Re Mistaken Identity (slight TBAY refs)

[eloiseherisson at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 80548

A very interesting theory, Lilian, and definite TBAY material.
But you know what? You've got to give your vessel a snazzy name and try to 
recruit some crew and throw in some obscure acronyms.  And don't forget the 
fish!  (CARP* are best)

<"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><  <"((><
    

Of course, HEDGEHOGS are my speciality. ;-)
FIE! FIE!

I'm now going to throw a spanner in the works, but don't worry about that. 
I'm sure you'll throw it back.

Lilian:
>- This is what the title of the post refers to and this is why I 
>believe that Lily has red hair. No family relation with the Weasleys, 
>no family relation with Dumbledore. A case of mistaken identity. 
>Mistaken identity by Bertha, which sets off a course of incidents. 
>Mistaken identity as a plot twist by JKR. -

~Eloise:
See, I find this element of the argument a bit circular. You believe, if I 
understand correctly, that Lily has red hair because Florence has. But where 
does canon state that Florence has red hair?

I'm not *quite* certain what you mean, actually. Do you meant you have come 
to the conclusion that Lily's hair is red because that way she could have been 
mistaken for the red-haired Florence (in which case it might be expressed that 
Florence must have red hair because Lily's is)? Or do you mean that the 
*literary* reason for Lily having red hair is in order for the mistaken identity 
thing to take place?

Canon tells us that Lily has red hair:

"She was a very pretty woman. She had dark red hair  and her eyes - her eyes 
are just like mine, harry thought...."
PS/SS UKPB, 153.


Lilian (quoting interview):

>"Q: Will Snape ever fall in love?
>A: (laughs) Who would want Snape to be in love with them? <snips rest 
>of quote for later reference>"
>
>Funny answer when you come to think of it. Seems a bit as if someone 
>wanting Snape to be in love is more on JKR's mind than Snape
>being in 
>love himself. Curious (oh, and BTW, do you notice that JKR 
>said `them'. Not her – not him either, but that's
>another discussion 
>entirely – but THEM. Plural, two persons at least). Very curious 
>indeed.


Eloise: 
Not curious in the least to my mind. It's just normal, rather sloppy informal 
English usage. If there *were* a hidden meaning there (which I don't think 
theres is), I would have said it was an attempt to cover up the *sex* of the 
person who wanted Snape in love with them (note *my* use of the word "them", 
which is a commonly used instead of "him/her", not that I think JKR has any 
intention of introducing Snape's gay lover into the series. Well, I certainly hope 
not!) 
    
Lilian: 
>But, but, that would mean that Snape got himself involved with a 
>WEASLEY, I can hear you all think. Yes, he did. Sorry, for the LOLLIPOPS-ers 
>among us, but Snape himself ruled Lily out in OotP as 
>she was `a filthy, little mud-blood' (don't like it anymore than you 
>do, but he said so).   


Eloise: 
Mmm. You really think so? That he ruled her out? Is it not a case of 
"Methinks the gentleman doth protest too much?". I have to admit that I never did 
volunteer for service aboard the Good Ship LOLLIPOPS, but OoP made me think that 
perhaps I was wrong <doffs cap in direction of Captain Tabouli>.


Lilian:
>OotP pg 734: `I trust Severus Snape,' said Dumbledore simply.'

>Florence convincing Severus to change sides is a bit thin IMO for 
>Dumbledore completely trusting him. And that is were the Weasley kids 
>come in. 


~Eloise:    
Oh, yes. I completely agree here. There is some Big Reason why Dumbledore 
trusts Snape.   Well, I think there is. There might not be. Of course I happen to 
believe Dumbledore is not infallible, even though the superficial impression 
is given that he is. I very much hope that this is not one of those things 
that no-one ought ever to say in a book. You know the kind of thing...."It's OK, 
earthquakes never happen in England" which you just *know* is the heralding of 
the entire population of London being swallowed up in a great cataclysm.

I am sure, though, that at some point we are going to call into question 
Dumbledore's trust in Snape.

Of course, dear Severus will be vindicated. ;-)

As for Ginny being his child?
Well, I'm sorry, but I don't buy it. His reaction when Ginny is taken into 
the Chamber doesn't tally. Before he knows who it is that has been taken, he 
grips the back of a chair very hard. But after he knows, his only recorded 
reactions are to belittle Lockhart. There is no hint whatsoever that he himself 
tries to do anything to secure her safety. You are right: he would have not to 
care much about her. But then, why distance himself from her sorting, or refuse 
to eat with her?


Lilian:
>And Dumbledore's patience with the man. Taking him in a 
>fatherly way to the feast in COS, Snape's not wanting Lupin to teach 
>in POA (no werewolf at the school where my kid is! –apart from 
>Snape's other reasons-). Realising that it is not easy for any 
>person, even Snape, to give up its child, distance itself from it.
    

Eloise: 
Dumbledore *is* patient. And he is trusting. And if you look for it there is 
a lot of evidence of father/surrogate son interaction between Dumbldedore and 
Snape. Snape is the wayward son, the prodigal brought back into the fold. He 
is the difficult, challenging child. Dumbledore is the caring father figure 
that OoP implies Snape lacked. They have a relationship of mutual trust, 
dependence and profound disagreement. I don't think we need to bring Ginny in to 
explain their relationship.

~Eloise

*Cyber-Action Role-Playing























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