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

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 134528

 
Lupinlore wrote:

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.



Julie says:
I don't quite see Dumbledore being wrong about people as often 
as you do. Quirrell had worked at Hogwarts before, and Dumbledore
had no reason to distrust him when he returned. As for Lockhart, 
I don't think Dumbledore was really any more fooled by him than
the rest of Hogwarts staff. He just needed a teacher to take a
temporary position (and he considered Lockhart temporary based
both on the supposed DADA curse--real or not--and on the fact
that he said so in CoS). I think Dumbledore hoped for the best
with Lockhart, that he would at least prove marginally competent,
but that's not the same as being fooled by him.
 
I give you Mad-Eye Moody. Dumbledore did know and trust the
real Mad-Eye, so I can only say he wasn't around the imposter 
enough to really get a read on him. It seems odd though,  and
I wouldn't be surprised to find out by the end of Book Seven 
that Dumbledore did know he was dealing with an imposter  but
kept it to himself for some reason. Dumbledore is tricky that
way. 
 
As for Sirius and Wormtail, it doesn't seem that Dumbledore
was around them enough to know them really well. The 
evidence seemed to speak for itself, and since he had no
contact with them after Godric's Hollow, he couldn't take 
his own reading, so to speak. Lupin, OTOH, wasn't a bad
judgment of character by Dumbledore, but Lupin did let
Dumbledore down by forgeting his potion.
 
That's also what happened in OoTP. Both Snape and Harry
let Dumbledore down by not making a supreme effort to overcome
their antipathy toward each other and focus on the critically
important task of teaching/learning Occlumency.  
 
So it's true that Dumbledore sometimes expects the best 
from people around him and they don't deliver. And those he
has trusted who subsequently "fooled him" have tended to
be people he didn't have frequent or prolonged contact with.
 
And this brings us to Snape. Dumbledore has worked with 
Snape for 17  years, and over the past 6 years the he has 
depended heavily on Snape to complete various tasks 
necessary to prepare for and win the war against Voldemort,
including both protecting and teaching the most vital resource
in that coming war, Harry Potter. He has told Snape things
he's told *no one* else, not even McGonagall. Of all the 
teachers at Hogwarts, Dumbledore and Snape may be the
closest in the sense of how much they know about each
other and how much vital information they share. 
 
I fully accept that Dumbledore can misread people, and that
he can expect the best from people which isn't always 
forthcoming. Dumbledore is fallable this way, and he admits
it. What I can't accept is that he could be wrong about Snape,
a man he's known now and worked with day in and day out
for 17 years, a man he has chosen to be for all intents and 
purposes his right hand man in the fight against Voldemort.
 
Dumbledore is fallible, he has been wrong about people 
before, but if he's wrong about Snape, the one man he's entrusted
with every critical bit of information that will lead to the downfall
of Voldemort, then he's not just fallible, he's a fool. And his
death is devalued greatly--it's not a noble sacrifice for the greater
good but simply the passing of a deluded old man. 
 
Thus, part of my reason for believing Snape is good is because
it redeems him (which I'm rooting for), but the other and just as
important reason is because it preserves Dumbledore as the
man I believe him to be, humanly fallible on occasion but 
still a wise and great wizard whose guiding hand is behind
Harry's every step in his journey to fulfill his destiny as the
boy who lived. 
 
Julie 
(who thinks this is the Snape she wanted, and better yet, 
the Dumbledore she wanted)


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