Why Does Snape Trust Dumbledore?

[melclaros <melclaros@yahoo.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 48412

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, wynnde1 at a... wrote:

> Well, I started thinking  . . . maybe we're asking the wrong 
question. Of 
> course wondering why Dumbledore trusts Snape is a valid question, 
but what if 
> we look at it from the other way around: Just why is it that 
*Snape* trusts 
> *Dumbledore*?

Aha...Finally. Okay so I'm not paranoid. 
Is it trust? I wonder. Look at your examples, starting from 
Dumbledore's treatmemt of Snape after the Prank (snigger--had to get 
that in). What EVER was done or not about Sirius the painful fact is 
that Severus was forbidden to discuss the matter further. He was 
forced to swallow his pride (a rather large mouthful, that!) and 
watch Sirius Black and co. run roughshod over the rules for the 
remainder of their time at Hogwarts. 

There was some sort of threat made to Severus at that time, I can't 
imagine what it was but there had to be something.

Now fast forward to the "present day" relationship between Snape and 
Dumbledore. For the most part it seems cordial. We are told that 
Snape "turned spy at great personal risk" so we *assume* that 
Dumbledore trusts Snape's judgement. 
BUT we are continously treated to scenes where Severus has tried to 
warn Dumbledore or express his trepidation about  certain situations 
and it always ends the same way. With the warning look, the warning 
tone. Or worse yet, a look of amusement!
Like in your example:

> ****
>        "Remember the conversation we had, Headmaster, just before - 
ah - the 
> start of term?" said Snape, who was barely opening his lips, as 
though trying 
> to block Percy out of the conversation.
>        "I do, Severus," said Dumbledore, and there was something 
like warning 
> in his voice.
>        "It seems - almost impossible - that Black could have 
entered the 
> school without inside help. I did express my concerns when you 
appointed -"
>        "I do not believe a single person inside this castle would 
have helped 
> Black enter it," said Dumbledore, and his tone made it so clear the 
subject 
> was closed  that Snape didn't reply. 


We've seen this over and over again. The most poignant example, of 
course being the scene in POA where Severus "reminds" Dumbledore of 
Black's murderous bent from their teenage days (as you cited so I 
won't repeat) Knowing what he did--that Black was innocent--
Dumbledore's response was nothing more than cruel "My memory is as 
good as ever, Severus."  After all, as far as EVERYONE ELSE was 
concerned Snape was *right* about Black! He didn't know what had been 
revealed in the SS during his little involuntary nap. Would it have 
KILLED Dumbledore to take him aside later and let him in on the story 
over a nice cognac?

My question is what has Dumbledore got on Snape. He cleared his name 
as a Death Eater, we know that. Is there something else? Or has he 
simply threatened to recant his testimony? Snape sure shuts up in a 
hurry with the slightest warning look or tone from him. I get very 
little sense of trust there. I get a sense of fear. Why does 
Dumbledore trust Snape? Maybe because Snape's scared to death of him. 
Why does Snape "trust" Dumbledore? His life depends on it?

You know, there's this tendency to look at Dumbledore as sort of a 
Santa Claus character, but he's not. He's tough as nails and mean as 
a snake when he has to be. He has to be to get where he's gotten to. 
Look at how he changed when confronting Crouch/Moody in GoF when that 
ruse was revealed! I wouldn't be at all surprised to find out that 
Snape and Dumbledore are an awful lot alike in the end.

My 2c
Melpomene