TBAY: Definitely NOT a Snape Theory (long)

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 145199

SSSusan stumbles into the Royal George, blinking furiously in the 
light and spots quite a crew assembled on the *down* staircase.  
"Huh," mutters SSSusan, "never knew *that* staircase was there."

[Okay, SSSusan is too exhausted to continue TBAYing at the moment.  
My humblest apologies.]


So... Neri has Faith expounding her theo--, erm, hypothe--, um, 
Innocent Intellectual Exercise in LID!Snape and claiming:

"DDM doesn't explain why Snape hates Harry so much – LID does. DDM is 
yet to find a satisfactory explanation of what had happened on the 
tower – LID doesn't have any problem with it."


SSSusan responds:
Oh, I don't know about this, Faith.  I mean, I know you don't like 
SPECULATION, but at this point, we've got to have SOME of it.  Jo 
left us scratching our heads and with jaws dropped *on purpose* at 
the end of HBP, you know.  

And honestly, I don't see why DDM *doesn't* explain Snape's hatred of 
Harry.  Why would any of the three positions *not* be able to explain 
Snape's hatred of Harry?  To me, a DDM!Snaper, it's independent of 
the position.  IOW, Snape hates Harry; he just DOES.  Whether that's 
because of James, whether that's because he finds the kid annoying as 
hell (a rule-flaunting, endangering-himself-and-others-without-a-care 
kind of brat), whether he hates the attention Harry gets and resents 
the importance the WW places on the kid & his role, who knows?  But 
the hatred can be real, true, and deep and STILL have Snapey be DDM, 
no?  

I mean, yes, Snape's a royal ass to Harry.  He's nasty and surly and 
sarcastic and demeaning and never misses an opportunity to put him 
down.  But why does the DDM position not allow for this?  After all, 
the DDM position has to do with Snape's loyalty to DUMBLEDORE, not 
with his loyalty to Harry or even to The Order, necessarily.  As long 
as Snape can be loyal to DD and be hateful towards Harry at the same 
time, where's the problem?  

As to the contention that DDM doesn't explain the events on the 
tower, I beg to differ.  There IS an explanation that many of us find 
quite satisfactory indeed.  (True, OFH!Snapers and ESE!Snapers don't 
care for it, but it makes sense to DDM!Snapers.)  And that is, at 
least in my version (sorry, Faith! – I told you, with this scene 
we've just GOT to do some speculating!), that DD knew he was dying, 
that he drew Snape's attention to himself immediately with the very-
surprising-for-DD "Severus... please," that *something* passed 
between the two in that moment (probably through legillimency), and 
that Snape AKed DD because DD wanted (or commanded) Snape to do so.  
Snape did it because he understood DD's reasoning (to save Draco, to 
get the DEs out of Hogwarts, to end DD's life quickly, to satisfy the 
UV, to secure Snape's "in" position with Voldy, possibly gathering 
info useful to Harry's quest, etc.).

This is not to say that LID!Snape doesn't also have a way of 
explaining the events of the tower.  I'm simply rebutting the notion 
that DDM hasn't offered up a reasonable explanation as well.  


Neri went on, offering this assist to Faith:
"Hey, that part can actually be made even more convincing," said Neri.
"Del and I posted about it. You see, if the Life Debt magic kills you
when you take a part in killing the one you owe to, then Snape should
have died after GH, but if Dumbledore saved him by magically
transferring his Debt from James to Harry, then Snape would owe a Life
Debt to Dumbledore too! That would certainly make Dumbledore trust
him. And after Snape saved Dumbledore's life back from the ring curse,
he could kill Dumbledore, but he still owes Harry..."

SSSusan:
Hmmm.  This would only work if the Life Debt only prevented the 
person ONE TIME from participating in the death of the person to whom 
he owed a Life Debt, then?  That "Snape saved DD once and so now's he 
free to kill him" notion.  Is there a reason in canon to suspect it's 
a "one time and out" kind of thing?  

Anyway, more to the point for me... considering both this possibility 
and what Faith was just saying about what LID can do that DDM can't 
do, what I'd like to know is this:  Exactly how does LID explain WHY 
Snape killed DD?  What, in LID, was Snape's motivation on the tower?  
*If* you're right (and this is, imo, a pretty big "if") about being 
freed from any Life Debt he owed DD after the ring-horcrux saving 
thing, and thus COULD now kill DD safely, LID!Snape still doesn't, I 
don't think, explain why Snape WOULD do so.  Would LID!Snape's 
explanation be that, in killing DD, Snape would be better able to get 
Harry out of Hogwarts, to ensure his safety from the DEs?  Or 
something else?


I had also been wondering the same thing a couple of others have 
brought up as well.  That is, WHY would Snape still owe Harry, and 
specifically, didn't the 1st-year Quidditch rescue count?

Neri offered this up:
"Well, for repaying a Life Debt, this case wasn't exactly what you'd
call clear-cut, was it?", said Faith. "I mean, from literary
considerations wouldn't you expect something more dramatic? And the
other cases of Snape saving Harry's life are even less clear-cut than
that."

SSSusan:
Sorry, but this seems a weak argument for the Quidditch save not 
counting.  

Yet Faith asked us:
"So tell me, what do you think is Snape's opinion? Does he behave as 
if he thinks the account was settled after that Quidditch match? Or 
after the end of the year? Or after the night of the Shrieking Shack? 
Has he really `gone back to hate James' memory in peace'? Was there 
any change in the way he treats Harry?"

SSSusan:
Well, no, he hasn't changed... but imo that can actually argue for 
DDM!Snape.  I mean, let's assume the quidditch save DID end the Life 
Debt.  Then for what reason would Snape continue to act to protect 
Harry?  Because of his LOYALTY to DD!  His dislike of Harry is true, 
but he continues to watch over him and protect him because DD wants 
him to, expects him to.  And so he does, all the while despising the 
little bugger.  Out of loyalty to DD.  


Lastly, Neri asks:
DDM too requires an explanation why Dumbledore refused to give his 
reasons to trust Snape. What's the DDM explanation?

SSSusan:
Well, I know you don't like this, but one possibility is LOLLIPOPS.  
IOW, when DD considered telling Harry the reason in HBP... paused... 
but elected not to... it might have been that he believed the 
revelation simply too personal.  

Given the relationship between Snape & Harry, the degree of animosity 
already present, and all that Harry blames Snape for, how would Harry 
likely react to the news that DD trusted Snape because he had turned 
back to DD when he realized Lily was in danger and wanted to protect 
her?  Exactly! "Eeewwwwww!!! Don't tell me that!" Harry might be 
expected to yell.  If (and yes, this is a giant "if" of my own here) 
DD knew he was dying or likely would die soon, and if he hoped that 
somehow Snape & Harry would be able to set aside their dislike and 
loathing and work together, would he risk a revelation that might 
make that even LESS likely than it already was?


Neri:
"Hmmm... now that you mention it," said Neri thoughtfully, "Snape and
Wormtail forced to share the same house in HBP, with no apparent plot
reason for that... could it be foreshadowing? You know, the two of
them, as much as they hate each other, compelled to cooperate in Book
7 in order to save Harry and repay both their Debts..." He trailed off
when seeing the look on Faith's face. "Er... speculation again?"

SSSusan:
Oooooh, now I admit I like the sound of this!  The two, hating each 
other, yet forced to work together because they both need to repay 
Life Debts to Harry.  

Hmmm. I also like its parallel to what I was saying about Harry & 
Snape having to work together in spite of their hatred for each 
other.  What would compel them to do so?  Not two Life Debts but 
perhaps two strong loyalties to DD. :-)


Siriusly Snapey Susan, with a tip of hat to Neri for a fun TBAY and 
especially for FOLLIPOPS.