Depth? Things to take on their face value (Was: Sirius' loyalty)

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 139798

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "Jen Reese" <stevejjen at e...>
wrote:

> Then we have the biggie, the one which is harder to accept: 
> Dumbledore trusts Snape and since Dumbledore is so clever he 
> sometimes makes comparatively 'huger' mistakes than the rest.
Hmmmm. 
> Still can't accept that one quite yet. Not because it would make 
> Dumbledore a fool, since choosing to love and trust over feeling 
> hate and suspicion are 'generally preferable' as DD (JKR) would
say. 
> But it would negate Dumbledore's life work, in a sense. He trusted 
> someone he shouldn't have, allowed him into Hogwarts & the Order, 
> and it led to death and destruction of many of the things he holds 
> dear. And the chain is just beginning, the ramifications of 
> Dumbledore's huge mistake would mount in Book 7 if Snape truly is 
> working at Voldemort's side. If this one is true, the real 
> redemption will be Harry righting Dumbledore's wrong. 
> <snip list of consequences>

Pippin:
I think we are to take Dumbledore's statements about life,
the universe and everything at face value. It is our choices,
it doesn't do to dwell on dreams and forget to live, killing is
much more difficult than the innocent believe, and so on.

I think it will make things very complicated in the end to have
Dumbledore be wrong about Snape. There will have to
be a lot of  shoring up not to undermine the idea that people 
are worth a second chance at trust. Is there any indication that 
this teaching, among all the fatherly guff that Dumbledore hands
out, is misguided? Well, Moody thinks it is, but his paranoia
is not presented as something to admire.

There's Peter of course, but even if  Pettigrew redeems himself,
he still won't be someone who  repented and was *trusted* again. 
Nor would there be time, in the  year of story that we have left, 
for Pettigrew to prove that his remorse had "stuck" so to speak.


Pippin