What mistakes Dumbledore made? Re: Loyalty & Trust
hickengruendler
hickengruendler at yahoo.de
Sat Sep 17 19:27:23 UTC 2005
No: HPFGUIDX 140363
Finwitch:
> Plain and simple, the *only* thing keeping Snape on the good side,
was
> Dumbledore's trust. Dumbledore was perfectly aware of this,
> particularly when one or other questions this trust. That's why
> Dumbledore kept saying "I trust Severus Snape" and refusing to listen
> any bad word of him. Because he did not wish to lose this soul who
hung
> to goodness *only* on his trust. I think that choice was a sign of
DD's
> goodness and wisdom-- not a misjudgement -- no matter where Snape's
> loyalties.
>
> If Snape wasn't worth that trust, the blame rests wholly on Snape's
> shoulders, and not on Dumbledore's.
>
> Finwitch
Hickengruendler:
I might agree with you, if Snape not worthy of Dumbledore's trust
couldn't have such disastrous results. If Dumbledore just trusted
Snape, because he hoped his trust would hold Snape on the right side,
than Dumbledore didn't just endanger his own life, with which he could
do whatever he wants, but also the safety of everyone else living in
Hogwarts, including Harry and Trelawney, both of whom Voldemort's
targets, what Dumbledore knew, and he knew that Snape knew as well.
Therefore it would make Dumbledore a trusting old fool, who put other
lives in danger, because he trusted a tale, that not even a child would
have believed. And the narrator agrees with me. He calls Dumbledore's
trust in Snape "unforgivable" (in the last chapter), which it indeed
would be, if the things were like they currently seem.
Personally, I'm beginning to think that the LOLLIPOPs are right. I
never believed in the Snape/Lily theory, but now I do. If Snape had a
crush on Lily or at least liked her as a friend, it would make his
story more believable and Dumbledore's trust much more acceptable (even
if Snape turns out to be evil).
More information about the HPforGrownups
archive