Snape in the Shrieking Shack (was re:time-turning)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 112953

> totorivers wrote:
> > Why didn't you talk about the morality? Snape has never shown 
himself to have moral either...he enjoys taunting *children*, and have
absolutely no problem handing a man to the dementor's kiss. Rowling
also declared that Snape was a true DE for a time, meaning that he
tortured/raped children, and he probably enjoyed it 
> 
> 
> SSSusan:
> WHAT?  How do you know this is what DEs do?  How do you know which DE 
> activities Snape participated in and which he did not?  It's *canon* 
> that many of the DEs were kept in the dark about who other DEs were 
> and/or what they were doing.  I *suspect* [can't yet know] that Snape 
> did participate fully in some kind of DE ugliness, but there's no way 
> you can state that he *did* do these things quite so assuredly.
> 
> 
> totorivers:
> > I have trouble as envisioning such a man as *moral*. 
> 
> Siriusly Snapey Susan responded:
> Again, there is much we do not know about Professor Snape.  Yet, what 
> about Snape's decision to save Harry during the Quidditch match in 
> SS/PS?  He could have played dumb about what was going on, he could 
> have sneered and said "Que sera, sera."  But he didn't.  He 
> intervened, in order to save Harry's life.  Was that not a "moral" 
> decision?  What about accepting the burden of turning to & sticking 
> with DD & The Order at "great personal risk"?  Is that not "moral"?  
> 
> I know that many posters here fully expect to find out that Snape 
> never did anything except as it fit into his own agenda.  I don't 
> believe that fully, though we can't be sure.
> 
> 
Carol adds:
I agree completely with SSS. There is no evidence that Snape or any
DE, even Antonin Dolohov, who seems to have no redeeming tratits
whatever, raped and tortured children. Nor do I expect to hear any
testimony that they did so. This is, after all, a children's series in
which rape, I hope, plays no part. Toto, please don't assume that you
*know* what the DEs did beyond the evidence we've been given. We know,
for example, who murdered the Prewetts, who specialized in the
Imperius curse and made other people do terrible things, who tortured
the Longbottoms into insanity. Snape has not been associated with any
of these crimes, and even the people who committed them have not been
accused of the crimes you mention. There is no canon to back you up.

As for Snape, who is "now no more a Death Eater than I am," according
to Dumbledore, he not only did the things SSS mentioned, he also
alerted the Order to Harry's danger at the end of OoP and in so doing
made it possible for them to save not only Harry but five other
students as well. And he goes into great danger, possibly contacting
the DEs to explain why he wasn't at the graveyard, at the end of GoF.
Other examples of his courage and loyalty to Dumbledore can be cited,
complete with quotes and page numbers if you need them. 

I, for one, think that Snape is wholly worthy of Dumbledore's trust.
He is always on hand when Dumbledore needs him and there may be more
even to his teaching methods than meets the eye. (I have a feeling
that specific lessons he has taught will come into play, for example,
that first lesson when he makes sure that Harry knows what a bezoar
is.) As JKR herself has said, we shouldn't judge Snape by appearances.
 There *is* a redemptive pattern to Snape for which examples can be
cited from canon, and he *has* gone out of his way not only to save
(or try to save) Harry but to risk his life working for the Order (in
addition to his teaching and supervisory duties).

Just because Harry dislikes Snape and he's presented *from Harry's
POV* as a "greasy git" who is sarcastic to his students doesn't mean
that he's evil. Dumbledore trusts him. Maybe we should, too.

Carol