Shaken Dumbledore? /Snape speech to Bella again

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 143438

Quick_Silver wrote:
> Agreeing with Alla here the Vance murder is the one thing that makes
me doubt that Snape is completely reformed. 
> 
> Either it's a genuine slip up on Snape's part (i.e. an accident) at
which point the idea of a competent spy!Snape is dealt a serious blow
(which isn't a problem IMO...I've always thought that Snape was a
rather pathetic spy to begin with). 
> 
> It could be a sign of Snape's undying loyalty to Voldemort but I 
don't think the series is headed in that direction.
> 
> Or it could be a warning that Snape really doesn't have any true
morals and is a hypocrite. It'd be a bit rich if he's giving up Order
members to mention his cover while scolding Harry for using Unforgivables.
>
>
Carol responds:
Or Snape could be lying to Bellatrix about supplying information on
Emmeline Vance, which is what I think he's doing. Shortly before he
makes this statement, he makes sure that she is no longer in contact
with Voldemort and can't check the truth or falsehood of the
"information" he supplies. Bellatrix says defensively that LV "shares
everything" with her and calls her "his most loyal, his most faithful
[servant]," to which Sanpe replies, "Does he *still*, after the fiasco
at the Ministry?" Bellatrix replies, "That was not my fault!" (HBP Am.
ed. 29) but it's clear that she's no longer in LV's confidence. Since
Snape's whole purpose at this point is to end Bellatrix's doubts
regarding his loyalty, he not only tells her exactly what he's already
told Voldemort ("Do you think has not already asked me each and every
one of these questions? And do you really think that, had I not given
satisfactory answers, I would be sitting here talking to you?" 26), he
apparently feels safe in throwing in a bit of additional detail to
persuade her that he's providing useful information to the Dark Lord
(that he's provided information on Emmeline Vance and Sirius Black).
We know that Kreacher has provided information on Black, and it stands
to reason that Wormtail would also have done so in the year between
PoA and GoF; there's no reason why LV would need additional
information on Black from Snape. But we have no way of determining
whether he's telling the truth about Emmeline Vance or not--and
neither does Bellatrix.

Snape also asks Bellatrix tauntingly whether she believes that he has
"somehow hoodwinked" the Dark Lord, "the most accomplished Legilimens
the world has ever seen" (26). Bellatrix still has her doubts but
doesn't dare to express them because that would imply that Snape is a
greater Occlumens than LV is a Legilimens. But if we look at OoP, in
which Snape tells Harry that only a very skilled Occlumens can lie to
Voldemort without being detected (quote not handy, sorry) and Lupin's
description of Snape in the same book as "a superb Occlumens," I think
we should at least consider the possibility that that's exactly what
Snape is doing--lying to Voldemort and getting away with it, and lying
to Bellatrix as well. He is certainly *concealing* information,
including saving Harry's life in SS/PS and saving Dumbledore's between
OoP and HBP.

IMO, it isn't necessary to take every statement Snape makes in
"Spinner's End" at face value. For example, when he says that Wormtail
has lately taken to listening at doors (obviously a true statement) he
follows it with "I don't know what he means by it" (24-25), which is
almost certainly untrue. I also think his statement that he thought
Quirrell was acting on his own rather than seeking the Philosopher's
Stone for Voldemort is a lie (based on the "where your loyalties lie"
passage in Book 1).

Snape has to be lying to someone, either Dumbledore or Voldemort or
both (his lies being sometimes compounded of half truths). *I* think,
based on the evidence of his loyalty that we find at the end of GoF,
that he's lying to Voldemort. And though I can't prove it, I would
argue that it's at least as likely as the alternative (that he's lying
to Dumbledore).

We can safely assume, based on "Spinner's End," that we now know what
Snape told Voldemort to persuade LV that he has not "left [him]
forever." What we can't safely assume, Snape being Snape, is that what
he told Voldemort (and Bellatrix) is the truth.

A side note since I don't know where else I can squeeze this in:

We've discussed the possibility that before the end of HBP (and maybe
even then) Snape had never cast an Unforgiveable Curse. The chief
piece of evidence for this view is Bellatrix's accusation in
"Spinner's End" that he repeatedly "slithers out of action." There's
also the notable absence of a specific accusation against him in the
Karkaroff Pensieve scene in GoF: Karkaroff connects specific crimes
with specific Death Eaters but accuses Snape only of being a Death
Eater. And Crouch dismissed the charges against him, which I doubt he
would have done if Snape could be proven guilty of torture or murder. 

I noticed another small piece of evidence for this view in "Spinner's
End." Snape says that he preferred his comfortable job at Hogwarts to
"a stint in Azkaban" (27). Not a life sentence to Azkaban, which he
would have received had he cast any one of the Unforgiveable Curses,
but a stint--defined by my dictionary as a definite and limited amount
of time, usually brief--a year or two, possibly, but not a lifetime. 

Just a thought I wanted to toss into the arena.

Carol, whose pumpkin pies are ready to put in the refrigerator,
wishing all the Americans on the list a Happy Thanksgiving and a Happy
Thursday to everyone else