Is Snape a pureblood? and a few other bits Ive been concerned about

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 89715

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Hitomi" <japanesesearcher at y...>
wrote:
> Karen wrote:
> > Snape tried to save Harry because he 
> > knew that someone had enchanged his broom to throw him off. Snape 
> > was doing a counter charm. That does not necessarily mean that 
> > Snape knew who performed the initial curse. However, in Harry's final 
> > showdown with Quirrel/Voldemort, Quirrel/Voldemort tells Harry 
> > that Snape had tried to save him. This produces a couple of
questions. 
> > 
> > *First, did Q/V just assume that Snape was saving a student and 
> > not actively working against him? 
> > 
> > *Second, would Q/V have considered Snape no longer a follower 
> > since he was working against him, whether consciously or
unconciously? 
> > 
> > Snape had the interesting conversation with Quirrel outside the 
> > Library wanting to know where his loyalties were. Knowing what we 
> > now know, we assume that Snape was warning Quirrel not to be 
> > working for Voldemort. However, if that is true, Quirrel/Voldemort
would 
> > now know that Snape is working against him. Snape would be no good as 
> > a "double agent". 
> > 
> > If Snape was warning Quirrel to not go against the Dark Lord, then 
> > Snape was and is playing a triple agent game, and cannot be 
> > trusted at all. I'm not jumping on the "Evil Snape" bandwagon, but he 
> > cannot be infiltrating Voldemort's camp without Voldemort knowing
that he 
> > is spying for Dumbledore. Either Snape's OotP activies are of a 
> > different nature, or he doesn't know that Voldemort is on to him, 
> > or else he is actually working for Lord Thingy.
> 
> Hitomi now:
> Don't you just love how this entire situation that we've been 
> discussing is completely ambiguous?!  (And Karen, you brought up 
> excellent points I hadn't bothered to think about, thank you!)
> 
> The entire situation could go either way, we don't know enough about 
> what Snape was thinking, which is the problem in Books 4 and 5, in 
> wondering whether or not we can trust him.  I agree, I find it 
> highly unlikely LV is completely ignorant of Snape's actions.  It 
> doesn't add up with what we know of LV's character, and I rather 
> suspect that LV probably suspects anyone and everyone, even Lucius 
> and Bellatrix.  Personally, I don't really trust Snape.  He acts as 
> a third party most of the time; we never know his true intentions,.  
> And we don't know enough about him for me to trust him, I don't care 
> what his past, it's no excuse to have ever joined the ranks of the 
> Death Eaters.  And I wonder sometimes, being a Death Eater, did he 
> kill Muggles and Muggle-borns, too?  There's just too much we don't 
> know.  And I know DD and Hermione trust him, but we now know DD can 
> make mistakes, and Hermione's trust is based mostly off of DD's.  
> And JKR told us to watch out for Snape.  I'm willing to trust him, 
> just not yet.
> 
> ~ Hitomi, who has never liked Snape, but is willing to give him the 
> benefit of the doubt


I doubt that Dumbledore would trust Snape (as he clearly does and
often states) if Snape (who was very young when he joined the DEs) had
ever killed a Muggle or a Muggle-born. Nor would he have hired him as
a teacher.

Carol