Yet another defense of Snape's Occlumency lessons (long)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 120075


> Dungrollin, previously:
  huge snip.
 
My biggest problem with the idea that Snape didn't teach Harry
Occlumency properly, is Snape's motivation. Why on earth should
he deliberately omit vital instructions? Nobody (IIRC) seems to
have suggested a plausible motivation – but I doubt that any
> will go as far as postulating ESE!Snape either.
 
Alla replied:
 
Eh? Why not? For the record, I don't believe in ESE! Snape, but
quite strong case can be put together in favor of ESE!Snape, I think.
> 
 Dungrollin now:
That's exactly my point – you don't believe in ESE!Snape
– so give me a good motivation for him deliberately withholding 
vital information about the proper way to learn Occlumency. 
That's what you were arguing before, wasn't it?




Alla:


LOL! I should not have mentioned that I don't believe in ESE!Snape. 
I should have just argued it.

So, even though I don't believe in ESE!Snape, I can easily imagine 
ESE!Snape. So, let's say he is still playing double or triple spy, 
for example.

No, I myself am not convinced.


What I do believe happened is that Snape let his emotions took the 
best out of him . He was simply incapable to teach occlumency to 
Harry properly, whatever it was.

Of course, it is possible that we will learn that there was no other 
way, but for now, I doubt it. Harry after his first lesson looked TO 
ME as the victim of the assault, not as student who ended the lesson 
with the teacher.



Dungrollin:

snip.

IMO, all he can be accused of is being Snape.


Alla:

IMO, that is plenty. :o)