Nope, no consensus on Snape (was Re: Snape's Grudge)

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 142727

>  > Alla:
> <SNIP>
> > Woudn't you agree that Snape did what ANY half decent person was 
> > supposed to do after such person realised that being a member of 
> > terrorist organization is very very WRONG?
> 
> 
> Montavilla:
> 
> Maybe any half-decent person ought to do what Snape did in 
returning to Dumbledore, 
> but it isn't necessarily an easy thing to do.  <SNIP>


Alla: 

Actually, I did not say that it was an easy thing to do, I just 
argued that it is not necessarily heroic thing to do. You know, of 
course it IS hard to turn away from evil, but since the person made a 
choice to turn TO evil in the first place, I do think that  it is a 
simple decency to try and pay one's debts.


Montavilla:
> Did Snape gain all that much from returning to Dumbledore?  He got 
a job and a place to 
> live during the school year out of it.  

Alla:

Erm... YES, IMO. He got a place to live, a paying job INSTEAD of 
facing Dementors in Azkaban, where I think we could agree he had been 
heading had Dumbledore not vouched for him. I think he gained an 
awful lot from returning to Dumbledore. JMO, of course,


Montavilla:
If he's DDM!Snape and Voldemort finds out for sure, 
> then he's earned a very painful death.

Alla: 

Yes, of course.


Montavilla:
If he's LVM!Snape (as he certainly appears to be 
> now) and the Ministry catches him, he'll get Azkaban for life at 
least.  Even before killing 
> Dumbledore, he'd get Azakaban for life, like any other Death Eater.

Alla:

How is it connected to Snape returning to Dumbledore? If Snape IS 
still a DE, that is his choice, no? I meant if he was sincere when he 
came back to Light, then he gained an awful lot. If he was sincere 
when he said " spinned him a tale of deepest remorse", then I'd say 
whatever punishment catches up with him, it still will not be severe 
enough. IMO only of course.



Montavilla:
> If ANY half-decent person would defy their own colleagues and 
bosses to do the right 
> thing, then there would be a lot less casual evil in the world.  
Yes, they should.  We all 
> should.  But very few do.

Alla:

But  defining casual evil does not mean that you were an evil person 
in the first place, IMO. It seems to me that it is not that casual if 
you turned to Grand evil first. Am I making sense or not much?

JMO,

Alla