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

[nrenka]

No: HPFGUIDX 139875

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "nkafkafi" <nkafkafi at y...> wrote:

>> Pippin:
>> But they were only shown mercy, not trust. I'm asking how 
>> Dumbledore's belief that someone on their second chance can be 
>> *trusted* is to be validated if Snape failed his trust. 
> 
> Neri:
> Well, you have pointed out yourself that Lupin was awarded that kind 
> of trust. So either we will have ESE!Lupin and Innocent!Snape, or we 
> will have Loyal!Lupin and Guilty!Snape. Whichever of these happens we 
> are assured that at least one character would justify trust awarded 
> as a second chance, and thus Dumbledore's epitomness is guaranteed.

I hadn't thought of it in those logical terms, but I do believe that 
Neri is right. :)

We've been arguing about how implausible it is that Dumbledore be 
fooled, but if we hew to Pippin's ESE!Lupin theory (which she has 
supported without break or failing heart), Lupin has gotten one over on 
Dumbledore--and has, indeed, been doing it for *years*.  With real 
style, too, to evade suspicion and be granted as much forgiveness and 
acceptance as the Order has offered him.

In this scenario, Dumbledore has given Lupin repeated chances to prove 
himself trustworthy--all of which Lupin has betrayed, but Dumbledore 
just keeps giving Lupin more chances.  Does that make Dumbledore an 
idiot, or Lupin into the uber-smooth spy of the century?

I suppose that it's BANG-ier than having Snape, who's worked much more 
closely with Dumbledore, be the betraying character.  But it still 
makes Dumbledore into the fallible figure that ESE/OFH!Snape does, 
which means that very same thematic objection can also be applied to 
the ESE!Lupin theory.

-Nora does occasionally wish she could use Hogwarts-class punishments 
for students who think Friday class is 'optional'