Snape as the One in Prophecy

[hermionegallo]

No: HPFGUIDX 136457

> > hg:
> > Snape's birthday is January 9.

> Christina:
> We were talking about this a few days ago, and whoever it was that
> started the thread (I'm so sorry I can't remember who it was!) said
> that since the "dies" is metaphoric, the "born" could be also.  As 
in,
> a rebirth of sorts; As the seventh month *ends*, Harry enters the
> world, Snape realizes that Voldy is going to go for the Potters, and
> it snaps him out of "Death Eater" mode and sends him to Dumbledore. 
> This is, of course, assuming that Snape was honestly remorseful when
> he approached Dumbledore and that it was the realization of Voldy's
> interpretation of the prophecy that lead him to switch sides (and 
that
> he actually *has* switched sides).  Not totally out of the question,
> IMO.

hg:
Oh, I see your point.  Interesting.  Although I like the "approaches" 
as Snape coming up to the door in that immediate sense, and I love a 
good metaphor, if I were to put Snape into the prophecy, it'd be 
elsewhere.  The only place I see the possibility of three individuals 
is "either must die at the hand of the other, for neither can live 
while the other survives."

Christina:
> What I find interesting is the "power the Dark Lord knows not." 
> Someone before suggested Occlumency, and that got me to thinking- 
does
> LV really know how good an Occlumens Snape is?  He can't possibly.  
If
> someone could tell if another person was using Occlumency, then they
> could demand that the person "open their mind" to them until they
> couldn't detect the technique being used anymore (and only then
> believe what they say).  So it must be impossible to detect whether
> Occlumency is being employed or not...it'd be easy for both DD 
*and* LV to say, "Well, I *must* be a better Legilimens than he is an 
Occlumens, so no worries."

hg:
Again, I agree.  I think he's used Occlumency to his advantage very 
well.  It seems to me, though, that the prophecy and Snape are two 
separate conversations and not one, and I'll explain why.

The metaphoric rebirth: compelling, but not convincing, to me, only 
because the last line of the prophecy reiterates the first two, as if 
to make no mistake that the first two lines are indeed the same 
person (approaches and born to parents and born as 7th month dies all 
applies to the one).  Snape's Occlumency, while again compelling as 
a "power the Dark Lord knows not" (nor Dumbledore for that matter, 
perhaps!), I think is rather the device that has enabled him to get 
so close to both Voldemort and Dumbledore and simultaneously has led 
him perilously TOO close -- to both.  It seems to me that the 
Unbreakable Vow that Snape took was a trap set by Voldemort, as if to 
force Snape's hand, and I get the sense that Dumbledore is forcing 
his hand, too.  I think I've posted elsewhere about this (if not I've 
been thinking about it a lot) -- that Snape didn't know what he was 
Vowing to help Draco to do, until that moment on the Tower.

When I think of the "power the Dark Lord knows not," I am reminded 
that Harry isn't afraid to die, and will willingly walk into the 
arena and fight, even if he is certain that he will indeed die.  
However, his purity of soul that Dumbledore talks about almost 
precludes Harry from AK'ing Voldemort, so another way of 
him "vanquishing" Voldemort, even at Harry's "hand," will have to 
come into play.  (Because I can't make up my mind: is it Harry's 
wholeness of soul or his willingness to die that is his unknown 
power.)
I'm definitely open to three individuals being in the prophecy; that 
fourth line almost necessitates three.  But maybe a Horcrux of 
Voldemort is one of the three?
hg.