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

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 138660

Finwitch wrote:
<snip>
> And I think Dumbledore IS dead. <snip> Umbridge wasn't able to get
past the Gargoyle, remember? No one could get in there with Dumbledore
away... I sort of think that McGonagall wouldn't have been able to
call it *her office* had Dumbledore not been truly dead.
<snip> 
Harry's loyalty even when Dumbledore's dead - would lose its meaning
if it turned out that Dumbledore is NOT dead. 
> Besides, I'd think Harry would wonder if he did NOT see the green
light, the one thing he remembered from his parents' death despite of
all the lies the Dursleys told him.


Carol responds:
I agree with all of your arguments about Dumbledore being dead. I also
believe that Harry, still in shock, is telling the truth *as he
perceives it*. But a *jet* of green light ("jet" being the word used
when "Stupefy" and other neutral spells are cast) is not the same as
"a blinding flash of green light," the description that almost always
accompanies a description of an AK. As you say, that flash is Harry's
first memory, and it does not at all resemble Snape's presumed AK.
(There's no rushing sound, either, and DD is "blasted" into the air
rather than falling instantly dead. His eyes are closed and his
expression is peaceful--all very un-AKlike. And Snape, of course, has
been a skilled caster of "nvbl" spells since at least age sixteen.)

So I think we should seriously consider the possibility that Snape's
spell was not a real AK, examining the evidence carefully rather than
basing our evidence on a traumatized Harry's interpretation of what he
hears and sees. As I posted elsewhere, in messages 134666 (Can it be
Impedimenta?) 

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/134666

and 137162 (Faked death or faked AK?),

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/137162

Snape's spell more closely resembles a disguised Impedimenta than an
AK. (To my knowledge, we've never been told what color the light is
from that spell. It could be green.) What the implications are if I'm
right only JKR knows, but it could be a signal to Harry that (whom
Snape surely knows is present because he sees the two brooms and knows
about the Invisibility Cloak) that Snape is not a DE. At any rate, I
hope he goes over the events of HBP with Lupin, who will (I hope)
listen carefully and (like Dumbledore) understand more than Harry does
from what Harry describes.

There's a difference between what we see or (over)hear and what we
interpret that perception to *mean* (witness the overheard
conversation between Snape and Quirrell in SS/PS), which Harry
misinterprets based on his preconceptions about Snape. I think we're
getting the same strategy again when Harry eavesdrops on Draco and
Snape and in the snippets of an argument between Snape and DD in the
forest partially overheard by Hagrid and reported by him to Harry.
These conversations and Draco's actions (which he interprets more or
less correctly) convince Harry that Snape is in league with Draco
(which is clearly *not* the case based on the conversation in Snape's
office, in which Draco makes a clumsy attempt at Occlumency to keep
Snape from knowing about the Vanishing Cabinets). 

Harry imposes this preconception (along with his hatred of Snape) onto
the moment in which he witnesses Snape speaking the words "Avada
Kedavra" and sending Dumbledore tumbling over the wall to his death.
Ignoring or forgetting about the Unbreakable Vow (which in any case,
he doesn't fully understand), he assumes treason and premeditated
murder, neither of which is necessarily the case. Yes, Snape killed
Dumbledore, but how and why are still unrevealed. (Unless, of course,
we are stubbornly determined to believe that Harry is always right, a
belief belied by his perception that he's being Crucio'd by Snape only
a few pages later.)

Harry's preconceptions are reinforced for the reader by "Spinner's
End," that sneakiest of chapters, in which JKR places the reader in
the role of eavesdropper. That chapter and "The Lightning-Struck
Tower" need to be read very carefully to distinguish red herrings from
clues. Snape is a master of deception, but so is JKR. We can't safely
assume that we know the truth when Book 6-7 (two halves of a whole, as
JKR has told us) is only half finished.

To sum up, I agree with Finwitch that DD is dead and that Snape killed
him (though not necessarily willingly or using an AK). I also agree
that Harry is telling the Order members what he *believes* to be the
truth (though he doesn't accurately report what DD told him about his
reason for trusting Snape--hated and anger lead to distortion here).
But what Harry sees and what we know about AKs do not fit together,
nor has Harry examined the pieces of the puzzle as carefully as DD has
almost certainly done. (I'm not suggesting that DD and Snape planned
DD's death at Snape's hands. I think both of them did what they
thought was necessary to prevent that possibility. Both of them, IMO,
underestimated Draco, with disastrous consequences.)

Aside to Eggplant: Examining the evidence to see if there's more than
meets the eye is not "bending over backwards" to support our theories.
It's understanding how JKR's narration works. For those who view the
books as two halves of a whole (based on JKR's own statement), the
chief difference between this book and its predecessors is that the
mystery has not yet been resolved. Just as she made Fake!Moody appear
to be a good guy in GoF, she may be (quite convincingly) making Snape
appear evil in HBP (though he does, directly or indirectly, save four
characters from death). 

Events and characters (Snape in particular) may not be what they seem,
and repeated assertions that Harry has correctly interpreted what he
sees will remain unconvincing without a close examination of the
evidence and canon support for that position. 

Just my opinion, as Alla says.

Carol