Secrecy (Was: Re: It's over, Snape is evil)

[tbernhard2000]

No: HPFGUIDX 137516

pippin wrote:
> > Why shouldn't Rowling  pull another deus ex machina?

nora wrote:
> Because we're getting to The End. The End of Everything.... Isn't it
about time for Harry to suck it up and get down with his own skills
and unique abilities (Chosen One, right?) and do things on his 
merits? He has the support of his friends which should be essential,
but too much support weakens the tension and the drama, as it were.

dan:
This is why the scene on the tower is immensely important not to dance
around, touch here and there, and not grab two fisted and tackle.
There are things that need to be explained in any theory about what
happened where those theories differ from what Harry experienced of
the event. What the book says is that Albus was pleading, that Severus
was filled with hatre and was revolted when he performed the AK.

Secrecy indeed. Every book contains a possession, or a substitution,
or secret form revealed. Is it Snape on the tower in this one? There
is another revelation in HBP, though. The character, the person, of
Tom Riddle, and hence the vital importance of character. Character is
not static in Rowling - people are moving or changing this way or that
all the time. One of the drawbacks of super duper secret saviour Snape
is that it seems to require an inordinate constancy, a kind of static
core to the person Snape, an unchanging character after the
renunciation of DE days. 

These theories must also address the fact that this was the first time
we have seen Snape in his role as DE in front of non-DE people (Albus
and hidden Harry). What does it mean in terms of the story Rowling is
telling to have this moment occur where it does? Also, we have not
seen Snape with Tom. That moment is definitely going to be a highlight
of book seven.

Nora's argument, and I agree with this, seems to be that the sides are
set up, the pieces are in motion - things are moving that cannot be
undone. If there is a tricksy moment coming, it will in some way
partake of everything that has come before - but not just as some plot
device. It will partake of the numinous authorial as well, the point
Rowling takes for granted, the fatedness of those who act in heart, as
Harry does. These Gryffindors, have provided the only sense of the
real, the only sense of authenticity, as it were, in the entire
series. The internal compass of the books cannot be lightly cast aside
for this or that plot-based whimsy.

Though there are obviously many possible ways to satisfyingly conclude
the series, part of the task for those who are begging a different
reading of what happened on the tower than what Harry saw, is to point
out how this immensely generous and self-sacrificing Snape, say, is
part of a satisfying conclusion. This vision of Snape seems to me to
be a reflection of the practise of keeping oneself removed, of quiet
forebearance, but with the bonus of being allowed, even encouraged, to
be a nasty bitch thrown for fun. Like an unreformed Aunt Betsy Trotwood!

Before this discussion, though, the question of what needs to be
answered, not just plotwise, but in accordance with the stated
intentions of the author and the hit-over-the-head thematic importance
of acting on a sense of justice, a desire for truth, and love in the
books must be set clearly before those taking sides on the debate.

Is it worth it to attmept this? Or should I just go into lurk for a
couple years, satisfying myself that once the plot irritants are more
or less cleared up, the themes of the writing can safely be addressed?

dan