21 Reasons Why Snape is a Good Guy--Let "Desperate Hope" Reign!

[Krista7]

No: HPFGUIDX 133329

I already posted this (in essence) on a Snape list and board, but
since we're posting our arguments for/against Snape, I thought I'd 
throw this out to the greater HP community. 


"I believe in Severus Snape."--Albus Dumbledore

Okay, to make myself feel better about Book 6, I am going to
construct a brief defense here of Severus Snape--an argument for us 
to hold on for Book 7, at the very least. In other words, I want to 
make the case that there's reasonable doubt in this book before I 
start bawling from the destruction of my favorite character! 

So, a list of objections to the assumption that Snape is as bad as we
think by the end of Book 6.


1.) Everyone, *everyone*, says that Dumbledore is absolute in his
trust of Snape *and* Snape's own colleagues/associates' (for years!) 
initial reactions are (paraphrased) "Not Severus." The idea that 
Snape killed Dumbledore in cold blood does not agree with anybody--
save Harry's--sense of Snape's character. And as we know Harry's 
inclinations here, he's not a reliable character judge. Whom do you 
believe: Harry or Dumbledore? Which of the two do you truly believe 
to be the better character judge?

2.) "Why Dumbledore trusted Snape"/why what we know doesn't fly. 
Harry believes Dumbledore took Snape back in to the fold after he
confessed to hearing the prophecy and spilling the beans; Dumbledore 
believed Snape to be so sorry about that incident that he decided he 
was absolutely trustworthy from then on. 

*However*, what Harry's theory misses is that while Dumbledore thinks
that the prophecy interpretation "may" have been the trigger to bring
Snape to the side of the good, Dumbledore *never* says, anywhere, 
that it was because of his confession alone he trusted Snape. That 
is, there may still be another reason, a more compelling reason, for 
Dumbledore's absolute trust in Snape.  

In that vein of thought--

3.) Dumbledore is kind but not stupid. Do we really believe Snape
showed up in his office one day, a boy with mastery of the Dark Arts 
*and* practical skill in it, whimpered a bit about having passed on 
that prophecy to Voldie, and Dumbledore just said, "Oh, well, that's 
a boy, have a lemon-drop and let's forget about it"? Dumbledore is 
not Dumbledolt. 

Let's review: 

Snape (and JKR, too) has suggested that Dumbledore didn't give Snape
the DA job before because it might've prompted a "relapse" into bad
behavior. Is this somebody who has turned a completely blind eye to 
Snape's past?

Dumbledore, I should point out, also has a history with homicidal
psychopaths in the making, and as we saw with his memory sequence of 
Voldemort, just because Dumbledore gives a person a chance doesn't 
mean he doesn't keep his eyes open. One would think, especially 
after Voldie, that Dumbledore would not be inclined to issue a blank-
check of forgiveness to anybody without unbelievably compelling 
proof of loyalty.

4.) Have we forgotten Dumbledore gave Snape a command in the last
book, one that was never clarified in this book--"You know what I 
must ask you to do, Severus", and a somewhat frightened Snape 
nodded? Why would that scene be necessary, especially the scared 
Snape? Why include it, unless it is to plant the idea in our heads 
that Snape isn't trotting off to join the masked boys of his own 
inclination? 

5.) Behaviorisms: When Snape uttered the curse, his face twisted with
"hatred and revulsion." Let's say you are Voldie, or a follower of 
his. Are you *revolted* by the sight of your enemy on his knees? 
"Revulsion" has the sense of pulling back, of being sickened (in a 
nauseated, not sarcastic, sense); what's more likely to make you 
feel ill--having to kill your most unspeakable enemy, or having to 
kill a man you love? 

6.) Later on, when Snape faces off with Harry, he's likened to the
frightened Fang in the burning house--trapped, desperate, dangerous 
because of his extreme emotions. It is a sympathetic image, and a 
strange one to direct to a man who's a stone-cold murderer, if we're 
truly meant to join Harry in hating Snape. 

7.) The words exchanged between Snape and Dumbledore are intriguing.
If Dumbledore's belief in Snape is ironclad, he would not feel a 
need to "plead" for his life. He might not outright *say*, "Oh, 
Severus, how nice of you to stop your double-agent work and come 
help me again" in front of the DE squad, but he definitely wouldn't 
start off pleading. Meanwhile, if Dumbledore's belief in Snape has 
been fundamentally shaken, he'd either come out with some statement 
of love for Snape--like with Draco, "This is not you, my son," etc.--
or disbelief. We'd see some sign of surprise in Dumbledore as Snape
raises his wand. 

Note: Dumbledore does try to talk to Draco, to talk him out of an
act of murder--but he doesn't plead, ever, with Draco, for his life. 
He does his best to dissuade Draco from murder, to talk him to the 
side of the good, and though he knows Draco's life, and his family's 
lives, are on the line, Dumbledore does not resort to becoming a 
pleading old man before him. Why would he plead, to use Harry's 
word, to Snape, but not Draco? 

8.) If Dumbledore believes so absolutely in Snape, again, and his
desire is to escape the situation with his life, why didn't he free 
Harry once Snape entered the room? He would believe at the time that 
he had two of the world's best wizards, armed, at his side, and if 
he could recover his own wand (likely, vs. the likes of Draco--and 
who's saying Dumbledore truly needs a wand, anyway), numerically, 
the Hogwarts boys definitely stood a chance of defeating the DE in 
that room.

9.) When Harry and Dumbledore return to Hogwarts, Dumbledore says,
then, as he did before in Hogsmead, that he needs Snape, not 
Pomfrey. Since she worked on Katie (as well as Snape), you'd think 
Dumbledore wouldn't just automatically waive getting the nurse in, 
too. So why just Snape?

10.) JKR never lets Snape say, at the end, "Ahh, the old man got
what he deserved!" or "Take that, Dumbledore! Here's for denying me 
that job for all those years!" etc. She doesn't give him the moment 
to explain that all JKR villains before have had. Even when he faces 
off with Harry, the only comments he makes are to deny he's a coward 
(with obvious emotional distress here) and to take a shot at Harry's 
father for his quadruple-teaming of Snape. There's no sign anywhere 
that Snape is on some sort of high from having thrown off his mask, 
that he wants Harry to see his acts as a rejection of the Dumbledore 
value system. Zippo. All he wants is to get out, and get Draco out safely.

11.) We  have reason to believe Dumbledore is dying before the AK
hits.  That's not an excuse for Snape doing it, of course. But 
what's the point of Dumbledore so obviously weakening at the end--
isn't that extraneous? Is it not enough to have Dumbledore at a 
disadvantage, somehow, but *dying* when facing his own murder? Isn't 
that a bit of overkill (literally)? What plot point would that serve-
-unless to give us the idea that Snape wasn't entirely responsible 
for the death, that there was something else going on in the scene? 


12.) This is connected to #11. We know Dumbledore can be vicious 
with those he loves. Note how he makes Harry swear to obey him 
before they go off on the mission, and then he makes Harry--using 
that vow--give him, forcibly, a potion that puts him through grave 
torment and pain. Does that sound to anybody else a bit like the 
scene Hagrid reported, of Snape and Dumbledore arguing, of Dumbledore
reminding Snape of his vows to do as Dumbledore said, even if Snape
doesn't want to do "it" anymore?
 

13.) Draco himself says Snape had no idea that Draco had, at last,
found the way to get the DE into Hogwarts. While Snape knows of the 
earlier efforts (after the fact), Draco cuts Snape out of the loop 
on the one that works. Hmmm, interesting, eh?

14.) In his vow to Narcissa, Snape seems to act in a
paternal/protective light that isn't consistent with a black-and-
white villain. It's too sympathetic. You feel a bit sorry for him, 
swearing to look after Draco, and then getting the tag-on, *after* 
they've started the vow, "And, oh, by the way--kill Dumbledore, too."
(Come on, even without them saying what the job was, we all knew it
was bad!)

15.) How can so many intelligent readers walk away with the same
frustrating sense that there's more to the story, if the author 
thinks it is all crystal-clear by now? JKR *wants* us not to accept 
the ending as clear.

16.) As Ron, I believe, pointed out, Snape never does take Harry's
book from him. Given that Harry never found anything worth of being 
expelled in the book, why wouldn't Snape demand it back? So it has a 
bit of silly grafitti in it, a stupid nickname. What harm would 
there be to Snape in insisting on the book's return? (And wouldn't 
there be a lot of good, from a DE POV, if such a guide didn't fall 
into the hands of Voldie's arch-enemy, training him against Voldie?)

Note well: Snape's own teaching saved Ron's life, according to both
Harry and Hermione. 

17.) Is Snape a turncoat, a secret blood supremacist, as Harry
thinks? Is the "Half Blood Prince" a positive title or a negative 
one? (I could see it being a sarcastic taunt from his peers in 
Slytherin, which Snape then jotted in his book sarcastically.) We 
don't have a lot of background on Snape's views on this. Note that 
he never takes a Mudblood crack at anybody save Lilly in that one
memory, when she's embarrassed him by standing up for him--and he
never takes the obvious shot at Harry's parentage. I just don't 
think we get enough info from Snape and Hermione's research to 
establish more than that Snape was a genius in school. (And 
apparently, he can teach well and informatively through his class 
*and* his old book...) Harry's use of the book--which Harry admits 
he wouldn't have done if Snape had still been Potions Master!--may
not have been ethical for his schooling, but the book itself doesn't
show any signs of an evil character behind it, I'd argue--just a 
really smart kid with an interest in fighting.

18.) Why is it necessary for JKR to drop the bomb that it was Snape
who heard the infamous prophecy right before Dumbledore and HP 
leave, not giving them a lot of time to discuss what Harry's heard 
and/or HP to demand more answers about Snape's trustworthiness? Why 
is it necessary to do so just *then*, if not to color our moods for 
later and make us, like HP, more inclined to jump to the conclusion 
that Snape is DE through-and-through? And to cut off the amount of 
time for pondering/explaining just why Dumbledore held Snape to be 
trustworthy after he came to confess his deeds?

19.) Snape is *still* saving HP as of the end of the book! Nor does
he attempt to haul HP off to meet/be killed by Voldie, as he could 
easily have done. Why is that? Why did HP and AD flourish for five 
years, if SS wanted them bumped off, as a matter of fact? 


20. For what reason does Dumbledore want Harry to go along on *this*
particular Horcrux mission? Beyond AD's reluctance to put a child in
danger, Harry's vital to the overall "Defeat Voldie" plan, too 
valuable by far to put in harm's way for no reason. If the 
invitation is for back-up, note, he didn't ask Harry previously to 
go with him, and he has other, more experienced wizards around him 
he could take if he just wanted back-up. (In fact, by making Harry
swear to run if Dumbledore tells him to, AD implies he's not going to
put Harry in harm's way and so he probably *isn't* there just for 
back-up.) He certainly didn't ask Harry along simply for the joy of 
traumatizing him with the force-feeding of the potion bit. And by 
the end of the sequence, when Harry and AD go home, Harry really 
can't do anything for AD--he only wants Snape. Why didn't AD bring 
somebody else along, if all he wanted was a person to force-feed him 
that potion? 

So why didn't he bring Snape all along, hmm? Snape's scrawny, so his
weight in the boat wouldn't have been a problem; you can't make me 
believe, seriously, Snape's magic will register in the cave and 
Harry Potter's *won't*; and Snape's the one AD wants in the end 
(when Harry seems to think AD wants a person to heal him), anyway. 

So why not just take Snape?  Taking Harry makes no sense--unless--
<theory generator on!> Harry was a back-up, not for Albus, but for
Snape. Harry was dragged into the mission without foreknowledge of 
what it would really entail--do you think AD would rush off into 
doing something without doing some research first, hmm?--because 
Albus knew any adult who knew him and the context would be highly 
suspicious/resistant to participate ("Go with me to a cave and do 
whatever I say. No, I won't explain what this entails beforehand. 
Yes, I already nearly lost my hand by trying this on my own earlier, 
but that's all you need to know." Sound like a suicide mission to
anybody else?) Note, Harry tried to back out of the force-feeding
idea once AD told him about it--would he have even gone on the 
mission if he knew he'd have to do *that* at the end, let alone if 
he knew it would kill AD? My idea is that AD had already broached 
the idea to Snape that he was going to drink that potion--perhaps he 
injured his hand by sticking it into the water earlier and then 
decided to drink it on the next go-round?--and Snape balked at the
idea of force-feeding him/possibly finishing him off. Knowing he
couldn't get Snape into that cave with him, Albus instead took 
innocent Harry, brutally manipulating him into following through 
with his obedience vow (and still not telling him the worst possible 
outcome of the potion).  By drinking the potion without Snape's 
presence or consent, AD was running an end-game around Snape's 
disagreement to the plan and forcing Snape to follow through
with the next step, killing off AD. 



---------

My gut theory: Dumbledore had to die. Either for reasons we don't 
know about, or to save Severus for the next book (who is more 
valuable? AD or the spy at Voldie's shoulder? We know AD does think 
in terms of "value," as he constantly explains to HP that AD has to 
do the blood-sacrificing etc. because he's of less value), AD had to 
die and he knew it. This isn't Sirius II, where somebody gets cut 
down out of the blue. Snape was acting on orders to kill AD--AD's 
orders. Maybe it was to stop Voldie from getting the murder-energy
to stash away another bit of his soul--because the kill wouldn't be 
a murder on Snape's hands (acting on orders from AD), as opposed to 
how it would be if Draco did it--and maybe, too, it was to spare 
Draco from becoming a murderer. But because of all of the above 
points, I suspect strongly that AD's end wasn't because SS double-
crossed him as HP believes.

And to reiterate: 

Reason #21. As has been beaten into our heads by now, AD believes
in Snape. Do you think, at the end of the story, JKR intends us to 
see AD as just a trusting old fool? Or as the symbol of love 
triumphant? As Lupin--who ranks *very* highly in JKR's eyes--
says, "If you believe in Dumbledore, you believe in Snape."

I rest my case!

Krista