"The Great Snape Debate" and a few words on LOTR

[justcarol67]

Carol earlier:
> 
> > has anyone read "The Great Snape Debate"? 
> 
Eggplant responded:
> It's funny you should mention this, I just this minute got home from
Borders where I spent a happy hour reading through it. I didn't buy it
because it will be obsolete in about 80 days. 
> 
Carol:
> >From what I understand, it's a flip book--read one direction, it's
about reasons to trust Snape. Turned over and read the other way, it's
about reasons to suspect that he's evil.
> 
Eggplant:
> Yes that's right. The evil Snape half makes a moderately compelling
case although their explanation of why an evil Snape saved Harry's
life in book 1 doesn't hold water, but other than that it's not bad.
The good Snape half of the book seems much to have much less critical
thinking, their explanation as to why he agreed to make that
Unbreakable Vow was pathetically weak.

Carol again:
Thanks. I think I'll do the same thing--just stand there and read it
next time I'm in Borders rather than spending the money (though maybe
it wil become a collector's item in twenty years). I was wondering if
it presented any new ideas that we haven't encountered on HPfGu.
Apparently not. I suspect that we won't know Snape's motivation for
taking the UV until DH comes out, and even then, some readers may not
find it adequate. ("But it was essential to the plot!" protests JKR.)

Carol, doubting that she's find the evil Snape side "moderately
compelling" as she'd be mentally arguing with it!