Snape, A Murderer? (Was: Re: Is Wormtail an Occlumens or an open book?)

[severelysigune]

No: HPFGUIDX 95440

Kneasy wrote:
<< I'm all for posters promoting their theories, but it does help if 
there is at least a smidgeon, a hint of canon backing to give them 
support. I'm afraid that I can't find any to back the idea that DD is 
so pure and righteous that he would never allow a killer to join his 
side in the war. >>

Sigune:
Sorry, sorry. I *did* mention my theories were based on, well, very 
little - but then there is not very much info available if you ask 
me. Anyway, I plead guilty to fanfic (but only one; can I be 
forgiven?), which means I have more or less absorbed several 
characters and see them in what is probably a somewhat distorted 
light. I try to avoid letting that interfere with my posts, but it is 
possible I failed here. I promise to try and mend my ways :).


Kneasy wrote:
<< Snape is my favourite character, but I have no difficulty in 
believing that he has killed on Voldy's orders. He is (or was) a 
Death Eater and you don't  get to be in that club by sending in 10 
Butterbeer tops and paying £1.50. Oh no.>>
<snipping of arguments about Snape and Voldy's testing of DE's>

Sigune:
My problem is not so much that I can't or won't believe that Snape 
killed, but rather with Dumbledore giving him charge of wizarding 
youth and a whole House that already seems to be tottering on the 
verge of a precipice. But then again - see next reply...

Kneasy wrote:
<< DD wouldn't have any qualms about accepting an ex-DE killer on to 
his side so long as he was convinced that he could trust Snape from 
then on. And he states (and so has JKR) that he knows Snape's reasons 
and believes that he can trust him. DD is a war leader. Deaths are 
inevitable. Note that DD doesn't descend into paroxysms of grief when 
deaths occur; a few sentences to the school after Cedric is murdered 
and mind games with Harry after Sirius snuffs it. Moody is a long-
time friend and he's a killer. Does DD look on him as a pariah? No. 
He did what was necessary. If you fight a war you get your hands 
dirty; to pretend that somehow it's possible to defeat Voldy and be 
able to avoid inflicting casualties on the enemy is not credible. It 
wasn't in the last Voldy war, why should it be different this time? 
He has to win the war. Any other alternative is not acceptable. And 
he will use whatever means are at his disposal that he thinks will 
work.>>

Sigune:
I think the difference between your reasoning and mine in this 
discussion is that you look at the whole thing from a realist 
perspective, whereas I, when reading a story about wizards, sort of 
fall back into a (possibly misplaced) more romantic fictional 
worldview. I fully admit that. Also, I never asked myself any of 
these questions concerning responsibility etc. when reading, for 
example, Lord of the Rings - I suppose that is because that story is 
so much further away from the recognisable world.
And yes, I admit to being really bad at martial logic. If I were ever 
to get involved in the sticky business of war I would instantaneously 
be crushed by mine enemies, being, as I am, very weak-hearted; and so 
I shall henceforth refrain from discussing Dumbledore's tactics for 
reasons of too much innocence on my part :).