Knowing it was Snape (was: What has Snape seen)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 119222


--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "potioncat" <willsonkmom at m...>
wrote:
> 
> Eliose:
>  Letting us see Snape in the memories allows the information to be
conveyed far more economically and therefore, I think, more
effectively. Likewise, 
> > Harry's memories are told more economically from the first person 
> > viewpoint; the narrative would be more cumbersome if he had to be 
> > described seeing himself in the action.
> > 
> 
> Potioncat:
> But we do see Harry in the action in his memories in the first 
> session.  Except for one memory and that one has no mention of 
> Harry. It's just Hermione, covered in fur.


Carol adds:
And not to be obnoxious or run my point into the ground, but Harry's
memories are not narrated in the first person even though they're from
his perspective. There's not a single "I" in the narrative portions of
the books. We have something like, "He was nine. He was being chased
up a tree by a dog" (very bad paraphrase, sorry). And it's true that
we can't tell how *Harry* sees these memories, but it's quite clear
that *Snape* can see both Harry and the dog.

In any case, I think the Legilimency spell works like the Pensieve in
making the memories appear in an objective visible form, but not, of
course, a three-dimensional one that can be entered. Even a Legilimens
like Voldemort or Dumbledore would see them in this form, not from the
subjective viewpoint of the person remembering. As Snape tells us,
Legilimency is not mind-reading. The Legilimens doesn't know the
person's thoughts; he only sees the memories in a form that he can
interpret. And that would include seeing the person whose memory is
being viewed in recognizable form, whether that person is Snape or
Harry. (The Hermione memory is an odd exception and would probably
confuse Voldemort if he were to see it!)

Carol