A simple-minded question

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 95023

Sylvia wrote:
Does Harry owe a life-debt to Snape for saving his life in the first 
book?
 
bboy_mn responded:
> 
> We are dealing with a common misconception held by almost everybody;
> in reality (fictional reality), Snape did not save Harry. Snape
TRIED to save Harry, but it was Hermione with her Flame Charm that
actually saved him, although she saved him by an accidental twist of
fate. In 'flaming' Snape, Quirrel was knocked over and that stopped
the Jinx that Quirrel was putting on Harry's broom. <snip>

> Now, I certainly can't say what Snape did was worthless; it did buy
> Harry some time, and that time allowed Hermione to come to the rescue,
> but I think it's probably an overstatement to say that Snape's
> contribution was enough to earn him a 'life debt'.


Carol:
I agree with bboy but would like to add that Snape still appears to be
trying to pay off his life debt to James by attempting to save Harry
at every opportunity (aside from the practical need to keep him out of
places where he might come to harm and make LV's victory over the WW
inevitable). I think that one of Snape's many reasons for rushing
after Lupin in PoA (aside from getting revenge on Sirius and catching
Lupin in the act of helping him) was to save Harry from a werewolf and
a murderer. There was more to his outraged disappointment than being
deprived of an Order of Merlin or revenge against Sirius. He's been
deprived--again--of his chance to end that confounded life debt. IMO,
at some point he's going to save Harry's life clearly and
unequivocally. (Much as I hate to think it, he'll probably pull a
Boromir and die immediately afterwards.)

Carol, who wonders what the consequences are for not repaying a life
debt and wants to know what other people think they might be