"revulsion and hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face"

[leslie41]

No: HPFGUIDX 135425

Dan wrote:

> Don't get me wrong, folks. I'm not shrugging off your suggestions. 
But
> neither explanation has that convincing authentic ring - these are
> very nearly, or almost explanations, just like the others I 
mentioned.
> If I had been so silly as to make an unbreakable vow to help Draco 
in
> his task without knowing what that task was, not only would I be an
> abysmally stupid person, and I don't think Snape is abysmally 
stupid,
> but I wouldn't, upon discoving the truth, feel hatred and 
revulsion,
> but horror at what I would, I suddenly found out, have to do.

Revulsion *is* horror.  It's one of its synonyms.

And Snape wasn't stupid to make that vow.  His main goal at 
Spinner's End was not to protect Draco or soothe Narcissa.  His main 
goal was to eradicate Bellatrix's deep distrust of him.  That's part 
of the reason why he took the vow.

He accomplishes this goal handily.  Bellatrix is "astounded" by his 
vow, her eyes wide with surprise.  She did not think he would do it, 
and now she has no excuse to distrust him or to take her suspicions 
to Voldemort.  

Killing Dumbledore completely cements Snape's position within 
Voldemort's ranks.    

Dan:
> If I had to put down an injured animal, I would feel pity. This 
too is
> not hatred and revulsion. 

You might feel that.  I would be horrified and repulsed. 

Dan:
> The only one so far that makes any sense is precisely what Leslie 
says
> is impossible. Leslie, how did you come up with this description? 
It's
> almost as if your arguement against it is based on an actual 
reading
> of it, possibly your immediate response, that you have subsequently
> rejected. At any rate, I think the text absolutely DOES read this 
way.
> 
> leslie41:
> > "Please what, old man? 'Please don't kill me'? I've been waiting 
for
> this moment for years, you pathetic, crumbling excuse for a
> wizard...Aveda Kedavra!"

Nope.  I wrote that description myself with the text at hand, 
modifying it so that it made plain what the text does not:  that is, 
the text does not demonstrate that Snape hates DD or that he wants 
to kill him.

The text reads:

"Snape gazed for a moment at Dumbledore, and there was revulsion and 
hatred etched in the harsh lines of his face."

He says nothing to DD.  Just "AK" and that's it.  Then, after that 
(according to Harry) "It's over."

My point in rewriting it was to show that Rowling most definitely 
wants there to be ambiguity in how we view Snape at this point.  If 
she wanted his motives and his feelings toward DD to be plain, she 
would have written in (as I suggested) a glare instead of a gaze, 
and made the recipient of the hatred and revulsion extremely clear.
Then, she would have shown Snape gloating before or after he 
delivered the AK.

She did none of that.  Snape *gazes*.  A gaze is a long, fixed 
look.  And his eyes don't "glitter" as they usually do when he's 
discovered something particularly pleasing to him.  

If this is his ultimate victory--if DD is his nemesis--why not 
gloat? Why not say "You worthless pathetic old man" as he kills him? 
That wouldn't offend the Death Eaters, certainly. The killing of DD 
is distinguished most not by what *is* in there, but what's *not*, 
and what we would have every right to expect if Snape really did 
hate DD.  

Look back at the end of PoA, when Snape discovers Lupin and Black at 
the Shrieking Shack.  Page 360, to be precise.   

Snape truly and deeply hates Black, loathes him with every bone and 
fiber of his being.  And he is very eager to gloat.

"Vengeance is very sweet...how I hoped I would be the one to catch 
you."

Rowling doesn't want us to peg Snape as ESE.  That's evident 
throughout the entire book.  She doesn't want to make things that 
easy for us, or for Harry.    

Leslie41