Chess Game, Snape's spying career

[ssk7882]

No: HPFGUIDX 36292

Chelsea wrote:

> I don't knw much about chess, so I'm not sure exactly how 
> significant the knight piece is. However, Ron taking the knight 
> piece, and valiantly sacrificing himself to help his friends, seems 
> a very powerful thing to do. 

You know, I've always wondered about Ron taking the knight's position
as well.  Ron's obviously a very good chess player.  So why would he 
have chosen to take the place of a *knight?*  I am not very good at
chess myself, but I have played enough of the game to know that the 
knights are, well...

Well, there's just no nice way to say this.  They're pieces that one
often chooses to sacrifice.

But I agree with Chelsea's implication that the symbolism was probably
more on JKR's mind there than the actual strategy.  All the same, as 
an in-character action, it has always bothered me a bit.  Taking the 
part of one of the knights was wiser than taking the place of one of 
the pawns, admittedly -- but it still would have been safer for Ron 
to clamber up into a castle.  Or, for that matter, just to play the 
king.


<Elkins experiences a sudden and intense desire to lay into an 
elaborate speculation which would culminate in the mysterious 
Florence singing a rousing rendition of "Nobody's On Nobody's Side," 
but she valiantly resists this urge and carries on...>


I said that I shared Athena's perplexity over Dumbledore's decision 
to pronounce Snape's agent role to the crowded tribunal.  David wrote:

> My view is that this is because Dumbledore considered that Snape's 
> spying career was, and still is, over.

Even so, though, surely Dumbledore's pronouncement could have placed 
Snape at far greater risk from other (still at-large) Death Eaters?  
He makes the pronouncement during Karkaroff's plea bargain, at a time 
when the Ministry clearly believes that there are many Death Eaters 
not only still at large, but also as-yet unidentified.  For that 
matter, he makes the pronouncement after it has become clear that 
there might still be Death Eater moles within the very ministry 
itself!  It just seemed a bit...inconsiderate to me.

For that matter, what about all of the DEs who gained aquittal on the 
grounds of Imperius?  As far as I've been able to reconstruct the 
timeline of events here, Lucius Malfoy was probably already a free 
man at the time of Karkaroff's hearing, as likely were a number of 
the other DEs we know to have been aquitted (Avery, Nott, Crabbe, 
Goyle).  

I very much doubt that Dumbledore ever attached much credence to 
Lucius Malfoy's claims of innocence.  At the time of Karkaroff's 
hearing, he must have known that there were Death Eaters who would 
likely never be brought to justice.  Why place Snape at risk of acts 
of retribution from his former colleagues by making his pronouncement 
in what seems to be such a (relatively) public milieu?  

Did Dumbledore really have faith in the discretion of all two hundred 
or so of the people in that room?  Did he feel confident that not one 
of the walked-free Death Eaters would be willing to risk his own 
safety by trying to get a bit of payback on a traitor?  Did he figure 
that all of the DEs had to know the score already, so a public 
pronouncement couldn't possibly do any more damage?  Or did he just 
want to ensure that poor Severus would never be able to feel 
comfortable setting foot outside of Hogwarts again, or be able to 
socialize with those who might prove a Bad Influence on him?  ;-)

I realize, of course, that the scene is probably just written that 
way because it makes for a more dramatic moment.  But all the same, 
it does make me wonder.


-- Elkins