Dumbledore's trust of Snape (Was: OFH, Life-debt and Snape/Lily-no-way)

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 162449

Sherry wrote:
> 
> <snip> I'd say the majority of people who post regularly on the list
believe in Snape's devotion to Dumbledore. 

Carol responds:
Well, not devotion, perhaps. But loyalty, yes. I, for one, think that
the evidence, beginning with Snape's saving Harry's life and talking
to Quirrell about where his loyalties lie in SS/Ps and continuing
throughout the books *even to the end of HBP*, points to Snape as
Dumbledore's man, with the UV and the killing of Dumbledore as
stumbling blocks but not insurmountable obstacles to that theory.
Snape's personality and teaching methods make some readers, not all,
by any means, dislike him intensely, but they're a side issue with
regard to where Snape's own loyalties lie. (I've already talked about
the evidence in GoF, PoA, and OoP as to Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore
despite his dislike of Harry, so I won't repeat those arguments here.
And I agree with wynnleaf (upthread) that JKR's comments in interviews
can't be taken as an indication of Snape's loyalties because he's her
mystery man: she can't givee too much away about him (she her refusal
to divulge his boggart and Patronus) because he's crucial to the plot
of Book 7. I do think, however, that if he were really loyal to
Voldemort that she would have ended HBP as she did, with Snape killing
DD and Harry intensely hating him. Nope. She's building toward a
reversal in Book 7, and she's using her usual misdirection here.

Remember Harry's first encounter with Snape, when he thinks that
Snape's intense gaze into his eyes, which we now know to be
Legilimency, caused his scar to hurt (we now know it was Voldemort
looking out from the back of Quirrell's head that caused the pain).
Snape was the red herring suspect in SS/PS. Many readers have yet to
jettison the suspicions aroused by that book. 

Me, I'm firmly in the DDM!Snape camp, which means we believe that
Snape is loyal to Dumbledore for reasons we don't yet know and that
Dumbledore is right to trust him *completely* (i.e, thoroughly and
absolutely, on all counts, to do what must be done to defeat
Voldemort, even if that means splitting his own soul and killing his
own mentor. If there's a God in the Potterverse, He will understand
the burden placed on Snape and have mercy on his soul, in contrast to
Voldemort, who murders often and without remorse for personal gain and
takes pleasure in Crucioing everyone from Harry to his own Death
Eaters. IMO only, of course.) As others have said, DDM!Snape does not
mean that Snape is a nice person (he's cold and sarcastic to most
people, the exceptions being Dumbledore, McGonagall, and Narcissa) or
that his teaching methods are effective for all students (though they
seem to work for Hermione, Draco, Theo Nott, and Ernie Macmillan,
among others) or that he's always fair (obvously, he isn't). He does
favor the Slytherins, even more than McGonagall favors the
Gryffindors, and he sometimes deducts points unfairly. But we can't
judge his loyalties by his sarcasm (he doesn't like dunderheads) or by
his teaching methods (which reflect those of the RW in an earlier
time) or by his prolonged and self-destructive hatred of James or by
his having once called Lily a "Mudblood," an epithet we never hear him
use at any other time. Something else is at work that makes him loyal
to Dumbledore (IMO) despite his natural inclinations and his Slytherin
background (Slughorn is proof that Slytherin doesn't equal Voldemort
supporter) and his cold, domineering personality and his black,
glittering eyes. Something causes him to risk his life spying for
Dumbledore before Godric's Hollow and again after the TWT. I just want
to know what that something is, and I want Harry to know it, too.

Sherry wrote:
I, however, do not. <snip> 
> Yes, Dumbledore is a great and wise wizard, but he is also human. 
Humans make mistakes in trust and love, and in my opinion, Dumbledore
made his greatest mistake of that kind in trusting Snape.  Dumbledore,
himself, says that his mistakes are greater than anyone else's
precisely because of his great age and wisdom.  If not his mistake in
trusting Snape, what mistake is it?  <snip>

Carol responds:
Harry says that he's Dumbledore's man through and through, but he
isn't really. Not yet. He still thinks that Dumbledore was wrong about
Snape. I think we'll find that the old mentor was wise after all, and
that the boy hero will learn that crucial lesson (among others) on his
journey toward manhood and the overthrow of the enemy.

Nevertheless, I think you've raised an important question: If
Dumbledore's mistake isn't trusting Snape, what is it? I'll attempt to
answer that question, hoping that others will follow up. 

First, Dumbledore says "mistakes," plural. He's admitted to several:
thinking that Snape could overcome his hatred of James (was that
really a mistake? Was that really the reason the Occlumency lessons
ailed? I don't think so, but DD couldn't  tell an angry and grieving
Harry that it was his own fault for not practicing and wanting to have
a dream that was really Voldemort's), keeping Sirius Black safe in a
house he hated (but Sirius surely would have died even sooner if he'd
had his own way), not telling Harry what was going on in OoP (but
surely Voldemort would have found out; we saw the snake rising up in
Harry every time he faced Dumbledore until the scar link was sealed
through Voldemort's Occlumency). 

What else? I don't think that placing Harry with the Dursleys was a
mistake (it was necessary because of the blood protection(, but
perhaps he could have kept better tabs on the Dursleys (I think DD
kenw that the Dursleys couldn't hurt him; we saw what happened when
Uncle Vernon tried to throttle him. I also think that being with the
Dursleys gave Harry training in self-defense and endurance that DD did
not intend but which nevertheless has proved to be an advantage.
Certainly, he's not afraid of spiders!). 

Second, he was referring to mistakes that he knows about, not
necessarily those he mentioned but those he's aware of as he speaks to
Harry. Maybe the mistakes include keeping too much information from
the Order members and the general public, particularly with regard to
Tom Riddle. And yet, as he says to Snape in CoS, "innocent until
proven guilty." He strongly suspects that Tom Riddle released the
monster that killed Myrtle, but he can't prove it. Even in CoS, when
he *knows* who did it but not how, he keeps his mouth shut, perhaps
because not even McGonagall will believe him. (Snape did, I think, but
I won't go there in this post.) DD knows that Voldemort is Tom Riddle
and that he's a Halfblood, not a Pureblood. Maybe he sould have
revealed that information, which might have deterred pureblood
fanatics from joining him to promote their own agenda. Other mistakes
might include not recognizing Fake!Moody as Barty Jr. until it was
almost too late (though, as I've said elsewhere, I think he had his
suspicions that "Moody" was an imposter) and allowing the Ministry to
appoint Umbridge as DADA teacher (but the alternative would have been
to hire Snape prematurely, at a point when DD couldn't give Harry
Horcrux lessons and otherwise prepare him for the confrontation with
Voldemort because of the highly active scar connection, and a point
when, IMO, he was not yet ready to lose Snape's services to the Order
and the school). Maybe he thinks that he could have prevented the
Potters' deaths but failed. Almost certainly, he regrets letting
Sirius Black sit in Azkaban for twelve years. But I don't think he
regrets trusting Snape, and that can't be the mistake he was referring
to because he was defending Snape's actions at that point. Nor can he
mean hiring Snape to teach DADA, which hadn't happened yet.

Carol, who thinks that Dumbledore is far wiser than any character who
claims to have trusted Snape only because Dumbledore did and that DD
will be proven correct in his judgment of Snape in Book 7