Snape's canon opposite/ Proving loyalty (Re: Hearing from the Great Middle)

[Jen Reese]

No: HPFGUIDX 140169

vmonte:
> Something that I find interesting in the Snape debates is that
> nothing JKR says in her interviews about Snape is ever considered
> as canon evidence. Recently JKR responded to an interviewer that
> she has never intentionally misled anyone regarding any of her
> characters (although she does say she may have needed to change
> something minor—but never a major plot point). If we are to take
> JKR's comments as for the most part being canon, then you will
> notice that she is very consistent in her comments regarding Snape.
 
Jen: Or canon interpreted differently? 

If JKR wants readers to view Snape as pure evil, she has shot 
herself in the foot by introducing his opposite into canon. A nice 
person, a non-greasy, well-mannered boy who is trusted by students 
and teachers (oh, except for Dumbledore), a *responsible* student 
who doesn't appear to be mucking around in the dark arts. So when a 
deeply horrible, not-nice, unliked boy who is 'up to his eyeballs in 
dark arts' appears AND he's trusted *only* by Dumbledore, well, 
forgive me if I have to wonder about him.

HBP was a study in the evolution of evil in Potterverse. Tom Riddle 
was a Very Nice Boy. He was polite, studious, well-mannered, 
affable. Behind his facade, he was working to unleash a monster into 
the school, murdering his family in cold blood, preparing a diary to 
suck the life out of a future student, studying how to form 
Horcruxes using his split soul, and wooing people using 
his 'considerable charm' to get whatever he wanted.

When JKR tells me Snape is a deeply horrible person, abuses his 
power, is culpable in a way Voldemort is not, isn't 'too nice', 
well, I get it: He's a Very Mean Person. He was not even capable of 
*acting* nice like Voldemort, instead, he waved it around like a 
flag of honor--'look, Deeply Horrible Person over here.'

All I'm saying is JKR has done a considerable job of shaping Snape 
into a person who has very few redeeming qualities in his 
*personality*. If indeed she is striving to tell us through text and 
interviews that Snape is evil, well yes, I'm guilty of missing 
her 'anvil size clues' on this one. 

zgirnius:
> Snape really did come to DD sincerely remorseful for his prior bad
> actions back in the days of Voldemort's first war. I expect to 
> learn more about why he was remorseful, and why Dumbledore
> believed him. I do not have a personal favorite theory. But I have
> seen more than one theory on the list which would work as far as I
> am concerned. (LOLLIPOPS, or his horror that Voldemort orders the
> killing of Regulus Black, as two examples). 
 
Jen: First zgirnius, I loved your post and had little to debate over 
so my thoughts are just additions.
 
I really believe we will see an *unmanipulated fact* to prove why 
Dumbledore trusted Snape. Words can be manipulated, stories of deep 
remorse spun, tears of sadness cried over Lily, stories of horror 
told about Regulus---all can be manipulated & fabricated by a superb 
Occlumens. Even if Snape did feel any of those things, they were not 
proof he was, or would remain, loyal to Dumbledore. 
 
In another post I mentioned how Dumbledore saw proof of who Harry 
was *inside* throughout the first two years at Hogwarts. Harry saw 
his family in the Mirror of Erised, he wanted the stone from the 
mirror but not to use it, he was able to call Fawkes and 
Gryffindor's sword to him in COS. Those are the kinds of things I 
believe Dumbledore relied upon to trust Snape, things we will see in 
the next book, and most likely a combination of inalterable magical 
forces such as Fawkes being with Snape, Snape's boggart, his 
patronus, perhaps an animagus form--things JKR believes tell more 
about a person's true character than words ever could.
 
I'm not saying Dumbledore ran Snape through a set of traps any more 
than I think he set up those tasks for Harry. But I do think while 
Snape's reason for changing sides earned him a second chance, they 
did not gain Dumbledore's complete trust until backed up with 
irrefutable proof. 
 
zgirnius:
<snip>
> I would not be particularly surprised if some variant of ACID POPS 
> were in play as well, and I *really like* the idea that Snape's 
> fateful decision to take the Vow may have been  due to the malign 
> influence of the DADA curse. (Yes, the timeline is off, it may not
> have been made official by then, but DD was thinking
> about bringing in Sluggie at Potions. Maybe the curse reads
> minds...)
 
Jen: I love the idea of the DADA curse at work for the UV, but also 
wonder about the timeline. Like you said, Dumbledore wasn't certain 
he could convince Slughorn to teach potions at the time of the UV. 
Snape mentioned to Bella he never got to teach the DADA position, so 
either he didn't know yet or he lied (big surprise). Still, it's a 
very useful example of the DADA curse at work if JKR intends to give 
us more about that.