Life debts (Was: Re: Snape ponderings)

[marinafrants]

No: HPFGUIDX 41485

--- In HPforGrownups at y..., "Irene Mikhlin" <irene_mikhlin at b...> 
wrote:
> Something else that I didn't understand from the recent 
discussions - why
> people keep talking about his life debts in plural? Surely the 
debt to James
> was repaid in the first year? Without his intervention Harry would 
be dead
> long before Hermione had a chance to knock Quirrell down.

I kind of wonder that myself.  Presumably, if someone saves your 
life, you only have to save them (or their kid) once in order to be 
quits; you don't have to run around babysitting them until they die 
of old age.  So at this point, I would say that Snape is free to 
hate James Potter's memory in peace. :-)

I also don't think that Snape has any life debt to Harry after PoA.  
Harry was acting to save a whole bunch of people, including himself, 
when he summoned the Patronus; he wasn't specifically trying to save 
Snape; in fact, I doubt he spared Snape a thought at the time. I 
think that in order to incur a debt, you have to act with specific 
intent to save a particuclar person from certain danger -- the way 
James did when he saved Snape, and the way Harry did when he saved 
Pettigrew.  If coincidentally saving someone from potential danger 
is enough, then the entire WW is already in life-debt to Harry for 
getting rid of Voldemort the first time around, and Snape is really 
no worse off than anyone else in that regard.

Marina
rusalka at ix.netcom.com