Re: This shall be Salman Rushdie´s words (Spoiler????)!?

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 156526

> 
> Neri:
> I read it like this: Rushdie's opinion is that if Snape is good, then 
> what happened on the tower was a ruse and Dumbledore can't really be 
> dead. JKR says his opinion is right (that is, that Snape being good 
> would imply that Dumbledore is alive) but unfortunately, Dumbledore 
> is definitely dead. 
> <snip>
> So the only question is, does Rushdie's opinion also imply that if 
> Dumbledore *isn't* alive, then Snape must be bad? I'd say the way he 
> presented it certainly suggests so, but he didn't state it 
> explicitly, and therefore the DDM!Snapers are still left, as always, 
> with some vague shade of hope. 

Pippin:
But there's another implication, which is that planning an elaborate
ruse in order to save Dumbledore and plant Snape in deep cover is 
indeed something that Dumbledore and Snape would do, just as we
DDM!Snapers have contended all along. The ruse, if one existed,
evidently failed to save Dumbledore -- but it *may* have kept
Snape from becoming a murderer while enabling him to secure
his position with Voldemort, who will hardly be expecting him 
to help Harry or his friends.

Pippin
wondering if the Faith-ist position shouldn't be that Snape is
good, since he has turned out to be on Harry's side in every other
book in the series