Why Does Snape Trust Dumbledore?

[kiricat2001 <Zarleycat@aol.com>]

No: HPFGUIDX 48478

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "melclaros <melclaros at y...>" 
<melclaros at y...> wrote:

> 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. 

I have to ask, what is the canon evidence of this?  Yes, Severus 
apparently was forbidden to discuss the matter further, as I have no 
doubt he would have "outed" Remus in a hearbeat if he could have. If 
Dumbledore saw Lupin as an innocent victim of Sirius' plot, he surely 
would have wanted to protect Lupin.  Did he appeal to Severus' sense 
of fair play?  That wouldn't have worked, as Snape believed Lupin was 
in on the prank.  So, what stopped him from saying anything?  We 
don't know.  

And, why is there the assumption that Sirius and co. ran roughshod 
over the rules for the remainder of their time at Hogwarts? Because 
we can assume that Sirius wasn't expelled?  I fail to see how the 
lack of expulsion translates into breaking every rule in existence 
with impunity for the remainder of MWPP's 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.

Maybe the threat was based on Severus' actions before or right after 
the prank. I know that a lot of people see Snape as the entirely 
innocent victim in this prank, strolling along meditating in the 
gardens, until Sirius all but threw him into the tunnel, rubbing his 
hands with Evil Overlordian glee at the thought of Severus' imminent 
demise. But, we don't have enough canon background about the 
circumstances to say that absolutely, positively, Snape was the pure-
as-the-driven-snow victim, set upon by the evil Marauders who had 
made his entire school life a misery.  So, perhaps there was 
something shady that Dumbledore used to keep Snape quiet in an 
attempt to protect Lupin.
 
> 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?

Well, at the time of this statement, Fudge was still standing there, 
holding the door to the Hospital open, waiting for Snape to leave 
with him to go off and get the Dementors.  Dumbledore couldn't very 
well say, "Oh, yes, I now believe in Black's innocence, even though I 
don't have a shred of evidence to offer you, Minister."

I think Dumbledore made that statement for two reasons. One, to 
remind Snape that his (Snape's) interpretation of the prank was not 
the same as Dumbledore's and two, an effective way to cut off this 
particular discussion at that time because of Fudge's presence.

And, for all we know, Dumbledore did let Snape in on the story 
later.  Snape may have refused to believe it. Or, Dumbldore realizes 
that the enmity between Snape and Black is too deep and too 
entrenched for him to be able to explain away over bottles of 
cognac...

The whole matter of trust is brought to the forefront in the Hospital 
scene at the end of GoF.  When Sirius reveals himself, much to 
Snape's loathing, Dumbledore says "He is here at my invitation as are 
you, Severus.  I trust you both."

I think this is Dumbledore's way of figuratively banging their heads 
together.  He asks Sirius to reveal his Animagus form to Severus 
(thus telling Sirius that he trusts Severus will not spill the beans 
to the DEs, the MoM or anyone else who could do Sirius harm).  And, 
this also tells Severus that he (Dumbledore) trusts that Snape will, 
indeed, not betray what he knows.

> 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?

I have to disagree here, although I can't shuffle up canon to support 
it.  I have never gotten the feeling that Snape has a sense of fear.  
I get more of a sense that Snape feels he must live up to 
Dumbledore's expectations. And this causes some ambivalence in him, 
particularly in PoA. Snape is sure that Lupin is in league with his 
old friend, the crazed murderer Black.  But, he has to tread lightly 
in trying to make Dumbledore see this because Dumbledore has been a 
strong supporter/protector of Lupin, both as a student and now, as a 
member of the staff. 

In a completely non-canon leap, perhaps another reason that Snape 
doesn't force the issue with Lupin earlier in the school year is 
because he doesn't have hard proof, and he remembers that he, also, 
was not completely clean in the events surrounding the prank.  If 
Snape's actions were not totally above-board in the prank mysteries, 
then he may very well have felt that Dumbledore would not be easily 
swayed to think ill of Professor Lupin.


> 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.

Mean as a snake? Hmm. Well, I certainly agree that Dumbledore is way 
more than the twinkly-eyed Father Christmas type when he has to be. 
Anyone who is considered to be the only wizard that Voldemort fears 
has to have some steely aspects to his character...

Marianne