It's over, Snape is evil (was: Dumbledore and Snape again)

[Jessica Bathurst]

No: HPFGUIDX 138576

eggplant wrote:

>Ok, fine, but why did Dumbledore have to die, Snape was already in good 
>with Voldemort? And > why did Snape make an Unbreakable Vow to Murder 
>Dumbledore months before he actually did > it? It all makes no sense if 
>Snape is good, it makes perfect sense if Snape is evil.

You can never be in too good with a sociopath.  (There's a sentence I never 
thought I'd write.)  I've been reading other messages about the OoP's 
immediate reversal of opinion on Snape after hearing that he'd killed 
Dumbledore, and I believe the distrust of Snape is equally as great on the 
other side.

About the UV - that was a mistake, probably born of arrogance (and possibly 
Snape's secret desire for desparate blondes).   Snape may not have seen 
where the Vow was going - he should have, as he told Narcissa that Voldemort 
expected him to do it if Draco failed; he may have been lying, but that sure 
put the idea in her head - but once the third part was proposed, he played 
out the string.  He was stupid to bind himself so irrevocably to a course of 
action (and this is true regardless of whose side he's on), but sometimes 
people do stupid things.  Even people as calculating as Snape.

>  Voldemort is going to start distrusting Snape too. Tyrants are always on 
>the lookout for rivals  and who better fits that role than the man who 
>killed the most powerful wizard in the world?  Voldemort is not going to be 
>happy when he hears people say Snape killed Dumbledore and
>  not the Dark Lord.

Based on how Voldemort has been portrayed, I'm pretty certain he'll get rid 
of Snape as soon as he has no more use for the man.  In the meantime, I'm 
sure he's thrilled to get rid of his biggest rival - assuming that Snape is 
telling the truth about Voldemort's expectations, he's supposed to have 
killed Dumbledore.  Besides, isn't Voldemort more concerned about Harry?  He 
apparently asked the DEs to leave him at Hogwarts to be dealt with later, 
personally.  (A side note:  if the megalomaniac villain for whom you are 
working passes up the easy kill for some dramatic ego-boosting showdown 
later, your side will lose.  *sigh*  I could clean up as an evil 
mastermind.)

>  I am certain Dumbledore would not be so caviler in dismissing Harry's 
>abilities, with the exception >  of Snape the other Death Eaters seemed no 
>match for Harry, and Voldemort personally tried to >  kill him 5 times and 
>failed 5 times; nobody is that lucky he must have something on the
>  ball.

I'm speaking strickly of hand-to-hand magical combat here, which I think is 
the mostly likely battle that Harry and Snape will have to fight; I think 
Harry's battles with Voldemort are an entirely separate issue.  Harry has 
mad magic skills, no doubt, but in a one-to-one match with Snape, he allowed 
his emotions to get the better of him, and he lost.  (Which also happens 
with Snape from time to time, but not generally in combat.  It must be so 
much fun to be in a room with those two.)

An aside:  the other DEs seemed no match for any of the other teenagers, 
either.  In fact, as a fighting force, they kind of suck.  (Voldemort really 
got screwed in his choice of personnel.  Oh well - you go to war with the 
Death Eaters you have, not the Death Eaters you wish you had.)

>  And Dumbledore must have known that even if Harry defeats Voldemort and 
>survives he won't > be able to get on with his life until he hunts down 
>Snape. If Snape is really a good guy then  Dumbledore has played a very 
>very nasty trick on both of them by keeping Harry in the dark.

I should point out, by the way, that I don't think Snape is a good guy.  He 
doesn't seem to have much in the way of abstract moral reasoning, and I 
doubt he'd align himself with a group just because they were the good guys.  
He does, however, have a very real (if completely personal) sense of what is 
"right," and he acts accordingly.   I can see Snape driven by his own 
personal sense of duty, whatever that duty may end up being.

I can only assume that if Snape is deciding to play this game, he's aware of 
this fact.  Assuming that there's not some exonerating evidence planted 
somewhere, he's a marked man.  However, I think his odds of surviving the 
upcoming apocalyptic battle are not too high; he'll be too close to the 
center of the action.

>>>After all, what's the other alternative?

>Kill the other Death Eaters and tell Voldemort that Dumbledore had done it, 
>Snape was far more > powerful than his Death Eater pals and he had the 
>element of surprise.

Only if he had entered the room "shooting" (what would be the magical 
equivalent of this?).  Snape had no idea what was going on behind the door 
until he opened it.  It took him a few seconds to put it all together.

Kudos, by the way, to whoever mentioned "The Spy Who Came In From the Cold." 
  That's exactly the model I'm using here.  (I realize that this entire 
argument makes me seem rather amoral.  I assure you that I personally do not 
advocate the killing, strategic or not, of elderly wizards.  And I love 
kittens.)

Yours,
Jessica