The Needs of Snape's Redemption (was Re: Heroes or not)

[lupinlore]

No: HPFGUIDX 145226

Betsy:
> I think that most folks going with a DDM!Snape who *will* have a 
> large role (though not the starring role) and a redemption story 
> line, *do not* think Snape maliciously killed Dumbledore.

Hmmm.  I guess a DDM!Snape by definition (well, almost) didn't 
maliciously kill Dumbledore.  So I think that for DDM!Snape to come 
true, some explanation (poorly written as, IMO, it would inevitably 
be) would have to be given for that.  


Betsy:
> But that's not what the "Snape is a good guy" people have to deal 
> with.  We tend to think that Snape *doesn't* have to make up for 
> his behavior on the tower but for his role as a Death Eater.

Which, unfortunately, we don't know much about.  And that is a huge 
problem when it comes to "redeeming" Snape without pulling the focus 
off of Harry and in effect making Snape (who you are right, I and 
others think is definitely a child abuser) into the hero of the 
story.  Multiple pages of explanation about this would have a 
tendency to lead in that direction.  
  

Betsy: 
> So book 7 won't *introduce* the redemption of Snape.  It will 
> *reveal* a redemption well under way.  *Harry* will have to 
> recognize Snape for who he really is, see Snape as Dumbledore saw 
> him.  

But the problem with that, for many of our perspectives, is that 
Harry's recognition CAN NOT come without penance and payment from 
Snape for many things  -- payment and penance made specifically TO 
HARRY.  For Harry to say, "Oh, you've been paying all this time, I 
realize that now," WITHOUT payment from Snape TO HIM for the things 
Snape has done to hurt Harry would be, IMO, a moral abomination.  
Payment made under the supervision of Dumbledore in no way lessens 
the specific wrongs Snape has done TO HARRY, and those wrongs MUST 
be acknowledged and specific restitution made within the context of 
that relationship.  Now, payment can be of many kinds, but will 
probably (and should probably) include strong elements of both 
karmic punishment, as discussed in another thread, and a genuine 
apology from Snape to Harry.  And redemption, for those of use who 
feel quite strongly that Snape IS a child abuser, MUST cover BOTH 
his actions against Harry's parents AND his abuse of Harry, 
himself.  Anything else would, IMO, constitute a deep moral flaw in 
the final structure of the books.  

Is JKR trying to tell a moral story?  She keeps saying she is, and 
therefore moral questions apply.  I would say she's got a serious 
problem on her hands if she doesn't plan to deal rather specifically 
with the particular relationship of Snape and Harry.  As I've said 
before, from many of our perspectives, saying that "Snape is DDM! 
and has been paying all along" doesn't fly any day of the week and 
doesn't fly twice on Sunday.  So, to come back to your original 
question, even if Snape is DDM! he is not redeemed, IMO and that of 
others, without dealing specifically with many other issues.  Sorry.


Lupinlore