Dumbledore's pleading

[Nicolau C. Saldanha]

No: HPFGUIDX 141437

Hickengruendler wrote:
> I simply cannot see Dumbledore begging for his life.

Eggplant:
> I don't know, I think Dumbledore wanted to live. But if I had to guess
> I'd say he was pleading with Snape not to betray him and tell him he
> was never his friend and show that he'd been wrong about him for 16
> years. However if I were JKR I'd never make it entirely clear what he
> meant, when you read real history small mysteries and loose ends like
> that are very common; and after all Dumbledore is dead so he can't
> tell us what he meant.

I don't think so: this is a point of too obvious interest, it cannot
be dismissed just like that. Not clarifying that would be IMO
comparable to leaving us in the dark as to the meaning of the famous
gleam on the grounds that Dumbledore is dead and can not tell. Yes,
this kind of thing happens all the time in real life but should not
happen in fiction, at least not in this kind of fiction (I think).
And, of course, the explanation has to be consistent with what we know
about DD: IMO neither "DD was pleading for his life" nor "DD was
asking Snape to kill him with AK" are satisfactory. I also find your
theory less than satisfactory: if DD somehow finds out that Snape is a
traitor (before he says anything or raises his wand, mind you),
pleading "Severus, please..." is not an adequate reaction from the DD
we know.

I add that I find speculation from DD's point of view to be much more
solid than that from Snape's point of view. We know a lot about DD's 
character both from the books and from JKR's interviews; on the other
hand, both the books and the interviews are very careful not to give
away too much about Snape. So, for instance, it makes sense for me to
say that ESE!Snape should have gloated before killing DD (which Snape
did not, and therefore Snape is not ESE) but this argument is weaker
than saying that DD would not plead for his life (because we know DD
better than we know Snape).

Nicolau