OFH, Life-debt and Snape/Lily-no-way

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 162478

> Carol responds:
> Not likely. We've already been through this, but the only "evidence"
> for an attraction between Narcissa and Snape is in "Spinner's End 
> Surely, if it were important, we'd have had more clues by now.

Neri:
The evidence for Snape/Narcissa is stronger than the evidence for 
Harry/Ginny, Ron/Hermione, Harry/Cho, Lupin/Tonks, or any other SHIP 
I can think of at the moment during the first book we see the happy 
couple together. Any more clues than we already got in Spinner's End 
would have completely ruined the surprise for Book 7.


> Carol:
> Indeed we may and probably will. After all, JKR has promised us more
> information on the Prank--primarily James's motives, I think. Sirius
> won't look very good, either, I suspect. 

Neri:
I suspect differently. James too looked very bad after OotP, and then 
JKR turned the table in HBP. She can do it again with the Prank if it 
fits with her goals. Easily.

> Carol:
> But regardless of what we see
> of Severus's school days, all that will be revealed there is his
> motives for becoming a Death Eater, which we already know he did. 
And
> he must have done other things besides eavesdropping while he was a
> DE, however good he was at "slithering out of action."

Neri:
Yes, but JKR has been very silent about those "other things" for the 
whole series. A silence that I personally finds ominous, but it 
certainly helped the DDM!Snapers in ignoring these deeds. It might 
turn out less easy to ignore them when we know what they were.   


> Carol:
> <snip> I think he was doing what canon says he was doing,
> trying to help Harry block Voldemort's entry into his mind,
> particularly after he realized what Harry was seeing. Note his anger
> when he realizes that Harry has been dreaming about the DoM and that
> he wants to continue that dream.

Neri:
Of course he's angry. This fits exactly with LID!Snape. He doesn't 
want Harry to go to the DoM and get killed. At least not until Snape 
clears his Debt. 


> Carol:
> IMO, he'd be dead if he'd told LV
> about the Occlumency lessons. His own skill at undetectable 
Occlumency
> is the only reason he's alive. And he's going to let Voldemort in on
> that secret? I think not.

Neri:
So could you please explain to me, how does Voldemort think that 
Snape has been fooling Dumbledore all this time, if not through 
Occlumency?


> Carol:
> Sigh. The "missing five hours" idea again. <snip> 
> Kreacher's treachery involved getting
> Harry to the MoM by pretending that Sirius Black was there. It has
> nothing to do with Snape.

Neri:
You are missing my point. I was trying to think how can JKR debunk 
DDM!Snape in the beginning of Book 7. This would not be an easy thing 
to do at all, you know, because by now the DDM!Snapers can disregard 
almost anything as "Snape keeping his cover". But if, in a 
conversation between Voldemort and Snape, Voldemort mentions that 
Snape knew about Kreacher before the DoM operation, this would be 
very difficult to disregard (but I suspect many DDM!Snapers will 
manage anyway).

You may think Snape doesn't have anything to do with Kreacher, but 
JKR might think differently. Snape knowing about Kreacher would be an 
elegant way to explain the dilemma of LID!Snape. He wanted to make 
sure that Harry doesn't go to the MoM and get killed, but he couldn't 
simply warn the Order because Kreacher might report it. The Missing 
Five Hours then fit right in.

 
> > Neri: 
> > 7. We might find out that Snape was instrumental in arresting 
> > Mundungus and sending him to Azkaban during HBP.
> 
> Carol:
> That's a new one. Do you have any evidence of a Snape/Mundungus
> connection other than Snape's sneering reference to him as "a smelly
> sneak thief" (unkind but accurate)? 

Neri:
I don't have evidence and I don't need any. I was just publishing a 
list of my personal *predictions*. Since when do you need evidence 
for a prediction in HPfGU? Mundungus getting caught and shipped to 
Azkaban is published in the Daily Prophet in HBP. Later Ron wonders 
aloud why Snape is sneering about it if he and Mundungus are supposed 
to be on the same side, and then we are immediately distracted from 
this question by other things. The mystery thus remains unsolved, and 
this is exactly the kind of questions that JKR likes to drop and then 
solve in next books.


> Carol:
> I don't know about assassinating Lupin (I think that may be 
Wormtail's
> job), but I do fear that Voldemort will assign Snape to do some foul
> deed and he'll be forced to do it to keep his cover. 

Neri:
Yep, this exactly demonstrates my point. Just any foul deed would not 
be enough to debunk DDM!Snape, because it will automatically be 
classified as "Snape is forced to keep his cover". But if we see a 
conversation in which Snape *asks* Voldemort for Lupin's head, this 
will go a long way. Especially since it's obvious that Snape 
personally hates Lupin and that Lupin isn't likely to be in this 
conspiracy together with with him.


> Carol:
> If anyone convinces Lucius to cooperate with the Order, it will be 
his
> old friend, Severus Snape. Why else emphasize their friendship in
> "Spinner's End"?

Neri:
Their friendship is empathized in Spinner's End? This is news to me. 
IIRC, Narcissa mentions their friendship *once*, and then 
Snape "flatly" trashes Lucius in front of her. 

 
> Neri:
> > 10. If JKR opts for the BANGy solution (which she often does with 
> > Snape) we might actually see Snape on page killing, or takes part 
in 
> > killing, an Order member or one of Harry's friends. Prime
> candidates: Moody, Mundungus, Luna.
> > 
> Carol:
> Extremely unlikely. Snape will need to maintain a low profile
> considering that he's the second most wanted man in the WW.

Neri:
Low profile??? It's going to be a *war* in Book 7. The most wanted 
man in the WW is going to have lots of fun around with all his 
minions, most probably including the next most wanted. Dumbledore is 
dead, Hogwarts might close down, and it's not at all certain how long 
the Ministry will be able to keep even the semblance of control that 
they now have. 


> Carol:
> Mundungus
> is not Harry's friend, nor would his death be bangy, and he's 
already
> in Azkaban.

Neri:
The shady Mundungus appears to be deeply involved in Dumbledore's and 
Aberforth's shady businesses. I predict he's going to be pretty 
central in Book 7. I would not be surprised if he was the one who 
needed James Invisibility Cloak before GH. And if Snape turns out not 
to be DDM after all, then a position will be open for the role of a 
shady Order member that Harry now hates, but will change his mind 
about with better acquaintance. Munudungus fits right in.


> Carol:
> As for Luna, I do fear that
> she'll die, but more likely at the hands of Bellatrix, whom we know 
to
> be both cruel and evil.

Neri:
Not very BANGy, IMO. We already know that Bellatrix is cruel and 
evil. It's hardly worth sacrificing Luna just to demonstrate it all 
over again. Some readers might actually cheer for Bella <g>.


> Carol:
> <snip> What's
> the point of a "climax" revealing that Snape is evil after we've 
seen
> him kill Dumbledore?

Neri:
Because after you saw him kill Dumbledore you are still convinced 
that he isn't evil. The point would be to convince you that he is 
evil beyond doubt, and *then* have him save Harry's life.


> Carol:
> I'm quite sure that she already knows about that theory and I very
> much doubt that she'll debunk it whether it's close to the truth or
> not. She likes to keep profitable lines of discussion going, and
> unlike, say, Snape is a Vampire or Dumbledore is alive or (sigh!) 
Mark
> Evans is Harry's Muggleborn second cousin, interpretations of
> "Severus, please" are profitable, as are DDM!Snape theories, even if
> they don't lead us to the exact solution to the mystery that she has
> in mind. And mark my words, she hasn't given us the Snape solution 
yet.
> 

Neri:
She didn't outright debunk Alive!Dumbledore for some time, and then 
she suddenly did. What caused her to change her mind? The interesting 
thing is that we see her changing her mind right there in live 
performance, from one question to the next. What made the difference?

I think the difference was that in the second question, Dumbledore 
being alive was very explicitly presented as the result of DDM!Snape, 
and the presenter was a famous author. If JKR hadn't debunked it on 
the spot it would have become the mainstream theory, and DDM!Snape 
would then be considered almost canon.

I don't have any idea what forums JKR mainly mines for fandom 
opinion, and what is the status of the Dumbledore-Told-Snape-To-Kill-
Him theory in these forums. But if JKR perceives that this theory is 
becoming mainstream, I predict she'll debunk it. She won't debunk DDM!
Snape itself outside the books, of course, because it does lead in 
profitable directions (LID!Snape, for example) but I think she might 
very well debunk the idea that Dumbledore will make Snape kill him. 


> Carol:
> I wonder how you'll like writing your "Huh! Fancy that! I was wrong
> after all" post. (I know I'll hate writing mine if that turns out to
> be the case!) <grinning back>
> 

Neri:
Well, if it's any consolation, it looks like your "I was wrong" post 
will be lost among hundreds of other such posts from all the rest of 
the DDM!Snapers, while my "I was wrong" post isn't going to enjoy 
that advantage <g>.


> Carol, hoping that the line of inquiry JKR decides to smash to
> smithereens is Harry!Horcrux
>

Neri:
I'd say it's highly unlikely. Even if Horcrux!Harry isn't true, JKR 
has no interest that I can see in smashing it before Book 7 is out.


Neri