Once a DE, always a DE? (was: Harry is ... brat)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 67875

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Melody" <Malady579 at h...> wrote:
> 
> Hmm.  You got me wondering, which I guess I why I read this 
site.  :D
> 
> Was Snape's decision to stop teaching Harry Occulmency a direct and
> purposely harmful to the mission action on Snape's behalf?
> 
> I say no.  Snape did not stop teaching Harry to hurt the Order.  He
> did it because it was too hard for him.  Dumbledore admits it when 
he
> is reflecting back with Harry at the end.  He admits he should have
> taught Harry himself.  He admitted that because Snape was more 
fragile
> in the realm concerning the Potters than he admitted.  
> 
> Snape agreed to teach Harry.  Even though Harry brings back so
> terrible memories that Snape would rather repress and not deal with,
> and I do not blame him for not dealing with them since James is dead
> and Snape does not *have* to see him.  Snape agreed to teach Harry
> because it was what Dumbledore wanted and also because Dumbledore 
was
> so busy.  Snape did his duty despite these problems in his life that
> might or might not have to do with him becoming a DE.  
> 
> Snape is trying to teach Harry.  He is trying to follow orders.  
And,
> he did up until it became beyond bearable for him.  He tried his
> hardest, and it was just not enough.
> 
> Every human has his or her limits.  Snape, even under Dumbledore's
> orders, is still human.  Or vampire...::wink to Pippin::  The fact 
he
> failed in this proves he is not all powerful and not all in command
> with his mind as he says.  He has this very raw, very sore, very
> personal part of his childhood that he has been either running away
> from or just plain ignoring for years.   
> 
> The fact Snape failed to complete an order does not worry me.  Snape
> was just being human.  He was not reverting back into old "evil" 
ways.
>  Dumbledore was apologetic to Harry about the fact he let Snape 
teach
> him instead of himself, and I fully expect Dumbledore to be as
> apologetic to Snape. 
> 
> This belief of mine may be from my need to believe a soul can change
> their ways and can become "good" again, but I, in a way, *need* 
Snape
> to truly have changed despite what the Trio thinks.  A soul can 
change
> for good.  Even if the shell is ugly.  :P
> 
> 
> Melody

Melody, I adore redemption stories and I do believe that soul can 
change for good. It happens more often  in fiction than in real life 
in my opinion, but that's why I love characters seeking redemption so 
much.


I am questioning though whether Severus fulfilled his duty by just 
agreeing to teach Harry not renewing the lessons afterwards.
I do blame him for not seeing that Harry is not James and yes, I 
worry very much that Snape disobeyed Dumbledore. The stakes were way 
too high. 

Add this to the fact that with evey book "Dumbledore's "I trust him" 
mean less an less to me.

Don't worry, though, I place the lion share of blame for this fiasco 
and for Sirius' death in particular on Dumbledore.

As I said earlier (couple weeks ago), I don't consider Albus to be an 
intelligent character anymore.
I even think now that Minerva will make  a better leader for the 
order now. Sorry!

Alla