They've crossed my mind before (and probably lots of others as well), but not having written an ed on them, I won't be getting the applause. That's OK, because you really deserve it for setting it out so plainly. And... you've willingly opened yourself up to lots of "return fire" for doing so. Yup. Applause worthy. Definitely. :clap:

Now to discuss the ideas!

JKR is famous for taking things that are really quite simple and putting the slightest spin on them that causes fans to work themselves into a frenzy looking for a more complicated explanation. When both Sirius and Dumbledore died, everyone went to the craziest, wildest conspiracy theories about how they could still be alive.I just had to laugh at the first sentence here - the mental image of espresso-induced bulging eyes and days-uncombed hair half-pulled out by the roots was just too true. :lol:

Of course how that played out for Sirius and Dumbledore isn't funny at all. I never thought they were still alive and I felt a lot of concern for those who couldn't accept this. I'm pretty sure some younger readers might not ever have lost any loved ones to so quick and unexpected a death, let alone an unjust one. In the Sirius and DD cases, Jo was being, in your words, obvious, but with good reason - sometimes it does happen that way in real life. It is harsh, painful, and sets out grief so strong one thinks they'll simply shrivel up and die themselves because of it. Hell, even Jo had trouble with it and she knows why it had to happen. :(


...suppose the simplest explanation (that [Snape] really is evil and on Voldemort's side) is the right one. This may blow up in my face and be totally off-base, but I'm putting it out there...While I still see reasons for Jo to redeem Snape (literary and religious-parallel reasons), I now see some very good logic for that not to happen. Other than Snape just being nasty, I had not previously found a good reason for him to really be as evil as he appears, because, well, you know... "obvious."

Now I'm seeing (thanks to your ed!) that despite having done all the right things, if Snape didn't do them for the right reason he's got nothin'. Everyone knows good intentions alone aren't enough (e.g. Percy) and now it's clear that good acts alone aren't either. I still have the feeling that Snape may not exactly be working for Voldemort, but I don't think he's exactly working for the Order either. I think this guy is an enigma wrapped inside a riddle and however else that well known quote continues. Snape's motivations are obvioulsy not only mysterious but deeply private and personal to him. It may be rather a surprise if we ever find out what they truly are.

If Snape does die, I won't be one of those mourning him (hmm... the term "delusional" echoes from somewhere out of the background). Even if he was working for the right side, he's never ceased to be a cruel and embittered man toward those who in no way deserve such treatment. If he is working for the Order, I will be grateful for what he did for them, for the risk he put himself into, and I may even feel some sympathy for whatever caused him to turn on Voldemort. But I will never like him and I will never believe he had any excuse to treat others as he has throughout the books. That may not merit a death sentence, but it does merit my not mourning him.

I gotta say, Brandon, if this blows up in your face it won't be because it was without logic. 'Cause you got that in spades, fella. :cool:

It is interesting to me that everyone is focusing on some intricate prior plot on the part of Snape regarding all that he has done. We see him as conniving and mean, waspish and spiteful. But we never see Snape showing a great deal of forethought.

We see two characters painted as master strategists: Dumbledore and Ron. Ron has only had opportunity up to this point to show his strategy at chess, while Dumbledore's ability to strategize was related to us in OotP, when one the of the characters at Grimmauld Place (I'm at work, don't have my book, but I think it was Lupin) said "Dumbledore's hunches usually turn out to be right" (or something along those lines).

What's my point?

I believe Snape is reaping the whirlwind of his many disastrous and tricky decisions throughout his life. We have never seen Snape plot anything (so far as I can remember). He tries with Draco, but is rebuffed. He is allowed redemption within greater wizarding society because of Dumbledore's plot to have him spy. When Snape tries to be sneaky as a young man, he gets caught listening at keyholes, almost gets killed by a werewolf, get humiliated by both his attacker and his would-be defender at the lake. Even in SS/PS his attempts to stop Quirrel are unsuccessful, while Harry is not.

Snape is a master at dealing with events as they arise or so he tries to be, but he is not planning things out beforehand. But just as Dumbledore has made mistakes in his calculations, so Snape has finally found himself in a situation where everyone finds themselves at some point in life. He has twisted and stretched to keep himself safe on all sides for so long that at last things have backfired. (This is just one more reason I think JKR is brilliant...Spinner's End. At last his confusing and morally ambiguous choices have left him without the ability to spin a way out of his self-made trap.) I would love to believe that Snape and Dumbledore were working for the protection of Draco all year (I am sure Dumbledore was) but do not forget that Draco mentioned the vow Snape had with his mother to Dumbledore and DD's response was "I am sure that is what Snape would have told you..." It makes me wonder whether Snape ever told DD about the vow.

I think Snape finally had himself in a position he knew he could not solve. Snape was fearful when Draco was caught walking around before Christmas. Dumbledore was arguing with Snape, according to Hagrid, about doing his best to discover the perpetrator. If Snape is trying to keep the vow, would it not be in his best interest to keep Draco's identity as the attacker a secret for as long as possible?

Snape has finally bitten off more than he could chew. But there is one thing I must mention. I don't know that Snape ever set out to be good or evil, just personally secure (whatever that may mean to him.) But now I feel that his intentions will change. JKR was astonished by the comment about Snape having a "redemptive pattern" and said that the observation was very astute, and that we would see.

I think that Snape will finally choose to do something for the right reason, whatever it may be, probably at great personal cost. I don't think he'll do it for Harry, and I don't think he'll do it for Lily. I think he'll do it for Dumbldore. Dumbledore is the one who trusted him, gave him another chance, and believed in him until the end. I think Snape will come to realize this, and it will redeem him. Harry may be the catalyst for this revelation, but I think it will be DD and his caring for Snape that will turn the tide for Severus.

Pardon the long post. It got away from me. :D

I think B.F., makes a mistake. The obvious choice is not going to be the right one. Going to the point where he brings about Sirius and Dumbledore being dead while everyone comes up with wild theories as an example, I say that JKR deals with death as it is. Meaning, when people dying it is real as well as for effect and doesn't think anything (magical powers included) can really bring 'em back. She's just realistic on this point.

That being said, this is exactly why she made the portraits speak and move. She wants Dumbledores to give Harry a message.

I totally agree with B.F. that Snape will die. There was never any doubt in my mind from the beginning. How can he possibly live? I think his biggest purpose for him was to kill Dumbledore and now he will do something to help Harry (sacrifice himself or something) and be terminated.

Another theory can be that since I think he's useless now, Harry will try to kill him and Wormtail will save his life...thats how Peter will repay Harry.

Love the editorial!
I think that Brandon always does such a great job. However, I have to say that I can't agree with Snape being "good." I think that Snape is a terrible man. He is selfish, very cruel, and thinks that he is always right about everything and everyone.
In fact, the one thing that bothers me about Dumbledore (even though he was my absolute favorite) is his letting someone so horrible teach young people. Think about it, what would happen to any teacher these days that treated students the way Snape treats his students?
I don't know if I think that Snape is all "evil" like Voldemort either. I think he is a ruined person. I think we can see that he's ruined by the fact that his humanity has gone missing. He just lacks so many human characteristics like empathy and compassion. He is a man that makes choices off of his emotions. He doesn't stop to consider the facts, ie Hermione and Harry trying to tell Snape that Sirius was innocent. Snape didn't want to hear it. His emotions wanted Sirius dead because of their history and that was all Snape was going to hear: his emotions. There is something so NOT right about him.
I hope that Dumbledore didn't make a mistake in trusting Snape. One more thing to add: I don't think that Dumbledore trusted Snape because Snape is truly good (just mistreated and misunderstood). I think that Dumbledore had something on Snape (not like blackmail) or Snape owed Dumbledore something.
Bottom line after all of this: Snape wants what's good for Snape.

It's a great editorial!
Although ever since HBP, I'm convinced that Snape is evil and serving no one but himself. Despite all the possible explanations, I would find it disturbing if Snape turned out to be good, especially when however way you put it, he killed Dumbledore. Dumbledore isn't perfect, and he could've been mistaken about Snape. I'm sure its a tempting thought to think that despite all the hatred, vindictiveness, and decided meanness Snape has, that he really is a good guy, his personality just doesn't match it.

Along the theme of the obvious, this is the sixth book. She said we would be getting answers. The ends are being tied, the i's dotted, and so on. It is perfectly reasonable, economical and plausible for us to believe what we are seeing, what the evidence points to---that SNAPE IS EVIL!! :evil:

I think that Spinner's End is proof that Snape is evil. The 6th is Snape's book, named after him, and he is a central actor in the climax, where usually he is absent. He's even got his own chapter (several, actually, but one without the Harry filter which should send off some red flags if you're a fan..hint: JKR is TELLING US SOMETHING HERE).

So, What is the point of Spinner's End? To show what a great liar he is? Well, that's been obvious for a while. To tell us about the Unbreakable Vow? No, that gets done later in the book too. (Chapter aptly named 'The Unbreakable Vow'). The plot unfolds with or without the chapter, and is explained in other ways. So then, why include it?

Imagine, if you will, exising Spinner's End all together. What would you be left with? A pretty concise book with all the necessary information.

Except...answers to questions regarding Snape. If it hadn't been there we would have been certainly left hanging at the end of the book, shaking our heads in confusion and asking questions like "Well, if he's evil, why hasn't he killed Harry yet? Why didn't he show up right away at the graveyard? What about trying to stop Quirrel get the stone?" ALL ANSWERED IN SPINNER'S END!! By providing answers JKR is giving us the solid evidence we need to believe that Snape is evil, an accumulation and summary of all his deeds in the past books that need explaining for the premise that Snape is evil to even be plausible.

Also, wouldn't it just be the same old plot twist if Snape turned out to be good? Isn't this Snape is EVIL idea different, shocking, and delicious? I certainly think so. I think it is waaaay more interesting than Snape being good. I also think it is a good study in character, especially on bullying. Harry can get past his childhood (being bullied by the Dursleys) but Snape cannot get past his. We can see that in his treatment of Harry. He has turned his cheek to the good side, the side of the Potters and the Dumbledores and the Sirius's who tormented him. Snape=evil!!!!!

Wow that was a long rant. My apologies! :) :)

I am going to throw this out there as well...I used to be a TFP is good because she (JKR) would not make this so blatantly obvious. But like you I believe she has and I base my ideas on this..I think the person who got the reprieve JKR spoke of recently is TFP. I see Snape as thinking he is better than most, including both Dumbledore and Voldemort. He sees both of them as a means to an end. Dumbledore got rid of Grindelwald and who was the next supervillian? Voldemort. Dumbledore himself said that you must keep fighting evil though never quite eradicating it totally. I believe TFP saw that Harry must (and will) defeat Voldemort. That leaves the door open for him to take over supervillian.

Along that vein I feel he was the one who got the reprieve because, should JKR decide to pick up the HP pen again in a few years (I am convinced she will) she is set up with a story. Harry, who will by then be a fully trained auror will match wits with TFP. Harry is nowhere near ready to take on TFP right now as was demonstrated by the end of HBP. I dont realistically see how he would be good enough to do Snape in as well as Voldemort in one book. If Snape does what he can to aid Harry....well it just seems to set itself up for a Harry Potter 5 years from now. I would look forward to Harry for the rest of my life and I have always felt that JKR wont want to just be done after book 7. Could be full of hot air but book 7 as it is being written is totally different than book 7 when it was first done. She is Harry Potter and Harry Potter is JKR.

Cant you just see it? Harry battling wits with Snape for several books..Kinda like Holmes/Moriarty. I have always felt that Harry/Snape would always be more interesting that Harry/Voldemort has been anyway. Oh well I will stop rambling now...Keep up the good work...good article!

LionHart, you make very valid points. I agree with you up to this point, that Snape has been looking out for himself. (JKR tells us in HBP through DD that the Death Eaters gravitate to Lord Voldemort not because of the virtues and strengths of the Dark Lord, but because of what they will get out of the association. I beleive Snape fits that mold.

However, JKR allowed for a question concerning a redemptive pattern in regard to Snape, and I can't shake that. It would be interesting if the redemptive pattern is that everyone keeps trying to redeem him and he just stays evil. But it doesn't strike me that way when you read JKR's quote.

That being said, what do all the "Snape will always be evil" folks make of the JKR quote? I sympathize, because even if Snape is "redeemed" in regard to the war between LV and the rest of the wizarding world, there remains a great deal of personal animosity and broken relationship for which he stands, if not wholly, than very, very culpable.

He will never be a nice man. I don't know that that is what so many hope for. I think they just want to know that this angry, bitter, resentful, and just plain mean character will fight against LV in the end. Because a bad person fighting an objectively evil person is, although not new, not altogether common either.

You know, after reading the other posts, I find myself having fallen into the "Snape trap" of acting just like TFP himself. :whistle: I'd become embittered enough myself about his past cruelty to others, that I precluded any sort of turn around for the man. While I still don't think there is too much of an excuse for someone so bright to use the past as a crutch for bad behavior, I can see that characteristic maybe changing - at last - in Book 7. My main reason for softening up a bit about him was this:

I think that Snape will finally choose to do something for the right reason, whatever it may be, probably at great personal cost. I don't think he'll do it for Harry, and I don't think he'll do it for Lily. I think he'll do it for Dumbldore. Dumbledore is the one who trusted him, gave him another chance, and believed in him until the end. I think Snape will come to realize this, and it will redeem him. Harry may be the catalyst for this revelation, but I think it will be DD and his caring for Snape that will turn the tide for Severus.I can see Snape's wanting to live up to DD's trust redeeming him to at least some degree. I couldn't see redemption before, or didn't believe it would happen, because I cannot imagine the man ever becoming thoughtful towards Harry. He might do the "right thing" to help Harry defeat Voldemort, but I can never see him feeling sorry for how he's treated Harry all these years. But to repay Dumbledore.... it could work. I would also like to see Snape do the right thing for his own sake, for finally taking a stand for someone other than himself, and doing so by choice. For a person to be truly redeemed, he must freely choose to do what is right - redemption is in the hands of the one who would be redeemed as much as in those of anyone who would help them achieve it.


Other than that (somewhat limited) change of heart on my part, I also found the following posts good:

I had an idea last night (in the shower, as usual): what if LUNA, in one of her imaginative tagents, comes out with the "Snape-is-not-evil" theory. Everyone else would just give her the *stunned-rodent look* and forget about it. Later on....I love in-the-shower ideas! Those and just-sort-of-waking-up ideas. Those two are always the best. And this one is really, really good! And funny!! :lol: Therefore, very Jo-like. :agree:

...the last thing I want to do is be proven WRONG.To paraphrase Dumbledore, "Hedwig_June, there are things much worse than being proven wrong." Been there, done that, not really that bad. Honestly.


Wow... Snape is... still as complicated as ever, it appears. It's too obvious one way, but then it's obvious the other way, too. He killed Dumbledore, like you said. It should be obvious. But at the same time, it's far too easy.

Urm *has nothing intelligent to say*Actually, the first part of this is incredibly intelligent! It hadn't occured to me that it's just too obvious... either way. It's a truly great author that keeps you guessing all the way through a book, let alone... SEVEN of them!!! :wow:


I'm convinced that TFP is not good but also not on Voldemort's side. I think he is meant to be one of the most complicated characters in the series and that he is very important for the overall message Rowling is trying to communicate...

Will he be redeemed? I honestly don't know. In keeping with Rowling's remarks about how some people really are just bad, he may not.I believe that Snape, whether good or evil, will have a CONVINCING redemption at the end. Yes, I believe he dies, and yes, I believe that he will die saving Harry. I believe Jo has singled him out to be the big redemption message. I believe it will become a moot point whether he is actually good or evil. I think he is mostly a survivor, trying to do the best for himself in a world in which he has never truly found a niche. Not totally good, not totally evil, playing both sides, never at rest. He is a sad character. Ok, he is mean to little children, that makes him a little less sympathetic but overall, a sad character.One thought that crossed my mind as I read the editorial is that sometimes real people can't be put into well-defined niches. Some people are both good and bad. If ever there was a literary character like that, it's Severus Snape. Jo has honestly and convincingly shown that sometimes good people die suddenly and unjustly. Maybe she's also going to show us that sometimes people are more complicated than lovely literary simplicities and that "good vs. evil" isn't how it happens in real life. She can't exactly do that using the Harry vs. Voldemort paradigm because that's the one she's using to show that good vs. evil is sometimes what it's all about. So to show us that at other times that that's just not the case, she dreamed up (er, nightmared up?) Severus Snape. By doing so she's giving us examples of both situations that can and do really happen. Pottersleuth200, someone being mean to little children because they're a sad character doesn't always get fixed, aka redeemed, in the real world. Some people are just like that their whole lives, leaving a trail of unhappiness for themselves and all they touch without ever learning better. Maybe, sadly, that's what will happen with Snape. I hope not, but I could understand Jo's reasoning if it did.


I think [Snape] is a ruined person. I think we can see that he's ruined by the fact that his humanity has gone missing. He just lacks so many human characteristics like empathy and compassion. He is a man that makes choices off of his emotions. He doesn't stop to consider the facts... He is a sad pitiable character.. but that's what's so annoying about him - he could have done so much better - he chose to wallow in bitterness and regret - damn him!Had the man never known love, as is the case for Voldemort, I would more willingly excuse his behavior because he is "ruined." But Jo has said he has known love and that implies he's learned how to do something for someone's benefit besides his own. But he did not heed that lesson, not in its true spirit. I stand by my original post's statement - you have to do the right thing AND do it for the right reason to really have it matter. Lady Sirius, you are correct... Snape chose - repeatedly - to be spiteful. And now he may well reap what he has sown. Certainly if he had been a kinder person all along, he would not have to face the almost foregone condemnation the Order - and the whole wizarding world (save the DEs) - will have for him.



About Alan Rickman's portrayal of Snape - up till the GoF movie I did find his portrayal as a man with violently burning personal demons, as well as a very devious mind (not to mention an oily personality), quite good, excellent in fact. Rickman didn't change for GoF, though. What I had issues with was the writers putting in the scene where Snape the study-hall-monitor keeps whacking Harry and Ron over the head with a book for talking. Sure, it's funny. Actually it's hysterical. But Snape the canon character is sooo much more creative than that. Some posters here spoke of Jo's rules for death being cheapened if certain things happen in Book 7. I sort of felt the same way about the book whacking scene - to me, it actually cheapened the depth of complexity and twisted motivation that plays out with Snape in the books.

Sorry to end on a down note.... but only about the movies - NOT the books!!! JKR simply rules. :agree:


EDIT: OK, four new posts showed up while I was typing this! Will have to look at the later, though, as I'm late as it is for other obligations. Sheesh. :rolleyes:

I commend your efforts on seeing around your prejudice towards Snape! I love how you have taken the opposing side on a matter you feel so strongly about, and you make many good points. The fact of the matter is that we have NO IDEA what JKR will do for book 7 with Snape, the only thing we can do it think of every possible (in our minds) solution to the Snape issue. I think reading editorials like yours is a nice break from the normal "snape is good and will save the world" type of schpiels. In making theories it is often essential to consider the alternative. Very nice editorial.

...and for the record, I never think your editorials are too long! :D

I think of Sirius' famous comment that I cannot find about the world not being divided into good people and Death Eaters. He was talking about Umbridge, but Snape fits too. Snape is an embittered, jealous, ubersarcastic, bitter, nasty man who could probably make a good living as the poster child for the "I Have Issues" campaign, should there be one. The only person he doesn't seem to enjoy making cutting remarks to is Dumbledore, and he killed him. Nonetheless I still believe that he is our louse, not Voldemort's and not a free agent.

Part of my reason for thinking this is organizational: we have a baddie already, thank you very much. Another is Spinners End. To my mind, Snape is CLEARLY not in Voldemort's favor to the extent Bella thinks he is; Wormtail is spying on him, which must be at Voldemort's orders since Snape is quite the powerful wizard and I don't think Wormtail would antagonize him casually-- and no one who thinks well of anyone would give them Wormtail. This is why he's sucking up to Bella; not only is she personally dangerous in her own right, but odds are she'll be back in Voldie's favor someday. It's also apparent that Snape doesn't know what Draco's task is until the sisters say enough to make it plain to anyone. And Snape's information to Bella is . . . weird. Only by the greatest stretch can we say that Snape's information led to Sirius' death. It was the information Snape gave TO SIRIUS that sent Sirius to Harry's aid. It wasn't information shared with Voldemort.

Brandon, I don't think your connection of Snape Goodism to the Shipping Wars is as spot-on as usual. Because my final reason for believing in Snape is that Dumbledore did. Yes, I'm DWTAT. If it had been established early on that Dumbledore was shipping Harry/Hermione (and the movies really DO make it look like that's the ship that'll sail), then the comparison would work. But I seriously doubt that the final verdict on Dumbledore at the end of the series is going to be that he was a stupid old man. Draco called him that on the Tower. Draco's wrong. Dumbledore's big mistake was in not telling Harry the Prophecy; that's why we lost Sirius. But I do not think JKR is going to leave us with a Dumbledore who was mistaken on a galactic scale where his most controversial decision was concerned.

emmasj, Dumbledore said it was how Voldemort interpreted the prophecy (as referring to the Potters) that led to Snape's remorse. Not their deaths. Harry interpreted it that way, but he should have known better; in Goblet ("The Pensieve") he saw Dumbledore say he'd testified that Snape returned to the good guys at great personal risk while Voldemort was still in power--which obviously was before the attack on Goblet's Hollow where the Potters were killed and he was nearly destroyed.

Brilliant editorial as usual Brandon. But you say that having TFP actually being evil would be too obvious, that it would be sending the message of 'once a baddie always the baddie'. I can see the point there, and we all know that JKR wants her characters to be realistic. What has always bothered me about the 'TFP is really good' theory is that it means that Dumbledore was right about him. Normally i would be all for believing in Dumbledore's infalability, but I actually believe that it would be more realistic, and more powerful if for once, he was wrong about someone, and it cost him his life. All throughout the books, Dumbledore has defended TFP, and until book 6 he has been proven right in doing so. In the interest of a realistic story, i will be dissapointed if it turns out that once again Dumbledore was right and Harry was wrong about TFP. This would be sending the realistic message that people are wrong sometimes, and that sometimes you should trust your instincts, two things that i think JKR believes in.

Hey everyone. I havent posted since the release of book 6, but im back and have a few things to say. First Brandon, great job as always. And whoever told u your editorials were to long can keep it to themselves. U help keep the HP spirit alive, so the longer the better.

K so now to my thoughts. I have always thought of snape as the character i love to hate. After getting over the shock of DD dieing, i have reread the book tring to peice some things together. And one thing that i havent seen anyone talking about (srry havent read everyones post since book six release so someone might have alrdy said this) is the unbreakable vow. NOT with narcissa and Snape however, I believe that Snape made a vow to Dumbledore. I believe dd told snape that if it came Between harry's life and dd, to make sure harry was safe. Think about it. There is a very breif couple of seconds between the time snape walks out the door pushes draco aside and then kills dd. It says somewhere in there that snape looked into the eyes of dd with the upmost discust (or something like this i dont have my book handy for refrence). This last statement should open some eyes, What are both Snape and DD masters of? Get my point yet? Ok, for the stragglers, they are both masters of legenimenz ( or however its spelled(reading of eachothers minds)). I think within the 2 maybe 3 second glance dd told snape where harry was, and that he was to weak to keep harry safe for much longer. So what does snape do? the only thing he can. He upholds his vow with dracos mother, he kills dd (which i believe dd knew it had to be done way before it happened), and hurries to get Draco and all the other Death eaters away from harry. Snape knew that as soon as dd was dead the spell holding harry would be broken, and that to make sure harry doesnt remove the cloak and revill himself to the DE that he needed to be quick on getting everyone off the tower.

Well, srry its long but theres a summed up version of my theory ive had. But i also want to say one quick side note. I did read a post of someone from prob a while ago about what voldemorts main goal is, now the poster put world domination. Now im not disagreeing because one thing voldemort is obsessed with is power, however if u go back to HBP, it says that voldemorts main goal in life is life itself. His goal is to become immortal. Death is voldemorts greatest weakness, dd always said it was. Voldemort believes that death is a muggle burden and anyone that dies is to weak. And since he believes himself to be the most powerful wizard in the world, he believes himself to strong for death, so he goes to great measure to make sure he cannot and willnot die.

This is a theory that has been submitted before , many times after the HBP was first released. I myself suggested a second unbreakable vow between DD and Snape and that that was the reason DD always trusted snape. The comments that it illicited were basically that DD's basic theory of humanity was that one could choose to be "good" rather than bad and that to force "goodness" was in some way cheating. When I thought about that comment I found myself agreeing with it.

Why then did snape kill DD? I submit he really didn't have a choice and DD knew it. Looking at the events logically that led up to DD's death. DD appears to be dying from the effects of the green potion. The only one who could save DD is snape ( JKR has told us that when she had McGonegal send Katie to Snape after she touches the cursed necklace, as well as DD's insistance that Harry fetch snape and only snape after DD drank the green potion), He is the only one who knows the antidote or would not panic before figuring it out ( perhaps he concocted it - just speculation). It is obvious that although slughorn is the current potions teacher and may be very knowledgable he does panic. I agree, DD and snape communicated non verbally in those few seconds, and that DD requested that snape kill him. I don't think this was planned priviously- but I think DD in a way is like Lily potter - he gave his life to save snape. He knew that he would die anyway without an antidote to the potion - snape's action served two purposes. It saved Harry from the guilt of having killed DD by force feeding DD the potion ( it is my contention that there was no antidote for the potion) and it saved snape's life leaving snape with a life debt to DD. What then would that debt be? What was most important to DD- Harry's safety naturally. Here snape thought he was finished with life debts- afterall he saved Harry in book one from Quirrell's cursed broomstickand now here it goes again, only this time it is DD' who did the saving. Certainly that look of revulsion that we see on snape's face is understandable.

That is one possibility or the other could be even more sinister. Snape is practical and is really motivated by his obcession to replace V with one who is more ( in his opinion ), more worthy - namely Severus Snape. I submit - snape heard the whole prophesy not just the first part, but only told V the first part in order that V choose Harry and mark him as his equal. If Snape has heard the whole prophesy he is aware that only Harry can do away with V - so it is to snape's advantage to protect Harry until such time as Harry fulfills the prophesy. Once V is gone , who is the likely replacement? Why snape himself. There is no prophesy that says Harry can not be killed and considering that V has thwarted the whole wizarding world and that the Wizarding world is unaware of the prophesy - after V is killed by Harry - if snape kills Harry wouldn't that make snape the most powerful wizard in the world ?

...In the interest of a realistic story, i will be dissapointed if it turns out that once again Dumbledore was right and Harry was wrong about TFP. This would be sending the realistic message that people are wrong sometimes, and that sometimes you should trust your instincts, two things that i think JKR believes in.


I don't think it would make the story unrealistic for DD to be right about Snape. As I said above, I think Dumbledore trusts Snape because of what he's capable of, not everything that he's done. (Though obviously, Snape did something in the past for Dumbledore to believe...DD was too intelligent to take the word of an accomplished occlumens like Snape.)

Dumbledore's ability to misjudge a person has already been proven. By his own words, he thoroughly misjudged...HARRY. Dumbledore knew the appropriate course of action to take in regard to the prophesy and Harry, and didn't do it. Why? He cared too much for Harry's comfort and happiness. In other words, he thought Harry incapable of handling the responsibility. But He admits that Harry was ready long ago. This is obviously not the normal misjudgment that we would think of, but it's true. We wouldn't expect two people who care about one another to make such a gross mistake. And yet this is the real life mistake so many of us make! ("We fools who love...")

On the contrary, as I said above, DD's genius will show through, I think, when Snape makes/shows some sort of something in reaction to all DD has done for him in the past. I don't know what it will be, but I'm sure it will cost him. And I think perhaps that that sort of insight into a person's potential would fit very well into the quirky, brilliant and lovable headmaster we have so recently lost. It makes him who he is: A loving man.

Harry is always acting on instinct. It helped him defeat Quirrel, it helped him defeat the Basilisk, it caused him to save himself and Sirius from 100 Dementors, it kept him alive in, and brought him back from, the graveyard in GoF. And It cost him Sirius in OotP. And DD was shown wrong, as I said above, in regard to Harry.

I believe JKR has shown us that people are wrong sometimes, and that people ought to sometimes trust their instincts. But this may be the time, as in real life, where the exception proves the rule. I think you are right on about JKR. But I think she has already proven those things.

Courtesy of grackle13:
Questioner: There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape.

Rowling: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read Book Seven. That's all I’m going to say.
...what do all the "Snape will always be evil" folks make of the JKR quote? I sympathize, because even if Snape is "redeemed" in regard to the war between LV and the rest of the wizarding world, there remains a great deal of personal animosity and broken relationship for which he stands, if not wholly, than very, very culpable.Personally, I think JKR is savvy enough to have meant that quote any number of ways. Perhaps she has meant the redemptive pattern to look promising, but is really planning the "sometimes life is just wrong" treatment of it. Meaning, even though there are lots of chances for Snape to straighten up his act, he repeatedly fails to do so. Perhaps the question caught JKR offguard momentarily as she realized how hurt some readers may be if Snape does turn out to be exactly what many of us have felt he is all along - a slimeball deluxe, no matter whose side he's on. Even if he's working for the good guys, it doesn't mean he'll necessarily be redeemed for all his nasty, hurtful behavior over the years. I'm thinking the only way that could happen is if he sincerely said, "I'm sorry." Yeah, like that's gonna happen. :no:


What has always bothered me about the 'TFP is really good' theory is that it means that Dumbledore was right about him. Normally i would be all for believing in Dumbledore's infalability, but I actually believe that it would be more realistic, and more powerful if for once, he was wrong about someone, and it cost him his life. All throughout the books, Dumbledore has defended TFP, and until book 6 he has been proven right in doing so. In the interest of a realistic story, i will be dissapointed if it turns out that once again Dumbledore was right and Harry was wrong about TFP. This would be sending the realistic message that people are wrong sometimes, and that sometimes you should trust your instincts, two things that i think JKR believes in.Dumbledore once said something (I think in HBP) that, being smarter than the average person, his mistakes, when he makes them, are that much more enormous than the average person's. From that point of view, I think you may be right, KathyH. :( No one is ever right 100% of the time, including DD, as the delay in telling about Harry the Prophecy showed. But absolutely the biggest mistake anyone can make is the one that gets them killed. DD may have been right in saying Snape had great remorse and came back to work for the good guys because of it. He may have been right in believing Snape would never go back to Voldemort for the same reason...

But it doesn't always follow that someone who has remorse forever acts appropriately after the fact. Lots of people feel remorse for, say, drinking or smoking. And lots of them try to get past those habits. Some succeed in doing so for good. But others don't. It doesn't mean they're not sincere in their initial attempts to reform. It just means that whatever's inside them that pushes them to take up those habits again is very powerful and not something they're able to beat. There's every chance Snape is like that too, that he started out meaning to do better than he had because something of that had caused him remorse. But as Shewoman said, the man's got issues, BIG issues. Regretting one act so greatly that he foreswore Voldemort for good (if he did), wouldn't make those issues all go away. They're old and they're deep. And they may just have gotten the better of him after all. I could be wrong, but as another poster said, it never hurts to consider another viewpoint.

I said earlier that Snape had repeated opportunities to change his behavior. But with all those issues he may not have been able to do so... on his own. But as far as we know, he never sought out help from anyone to try to get past them. Nope, he revelled in them. Those issues not only affected Snape's own mind set, they deeply affected how others suffered under Snape's tutelage. For that, I feel Dumbledore should have pressed him to take his issues in hand and either deal with them or at least with the behavior they engendered. No, DD nor anyone else can make someone change, but they can urge a person to do so and try to help them if they need it. That doesn't seem to have happened here. Unfortunately, by not (apparently) doing something more about this, Dumbledore was in a way enabling Snape's immature and hurtful behavior - for 15 years. :sad:

From Emerald63:Dumbledore once said something (I think in HBP) that, being smarter than the average person, his mistakes, when he makes them, are that much more enormous than the average person's. From that point of view, I think you may be right, KathyH. and But absolutely the biggest mistake anyone can make is the one that gets them killed.
Dumbledore's biggest mistake, as I see it, was not in misjudging Snape, but in not understanding Malfoy's determination to prove himself. Dumbledore did not believe that Malfoy could personally kill him and considered his attempts amateurish. But he underestimated Malfoy's desperation and determination to see the job through. Causing Dumbledore's death by allowing Death Eaters into Hogwarts was something Dumbledore did not count on. By underestimating Malfoy, Dumbledore made a mistake that cost him his life.


Quidditchcpt05, brilliant idea about setting up Snape to be the next Dark Lord, but I really think that Jo has planned it differently.

I...but...*whimpers*

We can't possibly be wrong! Were devoted fans for Gods sake! SNAP IS THE GUWD!! ROXX0RS!1

Sarcasm aside, I have always firmly pitched my tent in the "Snape is neither good nor evil, only selfish and morally bankrupt" camp. I've always loved Jo's writing for the multi-dimensional perspective on the books. We have Harry's black and white POV that firmly sets a line between good and evil, then if you look closer she writes an entire spectrum of grey. Snape's allegiance, I have always believed, is as grey as his underpants.

Snape is not, nor ever will be a "good guy" he does what’s good for HIM not for virtue or for the common good. Whether, at the end of the end, he chooses to do something for someone else, or the right reasons is up for debate.

Hey Sleuth, I know I am probably dreaming or lost in wishful thinking but I wonder how much she (JKR) has changed her book since its original inception. I bet its alot more than we will ever know. I guess I have nothing better to do than to dream about how great it would be to see Harry, who has learned much since his defeat of Voldemort, and is now going after his replacement...Too bad I dont read or write fan fic huh!..I do believe, all things said and done, that Snape is and has been in it for him. He was and is spiteful, vengeful and filled with many feelings...He is upset that Dumbledore is dead but not for any good reasons..his safety blanket is dead. If he wasnt the one issued the reprieve than I hope he goes bye bye in a painful way.

Quidditchcpt05, I also think she might have changed her mind about the series in the 10+ years since she first thought of Harry. In fact, I wrote an editorial about some of the changes I thougt she might have made but it never got published. I did this after her recent remarks about killing off some of the players she hadnt intended to, and figuring out how to save one that she planned to kill. One thing I dont believe she has changed is her setting up Snape as the redemption figure. The ONLy other possibilities I see are Malfoy (and he hasnt been so much redeemed as neutralized), and Rat-boy wormtail, which I would just as soon see happen upon some rat poisoning while hiding in Snape's cupboards...talk about wishful thinking! But I think that Snape was actually the cause of Lily and James' death, and there must be a lot of redeeming going on to make up for the death of Lily. So it has to be Snape. No other character has as much to be redeemed for.

What I don't get is why DD asks Snape to kill him.

Well, we don't know that he did, although that's often assumed. I now think that things fell apart the night of Dumbledore's death and there was no good, easy solution. I think Dumbledore knew all along that the potion in the Fake Horcrux cave would kill him but that he would have to drink it anyway; he and Snape had planned that Snape would be at Hogwarts to heal him as he did from Dumbledore's first Horcrux injury. I think that's why Snape was in his office, where he could be found. But Draco's attack took place that night--I don't think Dumbledore was expecting that--and so by the time Snape got to the Tower, Draco and other Death Eaters were there. What could they do? If Snape healed Dumbledore in front of them, Snape was screwed. If Draco didn't try to kill Dumbledore, he was screwed and Snape, Narcissa, and Lucius would probably die as well. I think the deaths of Slytherins is one of the last things Dumbledore wanted, since he keeps talking about the need to trust each other and to work together against Voldemort, and so I think he communicated with Snape silently at that point to kill him so that all the others--Harry included--would live. A lot of "I think," but that's the best I can come up with.

This is exactly what I've been saying for over a year. The "Snape is a Saint" crew remind me soooo much of the Harry-Hermione shippers it makes me sick. It will be hilarious if people start making websites and petitions to get JKR to rewrite the books to make Snape good after book 7 comes out.

That's the reason I'm sticking with "Gray Severus"/"I have no freaking clue."

Spinner's End was kind of...stark. Yeah, that word covers it. It was stripped-down -- it didn't have the Harry-glass over it. That's been true of all chapters that Harry wasn't directly observing, I think. There's this entirely different tone.

The Spinner's End chapter, if considered on its own, is a pretty solid case against Snape. However, no matter what, at the end he spared Harry. He deliberately refrained from attacking Harry (until Harry provoked him beyond his control). He then proceeded to give Harry advice on the reason he couldn't get a spell off at Snape. Thanks, Professor!

I think that the hesitation Snape showed before committing to the final vow of killing Dumbledore if Draco failed is kind of comparable to the legendary "gleam of triumph." Comparable in that it should be discussed obsessively, because it could be taken different ways based on good/bad Snape.

His moment of hesitation, if he's good, is easily explained: He doesn't want to murder Dumbledore and hesitates before making that particular "sacrifice." If he's gray...perhaps fear? Murdering the greatest wizard ever can't be an easy task. If he's evil...simple excitement? A slight thrill of anticipation ran through him, perhaps?

Also, I was under the impression that it's not a majority saying "Snape is good!" It's kind of split, isn't it? I still lean more toward good. Maybe Snape WILL sacrifice himself for Harry and redeem himself, but maybe JKR won't tell us any more than that. What if we never find out if it was under DD's orders?

Totally agree, and this has been close to my opinion for quite some time.

Theres no way Snape will be able to redeem himself. Imagine Snape showing up to an Order meeting in book 7, how would they react? They'd kill him on site, or atleast use veritasirum on him.

That would make for a moment of explanation, but all the same I dont see it happening.

Snape, as you, Brandon, have said, Snape will sacrafice himself after we are sure Harry will die. Only JKR could make us wait so long for Snapes explanations.

I still dont know about Snape.....after reading both sides of the opinion poles and waving the flag for, 'Snape did it because Dumbeldore asked him too' crowd, Im still completly confused.

Excvellent editorial! Were did you go for so long, Brandon?

Very thought provoking piece Brandon. Well done! I am new to these parts but have long read your editorials and Mugglenet in general.

I've a question to ask before I really jump in.

In regards to " the discussion/argument TFP and Dumbledore had on the edge of the forest -- if that is where Dumbledore supposedly reiterates to TFP that should it deem necessary he is to be killed -- I ask this:

Why did Dumbledore offer the " protection ' clause to Draco? I mean, look at the scenario, Dumbledore is keeping Draco talking, presumably to bide time until Snape arrives right? Dumbledore has been asking for Snape, it is Snape he expects or is hoping for right?

OK - if there was the 'death pact' agreement made months before that - WHY offer Draco protection he cannot possibly give? If Snape does arrive, then he is supposed to kill him right? Gotta save Draco...can't let him become a killer...Dumbledore doesn't want that...so instead - he allows himself to be killed. HOW in the world does that help Draco and his mother? Was there another pact made between Snape and DD that he will protect Draco and Narcissa after he kills DD at DD's request?

That is one too many pacts for me. This is bordering on Snape and DD being Seers and knowing all of the events beforehand and that is ludicrious imho.

So...why did DD offer a protection to Draco he presumably knew he could never keep once Snape arrived?

The offer does not make sense to me anymore. Not if the theory " you must keep your promise to kill me Snape" is to hold up.

Explanations? I mean more then, " Oh, they did not expect DE's to show up. That is the only reason Snape had to kill him, otherwise they would have all fled into the night unscathed." type of thing because then that shoots down the argument that Snape and DD were having on the edge of the Forest about Snape backing out of killing DD should the need arise. The need arose - he killed him as planned.

So again - why make the offer?

I agree that Snape will not survive the series. I think the manner and cause of his death will FINALLY let us know where his loyalties lie . . . and maybe let him know, too.

First, let me say Great point, Hinkypuckmum! I'd never thought about DD's offer in that way before.

I've always agreed with Harry, Snape is just plain bad, and the adults should have taken a closer look at him years ago. JKR gave us the key to Snape in book 5 -- you judge a person by how he treats his inferiors (paraphrased, don't have books at work). And he treats his inferiors, ie his students, horribly. Also, book 6 was about Harry being right. He was proven right about Draco, and I believe he was proven right about Snape.

I've never bought that whole "DD would sacrifice himself to save Draco &/or Snape" line of thought. DD was more important to the Cause then Snape could ever be. He (DD) needed more time to finish preping Harry. While its true that DD wasn't afraid of death, that doesn't mean he wanted to die. He still had work to do, and he knew it. And it's war, and sacrifices have to be made. And DD understood that better than anyone else. Whether DD knew about the UV between Snape and Draco is irrelevant. If DD had the choice, he would have let Snape die instead of himself, not because he's selfish, or afraid to die, but because DD was more important in helping Harry defeat Voldy. And to DD, Harry defeating Voldy was the ONLY thing that mattered.

It's a classic morality question; does the end justify the means? In this case, would the final defeat of Voldy justify letting Snape and/or Draco die on the tower? DD would have answered yes. So DD would not never asked/ordered Snape to kill him if it came to that. And without that agreement, the Snape-is-still-good theory pretty much falls apart.

So, I guess my point (and it's taken a long time to get there, sorry) is that: on first analysis, Snape is bad (obvious), then you read into it, and Snape appears good (mostly because we just can't believe that DD could be so wrong about someone, I suspect), but then you really look at it logically, and Snape has to be bad, because the "good" arguments start to fall apart.

As for RachelMe's post, I have to disagree with the DD letting Snape die because he is more important. Snape is a very important factor to the books, Dumbledore is very important to Harry but a childhood grudge paved the way for Harry and Snape to be enemys, if Snape hadnt hated James I belive that Snape would have been just as important, or at least more important. After all, if it wasnt for Snape in the first place listening in on the prophecy none of this would have happened, Harry would have never been an equal and Voldemort would possibily never be defeated. If you look at it the right way, if it wasnt for Snape the war would have never have the possiblity of ending, at least not for a very long time.

Since the first book, we have always got the feeling that Snape was truly evil. And I agree with Brandon in the sense that he always turned out trying at least to be the 'hero'. His actions throughout the book for the most part, he always intended to be for the good but they slightly always backfired and made him look worse than before. If in the seventh year, he turns out to be evil it wont be a big suprise, and JKR always loves a big shock, thats why I am partial to the Snape is good theory. We were all shocked when Snape wasnt the one trying to get the stone, I dont think that anyone honestly belived really that Ginny opened the Chamber, we all were shocked when Sirius wasnt a killer, we all were shocked when Cedric died and Voldemort returned, we never excpected Sirius to die, and we certianly never expected Dumbledore to die, let alone for Snape and Draco being the ones doing it. Snape has always looked bad in the books, his actions always being took the wrong way and his childhood grudge made him look this way. But this is JKRs point, she always like to shock us, and nothing would shock us more than our very own ex death eater dieing for the good. That is what i belive what will happen, I may be wrong, but I belive that Snape will die for the sake of the good.

RachelMe, Dumbledore never recovered from the injury the Horcrux gave him before HBP started. And he seems to be dying on the Tower from the potion he drank in the cave. Under those circumstances, his life isn't more important than the lives of those who will live longer. If he's been serious about all the things he's said about the importance of unity against Voldemort, then probably dying to save a couple of Slytherins (Snape, Draco, Narcissa, Lucius) is the most effective way to accomplish that.

As for Hinkypunkmum's question, I think Dumbledore assumed--rightly, in my opinion--that the Order would honor any protection that Dumbledore offered, whether he was still alive or not. But I don't think he planned to die that night.

You've misunderstood. I don't mean that DD is more important in the story, I mean he is more important to Harry's quest. I agree with your point that JKR likes to surprise, I just think the big surprise is that he is evil, when so many believe/want to believe he is good.

That said, I can totally see Snape helping Harry, as I don't think Snape truly wants to spend the rest of his life as Voldy's underling. I just don't think it will be the "yo Harry, got your back dawg, you the man" type of help. And I do believe he will die, no matter which side he's on.

But to answer Brandon's question -- what if we're wrong? -- I believe that, even if I am proven 100% wrong, it will be alright. JKR is such as good author that I know her explanation, whichever way it goes, will make perfect sense when it is finally revealed. I don't think any of us will really be disappointed. (Well OK, maybe a militant few.) But most of us just love the story, and will "enjoy the ride", no matter where it takes us. (Awww, group hug anyone?)

Brandon has cited many examples of obvious things which came true.

Remember before HBP came out and there were several editorials and threads about "what Harry has that Voldemort knows not" and most everyone was trying to guess everything but the simple "love" answer? In HBP, Dumbledore and Harry told us, it was just love.

How more obvious can you get, and we didn't want to believe it, even though Jo told us so, over and over again in every book.

Jo does not throw red herrings into every scenerio, but sometimes we still try to find them.

I think Brandon is right: the obvious is true more than it isn't. Maybe it is this time, too.

RachelMe, Dumbledore never recovered from the injury the Horcrux gave him before HBP started. And he seems to be dying on the Tower from the potion he drank in the cave. Under those circumstances, his life isn't more important than the lives of those who will live longer. If he's been serious about all the things he's said about the importance of unity against Voldemort, then probably dying to save a couple of Slytherins (Snape, Draco, Narcissa, Lucius) is the most effective way to accomplish that.

As for Hinkypunkmum's question, I think Dumbledore assumed--rightly, in my opinion--that the Order would honor any protection that Dumbledore offered, whether he was still alive or not. But I don't think he planned to die that night.


I agree that Dumbledore was weak but not dying. I would not take lightly the phrase " No Draco, it is MY mercy that has spared you tonight - not yours." (paraphrased - at work right now)

Also, how can the Order honor any protection Dumbledore offered when TFP spirited Draco away to LV's lair? Make no mistake - TFP cannot hide Draco from LV - he must produce him. JKR confirms this when she tells us that Draco will be learning what the consequences are by becoming a DE.

Therefore, I stand by what I said - this 'suicide' agreement between TFP and DD carries no weight at all.

*disclaimer* All of this is strictly conjecture and imho only!:cool:

Therefore, I stand by what I said - this 'suicide' agreement between TFP and DD carries no weight at all.

I agree. I think a lot of decisions were made on the Tower that night. I am not certain that DD knew of the Unbreakable Vow between TFP and Narcissa, because of the conversation between DD and Draco. Draco mentions the Unbreakable Vow, and DD responds "I am sure that is what Professor Snape would have told you..."

Why would DD lie to Draco about the vow? What purpose would it serve? I think DD doesn't know about it, which points back to Snape trying to salvage his place on both sides of the war. He's trying to save himself.

But on the Tower, with DEs standing around him, Draco's life in the hands of LV, Snape likely to be exposed as spy, and Harry immobilized, invisible, and unable to act...DD had to do some quick thinking, and make some tough decisions. I don't think DD was pleading with TFP because he expected TFP to take on all the DEs and defeat them. I don't think that TFP knew Harry was there, so I don't think that's what the pleading was about either. I think DD was pleading with Snape for one of two reasons:

1) To save Draco Malfoy. DD had just had a long conversation with Draco, obviously hoping that the Order would arrive, but still speaking truthfully with Draco about right and wrong. Then the DEs arrive and Draco's situation becomes more perilous. He must act against DD or presumably be killed himself, possibly even right there. Snape arrives on the scene, and becomes, in DD's eyes, Draco's only hope. At that point, I think DD would have accepted that his life had become forfeit. He is not one to pretend that he would survive surrounded by DEs, a spy, and being wandless, with a particularly nasty and lethal potion already running through his veins.

2) For Snape to stay reformed. Remember that DD believed Snape to have repented, whether or not it was a truthful repentence. Thus, seeing the situation as it stood, I am sure that DD didn't expect to survive. That being the case, it would be imperative that Snape not relapse into his previous DE ways. Remember, I don't think DD knew about the vow. I don't know that he plead with Snape to kill him on the Tower.

Of these two scenarios, I think the first is more likely. DD wouldn't be pleading with Snape to fulfill the UV, because he was ignorant of it. DD wanted Snape to save Draco.

A couple of quotes and how they may relate to Snape and Book 7.

" Nature abhors a vacuum " Attributed to many.

" Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication " Divinci.

We know that Harry, it some way, shape or form is going to vanquish Voldemort by the end of book. So to point to the first quote: Who is going to fill the void of Evil Incarnate? Who is going to be the one to step to the forefront and be the visible, famous Dark Wizard after Voldemort is gone? It is mentioned a few times in the first 6 books that evil can not be destroyed,but it must be battled, and henceforth a new Dark Lord must rise.

Snape, starting in book one, is jealous of Harry. Jealous of his being famous for an act that he can not remember, that took no magical skill at all to perform. Snape on numerous occassions has let it be known that he believes Harry is an ordinary wizard, has had the help of his friends and has been fortunate to survive most of his adventures. Snape knows that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he will help him do so.

It then leaves the door open for Snape to destroy Harry ( remember he feels that he is ordinary ) and from their battle in HBP, Snape's confidence level that he can defeat Harry must be high. Snape then can lead the DE's ( It is apparent by all of the DE's reaction to hm that they view him as en extremely powerful wizard ) and wreak havoc on the wizarding world. I suspect this is where Harry and his friends will find a way to rid the world of Snape, as Snape has underestimated Harry for too long.

The 2nd quote is obvious to attach....JKR let us know that Snape was evil from the beginning, that he loathed Harry and the Mauraders from beginning. The simplicity of it is brilliant. Snape is looking out for himself and has manipulated events so that Dumbledore is dead, that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he can be king of the baddies.

I believe that Dumbledore knew all of this, saw the simplicity, and set the wheels in motion for the end of both Voldemeort and Snape by giving each an overconfidence that will be fatal.

Brandon is right...Snape is evil.

Very thought provoking piece Brandon. Well done! I am new to these parts but have long read your editorials and Mugglenet in general.

I've a question to ask before I really jump in.

In regards to " the discussion/argument TFP and Dumbledore had on the edge of the forest -- if that is where Dumbledore supposedly reiterates to TFP that should it deem necessary he is to be killed -- I ask this:

Why did Dumbledore offer the " protection ' clause to Draco? I mean, look at the scenario, Dumbledore is keeping Draco talking, presumably to bide time until Snape arrives right? Dumbledore has been asking for Snape, it is Snape he expects or is hoping for right?

OK - if there was the 'death pact' agreement made months before that - WHY offer Draco protection he cannot possibly give? If Snape does arrive, then he is supposed to kill him right? Gotta save Draco...can't let him become a killer...Dumbledore doesn't want that...so instead - he allows himself to be killed. HOW in the world does that help Draco and his mother? Was there another pact made between Snape and DD that he will protect Draco and Narcissa after he kills DD at DD's request?

That is one too many pacts for me. This is bordering on Snape and DD being Seers and knowing all of the events beforehand and that is ludicrious imho.

So...why did DD offer a protection to Draco he presumably knew he could never keep once Snape arrived?

The offer does not make sense to me anymore. Not if the theory " you must keep your promise to kill me Snape" is to hold up.

Explanations? I mean more then, " Oh, they did not expect DE's to show up. That is the only reason Snape had to kill him, otherwise they would have all fled into the night unscathed." type of thing because then that shoots down the argument that Snape and DD were having on the edge of the Forest about Snape backing out of killing DD should the need arise. The need arose - he killed him as planned.

So again - why make the offer?


just to play devil's advocate here, as I don't think that there was a pact or at least not not one that would allow snape to kill DD. Personally, I find it hard to believe that DD would want snape's soul torn but back to original question - why make the offer?

DD made the offer for two reasons, 1) to buy time for snape to arrive thereby allowing time for him to administer perhaps the draft of living death to both Draco and DD which would make both appear dead to the death eaters. That way the death eater and V would think both were dead and give snape time to administer an antidote to the green potion. This is not to say that either snape or DD was a seer just that DD knew that at some time in the future,considering the unbreakable vow, that the administration of the draft would be necessary.

reason 2) DD wanted to give Draco time to reconsider tearing his sole as he knew that Draco could see no way out of his predictament. I think it was important for DD, as a teacher, that he succeed in getting his student to understand that all life poses choices and consequences and that Draco had a chance to choose to do "good" rather than "bad".

More likely the offer was made for both reasons.

Truly TFP 's comfy world was turned upside down the moment LV regained a body and returned.

Whether he is Good!Snape or Evil!Snape ( and I agree with Hermione, evil is a strong word ) he will ALWAYS be "I-Hate-James-Potter-and-his-son-Snape!

This rage and hatred will ultimately destroy him in the end.

Think of it, he casts off Harry's attempts at Unforgiveable curses almost laughably - until - Harry begins to think Levi... then TFP absolutely loses it.:no: tsk! tsk!

A couple of quotes and how they may relate to Snape and Book 7.

" Nature abhors a vacuum " Attributed to many.

" Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication " Divinci.

We know that Harry, it some way, shape or form is going to vanquish Voldemort by the end of book. So to point to the first quote: Who is going to fill the void of Evil Incarnate? Who is going to be the one to step to the forefront and be the visible, famous Dark Wizard after Voldemort is gone? It is mentioned a few times in the first 6 books that evil can not be destroyed,but it must be battled, and henceforth a new Dark Lord must rise.

Snape, starting in book one, is jealous of Harry. Jealous of his being famous for an act that he can not remember, that took no magical skill at all to perform. Snape on numerous occassions has let it be known that he believes Harry is an ordinary wizard, has had the help of his friends and has been fortunate to survive most of his adventures. Snape knows that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he will help him do so.

It then leaves the door open for Snape to destroy Harry ( remember he feels that he is ordinary ) and from their battle in HBP, Snape's confidence level that he can defeat Harry must be high. Snape then can lead the DE's ( It is apparent by all of the DE's reaction to hm that they view him as en extremely powerful wizard ) and wreak havoc on the wizarding world. I suspect this is where Harry and his friends will find a way to rid the world of Snape, as Snape has underestimated Harry for too long.

The 2nd quote is obvious to attach....JKR let us know that Snape was evil from the beginning, that he loathed Harry and the Mauraders from beginning. The simplicity of it is brilliant. Snape is looking out for himself and has manipulated events so that Dumbledore is dead, that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he can be king of the baddies.

I believe that Dumbledore knew all of this, saw the simplicity, and set the wheels in motion for the end of both Voldemeort and Snape by giving each an overconfidence that will be fatal.

Brandon is right...Snape is evil.

Here are some points in support of your very put theory. My only objection is with the term "evil" I see snape as practical. It is obvious that I am not a snape is good proponent. I see snape as one who is working for himself - in this case to be the leader. Much like Dumbledore said of those who would step up to fight V and delay his return to power - unfortunately there are those who would step into the shoes of V on the side of evil. Since he knows that Harry is destined to defeat V, in his own way he has made it possible for Harry to do so, ( look to the Quiditch match in book one, his attempts to "protect" Harry from entering Fluffy's chamber in book two, His attempt to "protect" Harry from Sirius Black in book three, His "helping" to "protect Harry from the fake Moody at the end of book four , as well as trying to stop Harry from wondering the Halls of Hogwarts at night, sending help to the MoM in book five, and lastly giving Harry advice in book six - "no unforgiveable curses for you". ) all in order to take V's place. I know that many have argued that without Snape's "help" Harry would long since be dead but I propose that snape is the puppetmaster here manipulating events to achieve his ultimate goal, supreme power. Although I think that the battle between V and Harry will come toward the end of the book, the ultimate battle will be between Harry and snape will be the finale.

Hinkypunkmum, Dumbledore certainly seemed near death to me. He was sliding down the wall (although he probably could have been saved if someone had offered an antidote). And if the Order hid Draco, it would still be Dumbledore's mercy.

pdhorner, I got the impression on the Tower that Dumbledore knew of the Vow; I think the disagreement with Draco is over Snape's motives in making it (don't have the books here).

If Snape is working for himself, he doesn't seem to have accomplished much. That doesn't seem a very tenable position for a practical person to take: to have to destroy two powerful wizards for--what? We saw in PoA that he wanted recognition (and that's probably part of his thing about James using his spells), but we've never seen him try to get power. He doesn't, for instance, try to undercut McG, Dumbledore's deputy, to get her position.

I really enjoyed this article. It stresses the points that I for so long have tried to put across to my friends. I find the arguments that Snape is good a little thin. There are only a few really relevant points that ligitimately draw us to the conclusion that Snape has indeed retained his integrity. None of the, DD and Snape made a vow, or DD couldn't hold the spell, or other cannon free speculations. Things like Snape flinching at the last line of making the vow with Cissy, or the argument between Snape and DD. Those points and others like them are what could hold Snapes ultimate redemtion.

I may be wrong, but at this point Snape is evil. Reading Spinners End, even before finishing HBP, is when this dawned on me. He really had no reason to give all this information to a death eater out of favor, or to the woman pleading desperatly for his help. We, on the other hand, have been on a need to know basis thoughout the books. The end is drawing nigh, and we may need to know now. Don't get me wrong, I had also believed snape to be a good guy, but a jerk none the less. I won't mind if I am proven wrong, but will need a good explanation for his turn around, other than what we have been given by JKR and what has been presented by firm Snape is good believers. I hope if he is good someone believes him.

Ok ok ok, first let me say that as much as I would LOVE too Dumbledore is not God, and what he says it not gospel for lack of a better metaphor.


We can quote Dumbledore all day about Snape, but as we all know a picture is worth a thousand words. Don't look at what is said about Snape or what he says of himself. Look at his actions. Haha not much better is it. Unlike Dumbledore, or Harry, or any of our "goodie" characters.

He gives his so called logical answers to Bella in Spinners End, you automatically think he lieing to her to cover his spy status, but my very first impression when I read the chapter is he gave completely neutral answers to Bella giving her enough truth mixed with lies to shut her up. What is truth and what he lied about, I haven't got the foggiest. But whoever mention that this was Snape book, and we got a whole chapter about him with the Harry POV filter definately HIT on something very powerful.

More importantly this was brought up by one of the first people who posted on this thread, the infamous LOOK of disgust exchanged by Snape to Dumbledore, I think that look says volumes. Dumbledore and Snape are skilled Legilemens and Occulmens. What was said between that could not be said through words, your guess is as good as mine but I bet my collection of paperback and hardcovers HP books that is very important.


Now to what everyone has pointed out, the Order will never take Snape back. This one point cannot be ignored, Harry at th end of HBP revved up such a fervor of Snape hatred from the lot, who is gonna listen to Snape if he shows up. No one, notta, squat, bubkiss.

I do believe the only possible way the "Snape is actually on the good side" will get wrapped up is the message Dumbledore's portrait will have for Harry, or perhaps a trip into the Pensive.

But I will always stick to the Snape is neither good or bad, not even neutral, because we have seen or heard nothing that actually helped Voldemorts cause along. But rather that Snape is a masterful wizard who is very smart, but very Slythrin! The key to Snape personality, just like Harry gets along by quick action and quick thinking, the difference is snape does that mostly for himself or to protect his persona as the Spy/Double Agent/Spy.



LOL well thats my very long two cents

Yahoo! I'm glad to see a member of the majority party conceding that they may be wrong.

I've been thinking lately about what a huge job Jo has in front of her: to wrap up the most popular and anticipated story of all time in a way that satisfies the reader. Given the dissenting opinions of her readers, it is impossible for her make every one happy. Like the harmony shippers, either the snape-is-good or the snape-is-evil party is going to be disappointed. It may even ruin the whole series in some people's eyes, if she doesn't play out the story the way they think she should.

I have always been a snape-is-evil-and-I-hope-he-burns-in-hell-for-eternity party card-carrying member, and like every one else, I believe my opinion to be the correct one. So I've been worried that all those snape-is-good types will be really upset when things don't work out the way they'd envisioned. (Of course, it also hit me that it may go the other way......) I guess we all need to remember that it's Jo's story, and at the end of the day, our own theories are just fan-fic fodder.

pdhorner, I've got my book now. On the Tower Dumbledore and Malfoy argue over--guess what? Snape's loyalties! (Hard to imagine anyone arguing over that).

On p. 588 of the US hardback of HBP, Dumbledore says "Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders--"

"He hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother--"

"Of course that is what he would tell you, Draco, but--"

"He's a double agent, you stupid old man, he isn't working for you, you just think he is!"

Their argument is over who Snape is actually serving--Dumbledore says "my orders" and Draco says "my mother" and then each tells the other that Snape is lying. Dumbledore doesn't ask Draco what he means by "he promised my mother," though, even though they continue to talk for four pages before anyone else shows up. That sounds to me like he knows what Draco is talking about.

I do think it's interesting that JKR began this book (well, it's the second chapter) with a DE listing all the ways in which Snape has not acted like he's loyal to Voldemort. I'm not using this to say that means he's innocent--she could have done that to convince us he is or to show us how slippery he is. In any case, she put the main controvesy of the book front and center. Nice of her, wasn't it?

I don't think it is as black and white as TFP is good or bad. Everything is the world of HP is full of grey areas. Even DD, rest his soul, who is absolutely tutin good, makes mistakes. Small mistakes, but mistakes just the same.

Sna... I mean TFP, is one of the most complex characters in the series, and the only people with as much personal background info give are Harry and Voldy.

I am still in the camp that TFP is on the side of good. But the fact of the matter is, as B pointed out, he has done some very unsavory things in the last 6 books.

My point is, this is more complex than, "Is he good?" or, "Is he evil?"
The most probable at this point is that he is only looking after himself.

Personally, I think TFP will be the one who kills Voldy. I think Harry's existance will set up the conditions for Voldy to be killed. This is why Harry is tied to his downfall. He doesn't neccessarily have to be the one to "pull the trigger." But that is what Voldy thinks, and so that is his blind spot and his weekness.

What happens after that, (If that is what will happen) could be complex. What if TFP tries to be the next dark lord? Then Harry has to take him out. Anyway... I'm rambling.

peace
b

Plainlypotter wrote...because then that shoots down the argument that Snape and DD were having on the edge of the Forest about Snape backing out of killing DD should the need arise. The need arose - he killed him as planned.
That snippet of conversation was deliberately intended to be so vague as to refer to several things, but it almost certainly was not a pact that Snape would kill Dumbledore if the need arose. Why? Because Dumbledore would NEVER force anyone to kill someone else. it would be forcing someone to commit a terrible act, so terrible that his soul would be torn. If, for argument's sake, Dumbledore made such an agreement with Snape and then he knew that Snape wanted out of such an agreement, he would not have reacted by getting angry and cutting Snape off. Not Dumbledore. No, they had to be discussing something far less deadly but much more important to Dumbledore, which I suspect was a vow from Snape to protect Harry.

Hinkypunkmum, Dumbledore certainly seemed near death to me. He was sliding down the wall (although he probably could have been saved if someone had offered an antidote). And if the Order hid Draco, it would still be Dumbledore's mercy.

pdhorner, I got the impression on the Tower that Dumbledore knew of the Vow; I think the disagreement with Draco is over Snape's motives in making it (don't have the books here).

If Snape is working for himself, he doesn't seem to have accomplished much. That doesn't seem a very tenable position for a practical person to take: to have to destroy two powerful wizards for--what? We saw in PoA that he wanted recognition (and that's probably part of his thing about James using his spells), but we've never seen him try to get power. He doesn't, for instance, try to undercut McG, Dumbledore's deputy, to get her position.



correct me if I am wrong , but when Draco suggests to snape that his father would nominate (?) him for headmaster ( I think it was in chamber of secrets or order of the pheonix when DD is removed as headmaster ) Sanpe is really happy about about that idea. But the point is hogwarts is too small a position - it has no real power excpet over students and teachers, but recognition like the order of merlin and taking over V's place would be real power. As far as working for himself - snape has heard at a minimum the first part of the prophesy - he knows that only Harry can do away with V- it seems to me he has done really well getting rid of anyone who might be in his way to achieve his goal. He has gotten rid of sirius, DD, and with a little help from harry he will get rid of V - then the only one standing in his way is harry and he has already shown that he can best him.

Where does it ever say that Dumbledore knew that Snape made the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa? Based on the following quote, it actually appears that Dumbledore was left in the dark concerning Snape's Vow.

HBP Page 588 American Edition

Dumbledore and Draco are on the Tower.

"Why didn't you stop me, then?" Malfoy demanded.

"I tried, Draco. Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders-"

"He hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother-"

"Of course that is what he would tell you, Draco, but-"


If you read between the lines, Dumbledore is under the impression that Snape told Draco that he took the Vow with his mother just as a cover up, when in reality, we know that he actually did take the Vow. "Of course that is what he would tell you, but..........."

I'd love to know what Dumbledore was going to say after the "but," but unfortunately he got cut off. Draco is the one with the correct information on the Tower. He knows that Snape took the Vow with Narcissa; Dumbledore does not.

Why would Snape choose to keep this information to himself? NEVER in the text did Snape tell Dumbledore about the Vow. As for the scene in the forest between Snape and Dumbledore where they're arguing and Snape is "tired of doing what he's doing," that could apply to anything.

Colleen1 wrote Draco is the one with the correct information on the Tower. He knows that Snape took the Vow with Narcissa; Dumbledore does not.
Oh but since we are on the subject of being wrong, what if the whole Spinner's End chapter was a ruse that Snape cooked up with Narcissa to convince Bellatrix and rat-boy Wormtail that Snape was REALLY TRULY DOUBLY DOOLEY on Voldemort's side. That whole chapter seems too pat, too unreal. I believe that a lot of that was staged. I believe that Narcissa would do anything to get her husband and her son back and I believe that she has turned against Voldemort for holding both of them hostage. I wish Brandon or someone on the listserv would analyze that chapter again and imagine that maybe it isnt what it seems either.

The HBP textbook is actually very symbolic of Snape's character: at first it appears to be very helpful (giving Harry potion advice, helping him win Felix Felicis and saving Ron's life with the bezoar tip) but when you give it a closer look, it's dark and evil (Sectumsempra). Sounds like Snape to me.

Nice use of symbolism, in my opinion

I wonder Could snape be innocent or guility ?Its hard to tell since he shows no apparent expression any way.I believe that he for himslef and only him slef? but who knows Snape could actually do something that unexpected of him in book seven.I hope If and If he does redeem himslef he will at least
have a chance to defend himslef. To be or not to be that is the question?
"william Shakespeare"as he put.:no: We have all this incrimating evidence against snape but at the same time evidence that he does have feelings in a sort of contrived way.

Where does it ever say that Dumbledore knew that Snape made the Unbreakable Vow with Narcissa? Based on the following quote, it actually appears that Dumbledore was left in the dark concerning Snape's Vow.

HBP Page 588 American Edition

Dumbledore and Draco are on the Tower.

"Why didn't you stop me, then?" Malfoy demanded.

"I tried, Draco. Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders-"

"He hasn't been doing your orders, he promised my mother-"

"Of course that is what he would tell you, Draco, but-"


If you read between the lines, Dumbledore is under the impression that Snape told Draco that he took the Vow with his mother just as a cover up, when in reality, we know that he actually did take the Vow. "Of course that is what he would tell you, but..........."

I'd love to know what Dumbledore was going to say after the "but," but unfortunately he got cut off. Draco is the one with the correct information on the Tower. He knows that Snape took the Vow with Narcissa; Dumbledore does not.

Why would Snape choose to keep this information to himself? NEVER in the text did Snape tell Dumbledore about the Vow. As for the scene in the forest between Snape and Dumbledore where they're arguing and Snape is "tired of doing what he's doing," that could apply to anything.



Am I reading you right - it is your contention that even when harry tells DD that he heard draco and snape arguing during slughorn's christmas party that DD thinks that snape is using this story as a cover up for the assignment he himself has given snape? But then why give snape an assignment to watch draco at all, unless DD actually thinks harry's information about Draco's adventure at borgin and burkes and the incident on the train is significant. Leave it to JKR to keep us guessing and second guessing ourselves. I guess I read that section knowing about the spinner's end chapter so I read right over the possibility that DD didn't know about/believe snape took the unbreakable vow - interesting idea will have to give it more thought.

When I first read spinner's end I thought - ok here's snape trying to figure out what draco is up to and agreeing to do what he can to protect draco and just got caught in his own web. Guess JKR set us up to believe against all obvious information that DD could not possibly be wrong about his assessment of snape. Up until the final AK curse I trusted in that assessment. I figured DD would die during book six or early to mid book seven but really didn't expect snape would be the culprit, much as I felt snape was a baddie. Even after the Ak I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but then there could be many reasons for the murder. self interest - snape didn't want to die from the unbreakable vow, defense of others - to protect harry from finding out that there was no antedote for the green potion and that he in fact was the cause of DD's death, and to protect both draco and harry from the death eaters. Or it be to establish himself with V or superior to the other deatheaters - leaving him ready to step into V's shoes when harry does away with V. There are just too many possibilities.

Dear Brandon,
unfortunately I have to admit that I found this editorial kinda weak. It looks to me, as if you're just coming up with that idea, so that you can say "ha, I knew it!", no matter how it will end.
I mean, even if you are totally sure that TFP is "good", there is of course always the possibility that he is not, so your editorial is not *that* rebellious.
And your idea comparing it with the harry&hermione/hermione&ron stuff.. ***? I think that is something completely different, I mean..relationships have to be kinda obvious, don't they?

Well, I mostly agree with GryffSolider that Snape is neither "good" nor "bad", even when he is on the "good" side, it doesn't mean he has to like everyone who is there as well. But me, I want to trust DD in this case, just because I think that he has a better human-knowledge than Voldemort. ;)

Well, I guess we'll find out in the end.

I agree with Pottersleuth (post #67 above).

Colleen1, in their dialogue on the Tower I understand Dumbledore to be telling Draco "of course Snape would tell you he's only doing this because he promised your mother, but it's really on my orders." I don't think he means "he did not either promise your mother." Draco himself doesn't mention a UV and I'm not sure he knows about it--"he promised my mother" is a lot less binding than a UV. In "The Unbreakable Vow" (pp. 322-4, US hardback) Draco does not appreciate Snape's questioning him about what he's doing at all; I would think that if he knew Snape had pledged his life to helping him, he'd be more forthcoming.

I like the idea and the justification of Snape being evil in #38 but truth be told, I can't run with it. I believe so much that Jo always has something to teach us and if Snape really were plain evil, she would be proving that trust means nothing because Dumbledore trusted Snape. Jo has admitted in the past that she speaks a lot through Dumbledore and I can't see her destroying faith like that.

i'm sorry, brandon. you can spout conjecture at me all day long, but you and i both know that snape is good.

'what if we're wrong?' you ask -- we're not wrong. the clues are there -- just as they were for ron and hermione. sure, they may be a little more subtle, calculated and intelligent, but they are there, and if you choose to ignore them...

i like your columns, but this one was a dud. again, i'm sorry. i agree with Illythia and Nepi.

BTW -- why did you write snape's name -- and in bold letters, no less? i thought you weren't going to until JKR told us why snape did it. do you know something we don't?

"Why didn't you stop me, then?" Malfoy demanded.

"I tried, Draco. Professor Snape has been keeping watch over you on my orders-"

This speaks volumes to me. And hey - maybe it is only me :lol: but...

TFP did not do a very good job of 'keeping watch over' Draco, he did not find out what he was up to, was not privy to LV's decision to send Fenrir with the other DE's ( which says LV does not totally trust TFP either) and failed to gain Draco's trust and confidence.

However, Dumbledore WAS given some very good information about Draco's movements and this someone kept very good watch over Draco.

Harry.

I like the idea and the justification of Snape being evil in #38 but truth be told, I can't run with it. I believe so much that Jo always has something to teach us and if Snape really were plain evil, she would be proving that trust means nothing because Dumbledore trusted Snape. Jo has admitted in the past that she speaks a lot through Dumbledore and I can't see her destroying faith like that.

Using your logic would you then disregard DD's comment that when he makes mistakes because of his higher intelligence they tend to be bigger than most ( no OotP here , but you get my point) ? When I first read HBP I did not say to myself "jo is telling us not to trust others" rather just not to trust blindly. she is telling us that trusting others is a two way street, it can have the most rewarding consequences (using harry's trust in Hermione and ron ) and the most devistating ( DD's trust in snape, or even DD's turst in himself that he would be able to detach his love for harry from the benefit of the wizarding world which in the end resulted in sirius' death).

shewoman

Snape told Draco he had made the unbreakable vow with his mother to protect him during the slughorn christmad party (see pg 323 HBP Us hardback edition) . That was how Harry found out about the vow. Are you saying that Draco didn't believe that he had made the unbreakable vow with his mother? I took it as even though he knew about the vow he went right ahead and continued his plan possibly b/c of youthful arrogance or b/c he thought it was his and his family's life or snape's.

Shewoman, please see below:

HBP Page 323

"Listen to me," said Snape, his voice so low now that Harry had to push his ear very hard against the keyhole to hear. "I am trying to help you. I swore to your mother I would protect you. I made the Unbreakable Vow, Draco-"

"Looks like you'll have to break it, then, because I don't need your protection!"

Draco definately knows that Snape took the Unbreakable Vow.

Where in the novel does it state that Dumbledore knows that Snape made the Unbreakable Vow?

Also, why did Snape volunteer to take the Vow? It was his idea to make the Vow; it's not like Bellatrix suggested it and he had to do it to prove his loyalty. The Vow is a very useful way of killing Dumbledore in the name of protecting Draco.

After waiting so long... we have received another fabulous Underground Lake, as usual.

This one was particularly juicy despite the fact that it was short. Why? Simple. Brandon humbled himself. There are few people I have seen do that. Most are utterly convinced that they are entirely correct. And only a very few of us will be. As Brandon said,

This may blow up in my face and be totally off-base, but I'm putting it out there, because we all need to start bracing ourselves for the fact that a lot of folks are gonna die in Book Seven, and I'm positive TFP is one of them.

:clap: Bravo, Brandon Ford. Bravo. Once again, you've turned out a spectacular edition of Mugglenet's best column.

Shewoman, please see below:

HBP Page 323

"Listen to me," said Snape, his voice so low now that Harry had to push his ear very hard against the keyhole to hear. "I am trying to help you. I swore to your mother I would protect you. I made the Unbreakable Vow, Draco-"

"Looks like you'll have to break it, then, because I don't need your protection!"

Draco definately knows that Snape took the Unbreakable Vow.

Where in the novel does it state that Dumbledore knows that Snape made the Unbreakable Vow?

Also, why did Snape volunteer to take the Vow? It was his idea to make the Vow; it's not like Bellatrix suggested it and he had to do it to prove his loyalty. The Vow is a very useful way of killing Dumbledore in the name of protecting Draco.


DD knows about the vow b/c harry heard the exchange you just quoted and harry told DD what he heard .

Playing devil's advocate here ( as I really think snape is out for himself) here are reasons that Snape took the vow - when first reading Spinner's End I got the impression that Snape might have been trying to find out what draco was assigned to do. If you notice there is no actual mention of what draco's task is only that snape says he knows what V ordered. This leave open to speculation iwhether snape actually knew the assignment. It is possible that snape did not know until after draco sent the necklace and the poisoned meade what the assignment was. Also when Snape agreed to take the vow there was no mention of completing the assignment for draco, merely that snapae would protect draco. This, considering that snape knows DD would not significantly harm draco, protecting Draco from DD was an easy task

that said - your point that taking the vow is a convenient way of accomplishing the murder of DD is right on the money in my opinion but you can see JKR has again left open the option that snape could be on the side of good or for his possible redemption in book seven.

I would like to point out that the famous "redemption" quote is not really all that good of an argument to use if you're trying to convince yourself or others that Snape is good. This is the EXACT quote:


One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.
JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape
JKR: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say.

So if you read it carefully, she is actually responding to the question "Is Snape ever going to fall in love." She is not stunned about the redemptive pattern, since she is not answering the interviewer's remark but rather responding to the person who initially asked the question. She sidesteps the redemption pattern, saying there so much she wishes to tell us, but can't. That could just as well mean the redemptive pattern (is it a pattern? The only time I think of him being redeemed is in the first book) is something like a red herring.

Another quote would seem to push this line of thinking even further:


Stephen Fry: Yes, and even in the books there is a certain flair. Most characters like Snape are hard to love but there is a sort of ambiguity – you can’t quite decide - something sad about him – lonely and it’s fascinating when you think he’s going to be the evil one a party from Voldemort obviously in the first book then slowly you get this idea he’s not so bad after all.

JK Rowling: Yes but you shouldn’t think him too nice. It is worth keeping an eye on old Severus definitely!

Here she says yes, she can understand why people would see this lonely, fascinating redemptive quality about Snape, but that we shouldn't think him too nice. That's a hint!!

Lionheart

I was not trying to suggest that snape would be or try to be redeemed just that redemption and choices have been a threads that appear throughout the series. For my part I do not see snape as on the side of good nor do I see him redeeming himself he is way too self interested for either. But, as the old softy I am, one can always hope for the best in each of us and the HP character to rise and conquer evil if only for a short while until the next evil doer steps up

Coincidentally, I've just been reading the cave scene again. Although everyone has been quoting The Lightning Struck Tower, I have to quote Albus when he and Harry returned to Hogsmeade.

"We need to get you up to the school, Sir. ......... Madam Pomfrey ...."

"No," said Dumbledore. "It is ... Professor Snape whom I need ... But I do not think ... I can walk very far just yet ...."

"Right -- Sir, listen -- I'm going to knock on a door, find a place you can stay -- then I can run and get Madam --"

"Severus" said Dumbledore clearly, "I need Severus ..."
HBP, Paperback, P. 580

The simple interpretation (and I admit it could be the correct one) is that Albus felt that he was beyond Poppy's help and only SS could help him. But what I believe is that Albus knew he was beyond help and wanted Severus to carry out his plan.

No, Albus wouldn't make anyone commit murder as said earlier, but he would have Severus kill him when he was in extremis in order to have SS fulfill his UV. It's like pulling the plug when a loved one is dying and there is no hope of recovery, to prevent further suffering. If that fell in with Albus' plan, so much the better.

As for my position, I waiver between Severus is on the side of good (but not intrinsically good) and Severus is out for himself. I certainly agree with Brandon that he will not survive Book 7.

And as for the following ... you gave me chills, Brandon.

This may blow up in my face and be totally off-base, but I'm putting it out there, because we all need to start bracing ourselves for the fact that a lot of folks are gonna die in Book Seven, and I'm positive TFP is one of them. So let's take a brief trip to the backwards "Bizarro World," one where Severus Snape is guilty and evil, and Voldemort is preparing for the single greatest plan in the history of the magical world.

Desraelda

I agree in part and disagree in part. I do think that Snape was the only one who could counteract the potion if it was possible at all. We have been shown that snape was the expert on counteracting dark spells - he "saved" DD after his encounter with the protections of the ring horcrux, he was given the necklace after Katie touched it, & he countered Harry's secptum sempra. This is not news to us, basically he has been doing this from book one ( counteracting Quirell's curse of the broomstick), but a pact b/w DD and snape for the purpose of sacrificing DD - I for one find that if not impossible to believe, at a minimum unlikely. That being said I do agree that DD knew he was dying, and under the circumstances his sacrificing his life was the only way for snape, draco, and harry to survive.

A lot has been written about the look of revulsion on snape's face when he AK's DD. Some have written that snape was "getting even" for being slighted when DD chose to side with the marauders about sirius' attempt at murdering snape, and for siding with sirius against snape about peter, some on the other hand have written that the look was b/c snape had to kill the one person who had believed in him. I suggest that the look was a reaction to the silent plea DD made agreeing to sacrifice himself for snape. DD's sacrifice was much like James' it comes with a life debt to the one person snape hates most in the world - harry potter. Imagine snape's chagrin, revulsion at being placed back in that position after being relieved in book one.

I do agree that snape will not survive book 7, but I think his death will not be while "saving" Harry from V.

A lot has been written about the look of revulsion on snape's face when he AK's DD. <snip> some on the other hand have written that the look was b/c snape had to kill the one person who had believed in him.
That is how I've always interpreted "the look."
I suggest that the look was a reaction to the silent plea DD made agreeing to sacrifice himself for snape. DD's sacrifice was much like James' it comes with a life debt to the one person snape hates most in the world - harry potter. Imagine snape's chagrin, revulsion at being placed back in that position after being relieved in book one.
An interesting point of view and one that I haven't seen before. I assume you are referring to "Severus ... please." I don't think that would have much meaning without some sort of prior agreement between Severus and Albus and I don't think the life debt would refer to Harry unless Albus made that a condition of the agreement ... all of which is quite possible.

It seems apparent from the way Snape swept onto the tower, took in the scene at a glance, and pushed Draco aside even before Albus said please, that he intended to kill Albus from the very beginning. If he hadn't, he would have leapt onto the ramparts with wand blazing.

It was Albus' plan from start to finish, I truly believe that, and Snape's look of revulsion was partly because he was never given a choice in the matter and partly because he was forced to kill his benefactor. And I also believe that when Albus says he trusts Severus, he means that he trusts Severus to act in character and respond to Albus' manipulations in a certain way. I've always felt that Albus was the master puppeteer and he's got Severus dancing to his tune. I say this of Albus with the greatest respect, love and bereavement.

I had to return to the test to see if your interpretation was correct. If you check p595 you will see that snape enters with the wand in his hand and his eyes sweep the scene. There is enough time for Amycus' comment that draco is not able to kill DDas well as DD"s first plea then " Snape gazed for a moment at DD and there was revulsion & hatred in the harsh lines of his face...." a second servus and then snape AK's DD. The gaze necessary for non verbal communication was there and so was the time to give severus the request and communicate the life debt.

Is Snape good or evil? --Is that the right question?

Snape is not on Dumbledore's side. That redemptive pattern for Snape that someone already guessed in an interview and JK essentially confirmed is good evidence of that. It can't be a "redemption" if Snape was already good. One can only redeem oneself from wrong. I also believe that DD would never ask someone to murder for him, so it wasn't a deal. JKR did prepare us for this when she warned that because DD is so much smarter and more powerful than average, that his mistakes are correspondingly greater.

That being said, Snape's probably not on Voldemort's side either. THAT would be too simple, and we need the lesson for Harry not to be so presumptious from book 1. There's also the evidence that he didn't hurt Harry at the end when he easily could have. And last but not least: DD isn't wrong! He had faith that Snape could redeem himself, and he CAN. (JKR wouldn't teach us not to have faith in people.) He just hasn't yet.

Returning to that redemptive pattern: Snape did NOT kill DD on DD's orders, he did it to save himself -- he is a true Slytherin (so far), but DD's trust is NOT unfounded and Snape will redeem himself in the end to help make Harry's success possible.

Snape is a very complex character, and now everyone's happy. :D

I think JKR's lesson on trust is that trust should not be given blindly it is earned. Surely we will all find out what made DD trust snape in book 7, it is certainly not that snape was sorry for the death of james. As for Lilly , that could be a factor - whether b/c Lily was one of the few people who befriended him or b/c there was more to their relationship than just friendship- at least on snape's side- sorry but I just can't see any woman finding snape attractive considering his treatment of others - this is no reflection on Alan Rickman but rather on the character snape.

I do agree that with cantwait in that I too do not see snape as good or evil - merely practical. Expanding on that I must reiterate that I see snape as one who is working for himself - in this case to be the leader. Much like Dumbledore said of those who would step up to fight V and delay his return to power - unfortunately there are those who would step into the shoes of V on the side of evil. Since he knows that Harry is destined to defeat V, in his own way he has made it possible for Harry to do so, ( look to the Quiditch match in book one, his attempts to "protect" Harry from entering Fluffy's chamber in book two, His attempt to "protect" Harry from Sirius Black in book three, His "helping" to "protect Harry from the fake Moody at the end of book four , as well as trying to stop Harry from wondering the Halls of Hogwarts at night, sending help to the MoM in book five, and lastly giving Harry advice in book six - "no unforgiveable curses for you". ) all in order to take V's place. I know that many have argued that without Snape's "help" Harry would long since be dead but I propose that snape is the puppetmaster here manipulating events to achieve his ultimate goal, supreme power. Although I think that the battle between V and Harry will come toward the end of the book, the ultimate battle will be between Harry and snape will be the finale.

Very good and thought provoking article - however it is quite clear whose side Snape is on - his own

I think JKR's lesson on trust is that trust should not be given blindly it is earned. I agree with you about this lesson. Trust needs to be earned. I never felt that it was right that Dumbledore expected everyone to trust Snape just because he did. And then he never gave anyone the reason why he trusted Snape. That required people to trust Dumbledore and Snape blindly.

WBUR Interview with JKR, 1999
One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.
JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape
JKR: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say. The interesting thing about this comment by JK Rowling is that it was made before Goblet of Fire was released. I think she was surprised about the redemptive pattern question because the readers had not learned that Snape had been a Death Eater at the time this question was asked.

It was Albus' plan from start to finish, I truly believe that, and Snape's look of revulsion was partly because he was never given a choice in the matter and partly because he was forced to kill his benefactor. I agree with another poster who made this comment: Well, one of the "truths" to Potterverse is that good people do not usurp the freedom of choice of other individuals.
http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=71040&page=6Dumbledore would never take away Snape's freedom of choice and force him to commit murder and force him to be a hunted fugitive.

Ok. I just want to say that I LOVE this article! I've never wholly believed that TFP was good. I used to waver back and forth, but for a few months I've been maintaining that he is evil, but I was occasionally seized with doubts and thoughts that I'm an idiot for believing that. But after reading this article, my doubts have been (mostly) erased.

The reason Harry gave for Dumbledore trusting TFP, was that TFP regretted James and Lily dying.

Yet TFP was working at Hogwarts for over a year BEFORE they died.

I never noticed that! He did say fifteen years in OotP, didn't he? That's so cool!

My problem with your too obvious reasoning is that to begin with I thought it was too obvious that he was ultimately good.

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought, too. There's so much evidence in the books (like TFP saying to leave Potter because he is the Dark Lord's.) that would say he's good. And Jo was probably counting on the fact that that we'd over-analyze DD's death. I still think he's evil, but I don't really like that particular part of your reasoning.

I just want to make it clear that I don't see TPF as either neutral or on his own side. I think he's evil. I view him sort of like Lucius Malfoy, but more cunning. Malfoy renounced Voldy's name when he fell and said he'd been under the Imperius Curse, but the instant Voldy came back Malfoy was there at his side. I think TFP is the same way, but he plays his cards more deviously. There was a greater chance that Voldy wouldn't take him back so he made sure he could still fall back on Dumbledore of Voldy decided not to trust him.

Bellatrix asks him a series of questions that we, the reader, have always wanted to know. TFP answers each of them in turn logically and believably. Now I ask myself: what is his motivation to tell her anything? Recall that by Bellatrix's own admission, she has somehow fallen out of favor with Voldemort, and TFP has swooped in as the right hand as he is ideally placed to be of the most use. Because of his position of power, he has no real reason to tell Bellatrix anything. One can argue that he did it to gain Narcissa's confidence so that she would be at ease. But recall that it is Narcissa who came for the favor, not the other way around. TFP says he knew all along the task set to Draco so he need not give information to Narcissa to get information from Narcissa. So what is his motivation to tell anyone anything? Suppose, just suppose, that he wasn't lying. Suppose everything he said was true?

His motivation is given to us by this scene in HBP [pg. 24 US hardcover]

Snape held up a hand to stop her, then pointed hiswand again at the concealed staircase door. There was a loud bang and a squeal, followed by the sound of Wormtail scurrying back up the stairs. "My apologies," said Snape. "He has lately taken to listening at doors, I don't know what he means by it...You were saying, Narcissa?"

Snape has been given an assistant, Wormtail. I doubt this was done at Snape's request, and more likely, so that Snape would have a constant companion wherever he went. If Snape were under suspicion from the Dark Lord, or the other Death Eaters as Bella points out, then what better way to find out information than to put someone like Peter with him? And clearly Peter tips his hand by listening at doors. Maybe this is TOO obvious of an answer, but I think Snape gives answers to all of Bella's questions, not for Narcissa's sake, but to aid in quieting the rumors that Snape is really working for Dumbledore. In fact, if you're right in your theory, that Snape is on the side of evil, he would have NO reason to say anything. So by process of elimination, Snape would not have anything to gain by answering these questions, if in fact he is on the side of evil. Therefore, he must be on the side of good.

I too think that Snape is mainly out for himself but partly out for Dumbledore too. We must not forget that if Snape hadn't come in and kill Dumbledore - who incidentally was already dying from the potion and his shrivelled hand - then Fenrir or one of the other Deatheaters wuld have done the job but not without first making Dumbledore suffer. Remember they are a bunch of sadistic morons who probably revel in torture before killing their victims. So Snape in a way did Dumbledore a favour by killing him quickly. Then we must remember that he got them all out of the tower before anything could happen to Harry. If as he said Harry was for the Dark Lord to finish off then why didn't he capture Harry and take him to Voldie then and there? Snape's behaviour certainly is amibiguous and leaves us all guessing his motives doesn't it?

I've never doubted for a second the Snape wasn't evil. It's so obvious that he is. Larger than the anvil-sized hints she gave for Ron/Hermione and yet people continue to believe in him. I could never understand the blind faith people put in him.

Excellent editorial. You raised a really good question.

If we saw Snape's true colours in Spinner's End, his loyalty isn't a mystery any more, the real mystery is why Dumbledore refused to see it coming. That theme gains far more weight because we, as readers, know not to trust Snape.

It's actually not even important whether he is loyal to Voldemort, to the Malfoys, to himself only or whether he plans to take over from Voldemort one day. It's simply the wrong question. I think the main point is that he isn't trustworthy. He wasn't exactly following Voldemort's orders either, and I think Jo chose to write it that way for a reason. (The alternative would have been to show Voldemort ordering Snape to kill Dumbledore if Draco failed, and Snape simply doing it.) And I doubt it was supposed to give people a chance to cling to some desperate hope (sorry, couldn't resist).

The whole chapter gives a lot of insight into Voldemort's style of leadership and the way Death Eaters interact - not just the pecking order, though it is shown to be a very determining factor in their interactions. It does loads more than show the reader that Snape isn't Dumbledore's man. The problem with the current state of the Snape-debate is that it is reduced to exactly this question. What if it wasn't the point? Jo made the answer obvious and hard to miss. I dunno why people feel that it is too obvious, instead of asking themselves why it is made that obvious.

PlainlyPotter, Colleen1, thanks for correcting my mistake. I'd forgotten Snape's telling Draco he'd made the Vow. Carry on! And, Plainly, I agree that Snape is fishing for Draco's task in Spinners End. He figured it out during the conversation, I'm sure, since I did.

I think Snape is good. I'm quite sure he isn't nice.

the longer I live (and I've been around a long time), the more I trust my gut feelings and first impressions - you could read and reread every chapter and just about put any spin you want on most quotes - I tend to think TFP is a sociopath with little feelings for anyone and only answers to himself - time will tell....

Wow, lots of really good thoughts since I last had a chance to check on this thread. :cool:


Dumbledore's biggest mistake, as I see it, was not in misjudging Snape, but in not understanding Malfoy's determination to prove himself. Dumbledore did not believe that Malfoy could personally kill him and considered his attempts amateurish. But he underestimated Malfoy's desperation and determination to see the job through. Causing Dumbledore's death by allowing Death Eaters into Hogwarts was something Dumbledore did not count on. By underestimating Malfoy, Dumbledore made a mistake that cost him his life.I see your point, but had DD not misjudged Snape (if he is a bad guy), Draco's determination, no matter how strong, may not have been enough to get the job done, DE assistance or not. Imagine if DD had returned from the cave expedition in excellent health and that Snape was on his side. Not only could Draco not have killed him, I seriously doubt the DEs could have either, not with the Order and DA members in the fight as well. Of course if Draco hadn't been desperate, there would have been no reason for Snape to be pulled into all of it, either. So it seems that there were at least the two major factors involved - misjudging the strength of Draco's intent and the willingness of Snape to assist him.

Something I hadn't considered, though, came to mind while reading your comment. Had the DEs not been there to witness the scene on the Astronomy Tower, would Snape still have killed DD? Would Snape still have saved his own life over that of DD? Without witnesses for whom he had to keep up a double-agent pretense, Snape might have been able to show his true colors, if he's a good guy. Snape might have said, "No, DD, I got into this mess on my own and I'll be damned if you're going to pay the price for me. Let me be the one to die; I was bound to get caught in the crossfire at some point anyway. You live and protect Draco, use the Draft of Living Death, use whatever you have to, just don't let Voldemort waste another life." But... as that sounds ludicrous given what we know of Snape... I come back to wondering whether he's good, bad, indifferent, selfish, or something we haven't even considered yet. :shrug:


Snape's allegiance, I have always believed, is as grey as his underpants.I laughed myself silly over this - good one!! :lol:


What I don't get is why DD asks Snape to kill him.We don't know that DD did ask Snape to kill him. That's only an assumption based on the possibility that he and Snape communicated through Legilemency atop the Astronomy Tower and/or that the argument Hagrid overheard was about that subject. Tons of comments have been made on why he did it - if he did - so I won't go into that.


Theres no way Snape will be able to redeem himself. Imagine Snape showing up to an Order meeting in book 7, how would they react? They'd kill him on site, or atleast use veritasirum on him.This reminded me of something in JKR's point of view as an author - she's said she's a Christian. And she does seem to be using numerous Christian themes (although they are also common to many world religions). Within that framework, there is no such thing as a person who is unable to redeem themselves. All that's needed is a renouncement of one's past sins and a sincere desire to change, along with commensurate behavior if one doesn't die right away. (In Christianity one must also accept Christ, though JKR hasn't worked that aspect into the story directly.) I'm not saying it has to work this way, though, because I think even Christians would admit that there are some people who never choose to redeem their behavior and continue for their whole lives to be out for just themselves. But I don't think we can say there's "no way" Snape could be redeemed.


So...why did DD offer a protection to Draco he presumably knew he could never keep once Snape arrived?

The offer does not make sense to me anymore. Not if the theory " you must keep your promise to kill me Snape" is to hold up.I think DD said "We can protect you better than you could ever imagine." (Sorry, book's not handy.) So he was never meaning to take on the protection of the Malfoy's entirely on his own. But this would mean he would have had to have talked with at least one other Order member on what to do for Draco and his family should he, DD, be killed. "It's my wish that the Malfoy family be saved." But I see that entailing all sorts of explanations about why Draco needed saving and why DD thought he wouldn't be around to do it.

I suppose it could have happened, especially if Snape were the one he'd discussed it with. And it would still work regardless of whether Snape was good, evil, or out for himself. If good, he'd have known he might have to kill DD, DD would have known it, and they'd both know that Draco would be taken care of anyway. If evil, Snape would want to protect Draco, but only because it was the only way to save his own life - the full extent of the Vow was not something he'd planned on and he unded up being trapped by it. If out for himself, then the Vow would still be in place, whether he wanted to bother saving Draco or not. But the result would be the same in all three cases - Snape would try to protect Draco's life. And that's pretty much what we saw as Snape grabbed him and fled the castle.

Of course... if I'm mistaken about "we" then all this falls apart. :rolleyes: :lol:


I agree that Snape will not survive the series. I think the manner and cause of his death will FINALLY let us know where his loyalties lie . . . and maybe let him know, too.This is ironically reminiscent of Snape's words to Quirrell in their Forbidden Forest conversation in PS/SS, when Snape tells Quirrell he'll be trying to find out where Q's loyalties lie. Intersesting interplay of ideas.


Also, how can the Order honor any protection Dumbledore offered when TFP spirited Draco away to LV's lair? Make no mistake - TFP cannot hide Draco from LV - he must produce him. JKR confirms this when she tells us that Draco will be learning what the consequences are by becoming a DE.

Therefore, I stand by what I said - this 'suicide' agreement between TFP and DD carries no weight at all.

*disclaimer* All of this is strictly conjecture and imho onlyDisclaimer noted, and it was good of you to say so. :)

However, we don't know that Snape spirited Draco away to "LV's lair". We don't know where Snape has taken Draco, or if they are even still together (though I suspect so). For all we know, if Snape is good he'll be hightailing it to wherever he can just to get as far away from LV as possible. Even if Snape's evil, he still can't "produce" Draco for LV because it's highly likely LV will kill Draco, which will kill the envowed Snape as well. If Snape wasn't on just his own side before this, now would be the time to start, because going to either side would seem to involve suicide.

There is the bit about Snape maybe being good... he'd be running away from Voldy so he would possibly be able to access the Order, at least to protect Draco if not himself as well. Keeping away from Voldy (OMG - Snape actually declaring an affiliation, at last?!) would also wipe out the need to produce Draco.

And sorry, but there could be many ways for Draco to learn the consequences of becoming a DE. It does not have to mean he does so by coming up before LV again. Should he live, he may well be known for the rest of his life for two dubious distinctions - that he devised the plot to kill Dumbledore and that he wasn't a strong enough wizard to do it. It'll suck to be Draco if he lives. ("There are things worse than death...")


Dumbledore would NEVER force anyone to kill someone else. it would be forcing someone to commit a terrible act, so terrible that his soul would be torn. If, for argument's sake, Dumbledore made such an agreement with Snape and then he knew that Snape wanted out of such an agreement, he would not have reacted by getting angry and cutting Snape off. Not Dumbledore. No, they had to be discussing something far less deadly but much more important to Dumbledore, which I suspect was a vow from Snape to protect Harry.But what if DD knew of the Vow, knew that the only two choices available were for Snape to either tear his soul or die? Which would he have wanted for Snape in that case? The Vow was a situation DD had no control over and that really messed up all sorts of things from the point of view of the good guys.

There's also the age old HP argument of whether killing always tears a soul or if it has to be deliberate murder. Just suppose DD did ask Snape to kill him if the situation arose and could not be resolved otherwise. Snape's under the restrictions of the Vow, so whenever Draco makes his move, and inevitably fails, Snape is bound to fulfill Draco's mission or die. DD has made it clear that Snape must continue his work as a double agent - no one else is in a position to do so. Snape's backed into a corner with no way out, DD has a particular outcome he is set on, so... is it murder? Or is it some other form of homicide, even justifiable homicide given the "victim" wanted it that way in a no-other-way-out situation? Perhaps, then, Snape's soul did not tear when he was forced into killing DD - if this is the way it happened.

...what if the whole Spinner's End chapter was a ruse that Snape cooked up with Narcissa to convince Bellatrix and rat-boy Wormtail that Snape was REALLY TRULY DOUBLY DOOLEY on Voldemort's side. That whole chapter seems too pat, too unreal. I believe that a lot of that was staged. I believe that Narcissa would do anything to get her husband and her son back and I believe that she has turned against Voldemort for holding both of them hostage.The problem with it being staged was that, even if Narcissa had turned on Voldy, the Vow she was asking for required Snape to kill the only wizard strong enough to lead an all out war against her new enemy Voldemort. (DD being the only one is from her perspective, since she probably doesn't know the details of the Prophecy and might not believe them if she did.) Any staging aimed at defeating Voldy would be very ill served to include killing DD as one of the parameters. :no:


The HBP textbook is actually very symbolic of Snape's character: at first it appears to be very helpful (giving Harry potion advice, helping him win Felix Felicis and saving Ron's life with the bezoar tip) but when you give it a closer look, it's dark and evil (Sectumsempra). Sounds like Snape to me.

Nice use of symbolism, in my opinion.This is good; I like this. But notice that Harry didn't destroy or throw away the HBP text - he put it aside in case he has to use it in the future. He felt betrayed that the "friend" he'd found in the book's margins would include something as awful as Sectumsempra, so he knows now that it's not really a friend. But he still sees it as an extremely valuable asset to have available. That's why he hid it and may well go back to get it. Frankly, I can't imagine why he would have hid it if JKR did not mean for him to go back and retrieve it. He may be forced to do the same thing with Snape as well. <insert retching smilie here>

(Hmm... he could have to go back for the book just as a means to find something else important in the RoR, but I still believe he'll go back for the book and actually use it again as well.)



TFP did not do a very good job of 'keeping watch over' Draco, he did not find out what he was up to, was not privy to LV's decision to send Fenrir with the other DE's (which says LV does not totally trust TFP either) and failed to gain Draco's trust and confidence.We don't know that it was LV's decision to send the DEs, let alone to send Fenrir with them. It would not be unreasonable to see the Big Bad giving an order, "Draco, kill Albus Dumbledore," then just letting Draco fend for himself on how he was going to do that. It might have been the idea of any of the DEs that Fenrir come along or, if he found out about their little field trip, it might have been his own idea to join the party, so to speak.

However, Dumbledore WAS given some very good information about Draco's movements and this someone kept very good watch over Draco.

Harry.And how sadly ironic is it that DD seems to have discounted that very good information? :sad:


When I first read HBP I did not say to myself "jo is telling us not to trust others" rather just not to trust blindly. she is telling us that trusting others is a two way street, it can have the most rewarding consequences (using harry's trust in Hermione and ron ) and the most devistating ( DD's trust in snape, or even DD's turst in himself that he would be able to detach his love for harry from the benefit of the wizarding world which in the end resulted in sirius' death).Oh, Brava, plainlypotter! Brava!!


LionHart, thanks for the interview quotes. You make a very good point about Jo perhaps referring to the question on whether Snape will fall in love as what she was "stunned" about. And that does change things quite a bit! :agree:


If you check p595 you will see that snape enters with the wand in his hand and his eyes sweep the scene.Maybe I'm forgetting something, but the way I remember the extended scenario was that Hermione and Luna were standing outside Snape's office to keep an eye on him. But then Flitwick shows up with the news that DEs are "storming the castle" (never thought I'd actually get to legitimately use that line!) and Snape is outta there. But then how does he know to go to the Tower? Do we ever see him (or hear about later, since Harry's not there) yelling, "Where's Draco?" to the other DEs? Does he see Order members trying to get up the Tower stair but coming up against the dark shield? If we're not told, then how do you suppose Snape knew to go up there?


Is Snape good or evil? --Is that the right question?

...It can't be a "redemption" if Snape was already good. One can only redeem oneself from wrong...This brings to mind a paraphrase of the famous Watergate hearing question - "What choice did Snape make and when did he make it?" DD does say the Snape "rejoined" the good guys, so perhaps the redemption already took place, at least the redemption for having passed the partial Prophecy to Voldy. But Snape's got a lot more to answer for than just that. Supposedly he actually feels sorry about that, but he's never shown one whit of remorse over how much of a terrorizing, slimey git he's been for years. So I see that he may have already had some redemption but not as much as he obviously needs... if he's gonna be a good guy.

DD isn't wrong! He had faith that Snape could redeem himself, and he CAN... He just hasn't yet.This is my exact reasoning for why I feel Wormtail will eventually do the "right thing," whatever that may be. It will show exactly why he was in Gryffindor (which I think he was even though we're not told explicitly) and redeem not only himself, but... the Marauders for ever having befriended him in the first place. You'd think he'd have to help because of the life-debt, but that would leave out choice on his part and we're never told what happens if you don't fulfill a life debt, so maybe not that much. I think he'll help out of choice and that will prove some semblence of rationale for the Marauders and for his (probable) house affiliation.


I never felt that it was right that Dumbledore expected everyone to trust Snape just because he did. And then he never gave anyone the reason why he trusted Snape. That required people to trust Dumbledore and Snape blindly.I don't think DD would ever just expect everyone else to trust his judgement on a regular basis without also telling them why he felt the way he did. But something to remember about Snape's case is that he was/is supposedly a double agent and DD telling everyone why he trusted Snape, and why they should too, would have blown that out of the water. Also, DD told us (or hinted?) that Snape's reason for "rejoining" the side of good was very personal and given to him in confidence and was, therefore, not something he would divulge. So, as with everything else concerning Snape, this seems to be a special exception to DD's usual modus operandi.

I agree with another poster who made this comment:Well, one of the "truths" to Potterverse is that good people do not usurp the freedom of choice of other individuals. http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=71040&page=6 Dumbledore would never take away Snape's freedom of choice and force him to commit murder and force him to be a hunted fugitive.No he wouldn't. But Snape had already done that himself, by agreeing to the Unbreakable Vow. He may have gone into it not realizing the condition of having to fulfill Draco's task for him and/or what that task was, but he did agree to enter a 100% binding Vow that would mean his death if not upheld. So there was no freedom of choice left for DD to take, not if Snape wanted - or needed - to live.

I can see DD reasoning it this way, "Severus, the Vow's been made. You are already bound to die if you do not complete Draco's task should he fail. You need to live and the only way for that to happen now, sadly, is for me to take your place in the One Who Must Die category. I accept and offer my choice freely while you are, unfortunately, not in a position to do the same and come out of it alive. We all knew that things would happen in this war that are highly regrettable, but must happen all the same if the war is to be won by the side of right. I regret with the strongest conviction what this act will do to you, but you must know the outcome of the war is more important than either of our 'druthers."

If ever there was a reason why Albus Dumbledore would try to convince someone to do something they really didn't want to do, it would be to ensure the outcome of the war against Voldemort. I mean, he did insist that Harry drag the horcrux conversation out of Slughorn, and we all know that was something Sluggy really didn't want to do. DD may well have sealed a death warrant on Slughorn by getting him to reveal that information, but he made it happen all the same.


Sorry about such a lengthy post, but I guess that's what happens when you miss out on such a good discussion for so long - tons of stuff to weigh in on!

Why does everyone trust/lament DD? He is responsible for so much misery! He is the man responsible for unleashing Tom Riddle onto the world in the first place, altho he realized that TR was a psychopath in the orphanage, and should have seen that TR never improved. He hired Quirrel/Voldy. He didn't realize that a basilisk was roaming around his own school. He didn't give sufficient protection to the triwizard contestants. If he is supposedly the only man Voldy fears, why doesn't he take that bad boy down? DD sux as a hero, and I'm glad he got killed off. If he had been around during WWII, Hitler would have lived a long and happy life. (I know, I know, if DD was as good as he's supposed to be, there wouldn't be any books.) Snape did the world a favor.

emerald 63

you are right about snape not being told or asking about draco's whereabouts - but isn't it obvious that when flitwick tells him that there are death eaters in the castle that draco would be with them? Snape at this point knows what draco had to do, and whether DD is present or not Draco is in danger if he has sided with the death eaters against the order which it appears he had . Snape entered the frey not necessarily to kill DD for Draco but to protect Draco from DD or anyone else on the tower who might cause Draco injury and thus effect Snape's well being . Once up there he could see Draco was "all in one piece" and it was DD who was dying (from the green potion). At that point there was no reason not to kill DD any other solution would end in both of DD and snape dying. unbreakable vow kills snape = DD dies b/c no antidote. It is the lesser of two evils so to speak.

As for Draco now, I don't agree with your assessment. Draco can go before V - all snape has to do is give him the draft of living death and tell V that he has disposed of draco and bring him his "lifeless" body to prove it. Then he can take Draco away and hide him as DD would have. The only problem I see with this scenario would depend upon when the unbreakable vow ends. As long as the vow ends with the killing of DD - then there is no problem but if the vow extends indefinitely Bella might pose a problem b/c she knows that snape has made the vow and if snape "kills" draco then snape would die for failing to protect him.

Why does everyone trust/lament DD? He is responsible for so much misery! He is the man responsible for unleashing Tom Riddle onto the world in the first place, altho he realized that TR was a psychopath in the orphanage, and should have seen that TR never improved. He hired Quirrel/Voldy. He didn't realize that a basilisk was roaming around his own school. He didn't give sufficient protection to the triwizard contestants. If he is supposedly the only man Voldy fears, why doesn't he take that bad boy down? DD sux as a hero, and I'm glad he got killed off. If he had been around during WWII, Hitler would have lived a long and happy life. (I know, I know, if DD was as good as he's supposed to be, there wouldn't be any books.) Snape did the world a favor.

I am speechless!! I am just wondering if we are reading the same series of books.

I am speechless!! I am just wondering if we are reading the same series of books.I am assuming that House of Black is being sarcastic :lol:

Emerald63, you really spent a lot of time reading and commenting on this post. I wanted to address your response to my comment about this quote:
Quote:
Well, one of the "truths" to Potterverse is that good people do not usurp the freedom of choice of other individuals. http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=71040&page=6

Dumbledore would never take away Snape's freedom of choice and force him to commit murder and force him to be a hunted fugitive.

No he wouldn't. But Snape had already done that himself, by agreeing to the Unbreakable Vow. He may have gone into it not realizing the condition of having to fulfill Draco's task for him and/or what that task was, but he did agree to enter a 100% binding Vow that would mean his death if not upheld. So there was no freedom of choice left for DD to take, not if Snape wanted - or needed - to live. Freedom of choice means that you are able to say no to any request. Snape's first opportunity to say "no" came when Narcissa asked him to complete the task if Draco appeared to fail. We assume this meant that the task was to murder Dumbledore. Snape was extremely clever when he explained himself to Bellatrix. He convinced her that he was on their side. There is no reason he could have not done the same to Narcissa. He should have accepted the consequences of his refusal to murder Dumbledore. Voldemort may have seen it as support, and been glad that he refused to perform Draco's task. We cannot assume that Snape's refusal to take the third part of the vow would result in his death.

And, if Dumbledore had wanted or needed Snape to live, as you suggest, then there would have been another way for Snape to live if Draco failed. Dumbledore could have killed himself. Then Snape would not have a beeen a murderer.

susanbones111

good points - I guess we all should remember where the information concerning the consequences for breaking an unbreakable vow comes from ... Ron is repeating something he heard is father say when he was only five, it is possible that he misunderstood. Usually when Jo gives us information "from the horse's mouth" so to speak it comes from either Dumbledore or Hermione so perhaps the consequence is not death bur rather something less dire like a short trip to azcahban.

I just remembered one thing that may be important. In PS/SS, Dumbledore tells Harry that for the safety of the wizarding world, eventually, Nicolas Flamel had to die. They, together, made the choice to destroy the Philosopher's stone and let Flamel "sacrifice" himself. To DD and to Flamel, death is but just the next adventure. This makes death almost joyfull, like, hey, let's go! it is time, let's discover what is next!
DD saying so for Flamel in the first book, he would certainly feel the same about his own death. Why couldn't it be the same case of "the greater good", let's die? Something else comes to my mind, though I don't have the book with me: at his funeral, isn't there a white cloud in form of a Phoenix that arises "joyfully" in the sky from his tomb?
So 2 things:
- the choice to plan death in the case of Flamel, which may be mirrored in DD's death maybe planned as well.
- the joyfullness of death, next great adventure or Phoenix arising.
I am personnally convinced that DD planned his own death with Snape, not having really any choice, and knowing perfectly that he is old and weakened anyway.

susanbones111

good points - I guess we all should remember where the information concerning the consequences for breaking an unbreakable vow comes from ... Ron is repeating something he heard is father say when he was only five, it is possible that he misunderstood. Usually when Jo gives us information "from the horse's mouth" so to speak it comes from either Dumbledore or Hermione so perhaps the consequence is not death bur rather something less dire like a short trip to azcahban.

Not necessarily, in book one before Harry and Ron became friends with Hermione he is the main sorce of information about the magical world since it is all new to Harry, and he usually is the one to tell Harry about things that are usually common knowledge to wizard families.
And I cant really see what the point of telling us it would be death if it were not.(IMO)

you are right about snape not being told or asking about draco's whereabouts - but isn't it obvious that when flitwick tells him that there are death eaters in the castle that draco would be with them?Umm... well... yeah. Now that you mention it. Duh. :whistle: (My bad! :lol: )


Snape entered the frey not necessarily to kill DD for Draco but to protect Draco from DD or anyone else on the tower who might cause Draco injury and thus effect Snape's well being.An excellent point in part - but I doubt Snape would ever need to protect Draco from DD. But from DEs? OH YEAH.


At that point there was no reason not to kill DD any other solution would end in both of DD and snape dying. unbreakable vow kills snape = DD dies b/c no antidote. It is the lesser of two evils so to speak.Harsh, but accurate. (Oh, and you're not harsh, the circumstances Jo set up are.)


Draco can go before V - all snape has to do is give him the draft of living death and tell V that he has disposed of draco and bring him his "lifeless" body to prove it. Then he can take Draco away and hide him as DD would have.This could well be how it turns out. We won't know for sure till Book 7 is delivered to us. But I just have a pretty strong feeling that somehow Voldemort might be able to detect the use of the DoLD potion. Even if he can't detect it, knowing him he'd still suspect it or something similar.

I'm reminded of the common practice during crucifixions (not just Christ's) of Romans thrusting a spear into the crucified body to make sure the person was really dead. Occasionally someone who appeared dead would revive, once the weight of their own body had been taken off their breathing muscles (most crucifixion victims died of suffocation for that reason). Before anyone says it, I'm not equating Draco with Christ! No Way!! I'm just saying that with Voldy being the way he is, I don't think he'd fully accept the apparently dead body of Draco as the end of it. I think he'd definitely add his own insult to injury and, even then, probably not let Snape just walk off with the body. God only knows what V would want to do with it, but I trust it wouldn't be pretty.


The only problem I see with this scenario would depend upon when the unbreakable vow ends. As long as the vow ends with the killing of DD - then there is no problem but if the vow extends indefinitely Bella might pose a problem b/c she knows that snape has made the vow and if snape "kills" draco then snape would die for failing to protect him.This is a good point - when does the vow end? I definitely need to reread Spinner's End. But I need to ask if I'm reading you right about your final point. Are you implying that Snape would die for "killing" Draco even if the "killing" is only the result of DoLD and not a true death? Do you mean it's up to Bella to kill Snape if he fails the Vow? I don't believe that's the way it works, although of course we don't know for sure yet. I think as a magical contract the Vow sets up a condition where the appropriate result happens on its own, not through the agency of the bonder. Otherwise, anyone who acts as bonder would be in the same position of possibly being required to be a murderer that SusanBones111 is concerned about.


I am speechless!! I am just wondering if we are reading the same series of books.I am assuming that House of Black is being sarcastic.Geeze, I hope so. But HoB sounded pretty strong in those opinions. :scared:



So there was no freedom of choice left for DD to take, not if Snape wanted - or needed - to live.Freedom of choice means that you are able to say no to any request. Snape's first opportunity to say "no" came when Narcissa asked him to complete the task if Draco appeared to fail. We assume this meant that the task was to murder Dumbledore. Snape was extremely clever when he explained himself to Bellatrix. He convinced her that he was on their side. There is no reason he could have not done the same to Narcissa. He should have accepted the consequences of his refusal to murder Dumbledore. Voldemort may have seen it as support, and been glad that he refused to perform Draco's task. We cannot assume that Snape's refusal to take the third part of the vow would result in his death.First, a note - I've included the bold from your original post, so I added underline to my own bolds to differentiate them. Now then...

If you'll look at my own highlighted comment, I meant that once Snape took the Vow, granted we understand the consequences correctly, he had no choice but to kill Dumbledore if he wanted to live (or was convinced to do so by DD). It was a done deal at that point, whether he really did have the right to refuse the third condition or not. By accepting that third condition, to complete Draco's task if he failed, Snape had sealed his fate, he had opted out of the right to choose differently later on because magically binding contracts don't let you wiggle out later. Of course Snape always retained the right to choose not to kill Dumbledore. But he would not just have been choosing that result, he also would have been choosing to die (that was the consequence you spoke of) because that is how the Vow he took was structured. I'm of two minds on why Snape would have chosen to kill DD or not - either he's out for himself/evil and just didn't want to die, or he's good and DD compelled him to do it for the greater good.

I should probably also say that I don't feel this is how it would work in the real world because we don't have magically binding contracts that so profoundly limit our choices to either comply or die.


And, if Dumbledore had wanted or needed Snape to live, as you suggest, then there would have been another way for Snape to live if Draco failed. Dumbledore could have killed himself. Then Snape would not have a beeen a murderer.But you got me here, Susan. Now I'm speechless. :wow:

I just can't believe I never thought of this option - it's brilliant! Sadly DD was only holding on by his fingertips - literally - so all he really had to do was let go. I wonder if his sacrificing himself like that, to save both Draco and Snape, would have also created some sort of magical protection like it did with Lily. I've always wondered if the protection from her own sacrifice really had to do with her being Harry's blood relation, or if that only came in later with whatever magic DD used to set up the protection on #4 Privet Drive. If there are seperate types of protection, one from sacrifice alone, one from blood relation, then anyone might provide that first type of protection to others through self-sacrifice. Given the comments on the latest Spinner's End thread (for SE #22) about what makes an heir, I can't see Jo requiring blood relation for sacrifice to have meaning. It would be too similar to Slytherin's requirement for blood connections.

So here's a pretty big question... why didn't Dumbledore just let himself slide off the Tower roof??? Was there something more at play in his decision to have Snape kill him (if that's what happened)? What in the world could that be? :huh: :shrug:



...the choice to plan death in the case of Flamel, which may be mirrored in DD's death maybe planned as well...This is a good parallel. Good catch, veelavoivre! (May I ask what your screen name translates to?)


And thanks, everyone, for making me really think about stuff! That's why I so like these discussions!! :tu:

A couple of quotes and how they may relate to Snape and Book 7.

" Nature abhors a vacuum " Attributed to many.

" Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication " Divinci.

We know that Harry, it some way, shape or form is going to vanquish Voldemort by the end of book. So to point to the first quote: Who is going to fill the void of Evil Incarnate? Who is going to be the one to step to the forefront and be the visible, famous Dark Wizard after Voldemort is gone? It is mentioned a few times in the first 6 books that evil can not be destroyed,but it must be battled, and henceforth a new Dark Lord must rise.

Snape, starting in book one, is jealous of Harry. Jealous of his being famous for an act that he can not remember, that took no magical skill at all to perform. Snape on numerous occassions has let it be known that he believes Harry is an ordinary wizard, has had the help of his friends and has been fortunate to survive most of his adventures. Snape knows that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he will help him do so.

It then leaves the door open for Snape to destroy Harry ( remember he feels that he is ordinary ) and from their battle in HBP, Snape's confidence level that he can defeat Harry must be high. Snape then can lead the DE's ( It is apparent by all of the DE's reaction to hm that they view him as en extremely powerful wizard ) and wreak havoc on the wizarding world. I suspect this is where Harry and his friends will find a way to rid the world of Snape, as Snape has underestimated Harry for too long.

The 2nd quote is obvious to attach....JKR let us know that Snape was evil from the beginning, that he loathed Harry and the Mauraders from beginning. The simplicity of it is brilliant. Snape is looking out for himself and has manipulated events so that Dumbledore is dead, that Harry can destroy Voldemort and he can be king of the baddies.

I believe that Dumbledore knew all of this, saw the simplicity, and set the wheels in motion for the end of both Voldemeort and Snape by giving each an overconfidence that will be fatal.

Brandon is right...Snape is evil.

Good points. However, look at what jkr has gave us so far. Besides power, what is the onething LV has over all other wizards? His name. His name alone brings fear into everyone (besides harry and dd) who hears it. What Voldy has over snape is that from very young age, he has been able to strike fear in the minds of everyone(again except dd and harry). Snape may be a powerfull wizard, but he has nothing on voldy. So, if what u said is true, then yes, snape will let harry kill voldy then attempt to destroy harry so he can become the all mighty dark wizard. However, he will not have the support of the DE. If u go back tot he books, yes some of the DE may follow him, however i think he will be put out to keep them all will be more busy tring not to get the DE to kill each other. B/c the one thing that all bad guys have in common, its want for power, and to be top dog. If something happens to voldy and snape does try to take over, look who he has in his way. (seeing that they all make it through alive in 7 that is) Belitrix, she believes she is voldys #1, and if voldy dies then she will want to take over. Malfoy, he has been voldys right hand man for a long time, he would want to take over. And my pick, wormtail, True, some of u may laugh at this statement, but lets look at what he has done, he has proven that he is a more powerfull wizard then what he seems, take a look at y he got sirus (R.I.P) in trouble, he kill numbers of muggles with one spell, and was able to also cut his finger off in a matter of sec. Hes was able to bring voldy back from the grave. true , he has done more, however i dont have my books here for reference. but the point is, he is stronger then what he seems, and he, alot like snape, is in it for his own life.

So, i guess what im trien to say is that if what u r saying is true, then snape will have a very hard time becomeing top dog once harry kicks voldys butt.

Emerald63

Actually I was thinking that if the vow continues after DD's death and snape brings the supposed dead body to V - Bella might tell V of the unbreakable vow and in that way snape would die probably at the hands of V. Considering the way Bella acted in spinners end , she appeared pretty flip about draco's life, I don't think she would hesitate to snitch on snape even if it caused draco's real death if it meant that snape would be removed from V's good graces.

I must admit I had not thought about V being able to detect the draft of living death, but considering that in DD's promise to draco he appears sure that there was a way that would both protect draco and be hidden from V I am going to go out on a limb and say that whether it is the draft of living death or something else it has been used successfully previously. Interesting about the crucifixtion, and I suppose the best way to insure the death. hmmmm Maybe snape would apparently "kill" draco in front of the other death eaters ( a little septum sempra would be pretty horrifying ) and then once they are gone a few words and draco is back to normal ( again the problem with the unbreakable vow come up here ) - or here's another pssobility - what if once you have taken the draft of living death you can't be killed until after it has worn off?

I am not sure at what point you are talking about when you ask why didn't just slide off the tower roof. When I read the chapter I got the impression that until the other death arrived DD thoguht all could be saved himself included. Then the other death eaters entered which caused a pretty big problem for dd - because without the completion of the killing by draco the death eaters weren't going to be distracted. I think if DD just got up and jumped out of the window the death eaters would have realized that something was fishy and would start thiking about the broomstick and who could have riden it, as well as how that person could have escaped(not). So that would have put harry in serious danger. By allowing snape to AK him DD saved harry 1) from knowing he force feed DD a draft that would likely have killed him anyway (as I have said before I don't think there is an antidote for the green potion -there had to be a good reason for the fact that it was mentioned several times throughout the book that there aren't antidotes for all poisons) 2) harry might have reacted differently had anyone else but snape killed DD ( in HBP it was that harry was "frozen" in place) that gave snape, draco and most the death eaters enough time to get out of the tower room. That is not to say that harry's reaction to DD's death have caused him to be shocked, just that the combination of DD's death and Snape's betrayal caused him to momentarily be frozen into inaction. I know I had a hard time comprehending what had just happened when I read HBP the first and kept repeating to myself "how could DD have been so mistaken?" 3) had DD committed suicide by jumping off the tower I think harry might have seen DD differently , perhaps as a coward, and might have reacted rashly, 4) By allowing himself to be killed by Snape he accomplished what he set out to do, save draco, harry and snape and initiating a life debt to snape to protect harry and perhaps draco .

Dariel

I don't see Malfoy as a problem for snape , I think it has been proven that snape is definitely a more powerful wizard- afterall harry was able to best him in the MoM as a 5th year. I don't see Bella making it through past V's death - don't laugh I think this is one person that Neville will take care of. That basically leaves snape and considering how the death eaters that got into the castle acted I think snape would have little trouble taking over.

As for wormtail - I see him helping Harry b/c of the life debt - again I don't see JKR just mentioning this for no reason at all - red herring or not.

Brandon, your editorial points out how JKR is never truly deceptive: we may not see the evidence before us for what it is, but the events in the Potter series always end up being simple and explicable in the end.

So here's a big question: how can Severus Snape be a consistently nasty piece of work throughout the entire series, and still display remorse honest enough to convince Dumbledore?

To answer, I'll use a unpleasant real-life example: drinking and driving.

Many people who cannot withstand the slings and arrows of the world take up alcohol to give them a false sense of cheer (Just so you know, I don't drink at all). One can overindulge time after time, and not suffer negative consequences, even as one knows fully that an addiction to drink is wholly a bad thing. Since nothing bad has happened -- yet -- the drinker deludes himself that he is in control of his alcohol consumption.

Then, on a day just like any other, our drunken friend runs a red light, crashes his car and walks away from the accident, but kills everyone in the other vehicle.

All along, this person has been irresponsible, potentially evil, and potentially dangerous, but until that day has not committed an irredeemable act. Having killed people in a car crash, our 'friend' drowns in real remorse. How can he not?

However, killing people in an accident does not make our alcoholic friend an angel. Quite the contrary; having committed an act that cannot be made right again, he is more likely to drink even more and make even more mistakes out of a sense of hopelessness. As he no longer feels worthy to live, he no longer takes even rudimentary care of himself. Those around him are in even greater danger than before: if you cannot love yourself, you end up endangering your loved ones, sometimes in ways you cannot imagine.

Something like this, I believe, happened to Severus Snape. Having been responsible for causing Lily Evans Potter's death (or something equally horrible) Snape displayed true, agonizing remorse to Dumbledore.

Snape was an unpopular student at Hogwarts, up to his eyeballs in the Dark Arts. He had an exaggerated -- and I believe, overcompensated -- view of himself: "The Half-Blood Prince!" His honest expertise at potions, his legitimate scholarship (remember the O.W.L. scene in the pensieve in the Order of the Phoenix. His writing on his test was tiny!), his membership in the "Slug Club," served to justify his high self-opinion.

He must have known that his immersion in the Dark Arts was not, ultimately, a good thing. They are not called Dark Arts because good, noble and charitable people use them! With enemies like James Potter and Sirius Black around, I'm sure he felt justified in studying and using them. He was able to rationalize his Dark infatuations, all the way to joining Voldemort's Death Eaters, until he caused Lily Evans' death (or something like it).

Like an alcoholic who causes a traffic death, the alcoholic doesn't reform naturally, regardless of the depth of his remorse. Snape is no different. If he had any chance to redeem himself, only one such as Albus Dumbledore would give him any hope.

This is how, I believe, JKR can have Severus Snape be both evil in behavior and truly remorseful.

If Snape was this remorseful over Lily he would never have treated her son the way he treated Harry. He does look a lot like James but Snape, being an oclumens, would be looking into people's eyes mostly to glean what's going on in their minds. As we all know Harry would have reminded him of Lily every time he looked at him. Such deep remorse could hardly belong to someone who has a such a childish behaviour syndrome (watch him throw tantrums all the time, just like a two-year old!) You really cannot compare Snape to a drink-driver because a drink-driver is not in the full faculties of his mind when he sets out on his dangerous journeys (I'm NOT absolving them from guilt) but Snape, on the other hand, is clever, calculating and deliberate in everything he does. Dumbledore's mistakes throughout the books have nearly always been his inclination to see the best in everyone. Hiring Quirrel and Lockhart and not realising, for a whole year that a friend of his, Moody, was an imposter does not make Dumbledore so infallible as everyone seems to think. Dumbledore made mistakes like the rest of us, his mistakes often affected those around him in a big way. Don't get me wrong - I loved Dumbledore too but I never put him down as being incapable of committing grave mistakes.

anyone out there ever think that the one snape loved was not lily, but narcissa. That was my first thought when I read spinners end. By the way was it ever answered how narcissa knew where snape lived? All I remember was bella saying something like I'll bet none of our kind have ever been here before.

belsito

"I loved Dumbledore too but I never put him down as being incapable of committing grave mistakes."

I am with you on this one - JKR kept telling us via DD that although brillient he makes mistakes and when he does they are decidely grander than most - or do you think this message is another red herring?

I doubt very much that it was a red herring. Jo portrays real-life people, even in such a magical place. No person alive can go through life and not make mistakes. Trusting in people will give us a very emotionally satisfying life but it has its risks - as Dumbledore was to find out to his cost. Hard as I might, I cannot picture Snape being in love with anybody. And the only woman who is capable of loving him would have to be his own mother! (And tons of fans who have substituted Snape with Alan Rickman in their minds.)

its really funny what people want - unlike V I can see snape loving someone just because I think his mother did love him. In the wizarding world what might have made snape attractive was that he was so good at certain subjects. I don't mean attractive in the physical sense I mean and a means to an end. I think that is why snape was "accepted" into the inner circle of V supporters. Being in that group he would have been attracted to Narcissa both because she is described as good looking and because she is pureblood. Considering how manipulative the Malfoys are I can see Narcissa leading him on, and snape who is starved for acceptance taking it as the real thing. Then when she had what she wanted she would have told him that she could not be with one who was not a pureblood as her family would disown her. Pretty much what she was doing in the spinners end chapter.

All good points and I agree I thought that Snape might have had a thing for Narcissa too and Bella doesn't even realise it. However I can't imagine Bella telling Voldie of the Unbreakable vow as she was the one who sealed it and I don't think Voldie would be too impressed with her involvement so I think she'll keep Mum about that. However I think Snape was a desperado concerning the opposite sex so he probably had a thing for Lily too. he might have had fantasies about the two most attractive girls in the school. Someone like Peter Pettigrew would have been the same. Maybe he was the one to ask Voldie to spare Lily after he had got rid of James because he fancied her for himself. Many people think it was Snape did this but what of Peter who seemed just as unattractive as Snape was then.

Thank you emerald 63. I think the most fascinating thread are the ones about Snape, indeed just because we don't know, and even the clues we may have from the previous books are not clear, though we try our best to pull them on one side or the other :-)
I thought that my parallel with Flamel was a good point leaning toward Snape is good and death was planned, but Susanbones111 comes in and almost convinces me: DD could have died all by himself in order to save Snape and Draco... that looks like the end of the Snape is good theory...
By the way, Emerald 63, my name is formed from Veela, as you would have guessed, and the french vouivre, a water snakelike woman entity, as appealing as the Veela, and as dangerous if crossed.

This is maybe another thread, and I don't know if it exists already, but I think too that Snape has something for Narcissa. I don't kow if really it is love, or admiration for the pure blood+good looking+something for the Malfoy family in general. We don't see Snape too much or at all, if I remember well, with Lucius, but Draco is definitly his preferate student from book 1 and he even accepts an unbreakable vow to help protect him, which is going a bit far if he works just for himself. I don't think Snape would go in such a mess just to prove to Bellatrix that he is trustworthy... So he must care about Narcissa a bit, and about Draco as well.

This is maybe another thread, and I don't know if it exists already, but I think too that Snape has something for Narcissa. I don't kow if really it is love, or admiration for the pure blood+good looking+something for the Malfoy family in general. We don't see Snape too much or at all, if I remember well, with Lucius, but Draco is definitly his preferate student from book 1 and he even accepts an unbreakable vow to help protect him, which is going a bit far if he works just for himself. I don't think Snape would go in such a mess just to prove to Bellatrix that he is trustworthy... So he must care about Narcissa a bit, and about Draco as well.

This is maybe another thread, and I don't know if it exists already, but I think too that Snape has something for Narcissa. I don't kow if really it is love, or admiration for the pure blood+good looking+something for the Malfoy family in general. We don't see Snape too much or at all, if I remember well, with Lucius, but Draco is definitly his preferate student from book 1 and he even accepts an unbreakable vow to help protect him, which is going a bit far if he works just for himself. I don't think Snape would go in such a mess just to prove to Bellatrix that he is trustworthy... So he must care about Narcissa a bit, and about Draco as well.

Fair warning all, when I get rolling on Snape's personality and motivations I do go on at length. That said, if those are issues you're into as well, please continue...


Actually I was thinking that if the vow continues after DD's death and snape brings the supposed dead body to V - Bella might tell V of the unbreakable vow and in that way snape would die probably at the hands of V. Considering the way Bella acted in spinners end, she appeared pretty flip about draco's life, I don't think she would hesitate to snitch on snape even if it caused draco's real death if it meant that snape would be removed from V's good graces.Oh, I see what you're saying now. Since Bella knows that Draco can't be dead without Snape also being dead, she'd know that Snape alive would have to mean Draco was also still alive. And she'd snitch on Snape. Of course this gets us back to how the durn Vow works and when it's over. Say once Dumbledore was dead the Vow was over, too. That was Draco's task and it's been completed. If the Vow were over then Draco could die and Snape would live. Snape could make up any story if he'd killed Draco himself, "Look at the prize I bring you, My Lord - the whelp couldn't do the task you asked of him. Having had to step in and do it myself, I felt you deserved the dead body of this failure as a trophy." Or someone else might kill Draco and Snape wouldn't have to lie. Could work either way.

But... if the Vow is still in effect since DD's death, then you are 100% spot on, plainlypotter. Even so, I feel Bella's position in this case may be somewhat different than you've expressed. I think she may have a bit more invested in Draco's life. She's family oriented, as are all LV's pure-blood followers. She was at odds with Narcissa during Spinner's End, but she didn't snitch on her to LV about the Vow even though Narcissa was expressly going against his orders to say nothing to anyone. So apparantly family trumped Bella's precious master in that instance. Snape believed she was the one teaching Draco Occlumency. Draco needed this skill not just to keep Snape out of his business, but to perhaps also deceive LV as to his progress regarding his task. (I wonder just what snippets of that boy's life she picked up before he learned how to block her. Erg.) And she had an ongoing rage at Sirius for being a traitor to the Black family name as much as to the cause in general. So perhaps Bella might be willing to let Draco appear dead for her master in order to protect Draco. But... once Snape was away from LV's presence I'd bet my last knute Bella would be gunning for Snape with everything she had for trying to put one over on LV. I mean, she already hates Snape's guts. She did pretty well at the Ministry, so it would be kind of exciting to see her and Snape in a duel to the death. (Sounds like the kids' argument of who would whip who - Batman, Superman, Green Lantern, Spiderman, etc. :lol: )

It's looking like we really do need to know how that Vow works. :huh:


I can't imagine Bella telling Voldie of the Unbreakable vow as she was the one who sealed it and I don't think Voldie would be too impressed with her involvement so I think she'll keep Mum about that.Excellent points. But it would still leave Bella wide open for wanting to get Snape herself. (Man, who in the world would you root for in a pairing like that?! :shrug: )


I must admit I had not thought about V being able to detect the draft of living death, but considering that in DD's promise to draco he appears sure that there was a way that would both protect draco and be hidden from V I am going to go out on a limb and say that whether it is the draft of living death or something else it has been used successfully previously.Yeah, you're probably right about this. It would sorta be a good thing if the potion masked your life signs from everyone. But I think DD said that the Order could hide Draco and his family better than Draco could ever imagine. That could imply that, not only would they seem dead, but they might be somewhere out of the spotlight. There's a big difference between looking dead from across a room and from literally right under LV's nose, at least I think so. But even if you're right, it wouldn't keep LV from still suspecting something like DoLD. So to be completely sure LV would have to nuke Draco from orbit... no... wait... wrong storyline. Um, he'd have to blow him out an airlock... Er, run him through! Behead him! Yeah, that's the right genre! :lol: I'm just sayin' I would thoroughly expect LV to want to finalize the deed himself.

You know, since LV swore to kill all the Malfoys if Draco failed, I just realized he doesn't really care about the pureblood manifesto as much as he claims. If he did, he wouldn't be so willing to wipe out an entire family when there are so few left, right? Rather than pro-purebloods I think LV is anti-Muggle. Just so happens the pureblood extremists are too, so he and they have that in common. Hence they're his followers. I wonder how those followers would feel if they figured out LV isn't into pureblood survival as much as they thought? Remember, Bella freaked when Harry tried to tell her that LV is a half-blood.


...what if once you have taken the draft of living death you can't be killed until after it has worn off?This has possibilities. I like this. Don't know if it's the case, but it could work and work well. :)


I think if DD just got up and jumped out of the window the death eaters would have realized that something was fishy and would start thiking about the broomstick and who could have riden it, as well as how that person could have escaped(not).DD is on the ramparts, I believe, where there's a walkway or small flat area next to a sloped portion of the roof. Harry sees DD beginning to "slip," meaning he's having to hold onto the building. This implies the area is sloped and would require strength to hang on. DD didn't have much strength left, so it would have been an easy matter to simply "lose his grip" (on purpose). With Draco "menacing" him at that point, seeming to be preparing himself to kill DD (or appearing to the DEs to be doing so), DD dying from a fall might have been enough to satisfy LV and keep Draco alive. Could be LV would still hold Draco to the task of actively killing DD, but maybe not. Having drunk the cave potion, there was really never any way DD was going to be able to just walk away from the position he was in without serious amounts of physical assistance. So it's very unlikely he could have gotten himself to his broom to escape. I don't believe the DEs noticed the two brooms, but Snape did. (Could be wrong about that, don't remember for sure.)


...enough time to get out of the tower room.To clarify, ramparts are on the outside of the building, they're a part of the roof. The whole scene took place outdoors.


...had DD committed suicide by jumping off the tower I think harry might have seen DD differently, perhaps as a coward, and might have reacted rashly.Hopefully I explained my take on the scene clearly enough to show that DD wouldn't have had to actively jump off the roof, which definitely would have looked very hinky. But by just letting go, it would have seemed apparent to anyone, even Harry, that he'd just become too weak to hold on any longer. It's likely no one would have ever suspected that such a great wizard would have chosen to let himself fall. This could also have forestalled any guilt Harry might have felt if DD had seemed to die from the direct effects of the potion. Harry would know that without the DEs there he could have helped DD up to safety, so DD falling with them there wasn't his fault. And the time it would have taken DD to fall to the ground might have been long enough for Harry to realize he needed to remain hidden even after DD's body bind on him was released. No doubt the DEs would have gone to the edge to look over and gloat, but Harry, hopefully, would either still be shocked into inaction or in grief over an apparant accident and unwilling to take action once freed of the bind. DD was very adamant about Harry remaining safe even before he put the bind in place.


By allowing himself to be killed by Snape he accomplished what he set out to do, save draco, harry and snape and initiating a life debt to snape to protect harry and perhaps draco.I don't believe life debts work that way, although Jo's never really explained them. But it seems that the person you save by your actions (DD saving Snape's life by making sure Draco lived) owes you their life, assistance, whatever, in return. But the person who saved Snape, DD, was dead within moments. The debt Snape owed DD could not be repaid to DD once he was dead. Something very similar has been discussed in another thread on Shewoman's editorial (http://www.cosforums.com/showthread.php?t=95514) concerning whether Snape had a life debt to James for stopping the werewolf attack and whether, once James was dead, the debt collector's position would have been transferred over to Harry. There's some good evidence that Snape has tried to protect Harry all these years because he feels a psychological need to fulfill a debt to James that he never got to repay for real. The main gist is that he feels the need to wipe out a debt symbolically and not because there is a magically binding obligation for him to do so. After all, Harry wasn't the one who saved Snape from the werewolf, James was. So I don't think there's any way a life debt Snape owed to DD could have required him to then repay the debt to Draco or Harry. Of course the same sense of needing to symbolically repay a debt that can't be repaid for real might come into play. But this would bring in Snape's choice to do so, not some magical requirement.

But you know, despite disagreeing about a number of items, plainlypotter, I not only appreciate your thoughts on all this, I find you've provided a really good reason for why DD would have wanted Snape to kill him. <hesitates to put in a smilie of thanks at an awkward moment> Once you'd introduced the idea of DD letting himself fall I couldn't see why he would opt for actively being killed by Snape. But now... I see a different sort of sacrifice than the self-sacrifice of simply letting go. By asking Snape to kill him (if he did), DD might have been able to transfer a protection to Draco just as Lily transferred one to Baby Harry through her own sacrifice to Voldemort. Maybe that sort of transfer can only happen when you're actively killed and not when you choose to die on your own. Everyone on that roof either knew or suspected what would happen to Draco if he didn't kill DD on his own. But only DD knew for sure that Harry was there. In essence, Harry was in no real danger. So I think any protection that may have been transferred would have gone to Draco, as he's the one DD knew might shortly be at the mercy of LV for not being his actual killer. Of course we won't know if this is the case until Book 7 is in our hot little hands and we see if it proves impossible to harm Draco. That would indeed be an ironic and valiantly humorous situation given it was the result of DD's last wish. Take that, LV!!!


I don't see Malfoy as a problem for snape , I think it has been proven that snape is definitely a more powerful wizard- afterall harry was able to best him in the MoM as a 5th year.Agreed. Despite his eagerness to be Big Bad, Jr (as opposed to LV's Big Bad, Sr), I see Lucius's strong point as his sneakiness and underhandedness, not overt action.


Dariel, I wanted to point out that there is a sort of individual who enjoys being a bad guy, but only so long as they have the safety of someone else being in charge. I mean safety because as a follower they'll never be the one to get the majority of the blame, and they might even be able to just fade into the background if the leader is deposed. That's exactly what happened when LV appeared to have died at GH. Tons of the DEs claimed they had been Imperiused or were never his followers at all. A few went to Azkaban, but many more did not. That's one of the things that is so sick about evil masterminds - many who follow them might never have had what it takes to commit evil on their own. They need a good leader in that effort, and one that is highly charismatic and able to control others is usually the best bet for that. Otherwise you need true personal loyalty (to an individual, not a cause), something that doesn't come as easy as intimidation. I really doubt every last DE is going to be trying to take over once LV is out of the picture, because most of them aren't the leader sort. They're the follower sort.


...if you cannot love yourself, you end up endangering your loved ones, sometimes in ways you cannot imagine.Wow. This is REALLY good. And extremely impressive to include in a first post! :clap:

Hirayuki, I read your whole post and the ones that followed it with interest. I can see similarities between the alcoholic driver and Snape as far as remorse goes. But I also see some differences, the biggest being that alcohol is a physically addictive agent in some people. Nasty, evil behavior is not. Yes, strong psychological difficulties can make it extremely hard for a person (Snape) to change his ways, but it is possible, especially if one asks for help to do so. Well, the same is true for quitting drinking, but I think the important thing in either case is the level of, and reason for, the psychological difficulties that compel drinking or nasty behavior to begin with. That's why the first quote of yours I cited is so important. Snape may have felt extreme remorse over whatever it was he did, but if he does not love himself - and cannot learn to love himself - he will never be able to reform entirely from being a horrid git about lots of other things. You usually can't cure the problem by treating just the symptoms. You have to find the root cause, which in this case is self-hatred.

About whether Snape could ever love anyone and his mother having loved him... I believe what likely went on in the Snape household, given what we saw in SWM, was a dysfunctional love at best. There were obviously serious domestic abuse and violence issues at play, ones that reveal that his mother was probably never a strong, self-loving, self-respecting person. If she had been, she would have either left or used her magic to stop the abuse of herself and her son. Given how Snape turned out, it seems to me that he likely never got healthy, supportive, nurturing love from anyone, except perhaps Lily. (Movie-Lupin said Lily could see the good in anyone and JKR didn't nix the comment.) What he did get in a pure form from his mother would seem to be a loyalty born out of being caught in a similar situation - both he and his mother seem to have been at his father's mercy.

And about whether Snape had/has feelings for Narcissa... I have the feeling Snape is not a big pureblood supporter. I don't think LV is either, but is simply using that as a means to gather fellow Muggle-haters around himself. But I think LV's reason for hating Muggles is different from that of his followers. And it's the same reason Snape fell in with the same crowd - self-hatred. Self-hatred makes one either very depressed or very angry, sometimes both. It's much easier to find a crowd who enjoys the same activities you do (dark magic, hurting others), regardless of why they like doing so, than to face yourself and your self-hatred, which often stems from thinking you're not worthy of being loved. So seeing as how I think our adamantly self-titled Half Blood Prince isn't as keen on the pureblood agenda as the other DEs, I don't think he'd be attracted to Narcissa for that reason. Doesn't mean her beauty and bearing didn't attract him, though, and enough so to put aside his usual "I'm not a pureblood, too, so I hate you" anger.


This is maybe another thread, and I don't know if it exists already, but I think too that Snape has something for Narcissa. I don't kow if really it is love, or admiration for the pure blood+good looking+something for the Malfoy family in general. We don't see Snape too much or at all, if I remember well, with Lucius, but Draco is definitly his preferate student from book 1 and he even accepts an unbreakable vow to help protect him, which is going a bit far if he works just for himself. I don't think Snape would go in such a mess just to prove to Bellatrix that he is trustworthy... So he must care about Narcissa a bit, and about Draco as well.I had not thought of Snape having a thing for Narcissa before, but it does have the ring of definite possibility to it. We're told at some point early on that Snape is Lucius Malfoy's "lapdog" (I think by Hagrid, so obviously that canon factoid could be wrong). But I don't know that we've ever seen them together. But Snape's favoritism of Draco, along with his willingness to go to such an extreme to help him (with the UV), does beg the question of what his motivation might be. (Yes, it's sad but true. We have yet another instance of being clueless about Snape's motivations!) It surely doesn't seem like he would be in it entirely for himself if he's gone and agreed to a "do it or die" sort of vow. Excellent point, veelvouivre. But that doesn't mean he has to be working for good or evil. He might just be looking to score points with Narcissa. Hey, her hubby's far away for who knows how long in Azkaban, and getting his sanity slowly sucked to boot. If Snape's had a thing for Cissy this would be an excellent time and opportunity for him to ingratiate himself to her on a very personal issue. Sick and twisted, I know, but this is Snape we're talking about. I'm just glad we never have to see him scoping out chicks. Yucko Deluxe!


I can see Narcissa leading him on, and snape who is starved for acceptance taking it as the real thing. Then when she had what she wanted she would have told him that she could not be with one who was not a pureblood as her family would disown her.If Narcissa had done something like this, why would Snape later want to help her by agreeing to take the Vow?


I can see Snape perhaps being in the market to take over after LV is gone. But I think his motivation would be the mistaken notion that succeeding on such a grand scale would do away with the self-hatred he has. Unfortunately that wouldn't be the case. The only thing that can begin to help Snape heal from his self-hatred is for someone to reach out to him in a sincere manner, to teach him that he is as worthy of being loved as anyone. Not for how he's acted, but just for being alive and being human. Dumbledore accepted his remorse but didn't seem to extend a personal freindship to him. Or if he did, Snape did not accept it. And that's another ingredient necessary for Snape to get past self-hatred - willingness to try to change.


If Snape was this remorseful over Lily he would never have treated her son the way he treated Harry. He does look a lot like James but Snape, being an oclumens, would be looking into people's eyes mostly to glean what's going on in their minds. As we all know Harry would have reminded him of Lily every time he looked at him. Such deep remorse could hardly belong to someone who has a such a childish behaviour syndrome (watch him throw tantrums all the time, just like a two-year old!)But seeing Harry every day would only serve to remind Snape of his failure to save Lily. He doesn't care what's going on in Harry's mind. That's how self-hatred works. So many things can act as reminders to one's sense of, and anger over, being unworthy. He is so focused on his own feelings of self-hatred, that are even more exacerbated by remorse but not remorse in a pure sense, that he can't conceive of acting on the remorse itself. As long as his self-hatred is so strong, he is captive to it above anything else, no matter how much he might sincerely wish not to be. Then, not being able to get past being a captive of it, he feels even less worthy. It's a viscious cycle that is very tough to break and can't usually be broken without outside help.


I cannot picture Snape being in love with anybody.I can picture him being in love with someone who would finally, at long last, reach out a hand of sincere friendship to him, as we believe Lily did. She would be the person who could help him start to break the cycle of self-hatred. Without such a person, then no, I don't think he could love.


And the only woman who is capable of loving him would have to be his own mother!Except someone who could see the good, that is the potential for good, in anyone, like Lily.


...unlike V I can see snape loving someone just because I think his mother did love him.I think he'd have to somehow get past any anger he has at her for not doing what a mother is supposed to do and protect him from an abusive person, even if it was his own father, before he could learn from whatever love she did give him. I imagine anyone who grew up in a household like the Snape's would have very confused feelings about love, since to them it obviously isn't the panacea the rest of the world makes it out to be.


I thought that my parallel with Flamel was a good point leaning toward Snape is good and death was planned, but Susanbones111 comes in and almost convinces me: DD could have died all by himself in order to save Snape and Draco... that looks like the end of the Snape is good theory...I'll be interested to hear what you think of my idea that wanting Snape to kill him involved DD forming a sacrificial protection spell for Draco. :eyebrows:


By the way, Emerald 63, my name is formed from Veela, as you would have guessed, and the french vouivre, a water snakelike woman entity, as appealing as the Veela, and as dangerous if crossed.That's really interesting; thanks for the explanation. :tu: I'm familiar a bit with Voudon (more commonly known as Voodoo), although I'm not a practioner of it. Taking the similarity of "vouivre" to the word "Voudon" and another I have no idea how to spell, "Veh-Vehs," adding in your definition makes me wonder if your French term is the source of some of the Voudon terminology. (Snakes are sacred in Voudon.) Voudon began among slaves in the Caribbean and combines both native African religious beleifs and Christian beliefs. In the areas where it started (especially Haiti) the French were the colonial power in control so French terminology is used. I'm a bit of an etymology freak, so it just made me curious. But not dangerous! And hopefully not too weird!! :lol: (BTW, the Veh-Vehs are the spirit helpers Voudon practitioners invoke.)

Snape may have a friend-of-the-family affection for Narcissa, but Lucius is too important to Snape's cred with Voldemor--and too possessive in general and too powerful--for it to go any farther than that. And if I were Narcissa and was trying to convince a man who was in love with me to do something, I don't think I'd mention my husband quite so much.

I agree with whoever it was several pages back who said that Dumbledore could well have asked Snape to kill him given that 1) Dumbledore was dying anyway and 2) under those circumstances Snape himself would die because of the UV. Draco would probably need protection, since other DEs knew that he had not even tried to complete his task, and Snape's probably the best person for that. And with Dumbledore dying--and I think that was going to happen no matter what Snape did when he got to the Tower--Dumbledore might well feel that, trusting Snape as he did, Snape was the best hope for Harry and the others to survive. We've not seen a stronger wizard (other than Dumbledore) among Dumbledore's people.

Emerald, your points about Jo's Christianity are good. From an interview in 2000: “'Interviewer: Harry, of course, is able to battle supernatural evil with supernatural forces of his own, and Rowling is quite clear that she doesn't personally believe in that kind of magic -- ''not at all.'' Is she a Christian?'
'’Yes, I am,'’ she says. '’Which seems to offend the religious right far worse than if I said I thought there was no God. Every time I've been asked if I believe in God, I've said yes, because I do, but no one ever really has gone any more deeply into it than that, and I have to say that does suit me, because if I talk too freely about that I think the intelligent reader, whether 10 or 60, will be able to guess what's coming in the books.’'' JKR, Vancouver Sun, Oct. 26, 2000). If a ten-year-old could get it, it's probably not some arcane interpretation of the Athanasian Creed. My money's on redemption, sacrificial death, or both.

emeral63

I will try to clarify my eariler post.

On Bella's attitude toward Draco:

Bella specifically says that she would gladly sacrifice a son to the cause - this could be taken with a grain of salt since Bella doesn't have a son to sacrifice and had she had one she might very well have felt differently, but it is an indicator of her feelings for or lack thereof for draco. This is understandable since she has had no relationship with him b/c of her imprisionment in azkahban - not justified , but at least understandable.

As for V's reaction to Bella being Bonder

I suggest she could redeem herself by telling him she consented to be bonder in order to prove that snape was a traitor which, if the vow were still in effect and snape used the DoLD to deceive V would accomplish what (we presume) V was requiring wormtail to do.

the ramparts -

You sent me to the dictionary on this one - websters defines ramparts as "a protective barrier" when I read the lightning struck tower i envisioned an area much like the owly in GoF ( the movie) - a large area with spaced open archways and on one side wall with a door leading into the castle. I did not see it as sloped (at least the part where DD was confronted by draco) as it had to house DD, draco, Harry, four deatheaters, snape and 2 broomsticks. I got the impression DD was using the rampart to support himself and as he weakened his knees buckled and he slid down the wall that is why I could not see DD easily killing himself without looking cowardly. What if DD in fact thought that snape told draco that he had taken the unbreakable vow in order to gain draco's confidence would he just kill himself ? Or why if there were an agreement (which I personally doubt) would he kill himself prior to snape's completing his assignment? Suppose for a moment that this was snape's moral test to do what was right rather then what was easy. I for one think that what snape did was right - under the circumstances. Legally under California law if you kill another ( even if they are a moment from death) in order to save yourself it is considered 1st degree murder (a murder commited with premeditation and deliberation). But a killing of another that is committed in order to save another life ( here by killing DD snape has saved, both himself and draco and likely also saved harry)it is justified. what a dilemma! Ah the genius of JKR - never an answer that is either black or white.

snape's mom

I guess I saw snape's mom as one similar to mierope - one who couldn't stand up to her husband. But there must have been more to it than that- perhaps the rest of the story of the memory that harry sees is his mother finally seeing her son terrorized rather than herself and doing something about it. It would seem that one who was as competant as his mom in potions and the dark arts would not have allowed the father to do terrorize her son. If she was afraid of her husband how was it that snape came to school knowing more dark spells than most of the seventh year students? I got the impression that either she did someting to her muggle husband or she left him - I don't see any man who acted the way snape's father did "allowing" his wife to use magic.

Interesting point about the V's pureblood manifesto - if you carry it to the extreme he would end up doing away with all those he terrorized eventually.

As

Interesting that Bella said she would sacrifice her non-exixtent son to Voldemort but Narcissa was reluctant to do so. It just goes to show how different sisters can be. Just look at Lily and Petunia. However I think Petunia like Lily might just do anything for Dudley as I think Narcissa would. Three different women, three different sons but the same love(?) by their mothers two of whom would all probably make the sacrifice that Lily did. I suppose we and the wizarding world should be grateful that Bella and her other half didn't have any offspring.
Now Snape's mother might have loved him but would she have given her life to save him from his father (or did she? We don't know the full circumstances of his parent's death do we?).
Voldie's mother died of a broken-heart I think when her husband was released from the love charm and saw who he had married and dumped her. Was Merope trying to save her son in a roundabout way by this sacrifice and it backfired? By this I mean I think she might have been trying to show her husband she really loved him and that he had a good-looking normal(?) son that he could be proud of. Unfortunately Voldie's father was so angry at being deceived that he took it out on his son. I wonder how different things might have been if he saw that his son was like him in looks and gave him some love instead of rejecting him. After all there was nothing in his son to remind him of Merope as he probably wouldn't have realised she was a witch so he could have easily brought him up in a fairly normal way and been proud he at least looked like him.
Sorry for the rambling but it seems to me that a mother's love is very important to this story and I suppose that is because JK lost her mother before she was ready to and has explored the kind of results that mother's influences have on their offspring.
People say that love and maybe the Christian religion have influenced these books but I think it is about love and in particular 'mother's love' that has played a major part.

I too saw merope as dying to save her son - afterall her husband had left her after finding out about the love potion, so she couldn't go to him , and she couldn't go back to her father with a muggle brat , not that she would have wanted to considering how she was treated and she had no way to support herself without magic. Perhaps she felt that leaving the child to be brought up with muggles was the best for him. But then who is to say it would have been any different - didn't JKR write that several couples took tom from the orphanage and then brought him back b/c he was weird? Considering his ancestors it is not surprising how he turned out - I guess this goes to the nature v nurture question. I wonder how much genetics played in this whole thing.

talk about going far afield from whether we are wrong about snape !

Originally posted by plainypotter

I think JKR's lesson on trust is that trust should not be given blindly it is earned. Surely we will all find out what made DD trust snape in book 7, it is certainly not that snape was sorry for the death of james.

I agree with you there. I don't think trust should be given blindly, I was making the point before that I don't think Jo would thrust the value of trust aside in terms of the whole Dumbledore/Snape trust thing. But trusting someone is not absolute. Like you said we will surely find Dumbledore's ironclad reason for trusting him.

Emerald 63, see this link for vouivre
http://www.theserenedragon.net/Tales/france-vouivre.html
and this:French version of the English Wyvern. I think it gave Vipere in french, which is a kind of serpent commonly seen in the countryside in Europe.
This is not the only version, and a vouivre can also represent the energy of water, like the serpent Kundalini. I know about Voodoo a bit, but am not sure at all if they are related.
The word "voodoo" comes from the West African word "vodun," meaning spirit.
I love to dig the origins of words too :-) French had colonies in Africa, so your theory may be good...

Back to Snape and DD...
Emerald 63 you said : "If Snape's had a thing for Cissy this would be an excellent time and opportunity for him to ingratiate himself to her on a very personal issue."
I have a sad story to share actually, but I think it is relevant so here it is:
In 1974, during the Cyprus crisis, my father (greek) had to go there with the army, as an officer. My mum had already have my brother, who was 6 months or so at the time. My dad, not wanting my mum to remain alone in Greece under the totalitarian Colonel regime, sent her over to France (she is french). For 3-4 long months, my mum was alone, without any news from Greece, not knowing if my dad was ok and alive, with a child in her hands, working hard to live. This was a bit much for a young mum of 27 (parallel with Narcissa, a prominent pure blood family suddenly suspicious for the ministry, alone with her child, the father in prison, not knowing if he is already mad, hungry, etc. Comparison stops here between Cissy and my mum of course, hehe). She went to see my grandfather for help, financial and moral, and he tried to use her, to show her his power and to profit of her situation of weakness to blackmail her until my dad finally came back from Greece...I tell this story because I suddenly realize that maybe, Snape is not at all in love with Narcissa, but actually enjoys his power over her, a pure blood and accepts to help to place her in his debt.
To further the comparison, his liking Draco may also be the same, a pawn in his hand that he carresses for the moment, there again like my grandfather. My dear grand dad simply just LOVED my brother (when he had grown up and became interresting to him). He was his preferate grand-son...until my parents realized that he had secret meetings with him in the town where he made his studies and that he wrote letters to him telling expressly not to tell anything to my parents! He was trying to "appropriate" my brother's mind through a false gentleness and lies he said about my parents. Fortunately, feeling pretty much saddened and shaken about this secrecy and lies, my brother decided to discuss directly with my parents, and it is how everything came to light...
So, regarding Snape, he may just try to assess his power over a pure blood family, to take revenge upon them and show his superiority of half blood, be it with Narcissa's beggar condition or Draco's position as preferate student...

Emerald 63: "I'll be interested to hear what you think of my idea that wanting Snape to kill him involved DD forming a sacrificial protection spell for Draco."
mmmmh. yes, though doesn't that involve strong blood relation, like mother/son, more than headmaster/student? This is after all why Harry has to remain at Aunt Petunia's. We just know one exemple of this kind of sacrifice and we know from Lily's death that she also had a choice. Did DD really have a choice to die? Because if Snape is bad then he didn't have the choice, then his death wouldn't be sacrificial and he would have said Severus, please....don't kill me, don't disappoint me etc./ Versus if Snape is good and death was planned, then again, DD has no real choice if he wants Snape to fulfill his UV and Draco to escape his fate of murderer. He can't really be proposed to "step aside", in either case. Or did you mean another kind of sacrificial death to create a spell of protection?

On the other hand, I still like the theory that death was planned:
There is not only the comparison between Flamel's planned death and possibly DD planned death with Snape.
There is also the comparison someone did in one of the Threads (sorry, can't tell which one! I should take notes or bookmark..) between Harry hating himself and disgusted to give the potion to DD in the cave, and the look of disgust and hatred on Snape's face when he kills DD...

So is Snape another kind of my terrible grand father figure who works for himself as a new godfather of the mob or is he loyal to somebody else than himself (DD and the Order cause)?
Maybe we won't have any answers. Maybe it will be like the end of the short story "the Lady, or the Tiger" by Frank Stockton, nothing will be answered about Snape because his nature is to be complex, and sometimes in real life you can't really tell who somebody is really, deep down... He is after all the only "gray" character, not all good, not all bad, contrary to DD and Voldemort... Maybe he is meant to remain this way?
hehe like you all, I can't wait to have answers though. I WANT to know if he is good or bad... JKR must be laughing to see us struggle with her clues :-)

veelavouivre-

your last comment is right on target! but imho, it seems that JKR has written a story that cries for a redemption.

with that in mind - it would seem likely that snape who is a bad/practical/selfish guy will in the end do what is right and be redeemed. I find it hard to find an agreement b/w snape and DD as the reason for DD's death, considering all the miserable things he has done directly and indirectly to harry and the fact that there have been several occassions when snape's knowledge could have helped DD to put an end to V (here I am thinking of SS/PS - where snape suspects Quirell and says nothing to DD, or at least it does not appear from the events that he has, and the fact that he knows about the dark mark and doesn't tell DD prior to the potter's death) I think snape just does what will be to his advantage and too bad for everyone else. Since snape has been portrayed as the likely worst guy other than V who will not likely be redeemed, it seems to fit that he be the one redeemed. even if Peter comes to his senses and helps harry it is probably b/c of the life debt and to be redeemed it seems should be not b/c of a magical contract but rather done willingly. As for draco, well he has already shown that although he is a bit miserable he is not so bad as to follow in V's footstepsand seems to me to have already taken the first steps toward redemption. That said that leave only snape

plainly potter:
I agree with you that if there is someone to be redeemed, it would be nicer if it was Snape, whose character has been much more developed than Pettigrew's.
BTW, Snape is one of the professors protecting the stone, with his potion riddle. I guess, if it is so, that DD had told these professors that the stone was endangered, that someone was up to stealing it. Snape does not seem eager to help Quirrell do so. I am pretty sure he doesn't know about V at this point, as he says himself in Spinner's end chapter. V is after all known to practice occulmency. Since he possessed Quirrell, Snape was unable to read his mind. And I think DD was aware that there must have been V behind Quirrell, whether Snape told him or not. DD does not seem surprised at all by Harry's revelations of what happenend and even says that there will be more attempts from V.
Also, I think it is quite courageous of Snape to agree to go back to V and play the part of the double agent at the end of GoF. His face clearly went very pale but he goes nonetheless. I am not sure if some sentiments that reflect on the face can be faked, like getting pale, or red. You can control your gestures, your speech, maybe your eyes, but when it comes to the body language, the sentiment is too strong to be controlled, it is because it comes as a vawe shock totally overwhelming that we have reactions apparent in the body. Snape IS afraid of V but obeys DD at that point. And here, his speech at Spinner's end gives an explanation that does not fit with his fear and pale face (I don't have the books to quote exactly how he reacts with DD asking him to be double agent, but I am quite sure there is a body change in him)

I think that in the Spinner's end "revelations" Snape is playing between what is the truth and what he lies about. The best most solid lies are the ones you can mix with the most of truth.

Snape may have a friend-of-the-family affection for Narcissa, but Lucius is too important to Snape's cred with Voldemor--and too possessive in general and too powerful--for it to go any farther than that. And if I were Narcissa and was trying to convince a man who was in love with me to do something, I don't think I'd mention my husband quite so much.Hmm... I'd never considered Snape to be reliant on, or otherwise connected to, Lucius to be considered valuable to Voldemort. Voldy seems to already have his own reasons to keep Snape on the payroll. And while Lucius may be possessive and powerful in general, he's not really in a position to do too much about anything happening in the outside world at the moment. I doubt anything will happen between Snape and Narcissa (especially in kid oriented literature), but, if their emotions for each other were to play an important role, Lucius probably wouldn't be around to protest. There's already been one mass DE escape from Azkaban, I doubt the MoM is going to let that happen again short of an all out assault.

But you make an excellent point about Cissy droning on about poor, lamented Lucius. (Blaah.) Not a good way to score points with another guy. So between that and the kiddy lit bit, feelings or not, I don't think we're gonna see anything happen.


Dumbledore could well have asked Snape to kill him given that 1) Dumbledore was dying anyway and 2) under those circumstances Snape himself would die because of the UV. Draco would probably need protection, since other DEs knew that he had not even tried to complete his task, and Snape's probably the best person for that. And with Dumbledore dying--and I think that was going to happen no matter what Snape did when he got to the Tower--Dumbledore might well feel that, trusting Snape as he did, Snape was the best hope for Harry and the others to survive.I'm not sure about some of this either. Sorry... (No fears, fellow readers, Shewoman and I are friends. :) ) I do agree that DD, apparantly being aware of both Draco's task and the UV, realized a watchful Draco might well catch him out if he returned to the castle in need of emergency help from Snape. So I think DD really could have foreseen a potential situation clearly enough to think there might be a need for Snape to kill him. However, we're the ones who are in a position to realize DD was likely dying. But think about Snape's PoV at that moment. He'd had no opportunity to examine or question DD about what had happened to weaken him and there had been other instances where Snape was able to stave off what seemed like certain death from dark magic. Even DD seemed impressed when telling Harry about Snape stopping the curse which would have surely killed DD (from the horcrux ring), a "save" that obviously DD could not have made himself. Without benefit of hindsight (or Jo-sight) I don't think it would have been a foregone conclusion to the characters that DD was about to die. That doesn't mean he and Snape might not have had a plan for Snape to kill him anyway, as a means to keep both Draco and Snape alive if there were no other way out of the situation.

As far as Draco needing protection, you're right, if he ended up failing his task he would.


Emerald, your points about Jo's Christianity are good.Thank you! And thanks for the interview quotes. So a ten year old could get it, eh? I feel kinda silly now, what with spending all this time obsessing over how it's gonna end. :rolleyes: :lol:



Bella specifically says that she would gladly sacrifice a son to the cause - this could be taken with a grain of salt since Bella doesn't have a son to sacrifice and had she had one she might very well have felt differently, but it is an indicator of her feelings for or lack thereof for draco. This is understandable since she has had no relationship with him b/c of her imprisionment in azkahban - not justified , but at least understandable.I had forgotten that Bella said she would sacrifice a son if she had one. But I do agree she might have felt differently were that actually the case. It's interesting, though, considering the instances I cited earlier, of her being family oriented, apparently not snitching on Narcissa for going against LV's orders (to keep Draco's task secret), and of hating Sirius for betraying the family as much as for good vs evil reasons. She does seem to have some divided loyalties. Now I really wonder what she would do if she were to see LV preparing to AK Draco, especially if Narcissa was there at the time.


As for V's reaction to Bella being Bonder

I suggest she could redeem herself by telling him she consented to be bonder in order to prove that snape was a traitor which, if the vow were still in effect and snape used the DoLD to deceive V would accomplish what (we presume) V was requiring wormtail to do.Your suggestion might work; it might not. LV has such a temper and chooses to be "merciful" at such odd times, ya know? Do you mean to say that Bella could safely admit to being bonder because it could turn out to be proof that Snape was a traitor? That is, once he showed up with an apparantly dead Draco? She would know Draco wasn't really dead and to prove that she'd have to reveal the UV and what it entailed (Snape dying if Draco died). I can see that covering her, since apparently Wormtail didn't get the goods on Snape being a traitor and it's something LV would definitely want to know. But it would still deliver her sister's son to his death at Voldemort's hands. I think that's where her maybe thinking twice about sacrificing someone so readily might come in, especially since DD did end up dead, as he was supposed to, and Draco managed to get DEs into Hogwarts, a major accomplishment. After all, there's a good chance she said what she did about sacrificing her own son just in the heat of the moment while arguing with a man she hates.

And I can see Snape worming his way out of the traitor business, too. All he has to do is trot out the obvious - he killed DD. How in the world (in his words) could he be a traitor, having done that? Even if he did it primarily to keep himself from dying, as Bella would be sure to point out, he surely would have died to save the great DD if he were really a traitor. He can always feign his ties of friendship to the Malfoys for agreeing to help Draco and for trying to keep him alive (rather than because of any promise to DD), despite LV's threats to kill him if he failed. "I thought, my Lord, that with Dumbledore dead, you might consider being merciful - he is so young and may yet prove of certain use to us."


websters defines ramparts as "a protective barrier" when I read the lightning struck tower i envisioned an area much like the owly in GoF ( the movie) - a large area with spaced open archways and on one side wall with a door leading into the castle. I did not see it as sloped (at least the part where DD was confronted by draco) as it had to house DD, draco, Harry, four deatheaters, snape and 2 broomsticks. I got the impression DD was using the rampart to support himself and as he weakened his knees buckled and he slid down the wall that is why I could not see DD easily killing himself without looking cowardly.You were right on this - I reread the Tower scene and realized DD was not on a sloped area trying to hold on. But they were outside, as I suspected:
Dumbledore had already crossed the crenellated ramparts and was dismounting; Harry landed next to him seconds later and looked around.

The ramparts were deserted. The door to the spiral staircase that led back in to the castle was closed...It's as you said about the owlery scene in Movie 4. They are in an outdoor walkway which has a protective wall, or rampart, around it. (Crenellated means there are cut out gaps in it. This allowed archers or canons to aim at attackers.) But "rampart" can also mean an earthen embankment, which is indeed sloped. I think I must have been confusing the two similar ideas of protective walls. It's pretty clear from the portion I highlighted that they're outside. But DD does indeed support himself by leaning back against the inside of the rampart wall. So I guess there was never any way he could have just let himself fall. Oh well... but now I wonder even more if there is a sacrificial protection in place on Draco.


I guess I saw snape's mom as one similar to mierope - one who couldn't stand up to her husband. But there must have been more to it than that- perhaps the rest of the story of the memory that harry sees is his mother finally seeing her son terrorized rather than herself and doing something about it.Of course the snippet we see in SWM is too brief to make any serious guesses about the overall Snape family dynamic. However, from a purely literary point of view, JKR showing us only that part of the scene has to mean something. I think it means that's the important image to come away with regarding the Snape family, at least on that day. If Snape's mother had stood up to her husband, for any reason, that would have been the more defining moment in Snape's memory rather than the one we saw.

I've also seen similarities between Snape's mother and Merope Gaunt. But I've seen differences, too. I don't know that Merope standing up to TR, Sr, would have mattered because he threw her out of his house. I doubt her arguing her point would have gotten her anywhere - the man was never going to accept her. And for all we know he may have become vioent. We know Merope had a tendency to lose some of her magical ability when faced with violent men. But for whatever reason, Snape's mom apparently did not stand up to her husband, at least not at the time of the scene we witnessed in SWM. It was the fear and helplessness of that run-in that stuck in Snape's mind. If his mother ever did stand up to his father it would have to have been at some other time, one removed enough from the scene we see to leave it as the most important memory from that day.


It would seem that one who was as competant as his mom in potions and the dark arts would not have allowed the father to do terrorize her son. If she was afraid of her husband how was it that snape came to school knowing more dark spells than most of the seventh year students? I got the impression that either she did someting to her muggle husband or she left him - I don't see any man who acted the way snape's father did "allowing" his wife to use magic.Hmm... I've been in a thread based on a similar discussion of Merope and part of what came up is the mindset of an abused spouse. Within that situation, it often does not matter what the abused party's strengths are. If she felt sufficiently beaten down by her husband, Snape's mother might not have thought of, or been brave enough to, use magic. She may have felt trapped in the relationship, dependent on staying with her husband, possibly for financial reasons, possibly from him having convinced her that no one else would ever want her. It certainly happens often enough in the real world. And real life women often fail to see available options when in the same situation, even when it becomes life threatening. There are women's shelters, 911, friends, relatives, even a neighbor, who could help them. But many women do not use those options because of the psychological state of fear and helplessness their abusive husband has instilled in them.

Whatever the reason if Mrs. Snape did not stand up to her husband, she still might have been able to pass on her magical skills to her son, possibly while her husband was at work. Harry managed to keep most of his magical gear under a loose floor board in his bedroom at #4 for years. If it was done in secret, it wouldn't matter whether her husband "allowed" it or not. He'd never know. That in itself would have taken great bravery if indeed he was abusive. If he'd caught her at it, the result would have been very bad. But she may have felt that Severus becoming magically skilled might ensure that he made it out of the abusive home.


Interesting point about the V's pureblood manifesto - if you carry it to the extreme he would end up doing away with all those he terrorized eventually.Thanks. You've made me wonder how Voldy would be affected if he did manage to do away with everyone but himself. There'd he'd be, in essence immortal thanks to his horcruxes, but with no one to lord it up over or terrorize. Reminds me of a Twilight Zone episode where an extremely nearsighted (almost legally blind) man wished he was the only man left alive so that no one could disturb him while he read all the wonderful books in the library. He got his wish when a nuclear bomb killed everyone but him (I think he was in the library basement). But... his glasses had been completely smashed. There he was with all the time in the world and no distractions... and no way to read his beloved books. Ouch.



I suppose we and the wizarding world should be grateful that Bella and her other half didn't have any offspring.Amen to that!!!


Now Snape's mother might have loved him but would she have given her life to save him from his father (or did she? We don't know the full circumstances of his parent's death do we?).No we don't know the full circumstances, but you ask an intriguing question - would Snape's mother have died to save her son? I'm part of the crowd who thinks Hogwarts librarian Irma Pince may actually be Snape's mother. She and Snape have very similar descriptions and behavior, the house at Spinner's End is literally wall to wall books, and Snape certainly had a close personal relationship with his N.E.W.T potions book. And... "I'm a Prince" is an anagram of "Irma Pince." If this all is correct then it would seem she got away from her husband at some point, whether by leaving, killing him, or him dying of natural causes. But if Irma Pince isn't aka Mrs. Snape, Mrs. Snape could be dead. Too bad we don't know a thing about it all for sure.


Voldie's mother died of a broken-heart I think when her husband was released from the love charm and saw who he had married and dumped her. Was Merope trying to save her son in a roundabout way by this sacrifice and it backfired? By this I mean I think she might have been trying to show her husband she really loved him and that he had a good-looking normal(?) son that he could be proud of. Unfortunately Voldie's father was so angry at being deceived that he took it out on his son. I wonder how different things might have been if he saw that his son was like him in looks and gave him some love instead of rejecting him. After all there was nothing in his son to remind him of Merope as he probably wouldn't have realised she was a witch so he could have easily brought him up in a fairly normal way and been proud he at least looked like him.I'm fairly certain TR, Sr, knew something was horribly off once Merope stopped feeding him the love potion. The scuttlebutt around the nearby town was that she had "deceived" him, lied to him to fool him into wanting to be with her. I'm betting, although it's just my opinion, that he would have known something much stronger had been involved. (I feel this is what DD believed.) TR, Sr, might not have suspected witchcraft, but he may have believed he'd been drugged in a Muggle fashion. At any rate, he never knew he had a son. I'm not sure if he knew Merope was pregnant when he threw her out. Even if he did, he did not know the baby's gender, as Merope did not deliver until she was on her own and almost broke in London. If he did know of the pregnancy, he obviously didn't care. I could be wrong, but I doubt seeing the child of the woman who had "drugged" him would have changed his mind. It was not his choice to have been with her and certainly not his choice to have fathered a child with her.


Sorry for the rambling.....You call this rambling? After the reams I've imposed on you all?? :lol:

And I think you're right about the death of Jo's own mother having a great deal to do with the themes she's explored.



I too saw merope as dying to save her son - afterall her husband had left her after finding out about the love potion, so she couldn't go to him , and she couldn't go back to her father with a muggle brat , not that she would have wanted to considering how she was treated and she had no way to support herself without magic. Perhaps she felt that leaving the child to be brought up with muggles was the best for him.I agree with all this except the part about her dying to save her son. I think she died from just giving up after losing her husband, as inkling7 said. She just didn't have enough spirit left to do anything but hang on till her baby was born. I guess you could say she willed herself to live to save her son and after he was safely born in a place where'd they'd take care of him, she gave up for good.


But then who is to say it would have been any different - didn't JKR write that several couples took tom from the orphanage and then brought him back b/c he was weird? Considering his ancestors it is not surprising how he turned out - I guess this goes to the nature v nurture question. I wonder how much genetics played in this whole thing.Interesting question on genetics. But I have no memory of anyone ever taking Tom home on a trial basis, unless this was in an interview I never saw.


talk about going far afield from whether we are wrong about snape!:lol: That tends to happen when you discuss a great story with so many intricately connected characters and motivations!



"I'll be interested to hear what you think of my idea that wanting Snape to kill him involved DD forming a sacrificial protection spell for Draco."mmmmh. yes, though doesn't that involve strong blood relation, like mother/son, more than headmaster/student? This is after all why Harry has to remain at Aunt Petunia's. We just know one exemple of this kind of sacrifice and we know from Lily's death that she also had a choice. Did DD really have a choice to die? Because if Snape is bad then he didn't have the choice, then his death wouldn't be sacrificial and he would have said Severus, please....don't kill me, don't disappoint me etc./ Versus if Snape is good and death was planned, then again, DD has no real choice if he wants Snape to fulfill his UV and Draco to escape his fate of murderer. He can't really be proposed to "step aside", in either case. Or did you mean another kind of sacrificial death to create a spell of protection?Wow, lots of good questions/comments here... First, I have the feeling that the protection Lily provided and the protection Dumbledore placed on #4 are structured differently. Yes, DD does tell Harry in PS/SS that his mother's blood being in him is what caused Quirrell to be burned when he touched Harry. But in the latest Spinner's End column (#22), Lady Lupin talks about heirs not always having to be blood heirs. Being a blood heir was necessary for Slytherin's heir to be able to open the Chamber, but that's not surprising considering how Slytherin felt about pureblood status. But Gryffindor didn't feel that way. LL conjectures that Gryffindor would choose an heir because of his worthiness, without requiring any direct blood relationship. While Lily's protection may have been facilitated by her being Harry's blood kin, I can easily see JKR providing for sacrificial protection even where no blood relation exists, simply because love for others isn't always limited to blood kin. (There's that "Jo's a Christian" thing again - Jesus was no one's blood relation, except maybe Mary's, depending on what denomination you belong to, and He sacrificed himself for everyone's good.) I can also see Harry's living in Petunia's home extending Lily's protection, since Petunia shares blood with both Lily and Harry. But whatever else DD added to #4 didn't use blood directly. It may have amplified the blood protection, but he could not use that route himself... unless Lily had left him some of her blood or he took some from Harry, both of which I doubt.

You make a good point that DD didn't have the same choice Lily did to simply stand aside rather than die. The whole point of the confrontation on the rampart was to get him dead. But not surprisingly this leads me to another "hmmm...." :lol: Having reread the Tower scene, it's obvious that the four DEs feel deferential toward Snape once he arrives. And Draco did say that he wanted to be LV's favorite, rather than Snape. (So much for Bella.) So now I wonder if Snape might have had a chance to take out some, maybe all, of the DEs super quickly then gone on to attend to DD's ailment. If Peter Pettigrew could kill 12 Muggles with one curse I have no doubt whatsoever that Severus Snape could succeed with a multiple person lethal curse too. And aren't there widespread charms that can affect multiple people all at once? So he wouldn't have even had to kill them. He could have bound them somehow then later obliviated them from remembering that he'd helped DD. Same with Draco. No one would remember Draco having failed, or even having been near DD. There would have been time to spirit Draco away so that he, and consequently Snape, could live.

But Snape didn't opt for anything like this. He was on the rooftop only a few seconds before he went ahead and AKed DD. To me, that smacks of three possible things - 1) some sort of plan was already in place; 2) there was no plan but Snape did what he had to for the right, but as yet unknown, reason; or 3) Snape is evil and he wanted to kill DD. If there's a plan... why was it a plan to kill? Why not plan to do what I just outlined? Why did it have to be killing DD? DD may not have been given an overt chance to live or die, as Lily was, but he and Snape could just have easily come up with some sort of attempt to get out of a worst case scenario other than just killing DD. As I said earlier, Snape had saved others in seemingly worse condition before, so there's no reason to think he and DD both might not believe that Snape could do the same this time. But a plan to kill DD, rather than try to stun the DEs and then try to treat the poison, seems to me like DD did have a choice - and he chose to die (granted there was a plan). But he was able to make his choice much earlier than Lily did hers. If you see my point about DD choosing this plan over another that would have perhaps saved his life, then maybe you can see why I think a protective spell may be at work, one that doesn't rely on blood relation.

Or I could just be nuts. Either one. :p


On the other hand, I still like the theory that death was planned:
There is not only the comparison between Flamel's planned death and possibly DD planned death with Snape.
There is also the comparison someone did in one of the Threads (sorry, can't tell which one! I should take notes or bookmark..) between Harry hating himself and disgusted to give the potion to DD in the cave, and the look of disgust and hatred on Snape's face when he kills DD...You know, I can see it being planned and I can see it being spur of the moment. I am truly stumped on this one. But on the side of there being a plan, you make a very good case with these points. :agree:


I have a sad story to share actually, but I think it is relevant so here it is... <snip> ...I tell this story because I suddenly realize that maybe, Snape is not at all in love with Narcissa, but actually enjoys his power over her, a pure blood and accepts to help to place her in his debt.

To further the comparison, his liking Draco may also be the same, a pawn in his hand that he carresses for the moment, there again like my grandfather.

So, regarding Snape, he may just try to assess his power over a pure blood family, to take revenge upon them and show his superiority of half blood, be it with Narcissa's beggar condition or Draco's position as preferate student...

Maybe we won't have any answers. Maybe... nothing will be answered about Snape because his nature is to be complex, and sometimes in real life you can't really tell who somebody is really, deep down... He is after all the only "gray" character, not all good, not all bad, contrary to DD and Voldemort... Maybe he is meant to remain this way?I was deeply saddened to hear of such bad intent and actions on your grandfather's part. :( I am very lucky never to have had the like in my own family, though many of them were far from perfect. I am equally glad that your own immediate family was able to remain intact, despite his machinations. :cool:

I do see your point, very clearly, about Snape perhaps being the same way, merely trying to manipulate those around him to do his bidding. I believe he's certainly smart enough and magically talented enough to do so. There was talk, once people knew he was the Half Blood Prince, of many parallels between Snape and Machiavelli's character The Prince, in his book of the same name. (I think there was even an editorial about it, or maybe a forum thread.) The only thing I see different between Snape and Machiavelli's Prince is that Snape seems to like working from behind the scenes. ("Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.") He may have designs on manipulating events but he doesn't do it overtly from a position of power and I see no reason for him to want to change that, at least not before LV is out of the picture.


I can't wait to have answers though. I WANT to know if he is good or bad... JKR must be laughing to see us struggle with her clues :-) I know how you feel! But I'm not sure if I want to know if he's good or bad because I might care, or because I'm absolutely dying for an answer to a so far unanswerable mystery! :lol: I don't know about Jo laughing, but I cas see her feeling very gratified and professionally proud (and rightly so) that her work has earned so much devotion.


Thank you for the further linguistic information, veelavouivre.

Always nice to find a fellow etymology freak on the boards! :whistle: :blush:


EDIT: Oh dear. I spent all that time on my post without realizing there were two more posts to consider! Missed page 7 entirely... :rolleyes: Oh well, it leaves me something to do tomorrow. :)

Well done Emerald that last post was almost and editorial in itself. Aren't we an insightful lot when inspired by others. I think Lady Lupin would be proud to see how she has managed to get all our little grey cells overtime working by her editorials.

Originally Posted by Emerald63
"I'll be interested to hear what you think of my idea that wanting Snape to kill him involved DD forming a sacrificial protection spell for Draco."A sacrificial plan would not apply in this case. Dumbledore was never given a choice to live, as Lily was. Dumbledore had been targeted for death by Voldemort for a long time. The only way a sacrifice works is if you have an option to live, and Dumbledore didn't have that. Someone was going to kill him on the ramparts. The second part of the sacrificial plan doesn't apply, either. Dumbledore's death by Snape's hand does not guarantee that Draco will live. Voldemort assigned the task to Draco, not Snape. Draco failed his task. Dumbledore would have known that Draco's only hope to live was to hide him in a way that Voldemort couldn't get him. There is no reason for Dumbledore to die.

This is like torture! :-)
Each post finds good arguments for each theory currently made about Snape!

But this is what makes it so nice to read!!

So let's mmmmmmh ... again. Big reflexions going on in my head...

1- This is true that DD didn't have a choice to "step aside" nor has he the blood relation to Draco. BUT! This is true too that as a powerful loving wizard knowing plenty of tricks, and knowing that choices are more important than blood, his death could have been planned so as to protect Draco in some ways. Not in the same way as Lily though. There might be different levels of protection that we don't know about.

2- I personnaly think that DD is powerful enough, when he is strong, to hold Hogwarts and everybody inside together and safe. It is disturbing to think that this attack has been planned at "a bad timing" when he is at his weakest... Would he have not been on a hunt for horcruxes that night, what would have happenned?
How do the DE know that there will be no best time to storm in the castle than that precise night? How come they dare to face DD (they must believe he is still strong and powerful) when their master V fears him and is defeated at the Ministry (he had to flee)? They should know that with him, power is not number, it is quality. DD could have been done with them all single handed, had he not be weakened by the poison. So how do they know he is weak? The only one knowing is Snape, who had to rescue him from the ring horcrux... None of them know that DD is out after a powerful horcrux and that he will come back as a wreck. They do not know about horcruxes. They are already in the castle when DD and Harry come back, so they still don't know about his condition. It is still weird that their timing is so good. Did Snape warn them that DD is not anymore as powerful as he has been? After all, he says so in Spinner's end. He is telling the truth there. But I am sure that at this point DD is still powerful enough. It is really the potion in the cave that finishes him off, and that, nobody can know, not even DD.

3- I want to know if Snape is good or bad for the same reasons: I don't really care about him: he is awful, playing and manipulating and trying to hurt people in their minds. I would likie to have an answer just to stop rambling about him :-)) Though the nice side to this is that we can discuss indefinitly and exchange funny or interresting thoughts!

How do the DE know that there will be no best time to storm in the castle than that precise night? How come they dare to face DD (they must believe he is still strong and powerful) when their master V fears him and is defeated at the Ministry (he had to flee)? They should know that with him, power is not number, it is quality. DD could have been done with them all single handed, had he not be weakened by the poison. So how do they know he is weak? Your post has a lot of good thoughts.

Draco knew that Dumbledore had left the castle because Rosmerta had told him. So he was able to plan the attack that night, having the Death Eaters waiting for Dumbledore when he returned. A surprise attack is always a good plan. They had no way of knowing that Dumbledore was weak that night, unless Rosmerta had told them how sick he was when she saw him in Hosgmeade. She was there when Dumbledore and Harry returned from the cave. She could have sent a message to Draco, but the attack would have happened anyway, whether Dumbledore was sick or not. That is why Draco was backed up by a group of Death Eaters.

And don't forget, Snape had told Bellatrix back in Spinners End that Dumbledore had been affected by his fight with Voldmeort in the MoM and was weakened. So they knew that Dumbledore was not as healthy as he used to be.

Emerald, the suggestion that Dumbledore could have asked Snape to kill him when he was dying anyway and his non-DE-involved death could kill Snape as well wasn't mine to begin with. But I do think it makes sense. I think most of us are agreed that something was going on during that "Severus . . . please . . . ." moment that we weren't privy to. And if Snape healed Dumbledore in front of other Death Eaters, he's dead as soon as Voldemort can arrange it.

Malfoy, not Snape, is the one who seems to act as the DEs' lieutenant in Voldemort's absence. He seems to respect Snape a great deal--certainly Draco thinks so. If Malfoy turned against him, which I'm sure he would if Snape were involved with Narcissa, I think Malfoy would carry the day. He's a wealthy, influential wizard. Snape's very much not.


Draco told Myrtle that Voldemort was going to kill him and his parents if he didn't succeed in his task. In that case, Dumbledore's death might possibly have saved all three of them. Dumbledore talked enough about presenting a united front against Voldemort that I think he may have intended that. I don't see any other kind of protection coming from his death, though. Voldemort will have to know that Draco didn't kill Dumbledore--Amucus and Alecto can tell him, and an examination of Draco's wand would make it evident. But Draco did set things up so there was chaos in the castle that night. If he hadn't, Snape would have been able to heal Dumbledore of his potion-induced sickness. It may be that V will be so glad of Dumbledore's death that he'll let the Malfoys off the hook . . . although somehow I don't think he'll be pleased with Snape for doing what he himself had never managed to do. (I discount Snape's statement that Voldemort intends him to fullfill Draco's task, since it sounds to me like he says that as a way of convincing the sisters he knows what's going on so that they'll drop enough info to let him figure it out--which they obligingly do).

emerald63

you are right I went back to the HBP - TR was not taken from the orphanage for a trial run ( wrong book - cider house rules not HBP) but he is described as being "a funny baby who hardly ever cried and then when he got older he was odd" It would seem to me that in an orphanage where there are many children that one who doesn't damand attention gets none this could of course indicate nuture over nature but I tend to go with genetics on this one.

I also went back to OotP to when harry breaks into snapes memories - he saw snape crying in the corner as his mother cowered while a hook nosed man shouted at her, ( p 591 US paperback ed) that gave me impression that his mother was being terrorize and although this affected snape he was not directly abused. Now you may very well be right about his mom not standing up to his father - the abused wife syndrone - but since we see snape still living in the ancestral home ( again I am assuming this since it is unlikely that snape would hae chosen to live among muggles otherwise) it appears that either his mom divorced dad or either mom or snape did away with him, my monies on the latter.

Good point about draco being useful in the future - but somehow I don't see V being rational enough to accept it . He strikes me as way too reactive to consider that draco might me useful - of course he did have the patience to plan out the whole moody thing but then he wasn't as powerful as he is now . Here I go again running in circles - ugh- I only hope that JKR actually answers these questions that are hanging out there in book seven rather than leaving things dangling just to make us all a little nuts.

truthfully I saw the sacrificial protection being for harry not so much for draco. I think snape would protect draco anyway - either b/c the UV was still in place or b/c of his feelings for narcissa or just b/c draco ( up until HBP) has always stroked snape's ego or just b/c Malfoy would owe him for protecting his only son.. When I read that scene I saw DD's death as being much like James' for snape - if he did in fact feel a responsibility to repay james for saving his life by saving harry ( and I have questions about this but it is for another post) then I can see snape being revolted by having a similar obligation via DD. In both cases, snape was not able to return the favor to the person who did the saving.

They must still be showing those old twilight zones on tv - you are not old enough to have seen them as first runs, and yes , I did remember that one from when it played originally - burgess meredith was the old man in the library.

susanbones111

You are right about draco not knowing that DD was weak- yes rosemerta let draco know that DD was back, but considering that draco didn't know DD was with harry ( draco sees the two brooms and asks DD who else is her or something to that effect) it is likely that rosemerta didn't see what condition DD was in only that he had returned. Also considering that none of the deatheaters attempted to kill DD when they came in I got the impression that they were there merely to "witness" draco's initiation into the fold.

although somehow I don't think he'll be pleased with Snape for doing what he himself had never managed to do. (I discount Snape's statement that Voldemort intends him to fullfill Draco's task, since it sounds to me like he says that as a way of convincing the sisters he knows what's going on so that they'll drop enough info to let him figure it out--which they obligingly do). - posted by shewoman

I wholeheartedly agree with you here - good job

Greetings Fellow Obsessed Snape Discussers!

I've been reading along with your replies but I may not have time to jump back into the conversation. My husband and I are leaving this coming Saturday for an 11 day journey to Florida and I'm needing this week to pack, etc. We'll be camping, so there's even more to that than usual! Even in Florida the night's can get really chilly this time of year and I have to sort through summer clothes for daytime temps and winter clothes for nightime ones. Then there's camping gear, cooking gear, bedding, chairs, etc.... well, you get the idea.

I just didn't want you to think I'd just dropped out. Maybe if you're still going when I return (around Nov. 14) I'll try to catch up. It's been swell, but I have to go for now. :)

plainlypotter--what did you mean MUCH earlier when you said Snape was culpable for not telling Dumbledore about the Dark Mark prior to the Potters' deaths? How do you know he didn't? How would it have helped if he had? In Goblet we hear that the Dark Mark was set over the homes of Voldemort's victims, so it doesn't sound like it was a secret. There's also a scene of Snape in the Pensieve saying "It's coming back . . . Karkaroff's too . . . stronger and clearer than ever . . . ," obviously referring to the Dark Mark. Dumbledore says that's "A connection I could have made without assistance." Snape's statement doesn't sound like it's the first time he and Dumbledore have talked about this, and Dumbledore's makes clear that he already knew about it anyway. ("The Pensieve," GoF, p. 598 in US editions.)

SusanBones, I agree with you: while Dumbledore's death may have saved Draco and others from being killed at that time, I don't think there's any magical protection resulting from it. Part of my reason for thinking this is that Harry's protection from Lily (augmented by Dumbledore) runs out when he turns seventeen--when he becomes an adult. He was fifteen months old when Lily saved him; at 17 he'll be 504 months old. So either the spell by its nature lasts exactly 489 months or that sort of protection isn't available to adults. I think the latter alternative is probably true. Parental love can shelter and protect children . . . but eventually they have to stand alone.

Have a great trip, Emerald!

plainlypotter--what did you mean MUCH earlier when you said Snape was culpable for not telling Dumbledore about the Dark Mark prior to the Potters' deaths? How do you know he didn't? How would it have helped if he had? In Goblet we hear that the Dark Mark was set over the homes of Voldemort's victims, so it doesn't sound like it was a secret. There's also a scene of Snape in the Pensieve saying "It's coming back . . . Karkaroff's too . . . stronger and clearer than ever . . . ," obviously referring to the Dark Mark. Dumbledore says that's "A connection I could have made without assistance." Snape's statement doesn't sound like it's the first time he and Dumbledore have talked about this, and Dumbledore's makes clear that he already knew about it anyway. ("The Pensieve," GoF, p. 598 in US editions.)

SusanBones, I agree with you: while Dumbledore's death may have saved Draco and others from being killed at that time, I don't think there's any magical protection resulting from it. Part of my reason for thinking this is that Harry's protection from Lily (augmented by Dumbledore) runs out when he turns seventeen--when he becomes an adult. He was fifteen months old when Lily saved him; at 17 he'll be 504 months old. So either the spell by its nature lasts exactly 489 months or that sort of protection isn't available to adults. I think the latter alternative is probably true. Parental love can shelter and protect children . . . but eventually they have to stand alone.

Have a great trip, Emerald!



I mentioned the dark mark b/c the first time we hear snape mention it is in goblet of fire as you pointed out. But had snape mentioned it when he was first hired by DD (before the potters were killed - we know this because DD tells us in GoF in the pensieve that he returned before the dark lord fell) there would not have been a problem proving that sirius was not a death eater in PoA. Now assuming that the mark fades when V is weak that might indicate why it wasn't mentioned then, but the Order was aware a year b4 the potters died that there was a traitor in their midst. If DD knew about the mark wouldn't he have made all those in the inner circle just raise their sleeves and prove that the mark wasn't there. We know from GoF that wormtail has a dark mark b/c that is what was used by V to call the other death eaters to him, and we know that DD is intelligent enough to put two and two together if he had had the information which it would appear he did not or peter would have been found out prior to the potters death. At that point V was at the height of his strength so the faded mark argument appears not to apply. The only other problem I could see with the argument would be that Peter was not marked until after he returns to V in albania - but then how would the information be transmitted either from Peter to V or from V to Peter ? I just find it suspect that snape does not allow sirius and lupin to prove that scabbers was really peter. I know that snape hates them but if his goal is for the good to triumph then anything that could help that happen should come first above petty hurts that happened some twenty years b4.

Good point about about the protection ending at adulthood - but what about the life debt? that does not appear to end in quite the same way.

emerald 63

we'l miss your spot on commentary - have a great trip

plainlypotter--if I used a Mark to identify my followers, I certainly wouldn't put it on a spy in the enemy's camp. Too easy for the spy to be identified in that way. I seriously doubt (does anyone besides me wish that Sirius had been named Harold, or John, or any other name that didn't sound like a real word?) that Wormtail was marked at that time. Given the stupidity of marking a spy, Sirius not having such a Mark wouldn't prove his innocence. We know that SIrius' immediate family was sympathetic to Voldemort's agenda but--aside from Regulus--didn't become DEs and so weren't marked, so the lack of a Mark doesn't mean the person is on Dumbledore's side. The Mark's main purpose was for calling the DEs to Voldemort, as far as I can tell--not for identifying them.

We haven't been told how Peter and Voldemort communicated, alhtough obviously they did. I would think Apparition to an already-agreed-upon safe place was involved, and that doesn't require a Mark.

What about a life debt? Wormtail still has a debt to Harry, if that's what you mean, but I'm not clear on what that has to do with the Dark Mark.

Shewoman -

I see your point about the dark mark ,but it seems strange to me that in GoF that none of the deatheaters present seemed surprised that wormtail was there they all seemed to know him and if wormtail wasn't marked prior to the death of the Potters since V was so weak prior to getting his body back how and when did wormtail get marked? V upon getting his body back immediately uses wormtails arm to call the other death eater, in addition wouldn't the mark have risen out of his wand if wormtail wasn't marked after the death of the potters - all the other spells/deaths seem to have appeared .

Sorry the life debt was in response to susanbones111 about the protection ending at adulthood -

Presumably, the mark is on the upper arm, right? Wizards usually wear robes so there's no reason that anyone would see the mark on Peter, am I right? It's possible that Voldemort marked Peter the night Peter gave him the info on the Potters, which would satisfy both Shewoman and plainlypotter's arguments! :p :D (Just being a little funny there.) Interesting question about Dumbledore asking all to raise their sleeves... :elaugh: It's so simple, really! Perhaps my half-joking suggestion has more merit now! I can see why you wouldn't want to brand a spy... yet Snape has a mark - though, presumably, he joined before getting his spy gig and Wormtail seems recruited for the purpose of spying... at any rate, is there a way to cover the mark or transfigure it away or something you think? Obviously, Sirius didn't have a mark yet most believed him to be the spy.

Great editorial, Brandon. Of course, we have to consider this option.

Draco wasn't yet 17 when the incident in 'The Tower' took place and he also could have been under some sort of protection by someone (not Voldie) and therefore needed further protection which Albus offered however like Harry, Draco was unaware of this protection. Maybe the unbreakable bow between Snape and Narcissa bonded by his aunt Bella was his blood protection. I wonder if Harry's was with Lily and Petunia and Albus bonding it or Lily and Albus with Petunia (the mind boggles) bonding it somehow? No - now I'm into the realms of unreal fantasy......

JustaHPfan

this is a good thought and would satisfy my objection , but it seems fishy to me that none of the deatheaters were surprised to see wormtail ( upon V's return, and didn't sirius says that the death eaters in azkahban were anxious to get their hands on peter something about the double crosser, double crossing them? If they knew Peter was the double agent , and that comment and reaction seems to indicate that they did, how is it that snape - the "double agent" didn't. I know Karkaroff says that everyone within the deatheaters didn't know everyone else , that just seems too simple an answer- it appears snape knew all the other deatheaters, why not peter?

Inkling7

interesting thought that lily and Petunia formed an unbreakable vow - I can see that but not as her being a bonder - it would seem you would have to be a wizard/witch for that.of course the does raise the question of whether an unbreakable vow can be made with one who does not have magical powers. I can more likely see DD telling Petunia that by taking harry in she and her family would be protected from the deatheaters and V until Harry reached adulthood. Perhaps by making Privit drive unplottable except to those that the secret keeper tells. Look at the reaction of Petunia when she hears that V is back and the Dursleys reaction that Harry will be an adult when he turns seventeen. It appears that they understand the significance of the protection of Petunia's blood not so much for harry but for themselves. I get the feeling that the protection must extend a ways from the house b/c DD and harry had to walk a fair bit away b4 they could disapparateand from Privit Drive and by the same token when DD appears on Privit drive in PS/SS it is a bit aways from the house. Even Sirius when we first see him in PoA does not see harry until he is away from #4. That does pose a problem though, b/c how could sirius know where #4 was or where harry was for that matter when he had just spent the last 12 years in Azkahban? guess I have to think about that a bit more

it appears snape knew all the other deatheaters, why not peter?

The only thing I can think of is that the books are from Harry's point of view. Harry is so focused on Voldemort in the graveyard scene that he is not paying attention to the other DE's - and their faces are in masks - they're all frightened because of V's return - any surprise they had about Peter would not have shown itself to Harry really. I think Peter's identity was kept within a few - I think it likely that the Lestranges knew the identity but keeping it from Snape is important because Snape is regularly in contact with Dumbledore, a great legilimens. Although, if you're a proponent of Bad!Snape, there is a good irony in Snape knowing that Peter was the spy the whole time and allowing Sirius to go to prison for it - among other things. I'm not ready to go that far.

Also, we need to consider what Sirius didn't say in PoA when he talked about "the double crosser" - Sirius knows it to be Peter because Sirius is the one who chose him as SK. Sirius tells Peter that the DE's are not happy with "you" - Sirius says that he heard them screaming in their sleep and that "it seems" that the DE's in Azkaban think that "the double crosser double crossed them" - that doesn't tell us for certain that the DE's know the identity of the double crosser. Yet, Bellatrix at least would KNOW the double crosser is not Sirius. Putting two and two together, they would figure out that it was Peter since Sirius went after Peter and "killed" him - other DE's (like Lucius) would also make the connection suspecting that Sirius was not a DE. :shrug:

I preface this with that this is coming from one who sees snape as practical rather than out and out bad. I got the impression that peter was known to the deatheaters, not from their reaction but rather from the way V addresses peter's presence. He calls peter "wormtail" rather than pettigrew or peter. Something just dawned on me - in PoA, snape makes the maurauders maps reveal comments , including one from wormtail ( and it specifies that name) so you may be right that snape did not know peter was in cahoots with V or he would have recognized his nickname and would have put two and two together and realized that the map was a product of the maurauders. Of course, V might not have use the diminutive in front of snape so that might not make the argument nil. As for how many of the deatheaters knew about peter- well I suspect even if they didn't know prior to sirius' imprisonment, they probably knew thereafter.

Well I guess from all this that Sirius knew where Petunia lived and I wondered if that is where she and Lily grew up and Petunia got the house when their parents died.

Plainlypotter I think you might be right in saying that 4 Privet Drive (that is the Dursley's address isn' it?) as well as it's inhabitants had some sort of protection from witch/wizard/craft which prevented Albus Dumbledore and Sirius apparating on the doorstep. Minerva was there (I think not in an evil personna as some would suppose) and I'm not sure whether she appeared at number 4 of further down the street as I don't think the books say. However Albus might have appeared further down the street so he could douse the streetlamps so Hagrid's appearance wouldn't be so easily seen and remember Hagrid had no trouble riding the motorbike straight into the front garden of 4 Privet Drive.

Good editorial, I like ones like this one, that make me consider "the other side" so to speak.
But despite that, I still believe in the end, we will find out that TFP was on the side of good, and we will find out exactly why.
I think there was alot more to the events on the Astronomy Tower than we know about, and once we know the full story, everything will make sense.
As for why he would bother explaining himself to Bellatrix, I think the answer is simple: he wanted to put her in her place and see her squirm a little.

In each book, there was always missing information that we the readers could not have known, that made everything fall into place in the end.
In PS/SS, it was the fact that Quirrel, not TPF, was the "bad" guy helping LV.
In CoS, it was the fact that TM was LV.
In PoA, it was the fact that PP was the real traitor, and was Ron's rat.
In GoF, it was the fact that BC, Jr. was alive, and disguised as Moody.
In HBP, it was (partially) the fact that Draco was trying to kill DD.
But in HPB, there is more we don't know: as JKR herself said, book six and seven are more like one in two parts. So, I think it is fair to say that we can speculate all we want, but until we get the crucial, unknowable, missing information, we are just making mostly wild guesses.

Hi. I'm a bit new at this. Just wanted to add my 2c worth. As much as I really don't like Snape and therefore I hope he's really evil, something at the end of HBP puzzled me. Sorry, but I don't have the books in front of me so I can't give exact quotations.
At the end of the book, when Harry caught up with Snape, and Snape deflected/blocked Harry's curses/spells again and again, isn't it odd that Snape bothered to explain to Harry that he's blocking his spells, and will continue to do so until Harry learns to close his mouth and use his brain? Doesn't this seem almost as if he was trying to teach Harry something? I mean, in OOTP Bellatrix taunts Harry by telling him he can't perform an unforgiveable curse without really meaning it, but this was done in a taunting, hateful manner, which is very different from the typical (typical by Snape's teaching methods) teacher method that Snape used in HBP.
That's just how I saw it anyway.

At the end of the book, when Harry caught up with Snape, and Snape deflected/blocked Harry's curses/spells again and again, isn't it odd that Snape bothered to explain to Harry that he's blocking his spells, and will continue to do so until Harry learns to close his mouth and use his brain? Doesn't this seem almost as if he was trying to teach Harry something? I mean, in OOTP Bellatrix taunts Harry by telling him he can't perform an unforgiveable curse without really meaning it, but this was done in a taunting, hateful manner, which is very different from the typical (typical by Snape's teaching methods) teacher method that Snape used in HBP.
That's just how I saw it anyway.I think that this is exactly what is happening, Snape is trying to teach Harry what he needs to learn in order to battle Voldemort. This is one of the many things about Snape that make him so obscure.

(Great, I've forgotten to post this for a couple days now. Sorry about any outdated ideas!)

Wow. First off, a good editorial on Brandon's part. BTW, imo, making an editorial shorter just limits the space for your wonderful logic. I've had several interesting thoughts while reading this thread. Please forgive me if I end up a little off topic.

First, the difference between Occlumency and Legilimancy in regards to Snape. Snape is repeatedly classified as a very good Occlumens. The two that we hear are very good Legilimans are Dumbledore and Voldemort. Never do we hear that Snape is good at Legilimancy. A few things pop into my mind. First, when Harry tries his hardest in Umbridge's presence to get the idea of Sirius being captured over to Snape and Snape finally realizes, if Snape was good at Legilimancy, he should have commuicated without oral speech back to Harry. Isn't that what we want to have happened between him and Dumbledore? A little conversation no one heard? But Snape didn't do it in that first instance. (Should we even hope for it in the second?) Second, the Occlumancy lessons with Harry. This is the first time ever that Legilimancy is treated as a spell. We never hear Voldemort use it, and never ever Dumbledore, but Snape uses it. Also, the disjointment of the memories called up for Harry indicates some lack of control somewhere. When Voldemort employs Legilimancy, we see that Harry doesn't recall any memories, Harry just stands there, and Voldemort understands that Harry is telling the truth. I've noticed, rereading the other books, that Harry would practice clearing his mind before going to bed, but once Snape asked it of him, he wouldn't. Also, the times that Harry sites that it was almost as if Snape had read his mind, there was not the disjointed memories and no pain for either of them. Perhaps Snape tried too hard?

Second major thought is that the two people that Snape actually relates to are Harry and Wormtail. Interesting parallels pop up immediately. Snape and Harry are so similar, it was weirdly funny for me to read Snape berating Harry for the things that Snape is doing at the moment. I mean how many times does Snape lose his temper with Harry and he tells Harry not to lose his temper? lol. It is just so funny, because if we weren't inside of Harry's mind, what would we think of Harry's actions? Anyway, the parallel between Snape and Wormtail are somewhat obvious. Both spies, double-crossers, etc. It's actually kind of sad that the readers are more attached to Snape and want to believe he's good. If she had had the time to spend ingratiating us toward Wormtail, who knows? We might keep hoping that he has some redeemable qualities, similar to what we keep doing for Snape, instead of just wishing that Wormtail would drop dead. Perhaps we think that he'll die in a great act of self sacrifice for Harry, but still, Wormtail's dead by the end, ISN'T HE? All the normal people enter your mind when JKR says she spared one. You never stop and consider that JKR might have spared a "baddie," do you? What if you are wrong? (ha. I included the topic name yay!)

Last thought (maybe) that came to mind had to deal with the more recent discussion of number 4 Privet Drive. If you recall with me in the sixth book, Dumbledore considered it impolite to apparate on someone's doorstep, and that it was considerably out of bounds for propriety. In at least two instances that I can think of, Harry thinks "why do we have to apparate so far away?" And both of those times he is with Dumbledore. It would make perfect sense if he apparated farther away because of his sense of propriety rather than any particular protection on the house itself. Also, considering why Sirius knows the general area where Harry is at, remember Hagrid told him about his orders from Dumbledore to take little Harry to his aunt and uncle's house. Sirius then lent him the bike. Who knows what kind of slip of the tongue Hagrid might of had in protesting this offer? I can see him saying something like, "Nah, I can' do tha'. I'm takin' him all tha way to Bristol." Wait, Harry fell asleep when they were flying over Bristol. Where is Number 4 again? Surrey? Anyway... Back to apparating. Are you even sure Hagrid knew how to apparate? You don't learn until you're 17 and he was kicked out of Hogwarts when he was 13. Hagrid might not have known how to apparate and that was why he finally accepted Sirius's bike.

And that concludes my very long first post. Thanks for reading it!

Well I guess from all this that Sirius knew where Petunia lived and I wondered if that is where she and Lily grew up and Petunia got the house when their parents died.

Plainlypotter I think you might be right in saying that 4 Privet Drive (that is the Dursley's address isn' it?) as well as it's inhabitants had some sort of protection from witch/wizard/craft which prevented Albus Dumbledore and Sirius apparating on the doorstep. Minerva was there (I think not in an evil personna as some would suppose) and I'm not sure whether she appeared at number 4 of further down the street as I don't think the books say. However Albus might have appeared further down the street so he could douse the streetlamps so Hagrid's appearance wouldn't be so easily seen and remember Hagrid had no trouble riding the motorbike straight into the front garden of 4 Privet Drive.

small correction - the first time we see prof mcgonagall ( as the cat) is when vernon sees her on the corner reading the street sign, and DD apparates to the same spot (SS pg 2,& 8 US paper) & hagrid arrives on the street in front of them ( P14 SS ) I have a feelingly that the protection that emcompasses privit drive worked similarly to that of the sorcdrer's stone - only those who didn't want to harm harry could see it - that would explain why sirius could watch harry in PoA but we have never seen any other deatheaters near the house and why dobby was able to apparate into privit drive and see harry in CoS. Even when Harry is attack at the beginning of OotP it is in an alley that from the description of harry trying to get dudley home was not so close to the house that it would have been within the range of the protection.

This essay was a very fascinating read. Congratulations on successfully challenging your own position. Not many people can pull this off properly. :cool:

I'm really intrigued by the fact that the big debate is whether Snape's a big villain or a big hero. I thought it was obvious that the only big things about him were his nose and his sense of self-importance. He's a classic wanna-be in my opinion, and I think Ms. Rowling ruthlessly exposed him as such in Half-blood Prince.

The idea is that if TFP were, in fact, evil, that it teaches us to go with our first impressions, and a character we thought was so complex because he was mean yet working for the good guys is actually evil, thus somehow lacking in dimension.

Hm, there must be another reason for people's obsession with this character. It can't just be the fact that he was a nasty person who the readers thought worked against Voldemort up until the 5th book. Such things happen in life. The Ministry is supposed to be against Voldemort as well, and their portrayal in the books isn't very complimentary. There's certainly not much depth to the characters on the top level.

It's just my impression, but I think people might be reading too much into the fact that Dumbledore trusted TFP (I like that breve). I'm not sure Dumbledore saw him as such a great asset. More like someone who needed his protection and a lot of careful guidance. Snape's in his thirties, and Dumbledore still was wary of giving him the Defence Against the Dark Arts position for so long because he feared it might be too much of a temptation. That doesn't sound like he thought very highly of Snape's maturity-level. And the fact that Snape reported to the whole Order in OotP is also odd. Nobody in their right mind exposes their spy in such a way. It's almost like Dumbledore wanted to give Snape the opportunity to feel respected for doing something brave and heroic. That was probably a mistake, because Snape was bound to realize that his work was not that important if the rank and file and their kids were allowed to know what he did.

Plainlypotter now I remember her reading the street sign. Thanks for that reminder and your other thoughts on the Dursley house and it's protection. I oftern wondered how Harry was protected while there but then couldn't the DE's have got at him while he was away from the house like at school or something? But then (I know - I shouldn't start a sentence with 'but') as Voldie was out of action until Harry went to Hogwarts I guess the DE's wouldn't have been too bothered to find him.

I like the idea that only those who didn't want to harm Harry could get near the house which means none of them are evil Voldie spies as some other forum topics are insinuating. However Minerva was right about the Dursley's being terrible people to leave Harry with especially as they didn't want him in the first place. Wouldn't it have been better to foster him out to a family like the Weasely's or some other muggle family? However that is a different story.

I was under the impression that Snape wasn't offered the Defence of Dark Arts job at it seemed jinxed and was only ever held by Professors for one year before something like death or some other circumstances forced the teacher out of the job. This would mean that Snape would only have it for one year (and he did) and as Albusd wanted to keep him on a as a teacher didn't give it to him for ages. This way Snape could still be a spy and kept an eye on at the same time.

I don't want to believe that Snape is simply evil!!! I don't! I don't! I don't! *promptly throws temper tantrum*

but I must admit (grudgingly) that it is a possibility.

But what kind of lesson would that be?!? Grrr...

How about Jo just finishes book 7 now so we can all finally get some sleep.

Hi
I had a thought on this....
Jk also said in another interview (can't remember which sorry, read way too many!) that Snape has been loved so that makes him more... umm something... for his actions. The gist of it was that he's felt loved, been touched by that good feeling, knows wrong from right, has a moral compass (of sorts - it's questionable if it's snape) so when he does something wrong, he knows it. That's one thing about Snape that's made very clear. He's very accurate and perceptive, very deliberate. So when he makes a mistake, he does it knowingly. My point is, maybe this is what he did, kept doing in the past... until it cost him something he didn't intend on losing. [loved-lily shippers insert loved/lost lily here]

He's been given many chances and he blew them until Dumbledore took him in and BELIEVED in him.

Bravo Gre_Magus! :clap:and yay i'm not the only one!:D

Oh boy made it long again..
right, gonna sit back and watch now:cool::lol:


Nice editorial :clap: , it was interesting to read!!

I think that she said that he was more culpable for his actions .

Hi. I'm a bit new at this. Just wanted to add my 2c worth. As much as I really don't like Snape and therefore I hope he's really evil, something at the end of HBP puzzled me. Sorry, but I don't have the books in front of me so I can't give exact quotations.
At the end of the book, when Harry caught up with Snape, and Snape deflected/blocked Harry's curses/spells again and again, isn't it odd that Snape bothered to explain to Harry that he's blocking his spells, and will continue to do so until Harry learns to close his mouth and use his brain? Doesn't this seem almost as if he was trying to teach Harry something? I mean, in OOTP Bellatrix taunts Harry by telling him he can't perform an unforgiveable curse without really meaning it, but this was done in a taunting, hateful manner, which is very different from the typical (typical by Snape's teaching methods) teacher method that Snape used in HBP.
That's just how I saw it anyway.

I noticed that as well... It's especially interesting since that happened [I]after he had killed Dumbledore... is this telling of what side he's really on, I'm not sure, but I can't wait til' book 7 to find out for sure :clap: !

Great Editorial!!!:clap:

Hi everyone. Best Chrismas wishes from Buenos Aires, Argentina...

Considering that I am also a "Snape still good" fan I have to say that the same questions has always been in the back of my mind... What if what Jo really wants to say is that one must believe in first impressions, and that what at first may seem wrong it might be wrong indeed?

However I have to say that there are still more reasons to believe in his loyalty to DD. I have to agree with Daniel I also believe that Dumbledore`s main concern was to make sure that Harry was to be safe no matter what, not only for Harry`s sake but also to make sure that there is going to be someone who can face Voldemort and have a chance to destroy him. I too think that there were lot of thing said between DD and TFP in those seconds, that Harry was not aware of...Remember that this was actually the first time that Harry saw Dd begging for “his life?”. What I think is that Dd was actually begging Snape to protect Harry, to think of what it ment if choose not to kill him, to what danger that would put Harry in...
Now going to what Brandon wrote: “ He can never go to the Order and explain himself because they'll kill him on sight. There is no explanation he can give now good enough to justify the good guys not killing him.[...]I cannot see a scenario in which TFP could come up with a sufficient explanation for his actions that will redeem him in the eyes of the trio and the Order”
Well I have to say that I don`t think that`s going to happen in book 7..there`s absolutely nothing that he would say that would make Harry forget he kill Dd, he saw the man doing it for heaven`s sake!.. I think that there`s still more things that Harry will have to find out about Dd before the final battle aginst Vd that will explain Snape innocese in a better way...
Maybe some thoughts left behind for Harry to discover what Snape is really about and the reason for Dd to trust him? I don`t know... if that is not the case the I have to say that risking his life to save Harry is the only way that someone is going to believe him ever again (that is of course if he manages to continue alive after that)

Sorry it came out longer than what I expected... until next time...

Okay Okay i just have to say that theres this little thing called over analyzing. Now i myself am a person who loves to analyze this plot, but i was sitting here thinking about all my theories and i thought to myself, Is it possible that the answers were looking for are right in front of us? Is it just a part of the human mind that we have a hunger to make things more complicated than they really are? I believe so. Yes while some things may not be as abvious as others and there probably are parts of the story that require a bit of analyzing, I honestly dont think that everything in this plot is as hard as we make it. The whole thing with snape, is he good is he bad? What do the abvious clues point to? That hes good, because of the unbrakable vow and that hes been working as a spy all along. Now you may think that took analyzing, when really it didn't. That would be my obvious conlusion. Now I could dig deeper and keep analyzing more and more and go back and forth between good and bad and in many cases still come up with the same conclusion. I guess what i think more people need to focus on is what would be the obvious conclusion. A lot of people would say "well thats to obvious...it cant be" maybe thats what she wants. She wants us to do just what im doing now (by analyzing what shes thinking =]) and over analyze everything and lead us in different directions when really what were looking for is what was right under our noses the whole time and we just refuse to accept it. Now I really don't know what's going to happen and i can't wait to find out! Oh yeah and i really think that DD had to die because Harry could use him to help him anymore. If harry is going to defeat Vmort then he has to do it on his own becuase it's his battle. But who knows i could just be over analyizing ;D

The "redemptive pattern" and "not too nice" quotes are possible clues as to Snape in book seven. We are also told his patronus & bogart form are important. Further,his initial meeting with Harry in book seven "will be interesting". We are to find out, most likely, about his having been loved, his relations with Lily & the Marauders. There is much to learn before we can judge Snape.
Students of English Literature have long considered the only characters it has produced with great originality to be Ebeneezer Scrooge & Long John Silver. I have felt for some time James Bond should be added, and if JKR plays her cards correctly in book seven, Prof Severus Snape could top them all!

This is not up to Brandon's usual standard. I appreciate that he wants to consider both possibilities, but he doesn't do a good job of it. Two major flaws in this editorial caught my eye.

Aside from his treatment of Gilderoy Lockhart, TFP has done nothing to endear himself to the reader or to Harry. Indeed, were it not for Alan Rickman's delectably evil, yet decidedly "toned down" portrayal, the character would have no redeeming qualities.

Baloney. Wouldn't caretaking and healing powers count as "redeeming qualities?" Snape is shown to have such qualities in a number of places. Brandon mentions in his own editorial that Snape was casting a spell to save Harry from falling in PS. In addition, he conjures up stretchers for the injured in POA, and heals Draco's wounds in HBP. The latter is nothing minor. Judging by the description of the cuts and copious bleeding, Draco probably would have bled to death if Snape hadn't gotten to him in time.

Regardless of TFP's motivations, he DID kill Dumbledore; there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it. He is now totally and completely committed to Voldemort and the Death Eaters. He can never go to the Order and explain himself because they'll kill him on sight. There is no explanation he can give now good enough to justify the good guys not killing him.

These ARE the good guys, after all. They are not going to kill Snape on sight, just as Dumbledore did not blast Crouch Jr. into oblivion after he had admitted his guilt under Veritaserum, and just as Harry did not allow Sirius and Lupin to kill Peter Pettigrew. They would not seek to kill Snape but to capture him and bring him to trial, and if he had an explanation he wanted to give to them, at least some Order members would be willing to listen.

As for Snape's answers to Bellatrix, I can think of a perfectly sound reason why he'd want to answer her questions. She is one of the Death Eaters, and the more she speaks of her distrust, the more the other Death Eaters are going to listen, perhaps even the head honcho himself eventually. If he can shake her distrust of him and make her less inclined to blab to the others about why Snape can't be trusted, it's well worth it to him to take the time to "spin" a few good answers.

There are no good arguments in this editorial in favour of Snape being evil. Maybe this is because Brandon does not actually believe it himself.

Students of English Literature have long considered the only characters it has produced with great originality to be Ebeneezer Scrooge & Long John Silver. I have felt for some time James Bond should be added, and if JKR plays her cards correctly in book seven, Prof Severus Snape could top them all!

:wow: HUH?! Who knows how many hundreds of books there are in English literature, and the only original characters are Scrooge, Long John Silver and James Bond? Wow. Who knew? I for one am flabbergasted. :rolleyes:

Spinner's end is indeed a great chapter and good column. However if Snape is all bad, two things surprised me:
- the emphasis on "the plan" not to be talked about, meaning Snape doesn't have to tell all the truth to Bellatrix because she can't run to LV and double check with him
- Snape's wand trick with Wormtail when he's eavesdropping; now why would he do that unless he's got something to hide?

- also in GoF, why didn't he just go "forget DD, my real master is back" and bolted for the graveyard asap when he felt the Mark burning

As for Snape's answers to Bellatrix, I can think of a perfectly sound reason why he'd want to answer her questions. She is one of the Death Eaters, and the more she speaks of her distrust, the more the other Death Eaters are going to listen, perhaps even the head honcho himself eventually. If he can shake her distrust of him and make her less inclined to blab to the others about why Snape can't be trusted, it's well worth it to him to take the time to "spin" a few good answers.

I agree. :agree: This is my original (and still held) opinion of Snape's actions in this chapter. Bella is influential, even if she has fallen from grace, and it is a good thing to get her on your side. Also, she's quite a loose cannon. I wouldn't put it past her to make certain Snape had a little "accident" at some point. :evil: Plus, if Wormtail IS listening and reporting back to the V-master, then V gets to hear Snape's "loyalty" to V in action (if the Dark Lord has asked you not to speak of it, then you shouldn't do so,) along with a repeat of the answers already given to V by TFP regarding the "cozy" situation with Dumbledore and Harry's well-being.

I love your ideas, except that TFP is good.

To add to your idea that maybe he is not good, I think that his patronus is a fox. That was a clue in Spinner's End. Fox are very clever. I think the Half-Blood Prince is a very clever and powerful wizard. We have seen his work many times. He knows more about the dark arts than anyone besides LV. He fools even LV with his occulmens. He thinks very highly of himself.

So, why keep Harry alive? Why help the order? I think he must because he heard the prophesy. I think he heard the whole thing, and just told everyone that he only heard half of it. He knows that Harry is the only one who can vaquish the dark lord. So, he must keep him alive. As long as LV lives, TFP can only be a servant. With LV out of the way, he would be a leader.

I think he helps Harry for his own selfish reasons. I think that is why JKR said in the interview that "Snape has known love, which makes him even more culpable."

TFP is a fox. Watch out for him.

Can't wait for the book!!!!

That's an interesting idea of his patronus being a fox. He is certainly crafty, that's for sure.

I thought for a while his patronus might be a spider which is why he lives in Spinners End and weaves his web of deception to entrap or fool various people.

I realize this comment is late in coming but it takes me a long time...and many re-reads....to thrash things around and come to some conclusion. And perhaps this has already been presented by someone else.

Locking on to JKR's rules I'm leaning toward TFP being exactly what Dumbledore said he is. He trusts Severus. Therefore he is working for the Order despite some things that seem to be in opposition.

Some clues I'm looking at just now are:
1. TFP made the potion for Lupin even though he despises him.
2. his carefully worded responses at Spinners' End
3. the injury to Dumbledore's hand....could he have known it was fatal and asked TFP
to prepare a potion or work a spell to slow the effects, there being nothing to
completely stop the damage?
4. the argument in the forest may have been about a previous arrangement when
Dumbledore discussed the chore he knew Draco had been set to do. Knowing he was
eventually going to die from the injury to his hand he might have asked TFP
to perform the magic at the right time to both end his life and make it appear that
he was still on Voldemorte's side, as well as fulfilling his unbreakable vow at the
same time. TFP's objection was because he didn't want to cause this death.

The magic that was performed on the North Tower is somewhat suspect. I didn't catch it until I'd read another's comment somewhere and then re-read it again. The killing curse requires the wizard to say "Avada Kedavera" after which a GREEN flash of light erupts from the wand and the victim collapses. The magic TFP performed caused a RED flash of light after which Dumbledore was blasted into the air. This is what happened when someone used "Expelliarmus", a disarming spell.

Also brought to my attention is the lesson in book 6, non-verbal curses. Even though TFP said one thing he could have been THINKING something very different. If JKR is holding to her own rules then this event is not what it seemed. There are enough other passages in the book to confirm that Dumbledore really did die but I don't believe TFP actually killed him. Rather I think Dumbledore was in the process of dieing at that moment and it was pre-arranged between the 2 of them that TFP would perform a special spell that would LET the hand injury magic complete it's work. I do have to wonder about that injury and why Dumbledore didn't have Fawkes heal it. And speaking of Fawkes...I wondered why he didn't catch Dumbledore and fly away with him. I also wondered if someone was using Polyjuice Potion to impersonate Dumbledore just then. Oh but wait! That would mean Dumbledore didn't die! aaarrrgghh!!

Oh PULEEEZE, JKR, get on with book 7!!

inkling7, that's my favorite idea for his patronus. :agree:

Now what would Snape's Boggart be I wonder. Does anyone know what his patronus is? He would have needed it to communicate with the others in the Order.

I think Albus was already dying when Snape finished him off. Actually it most likely saved Albus from being tortured and then killed by Fenrir and the other DE's present in the Tower so in a way Snape did him a favour.

[QUOTE=KateH;4291101] I do have to wonder about that injury and why Dumbledore didn't have Fawkes heal it. And speaking of Fawkes...I wondered why he didn't catch Dumbledore and fly away with him.

QUOTE]

I think the other DE's would have noticed if the AK wasn't performed properly. Also, wouldn't Snape die if he didn't do Draco's mission = kill DD?

I have a feeling Fawkes (he didnt' come, because DD and Snape improvised on the Tower) will be inherited...by Harry. A non-dying animal eating AKs is a very useful help.

I've been thinking - can the AK be done without splitting the soul (and has Snape made a horcrux)? Is AK-ing someone a la DE's or LV the same as aurors AK-ing someone in self-defense or under pressure (as I believe Snape was in HBP)?

What if Snape made an unbreakable vow to protect Harry and that's why Dumbledore trusted him?

If that is true, there has to be a binder. Could be Aberforth, or somebody who has already died? Still, i don't think that is the case. If it was true, why can't DD just tell Harry that is the reason he trusts Snape.

And why did DD want Snape after they found he locket? Was it because of the potion, or because he had to help and destroy the horcrux? DD did not yet know it was a fake. i believe he was planning on teaching Harry how to destroy it.

A comment: The only motivation I can see that would justify Snape killing Dumbledore in anyone else's eyes is if he were secretly the Secret Keeper for the Order. The reason for this arrangement would have been that everyone would assume the keeper was Dumbledore, when in fact Dumbledore would have done something typical of him: hide his secrets directly under his enemies nose with the person he trusts but noone else does, thus deflecting suspicion.
If this were the case it would explain a great deal. For one thing, it would explain Dumbledore's unshakable insistence that he trusts Snape. It would also explain what Dumbledore and Snape were fighting about in the forest and why Snape HAD to kill Dumbledore to keep his position among the Death Eaters.

One of the main reasons I can't imagine Snape turning out to be evil is because if he is, the confrontation between Snape and Harry will completely overshadow the conflict between Harry and Voldemort.

Snape's betrayal is fresh and particularly ugly, given how much trust Dumbledore placed in him. Snape had the ability to be good while HPB really emphasized that Riddle was just born evil, hating Riddle for being evil is like hating the grass for being green. And yet, I think the final battle has got to be Harry vs. Voldemort, Snape might be more dispicable if he is evil, but Voldemort is still the primary threat to the Wizarding World and beyond. I don't want that battle to be anti-climatic and a show down between Harry and Snape where Snape is guilty would be more emotionally charged, if less significant to the big picture.

One of the main reasons I can't imagine Snape turning out to be evil is because if he is, the confrontation between Snape and Harry will completely overshadow the conflict between Harry and Voldemort.

Snape's betrayal is fresh and particularly ugly, given how much trust Dumbledore placed in him. Snape had the ability to be good while HPB really emphasized that Riddle was just born evil, hating Riddle for being evil is like hating the grass for being green. And yet, I think the final battle has got to be Harry vs. Voldemort, Snape might be more dispicable if he is evil, but Voldemort is still the primary threat to the Wizarding World and beyond. I don't want that battle to be anti-climatic and a show down between Harry and Snape where Snape is guilty would be more emotionally charged, if less significant to the big picture.

Neither can I....

Yes it is... and I wouldn't want that either, it would lessen the tone of the book, in my opinion.


Nice job on the editorial -- it was well-done!! :clap:

I also agree that Hermione is not the only one who would believe in Snape's loyalty to DD. In fact, I had an idea last night (in the shower, as usual): what if LUNA, in one of her imaginative tagents, comes out with the "Snape-is-not-evil" theory. Everyone else would just give her the *stunned-rodent look* and forget about it. Later on, heliopaths turn up to fight the Big Battle, or something, and.......well, anyway, you get the idea. If you happen to stumble across something like that in Book Seven, it MIGHT just be a clue.....

As to the main idea of the wonderful editorial, I have had that question in my head for one year, three months, and two days. And I keep it in my head, so as not to take a stand on the loyalty issue, because the last thing I want to do is be proven WRONG.

fabulous ed but we are not wrong:err:

And why did DD want Snape after they found he locket? Was it because of the potion, or because he had to help and destroy the horcrux?

I think we have the answer to this question early on in HBP, when Harry remembers that DD at no point actually told him what Slughorn would be teaching - we all assumed that was just so that the surprise would not be spoiled when we got to reading about the Welcoming Feast, but what if the reason is that, at that point, DD had not decided? What if Snape had just come to DD to tell him about the Unbreakable Vow he had been obliged to make (Snape would have to make snap decisons like that all the time - in a double-agent's job, a second's hesitation could cost him his life), and DD was deciding what to do about it, so he hired a teacher (Slughorn) who could teach either DADA or Potions, as required? I believe DD knew he could finally give Snape the DADA job because he knew that matters were finally going to come to a head.
Anyway, to answer your question, DD had to get to Snape so that Snape could kill him, fulfilling the terms of the Unbreakable Vow and ensuring Snape's continued survival. I can think of no other reason that DD would be so desperate to get to Snape ... furthermore, DD's "Severus, please" I believe referred to what I believe was always DD's biggest concern - the safety of the students. He was pleading with Snape to get the death eaters out of the castle without anyone else getting hurt - and isn't that exactly what Snape goes on to do? Think about it; a group of death eaters break into the school while DD is out, and not a single student is injured?
I believe Snape is good. I believe he will redeem himself by sacrificing himself for Harry. Oh, I'm not saying he's a good person - he's petty, cruel, and a bully, but he is not on Voldemort's side.
One last thought - Flitwick actually DID collapse in Snape's office when he went down to fetch him at the end of HBP. Hermione assumes that Snape must have Stunned him, but if this had been the case, Flitwick would have been thrown backwards and fallen on his back, yes? However, he is actually left with a bruise on his forehead (haven't got the page reference, sorry. Trust me, it's there), therefore he fell forward onto the stone floor. If Snape did not attack Flitwick, that does cast rather a different light on his participation in the DEs' attack.

Shewoman -

I see your point about the dark mark ,but it seems strange to me that in GoF that none of the deatheaters present seemed surprised that wormtail was there they all seemed to know him and if wormtail wasn't marked prior to the death of the Potters since V was so weak prior to getting his body back how and when did wormtail get marked? V upon getting his body back immediately uses wormtails arm to call the other death eater, in addition wouldn't the mark have risen out of his wand if wormtail wasn't marked after the death of the potters - all the other spells/deaths seem to have appeared

Good point. Maybe the DEs can choose to hide their Mark when they need to (although that would clash with Harry's Draco's-hiding-his-new-Dark-Mark theory) - remember that, in GOF, when Harry mentioned to Sirius that Karkaroff had showed Snape something on his arm, and Sirius had no idea what that was about? HOW could Sirius not know about the Dark Mark??

Good points there and you have now got me wondering WHY??????

However he might have stunned Flitwick so he wouldn't get hurt either.

And Flitwick couldn't follow Snape or he'd know that Snape had run right past the fray and up the steps after some unknown action up there. Flitwick might have even tried to follow and wondered why he couldn't get up there. Upon the slightest chance that Snape could get Draco, himself and Dumbledore out of this thing alive, it would be best if no one saw what Snape was up to so as to maintain his cover.

Snape actually being on the dark side- overly obvious. Or is it??
When you think about it, it's just as overly obvious for him to be on the good side. I doubt there were many people who read HBP for the first time and didn't think "no... he can't be bad... he'll turn out good in the end."
In fact, the more I read HBP, the more difficult I find it to believe that Snape can be good after all this. All the theories about Snape still being on the good side ARE very convincing. But yes, we need to condider... what if it's really just that simple? It's late in the series, not too early, I don't think, to be telling us Snape's true allegiance.

However. Snape being evil would cause serious problems. Someone already mentioned that Harry/Snape conflict might override Harry/Voldemort conflict. But, simpler than that: If Dumbledore really did just make a huge mistake... then how on earth will Harry even start to go about destroying the Horcruxes? The odds stack up against him; there is less of a chance that Dumbledore would have left any instructions, the Death Eaters would have a very useful spy in Snape, and Snape will be of no help to Harry, which I'm pretty sure he would be if good.

So. Yeah, it's not really all that simple, is it??

Hi there,
This is my first post on any HP site but this whole subject is central to my own confusion about HBP and the final resolution and the loyalty of TFP.

This is one question I have never seen really properly answered or even discussed about the issue.

We have been shown clearly in several scenes from OotP and HBP that AK can only be performed if you "really mean it". This led me to the conclusion that TFP could not have killed DD if he was working for the good side as he would have to hate and want DD dead to use AK successfully. He COULD use AK and appear to kill DD and if he added an expelliarmus NV he would also have lifted DD over the battlements. AK on its own only drops someone where they stand as we have seen many times. So I was convinced initially that DD could not be dead and subscribed to the theory that the DD body was a fake and that DD had the real horcrux. This theory was dealt a severe blow when JKR said that we should not expect DD to do a Gandalf and so at least apparently put paid to the DD still alive theory.
This means that DD is dead and so apparently means that TFP must indeed have killed him and if my understanding of AK curse is true then TFP must be evil.
There is one possible way out and it is foreshadowed in a sense and has been discussed elsewhere in passing I think by Maya in the horcrux shortcuts thread. In PS Snape talks of stoppered death and most folk assume he just means poison potions. This is fair enough but after all hardly that wierd you don't need to be a wizard to stopper a bottle of poison. However the other reading of it is that in HBP DDs hand is black and withered and it has been suggested that Snape has stoppered death by preventing a fatal curse from spreading at least temporarily. In this reading DD was already doomed and adding the potion he had just drunk to the equation could hardly have helped.
The snag with that theory would then only be why knowing he was doomed did DD not give harry more warning and why would he leave him apparently so unprepared for the final conflict?

There is one way out of that too though and it resolves a lot of initial problems in Book 7 without waisting too much time either way.
Whatever happened to DD the one source that knows for sure is DDs portrait in Hogwarts. At some point fairly soon then we can be sure HP can get a full explanation of either "Sorry Harry I was wrong to trust Snape and now you have to carry on" or "Harry listen there are things I could not tell you as I needed you to act in a way that would ensure Snapes cover remained intact and if you had known the truth you could not have carried off the deception bla bla"
The problem with the TFP being not evil is that because of the AK issue the whole scenario is too complex. We end up in the convoluted scenario of inevitable doom discussed above and a rather weak explanation for if that were the case why did DD not give HP more info and the main problem of what purpose did DDs death serve other than making TFPs cover much more solid to V.
The main argument for TFP being good is the fact that he did not take HP to V I believe that he did not kill him for the reason that we know for sure that V definately wants HP for himself but that was no reason not to take him along. So the question remains the same if AK can only be cast if it is meant then TFP must be evil if DD is dead by AK. If DD is dead for some other reason then that is a loophole.

The main literary argument for TFP being good really is that it would seem on the face of it so lame that the obvious villain for 6 books is in fact a villain Its OK for the "Arch enemy" to be V from the beginning but to have TFP resolve so plainly seems just such a let down. The other big snag is that there are no really great wizards of sufficient knowledge of the dark arts left to help HP in the order Moody maybe and perhaps lupin but for me the ally in book 7 had to be Snape. The whole working together while hating each other and gradually coming to respect each other theme seemed probable. Without that if it is really just up to Hermione Ron and Harry to figure everything out then we dont just need book7 we need another four books at least! and we know that is not the case. In essence if TFP is really evil through and through then the resolution to the series is going to have to involve some pretty thin plotting and a lot of luck as not only will HP not have Snapes help he will no longer trust DDs portrait help either as DD has been so spectacularly wrong and HP so right all through HBP this would surely be a really rotten message to pass on. HP is a boy still and has much to learn, to be convinced at the age of 17 that he is the only one who is right is a recipe for disaster both for HP and for the readers of that age so unless there is some brilliant resolution that cracks that problem I still cling to the Snape good theory but I can not accept most of the explanations put forward for the snape good scenario I have seen so far as they dont solve the AK problem.

In the same vein though I was kind of flabbergasted by the end of GOF too as it seemed to me that the complexity of arranging for HP to be in the triwizard cup and then win it so that he would grab it as a port key was just plain silly when clearly Moody/crouch could have had harry touch a port key at any time in the year so why the complexity and daftness of making it the TW cup??? Then I read the master plan thread and realized that it did make sense if the aim was for V to appear having vanquished HP in the middle of the arena with the entire wizarding whos who at his mercy he is just vain enough to go for that so I buy that plot line now but still think it was a bit weak so it is conceivable that DH will follow a similarly far fetched plot line but if so I will be a bit let down and in general I think JKRs writing is really good and so prefer the theory that GOF was part of Vs arrogant master plan and that DH will involve some sort of redemptive TFP.

what do you think of this line of reasoning ?

I have to say I like that line of thought ~ especially the "stopper in death". It is very possible. Snape's loyalties or lack there of (Depending on which side of the fence you stand on) are endless fastinating for me anyway :tu:

It's interesting to think about the AK curse in those terms. What about Moody killing the spider in GoF - did he really want the spider dead? I suppose a simpler life form is easier to kill, just as it's easier to transfigure a simpler animal.

To help your excellent argument: Overall, perhaps Snape didn't want DD dead, but in the context of the situation he absolutely needed DD dead - or else risk setting off a series of events that would ultimately do greater harm than good. So AK worked because in that moment, he wanted it to.

I don't think we're wrong.

After their greatest triumph, invading Hogwarts and killing Dumbledore, why did the DEs suddenly flee? If they wanted to wreak havoc, they should have stayed to wreak more havoc. They did not. Snape led the flight out of Hogwarts. Do you retreat in your moment of glory?

Yes, it's "obvious" that Snape is evil. But yet.... so many things point to him being much more than that. Why spend your last moments fleeing in a teaching moment with Harry, a pupil whom you despise? Snape got the Death Eaters off of Hogwarts grounds, including the werewolf, who just wanted to attack more children. If he was so heartless and evil, he would have just stayed.

Snape is not good, no. But he is not on Voldemort's side either.

Well Brandon, you've done it again. I always enjoy reading your column. :)

Hmm...I've never had a strong opinion about Snape's position, and I don't intend too. I've already had enough brainaches thinking about who JKR has killed off. No doubt that Snape in Deathly Hallows will be, for lack of a better word, epic. Hopefully...