McGonagall and Lupin's reaction to Harry's story (and Snape's DE past)

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 138626

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Cathy Drolet" <cldrolet at s...> 
wrote:

<snip>

> CathyD:
> I can't speak for Carol but I am not forgetting it at all.  I'm 
> quite certain McGonagall knew Snape's past.  She'd been a teacher 
> at Hogwarts for 40 years.  While she wasn't a member of the Order 
> the first time, I'm certain she could read the papers, and must 
> have at least heard the outcome of some of the trials in which 
> Snape's name was mentioned in connection with Dumbledore. 

<snip>

I think that other posts have already brought it up, but I agree--
there's really no evidence that Snape's particular trial was a matter 
of public record.  Given the way that Dumbledore vouches for him, I 
doubt Snape got run through what Lucius Malfoy et al. did, with the 
public accusations and public 'clearings'.  Moody would have known 
(because he was there), but he's pretty absent in HBP, and we don't 
get much of his view on Snape in OotP either.

> McGonagall and Snape had a history of 15 years working together as 
> teachers and Heads of House.  She certainly should have trusted 
> Snape for her own reasons by then, as well as for Dumbledore's 
> judgement.  She certainly didn't seem to think Snape's last set of 
> detentions for Harry was out of line.  Then suddenly everything she 
> *knows* about him is thrown away on the say-so of a 16 year old boy 
> who, in all honesty, does not have the best track record for 
> telling the truth...or for telling it without gloss, at least...and 
> who is well known for his animosity towards Snape.

The other conclusion, if you don't want to start trying to explain 
away the inconvenient details, is that while she had a working 
relationship with Snape, *she did not have a deeper, more personal 
one*.  It seems that no one did.  And this speaks to all the RL and 
other examples (okay, I confess--I did watch the entire Law and 
Order: SVU marathon instead of studying) whereby people think they 
know someone, who ends up capable of what seems uncharacteristic and 
hideous actions.

Knowing someone as a colleague and teacher is not the same as knowing 
them as a person in the deeper sense.  And that is what we now can 
(with a lot of backing) postulate was the Snape/all the teachers at 
Hogwarts relationship.  I'd hesitate to even call it friendship.

It's often advanced by the DDM!Snape advocates that Snape is a very, 
very good actor--good enough to fool Bella et al., and good enough to 
have been a spy within Voldemort's camp, et cetera.  This can surely 
also then be applied to his relationships within Hogwarts.  And then 
Snape goes home for the summers, and does whatever.

Harry's basic honesty has been brought up in this thread, as well.  
We've seen people quick to change their minds and be wrong--and we've 
seen people quick to change their minds and be right (Lupin in the 
Shack--shhh, Pippin!).  It could go either way, but the latter option 
does not strike me as wildly OOC and a drastic betrayal of 
Snapeykins, not at all.  It means that we have to re-examine what we 
assumed without solid proof about Snape and McGonagall.

-Nora ponders doing some review for orals...nah...