[HPforGrownups] A Simple Snape Explanation

[Shylah]

No: HPFGUIDX 137496

Snipped

>redeyedwings wrote:
>  
> If years ago, when Dumbledore realized both that Snape had gone back to
> the side of Good and that LV was definitely NOT gone for good, he told
> Snape that his mission, should LV return to full power, will be to
> rejoin the Death Eaters and STAY WITH THEM, whatever the consequences
> until the very last battle.
> 
> That would explain the lack of specifics btwn SS and DD during the
> forest conversation (SS is simply saying that DD takes too much for
> granted, he's scared at what he may be forced to do with the DEs before
> the final battle) and DD is simply reiterating that - no matter what
> the cost - SS must be in position to betray LV when he is at his most
> vulnerable (ie, when Harry and DD [and RAB?] have destroyed the
> Horcruxes.
> 
> This also explains the look of revulsion and hatred, which wouldn't be
> present if the specific killing of DD by SS had already been discussed -
>  SS is repulsed both with himself (for what he knows he must do) and
> with DD (for his longstanding orders that have now left SS in this
> position).
> 
> But nevertheless, being DD's man, he carries out his orders and rejoins
> the DE (destroying any hope of good relations with any Order members)
> and he now knows he'll be on their side until the end - a supremely
> unappealing prospect as he knows that he'll be asked to kill again.
> This would also explain why he's so angry at being called a coward -
> he's arguably sacrificing more for the battle than either Harry (who
> has already lost much, but hasn't chosen to give any of it up) and DD
> (who gave his life, but did so with his good name and reputation as a
> great good wizard intact).
> 
> Snape is sacrificing everything, and he knows he will most likely die
> in the process and be remembered as a traitor - I'd be damn upset if
> someone called me a coward for doing that.


Tanya now.

I have snipped this as much as I can. But great post.

Personally I have been thinking about this for a while.  LV doesn't
strike me that is the type that would be satisfied with only
information for too long. It might help to set up things, but once
that was done, things would likely change.  While Snape might be able
to hold the information (16 years of it) card at the beginning.  It
won't sustain him for long.  It's my expectation that no Death Eater
is permitted to be on the sidelines, desk job, so to speak.

Neverless he is caught. No matter what anyone says he has witnesses to
the AK, which carries a long sentence, regardless of motive.  I do
question the fully evil side of it though, motive wise.  To me he
didn't act like the other DE's.  Here he is, given a gift that none of
them would ever have imagined. Dumbledore in that state.  Not only
does he pause and stare, but he doesn't 'lord' over him, showing off,
or rubbing Dumbledore's face in it for fooling him that many years. 
Now that would be something to brag about, and to his face.  He had
plenty of time, none of the Order fighting below had a chance of
breaking through the barrier.  Draco certainly had pleny to say about
Snape 'fooling' Dumbledore.

Still if he has just gone deep undercover and his choice was one of
how many to save.  Killing Dumbledore for that reason, then I hope
that comes to light before he bites it.

Back to talking about Dumbledore, I am sure that he knew that Snape
would be required to go back to the old ways, killing and torture, as
soon as he set foot within sight of LV at the end of book 4.  Winning
his 'trust' again would not include readiness to give information but
nothing else.

Tanya