[HPforGrownups] The Possibilities of Grey Snape (was Re: What would a successful AK mean?)

[elfundeb]

No: HPFGUIDX 143025

Jen has thrown out so much interesting stuff in the past few days rethinking
so many of our issues. I can't respond to everything, so I'll just bite off
a little bit.
 Jen:
You know, gut instinct aside about the tower scene, I've been
thinking about another Snape option, Grey!Snape lets call him, in
honor of his underpants.

Grey!Snape bears more than a passing resemblence (but is clearly not
identical) to something I posted last month, which I won't repeat, but which
can be read here:
 http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/142005
 Jen:
The idea of Dumbledore trusting in Snape's ultimate goodness is the
key to this guy. Dumbledore doesn't completely trust Snape the DE,
the man who joined Voldemort, but he does trust Severus Snape, his
former student and the person who turned from Voldemort for some
still partially shrouded reason.
 But Snape is vulnerable, he's morally weak, and even Dumbledore's
faith can't protect him from himself. He is his own worst enemy in
cliched terms.
 Debbie:
As I see it, Snape's weakness has two root causes:
(1) His emotions, which in most circumstances he is enormously adept at
controlling, but he has a weak spot in that the wounds of his adolescence
still have not fully healed ("fools . . . who cannot control their emotions,
who wallow in memories and allow themselves to be provoked so easily").
These issues come to the forefront in the Shrieking Shack and in the
disastrous end to the Occlumency lessons.
(2) He plays to win. This doesn't mean that, like Peter, he shifts his
alliances depending on who seems to have the upper had. It means that he is
not only convinced that what *he* brings to the table will make the
difference, but he thinks (or thought, at any rate) that he can play the
double-agent game and emerge unscathed.
At the end of HBP, his loyalty to Dumbledore has compromised his
double-agent status and the UV has saddled him with a cowardly teenager with
a price on his head. Regardless of his loyalty, he must be passionately
loathing Dumbledore at this point for having put him into this position.
  Jen:
So Dumbledore does keep him from the DADA job, knowing the curse may
wreak havoc on their precariously balanced faith in each other and
he tries for sixteen long years to nurture the part of Snape that is
still good. He tries to bolster other people's belief in Severus,
hoping his faith in him and his goodness will win out.
 Debbie:
My thinking is similar, but I give Snape credit for genuine remorse and
loyalty. Dumbledore's trust is justified because for sixteen years Snape's
loyalty is with Dumbledore. The Occlumency fiasco was a revelation about the
state of Snape's emotions, but not an indicator of his loyalty. This is why,
I think, we are shown in OOP that the old Marauders-Snape conflict brought
out similar emotions in Sirius. Neither one can surmount this aspect of
their past, but we should be wary, even in retrospect, of reading this as a
sign that Snape was less than loyal. Rather, it sets up the turmoil he faces
at the end of HBP.
Jen:
A combination of the DADA curse and his weakness
bring him down by first taking the UV, and then following the course
through to its logical end.
 Debbie:
I like this! I had not thought that his entrapment into the UV was the
result of the DADA curse, but you're right. The DADA curse doesn't get much
play, but its effect is a mirror to the luck conferred by Felix Felicis.
With Felix Felicis everyone makes the right choices. Almost as the DADA
curse kicks in (in my earlier post I concluded that Snape had been appointed
to the DADA job before Spinners End), Snape's double agent role is
compromised by the UV.

Jen:
So we see that Dumbledore did not ask Harry to bring Lupin or the
other Order members, any of the noble folks. He asked for Snape. He
asked for the person who was bound by the UV, was not a brave person
in the traditional sense. Dumbledore chose to land on the tower
under the Dark Mark and called for a person whose hands are tied.
Why?
 Debbie:
I see Dumbledore's actions on the Tower as directed to the rescue and
redemption of Draco. Snape is the only person who could have accomplished
that. Anyone else would have engaged the other DEs in battle and perhaps
distracted Draco sufficiently from his fears so he could have AK'd
Dumbledore himself.
 I found Lupinlore's conversation with his military friend to be quite
fascinating, particularly this tidbit:
"He also openly despises the CIA and other
intelligence agencies and admits that one of the main purposes in his
present activity is to argue against allowing special exceptions to the
law for intelligence gathering and covert activities."
 I suspect that it is no different in the WW. Espionage has always been an
extreme sport, and anyone who plays that game must be willing to play the
game through to the end. Snape must have always known that he might be
forced into an action like the AK on the tower, and he has always known full
well that he has no expectation that he could escape justice if he is
captured after committing such an act. I think this is an important point
because without this prior knowledge and understanding, it would be an act
of evil on Dumbledore's part to ask or expect Snape to carry out the AK.
 Jen:
And Dumbledore, on the tower, does realize that he's asked too much
from someone once again, that his belief did not the man make. BUT,
he still believes even if Snape kills him and saves himself, Snape
does want Voldemort gone and cares for Draco as much as he is
capable of. So the pleading was not 'you must kill me' or 'you must
not kill me' but 'you must follow our plans through to conclusion,
you must help Harry defeat Voldemort, you are capable of this
whatever the personal price'. You know, in a nutshell ;).
 Debbie:
Just to clarify here, I think you're saying that Snape *is* loyal to
Dumbledore here, in which case the weakness was entering into the UV which
committed him to the action that he is now carrying out. (He has no choice
on the tower -- either he kills Dumbledore, or they both die, and probably
Draco, too, since there are four bloodthirsty DEs at the ready.) But, yes, I
think Dumbledore is asking for Snape's *continued* loyalty, which is not
assured.

Jen:
And Snape *will* do the right thing in the end, Dumbledore's faith
in him will prove to be true, that he is capable of being faced with
temptation and won't try to 'slither out' at a pivotal moment.
 Debbie:
I agree with this, but Snape's emotional state at this point doesn't allow
him to see this clearly. I think Snape is left at the end of HBP alone with
his emotions and Draco Malfoy and a bunch of decisions to make. His future
loyalty is not assured, but I agree that he will do the right thing in the
end.

Jen:
I still love the idea that Dumbledore's unwavering trust in Snape
will be proven true because it so beautifully counters his mistrust
of Riddle, which was believed by none.
 Debbie:
This is true, but I never liked plain-vanilla DDM!Snape because there's no
element of choice. This is why I picture Snape out there somewhere in his
own private hell, trying to make up his mind whether to carry out
Dumbledore's plan to save Draco or whether to go over to Voldemort and save
himself. What would really justify Dumbledore's faith would be for Snape to
emerge from this crucible and do the right thing. It's easy to be faithful
while ensconced in a safe job at Hogwarts; to really justify Dumbledore's
faith he must face a final test. That's one reason why I think Snape must
have actually been loyal to Dumbledore up to and including the moment of the
AK on the tower.

Sydney:
> The larger objection is a wavering, agonizing, side-switching
> Snape is just such a massive focus-puller. It would make Snape,
> not Harry, making all the critical choices and going through the
> most interesting emotions at the end of the book. Story-wise I'm
> much happier having Snape running down a pretty clear,
> straightforward track, and Harry doing all the mind-changing. For
> this reason I would prefer Evil!Snape to conflicted!Snape, because
> much as I'd rather read a book about Snape, this ain't it.
 Debbie:
Having set up an apparent contradiction by juxtaposing the look of revulsion
on Snape's face and Dumbledore's apparent plea, both DDM!Snape and ESE!Snape
seem too simplistic as explanations. I would find Book 7 quite compelling if
I were to read about Harry adjusting his view of Snape as Snape's own final
decision unfolds in front of him. That's what made the Shrieking Shack so
compelling -- Harry's understanding of who his enemies were changed moment
to moment as the Marauders made their revelations in front of him.
 Debbie
apologizing for reorganizing all of Jen's points


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