Snape's reasons and "real life" (was Draco won't be DE)

[darrin_burnett]

No: HPFGUIDX 41638

Talia Dawn wrote:

Draco will be a DE - and a damn good one at that - because he 
> was raised to follow his father.  And the whole "think-for-yourself-
and-have-a-value-system" thing, that is the Malfoy's system.  They 
think along the same lines as Voldemort.  That's why they're loyal to 
him.  They believe what he does.  They don't want redemption.  

Actually, what started all this was the question on whether Draco has 
shown enough backbone to be a DE. Many of us think he's not only a 
little brat, but a coward as well. I submitted that unless Draco 
grows a spine, he's more on the Wormtail path than the Lucius Malfoy 
path.

And Lucius may have made a conscious decision to follow Voldemort 
because of their similar belief system, has Draco? How can you tell 
if Draco is merely parroting his father or truly believes it? 

As much as I love Snape (and I do, he's the best character in the 
whole series!) he went to the other side because of fear, whether it 
was fear of his actions or fear of the consequences of said actions, 
and that makes me wonder where his loyalties truly lie.  Both sides 
are using him.  We just don't see it that way because Dumbledore is 
the good guy.  At least with Draco, we know 
> where he stands.


This is an interesting interpretation. Snape was afraid of his 
actions of the consequences of his actions, so he turned on Voldemort.

(Let's ignore for a minute the somewhat important fact that canon 
doesn't yet tell us why Snape turned.)

In the earlier post, I asked this: If Lucius teaches Draco the AK 
curse and tells Draco to kill a mudblood, is Draco showing a good 
quality - loyalty - by not disobeying his father?

I submit that good qualities used in the service of evil are no 
longer good qualities. And good acts committed in the service of evil 
(Hitler oversaw the building of a pretty good highway system) can be 
outweighed by the evil.

Now, if Voldemort orders Snape to do something and Snape refuses, or 
gets so racked with guilt after doing it that he leaves, is Snape 
somehow showing a bad quality -- fear?

Should we call Snape a coward because his conscience got to him? (IF 
that's even the reason.)

No, Snape is a coward for many reasons, not the least of which is his 
bullying of children who can't fight back, but if he turned on 
Voldemort because of his conscience, then that is not cowardly. 

Now, if Snape is indeed only on Dumbledore's side because he realized 
D-Dore is going to win (something I do agree is possible) then sure, 
his actions are based on the fear of the consequences. He probably 
didn't want to end up dead or in Azkaban. This also means he could 
turn back if Dumbledore dies or if Voldermort gains the upper hand 
quickly.


> 
> ~*~*~Talia Dawn~*~*~
> --For the record, I've dealt with the fact that Voldemort will lose 
> thankyouverymuch, and it makes me mad because I'm sick of reading 
stories 
> where the good guys always win because they don't, as in the 
> aforementioned-by-Darrin terrorists bombing the WTC - we're never 
gonna get 
> rid of al-Qaeda and such and I don't know why we try to pretend 
that we will.


Does this mean the James Bond movies should only be set in dingy 
hotel rooms with a sweaty, middle-aged agent listening to a wiretap 
for hours on end, trying to decipher the code? And if he doesn't get 
it completely right, he gets dragged before Congress to explain 
himself? 

Because that's a more realistic view of espionage than anything in 
the Bond films.

Real life SUCKS, which is why most of us read HP, and James Bond, and 
all other good-vs-evil stories. There, good does triumph over evil, 
and does so decisively. If I wanted to read about evil triumphing, I 
can just read the newspaper.

I think we will get Osama bin Laden, but it will be completely 
unsatisfying. Some soldier will stumble across a mutilated body and 
we'll get it ID's as bin Laden. It will be low-key and people will 
somehow wish it could have been more painful, or more public. And 
even then, it won't be enough - do you think Timothy McVeigh's death 
brought any peace to people?

The more evil the villian in fiction, the more satisfying the death. 
That's why Goldfinger had to be sucked out of an airplane or Dr. No 
had to be drowned in the coolant water of his atomic reactor.

And that's why Voldemort will -- in my view -- get destroyed somehow 
by the ghosts of his victims. That's why Lucius will end up broke and 
publicly carted off to Azkaban. That's why Draco will (hopefully) end 
up a mental vegetable and why Snape (IF he turns back to V-mort) will 
be force fed that potion he was going to use on Neville's toad.

Oh, and why Fudge will end up thrown out of office after Rita Skeeter 
uncovers picture of him performing inappropriate magical charms on a 
Grindylow.

> (p.s. are you guys serious about that book burning thing or is it 
an inside 
> joke that i missed?)  
> 

Darrin -
Well, it's difficult to say how serious we are. Actually, if Draco 
ends up with Hermione, wouldn't that indicate he's been redeemed? In 
which case, you'll be coming, right? We need someone to bring paper 
plates.