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

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 156528

> 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.
> 

Neri:
It's a possible implication, but it doesn't sound at all like
something that Rushdie meant, so I doubt JKR meant it when she said
"your opinion is right".


> 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
>

Neri:
Hmmm. Faith believes what canon places before her, but she isn't Naïve
or Gullible (she's only their first cousin). Since Snape saved Harry's
life (or tried to, anyway) several times, Faith certainly believes
that Snape is likely to do so in Book 7 too. However, to conclude from
this that Snape must be good, that would be gullible. After all, Faith
also has to believe that Snape tormented orphans placed under his
authority, tried to turn in two innocent men to be soul sucked, and
killed Dumbledore on the tower with an Unforgivable curse. The most
straightforward interpretation of this is that Snape is bad. So Faith
would ask: can Snape be a bad man *and* try to save Harry's life?
Turns out it's not only possible, but is strongly implied in canon.
Yep, Faith would go with that.

Neri