Snape and Peter and Prophecy and Harry

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 145494

 
Alla wrote:
I have not said that Snape is fully to blame  
for Potters' death, I said he played a PART in Potters' death, large  
part, but part nevertheless.
BUT I believe that Snape is guilty in more  than Potters' need to go 
in hiding. He is guilty in identifying them as  targets for Voldemort. 
You are arguing that they were safe in their hiding  place and I am 
not sure I agree with that. Secret Keeper CAN break the  Fidelius 
Charm voluntarily, we know that, when Harry is told where 12  
Grimmauld is located, so they must have known that Fidelius Charm is 
not  100% safe, so I don't see how "nobody could find them". Anybody 
who would  learn the secret, could find them IMO.

The fact that they were forced to  use it AND that Voldemort started 
hunting for them, makes Snape guilty in my  eyes.

 
Julie:
I agree that Snape is guilty as you state above. His actions  did
force the Potters into hiding. But there is also nothing more  he
could have done to rectify his mistake than what he  did--warning
Dumbledore, and getting the Potters into a safe place. It wasn't
enough in the end, because, as you say, even a Fidelus Charm
is not 100% certain protection. But it was enough that it mitigates
Snape's guilt quite a bit, at least for me.
 
I know it doesn't mitigate Snape's guilt to Harry, because  Harry
is quite invested in hating Snape. Enough so that he misstates 
Dumbledore's words to imply that Snape turned *after* James 
and Lily's deaths rather than before, and leaves out the fact that
Snape tried to save his parents in the end. But I do expect Harry
will reevaluate his hatred of Snape and how it actually fits with
the facts in Book 7 (regardless of whether Snape turns out to be
DDM, ESE, or OFH). It's necessary if Harry is to grow up :-)


Alla wrote:
Peter is a treacherous bastard and it is quite possible that  he is 
much worse bastard than Snape, IMO, but there are so many people who  
live their lives without being forced to show the worst in their  
natures, again IMO.

I think that Snape's actions forced Peter to  reveal the worst in his 
nature and betray Potters. No, Peter may not have  been a better 
person if Snape did not do what he did, BUT it is a possible  
speculation, IMO that maybe Potters would have never learned of who  
Peter really is and especially not with the price of their  deaths.

For THAT I blame Snape.


Julie:
Wow. I am SO far away from you on this one. Snape *forced*  Peter
to act on his worst instincts? Are you serious?
 
Okay, you are, but I definitely disagree. It is NOT possible to
speculate that Peter could be a better person, because Peter
was passing information to Voldemort long BEFORE he betrayed
the Potters. If Peter could have been a better person, why was
he doing that? If Peter could have been a better person, why didn't
he take the opportunity to REFUSE the secret-keeper role, by
admitting he might crack under the pressure?
 
Snape WENT to Dumbledore. Snape tried to save the Potters,
whatever his real motivations. Does he not get any credit at all
for that? Meanwhile Peter accepted the secret-keeper role with
the PRIOR INTENT to betray them. Peter is scum. Scum. SCUM.
And he was always scum, no matter what speculative universe he
might have been in. 
 
Snape, OTOH, may be scum, or he may not be. He's certainly
guilty of many things either way. But one thing is is NOT guilty of
is making Peter Pettigrew the pitiful man he is, because  Peter's
"worst" nature is simply his nature, period.
 
Julie 







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]