In Defense of Snape (VERY long)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 122242



Carol:

Hi, Alla. Here's my answer, which I know in advance you won't agree
with. First, nice doesn't equal good. Look at Crouch!Moody and
Lockhart, who were both a great deal nicer to Harry than Snape but
neither of whom was good. Rita Skeeter at times also tries to seem
like Harry's friend, but we know she isn't. Or how about Umbridge
nicely offering Harry tea or coffee in her office? And the opposite 
is also true--McGonagall is not always nice--witness the way she
humiliates Neville when he loses his list of passwords--but only a 
few people have argued that she's evil.


Alla:

Hey, Carol! You do know me well. :o)

I said earlier that if niceness means just "pleasant person to be 
around" then I have no problem accepting that " nice does not equal 
good"

I also said earlier that in my book "nice" is more than that. It is 
how person genuinely treats people around them.
If person is having fun watching other person in distress, I do have 
trouble calling such person " nice" or "good", but that is just me.

By the way, the examples you gave are not the examples of genuine " 
nice" but "fake" one, don't you agree?

Crouch!Moody and Lockhart could care less about Harry. Any other 
person who was kind to Harry does seem to care genuinely about him.


Carol:
snip.

and I will bet you a year's supply of
butterbeer that there *is* a redemptive pattern to Snape and that
JKR's surprise was not because the interviewer was wrong but because
he had anticipated Snape's redemption in Harry's eyes in Book 7.


Alla:

Not sure if I accept this bet, Carol, since I am also pretty 
confident that at the end Snape will redeem himself, BUT I am also 
offering you a bet that before that happens we WILL be lead to 
believe that Snape has betrayed the Order OR we will learn that 
Snape has never truly changed the sides at all.

In short, before Snape's big redemption thing, we will learn 
something TRULY nasty about him. How about THAT bet? :o)



JMO,

Alla