This is not the Snape we wanted. Can we still love him?

[inkling108]

No: HPFGUIDX 134511

"nrenka"  wrote:
> <SNIP>
> > 
 Consider it a hypothetic, 
> to work upon the task of seeing all sides, and all possibilities.
> 
Inkling now:

That was the idea -- not to argue the premise, but take it as a 
given.  The logic I meant to convey was if...then.  That is,  if 
Snape's betrayal is real, then what does that tell us about him?

Obviously, if the premise is wrong, the rest of the post is 
irrelevant (we'll all find out in two years or so).  But for those 
of us who think Snape did truly betray Dumbledore , some rethinking 
is going on, and I wanted to reflect on that.

Nrenka: 
> > Is it really so utterly unthinkable, that Dumbledore might have 
> > been mistaken--or at the least, fooled?  This possibility is 
> > brought up repeatedly in the text; this might be only a 
reference 
> > to young Tom Riddle, or it might be foreshadowing.  If one 
objects 
> > to the foreshadowing on the grounds that it's entirely too 
obvious, 
> > I'd like to point you to the romance of Ron and Hermione, also 
> > rejected by many a poster on *exactly the same grounds*.

Then Lupinlore: 
> Excellent point.  The books are, it is true, full of references to 
> how Dumbledore trusts Snape.  They are also, however, full of 
> examples of how Dumbledore is often wrong about people -- 
sometimes 
> in spectacular ways.  In PS/SS he was wrong about Quirrel.  In CoS 
he 
> was wrong about Lockheart.  In PoA he was revealed to have been 
wrong 
> about Sirius and Wormtail, and perhaps about Lupin as well.  In 
GoF 
> he was fooled by someone impersonating one of his oldest friends.  
In 
> OOTP he was wrong about Harry, Sirius, AND Snape.  We also have 
the 
> hint in HBP that he had been wrong about the Dursleys (although 
that 
> does contradict - I suspect by conscious choice on JKR's part - 
some 
> of what he said in OOTP).  Added to is JKR's statement in her 
> interviews about how trusting too readily and wanting to believe 
the 
> best of people really IS a weakness of Dumbledore's, that indeed 
his 
> great intelligence sometimes made him liable to large-scale 
emotional 
> misunderstandings and miscalculations.  The theme of Dumbledore's 
> weakness in this area runs straight through all the books.  On the 
> face of it, there seems little reason to believe he might not have 
> been wrong about Snape -- particularly if Snape was playing his 
own 
> selfish game and if Snape came under severe emotional stress that 
> Dumbledore did not fully forsee or understand.

Now Inkling:

I know we're supposed to be snipping more, but these are such 
important points!  We need to think outside a self-imposed box about 
Dumbledore trusting Snape, and the case for him being mistaken is 
there in canon if you want to see it.

(SNIP)
Nrenka again:
> > Theme has become a weak point to argue upon, because none of us 
> know 
> > what Rowling is really aiming for. 

Inkling now:
You know, I think theme is really all we have to argue from in a 
way.  We certainly can't predict the future based on the past.  
Remember all the pre-HBP predictions that went nowhere?  But if we 
have a sense of what she is trying to do, then we can predict, not 
specific events, but thematic unfolding.  For example, I believe she 
is working toward Snape's redemption, but can't begin to guess how 
that might specifically happen.

(Of course you are right that none of us really know what she is 
trying to do, but by this point, the penultimate book, many do have 
a strong sense or opinion about it.  I know I do :-))

And I think the argument over Snape is essentially a clash of 
dueling themes, and those who believe in one theme will see the 
evidence for it, while those who believe in another will see the 
evidence for their position, and both will tend to ignore the 
evidence to the contrary.  And things may get dicey because there is 
a lot of emotion involved when it comes to Snape, and at this point 
the shock of the ending of HBP is still so fresh.  That's why I 
wanted to step outside the argument for a minute and say, well, 
suppose he acted out of evil intent, what then?  But I'm not asking 
anyone to agree with that premise or to say that I know the answer 
to the big question about him.  Just to present is one way of 
looking at it.

Inkling