Snape-Quirrelmort Conundrum/Time-Turner

[elfundeb at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 39819

I asked, regarding whether Voldemort could still believe Snape to be loyal:
     
> I can't figure 
> >this part out.  Or why Voldemort would still believe Snape is loyal to him 
> >after all the work Snape did in PS/SS to thwart Quirrell with Voldemort 
> >hiding in his turban.
> 
> Eloise:
> 
> That old Snape/ Quidemort conundrum again, eh?
> The information we have is very ambiguous, IMO.
> 
> I'm starting from the premise that Snape has managed to keep up at the very 
> least some doubt in Voldemort's mind as to where his loyalties lie (my 
> actual 
> position is that Voldemort believed he was a double agent in *his* service).
> 
> If Snape knew/suspected Quirrell was in Voldemort's service, as apparently 
> he 
> did, right from the beginning, he *must* have been very circumspect in what 
> he let slip. In fact, whilst attempting to thwart Quirrell, I believe it 
> was 
> imperative that he didn't appear to be truly on Dumbledore's side.
> 
> Quirrell never actually *says*anything about Snape in this context other 
> than 
> how useful he was to distract attention from himself. The overheard 
> conversation in the Forbidden Forest is terribly ambiguous and could (as 
> JKR 
> obviously wants us to do, initially) be interpreted as Snape trying to make 
> sure that Quirrell is on-board as a Voldemort supporter. Perhaps this is 
> indeed the game that he is playing, making out that he wants the Stone for 
> Voldemort and that he suspects Quirrell is playing Voldemort false, either 
> wanting the Stone for himself, or lacking the courage to go through with 
> his 
> 

Yes, the conversation in the forest is terribly ambiguous to us, but not, 
apparently, to Quirrell.
Quirrell himself indicates to Harry when Harry confronts him at the Mirror 
that he was well aware that Snape was not trying to bolster Quirrell's 
loyalty to Voldemort.  He discusses Snape's countercurse at the Quidditch 
match, "trying to save you."  And regarding the conversation in the Forbidden 
Forest, Quirrell tells Harry, "He was on to me by that time, trying to find 
out how far I'd got. He suspected me all along. Tried to frighten me -- as 
though he could, when I had Lord Voldemort on my side."  That seems to me to 
be an unambiguous statement, which of course Voldemort heard behind the 
turban.  If Quirrell understood Snape's real meaning, then Voldemort 
certainly did, too.  So while Voldemort may have believed that Snape was 
still acting as a double agent loyal to him at the beginning of PS/SS (and I 
do like the double agent theory), Quirrell's language, IMO, clearly indicates 
that he understood Snape to be  working against Quirrell and that Quirrell 
knew it.

I also thought about the possibility (quite likely, IMO) that Snape did not 
know that Voldemort was inside Quirrell's turban, and was trying to prevent 
Quirrell from getting the Stone for himself.  But I don't think that using 
that premise I can reach the conclusion that Voldemort still thought Snape 
was loyal.  Snape specifically asked Quirrell to meet him in the Forbidden 
Forest, far from prying ears.  Since Snape was interfering with Voldemort's 
plans for Quirrell to kill Harry, this would have been a perfect time for 
Voldemort to reveal himself and demand Snape's loyalty.  I can't think of any 
reason why he does not, if he doesn't suspect Snape.  This suggests to me 
that Voldemort already had grave doubts about Snape's continued loyalty.  I 
also think that Snape is well aware of this fact.  And, yes, I've had a lot 
of trouble with the idea that at the end of GoF Snape is sent out to 
reestablish his double agent role, because I think that would be suicide.  He 
may be recruiting another mole in the Voldemort organization, but he can't be 
contemplating taking on that role for himself.

But then again, I'm as suspicious as Moody.

Amy Z on the Time Turner:

> I know it goes round in circles, but the fact is that life with a TT is not 
> the same as life without one.  Something *has* been changed, though we 
> can't 
> say *when* it was changed because time as we usually speak of it has lost 
> its meaning.  Otherwise, in that first scene in the hospital wing, 
> Dumbledore would just smile at Harry and Hermione and say "Don't worry, you 
> 

Dumbledore has figured out by the time he speaks to Harry and Hermione in the 
Hospital Wing what has happened.  But he either can't or is reluctant to tell 
them to use the Time-Turner.

Amy (quoting me):

>> I think a lot of the confusion about the Time-Turner arises because of
> >Hermione's reference to changing time.  It's hard to decipher exactly what
> >she means, but it could simply refer to the fact that every time Hermione
> >uses the Time-Turner, she changes what time it is for herself.  However,
> >there's nothing about the Time-Turner's actual use that suggests it can be
> >used to change events that have already occurred.
> 
> I think there is.  One, there is the warning--in saving Buckbeak and 
> Sirius, 
> Harry and Hermione are doing exactly what they are not supposed to do, and 
> so they need to make the change as narrow as possible.  No fooling around 
> with Pettigrew or the Invisibility Cloak or anything else Harry's tempted 
> to 
> do, because this is already a risky business.
> 
> Two, we are mistaken when we think of "change events" as referring only to 
> BIG things:  saving someone who would have died, removing an Invisibility 
> Cloak that someone would have used.  Really, *any* overlapping of time 
> changes the way things were.  The second Harry and Hermione flip over the 
> Time Turner, they have changed things.  Different atoms are now swirling 
> around the Entrance Hall.  

To me the notion that the Time-Turner does not actually change past events is 
so instinctive that the first time I read PoA I immediately checked back to 
make sure JKR hadn't screwed it up by showing Buckbeak being executed.  But I 
think that one of the problems with making sense of the Time-Turner concept 
is that Harry himself, who really doesn't understand the underlying concept 
of the Time-Turner, expresses their mission as "There must be something that 
happened around now he wants us to change."  But what he's actually doing is 
preventing an event -- Buckbeak's execution -- that he thinks has happened 
but did not because HH2 were actually there the first time Harry and Hermione 
experienced 9-midnight helping him escape.

Maybe the problem is that the phrase "Time-Turner" is a misnomer.  Maybe a 
better way of describing the Time-Turner is that it creates a double of the 
person using the Time-Turner for that period of time.  At 9 p.m. Harry and 
Hermione each split into two persons somewhere around the Entrance Hall, and 
at midnight they merge back into one in the Hospital Wing.  There aren't 
different atoms in the Entrance Hall.  Nine o'clock only happens once, and 
there are two sets of Hermione atoms and two sets of Harry atoms in the 
Entrance Hall.  Indeed, Harry asks Hermione if "we're here in his cupboard 
and we're out there too?"

Maybe it would help to go back to the language Eloise quoted:

'We're breaking one of the most important wizarding laws! Nobody's supposed 
to change time, nobody! You heard Dumbledore, if we're seen - ' (POA, UK 
paperback, 291-2)

Hermione refers here to changing time, not to changing events.  The problem 
with using a Time-Turner, as Harry and Hermione do, is that you *can't* use 
it to change events.  That's why Harry can't pick up the Invisibility Cloak 
-- because Harry1 has lived through the events and Harry2 knows it wasn't 
picked up.  He *can* cast a Patronus charm, however, because Harry has lived 
through the events as Harry1 and saw that occur.  The Time-Turner is 
dangerous, and its use is generally prohibited, because it it too tempting -- 
as it is to Harry -- to try to use it to change events, the consequences of 
which are not revealed to us.  The only legitimate purpose of a Time-Turner 
is to be able to do two things at once, which is why Hermione was made to 
promise that she would never use it for anything but her studies.   What 
Harry and Hermione were doing was in fact really dangerous, using it to 
influence events that (to their minds only) had already happened as HH2 were 
experiencing them.

Debbie, who could really use a Time-Turner sometimes


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]