Snape's principles (WAS Re: Snape's Attack on Flitwick)

[juli17 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 139561

Christina:

....... Even if it does turn out that Snape has  ultimately rejoined
the Death Eaters, I don't think he came to that decision  until he
found Dumbledore on the tower and saw how slim his options had  become.
I think his actions regarding Flitwick, Hermione, and Luna were  those
of a double agent in a highly precarious position who needed to  be
able to mold into whatever role was required for the situation at  hand
*without interference*.  If Flitwick had followed Snape down  the
hallway and they ran into some Death Eaters, Snape would have  been
stuck in a pretty tough situation.  He would have been forced to  turn
on either Flitwick or the Death Eaters, costing him his position as  a
double agent no matter which option he chose or what side he was  truly
on.  I personally think that Snape is still good, but I think  his
actions in this particular situation don't really support  any
interpretation.  Snape is a double agent.  Whether he's working  for
Dumbledore or Voldemort (or still considering which side to fall  on),
blowing his cover is the worst thing he can do.  Which is why  he
needed Flitwick (and Hermione and Luna) safely out of his  way.
 
 


Julie says:
The key word you use above is "safely." Why would an  ESE!Snape,
or even an OFH!Snape want Flitwick, Hermoine and Luna SAFELY
out of the way? Why not just out of the way, period? And why not 
out of the way in a more certain manner? Even if ESE/OFH!Snape
didn't need/want to kill them, why NOT stun Hermoine and Luna
too? That way they *definitely* won't be interfering in his business. 
 
It seems odd that throughout this whole Tower/DE Invasion Snape
keeps everyone he encounters SAFELY out of his way, doesn't it?
(Well, not including Dumbledore, of course). Flitwick, Hermoine,
Luna, and most especially, Harry. What does he care if any of
them suffer some minor (or if he's ESE, major) pain or damage?
Why, oh why, does Snape seems *so* concerned about getting
out of Hogwarts without anyone else coming to serious harm, 
so much so he pressures the DEs to leave before they've had
their requisite amount of fun? (And the DEs were winning.)
 
I think it's because he's Dumbledore's man, but I also think it's
because Snape, as verbally nasty as he is, has a moral code
against harming anyone--especially the children of Hogwarts--
though he can be driven to it by rage (as when Harry called him
a coward for killing DD). And even then he keeps it mild. Which
leads me to believe that Snape is on the side of Good based 
on principles, principles that he perhaps adopted late, but did
adopt. 
 
I think it's also the deepest reason Dumbledore trusts him.  Snape
is on the side of Good *on principle,* which is the only  motivation
that is completely trustworthy. And perhaps the only motivation 
that would convince Dumbledore to allow Snape to teach children,
knowing Snape might intimidate them or even hurt their feelings, 
but won't even harm them or allow anyone else to do so. It's  the 
old "sticks and stones..." bit, which while not completely true, does 
have validity in the most austere sense--that of survival. And  survival
is an issue in the WW as long as Voldemort is a threat. 
 
What led to Snape's change of principles (and I don't think it was 
his guilt over revealing the prophecy to Voldemort), that more 
concrete reason which Dumbledore considered telling Harry but 
didn't... that we have yet to find out. But I suspect it's coming 
in book Seven. 
 
Julie 
(who may be blissfully fooling herself about Snape, but does have
some canon disparity to support her hopeful ponderings)
 
 
 
C


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