A Credo For George

[abigailnus]

No: HPFGUIDX 35591

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "marinafrants" <rusalka at i...> wrote:

Snip *lots* of interesting stuff about George, of whom I have 
already declared myself to be a loyal follwer.  If I might be 
allowed to address one minor issue, though:

> I have to admit, both George and I are wobbly on the James Potter 
> issue.  On the one hand, it's appealing because it's a perfect 
> example of principle winning over sentiment: Snape *hates* James 
> Potter; on the emotional level, he'd be quite happy to see him come 
> to harm.  But principle demands that if a man saved your life, you 
> don't just stand by and let him and his son be murdered.  So it's 
> tempting to see this as a major motivating factor for Snape.  But, 
> as you say, the timeline is hard to reconcile, plus it strays 
> perilously close to the Big Bang theory, which is George's one 
> antithesis.  So we waffle.  Overall, though, I don't think the "life-
> debt to James" theory is incompatible with George; it's merely takes 
> a bit of work to reconcile, same as LOLLIPOPS.

If I've understood correctly, the problem with the timeline under 
the Life Debt theory is the assumption that a very short time 
passed between Voldemort's decision to kill the Potters, Snape's 
alerting Dumbledore to it, the Potters casting the Fidelius charm 
and their deaths a week later.  Thus Snape's conversion comes too 
close to Voldemort's fall.  I've always assumed, though, that in fact 
the Potters' deaths were preceeded by a very long period of playing 
cat and mouse - constantly one step ahead of Voldemort's assassins.  

Under this theory it's entirely possible for the threat to James to 
cause or at least trigger (if you don't favour Big Bangs as I don't) 
Snape's conversion, and his proof of candor to Dumbledore would 
be to provide him with information about the coming attempt(s) on 
the Potters' lives.  He could continue to act in this manner for a long 
time.  This also covers the great risk he was in - every attempt foiled 
would bring Voldemort closer to realising he had a leak in his organization.
 
I realise this theory (can I call it Cat & Mouse?) doesn't work over 
a long period of time unless Voldemort is supremely stupid or Snape 
is an exceptionally good spy (and Dumbledore is careful not to blow 
his cover by acting as though he has a spy in Voldemort's inner circle).  
But I could believe that the deceit would last for at least a few months, 
maybe even close to a year.  Is that enough time for all those people 
(like me) who want Snape's redemptive acts to be substantial enough 
to forgive him his youthfull indiscretions?
 
Abigail