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

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 162510


Neri:
> 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.
> 
Pippin:
Huh?  Kreacher can still report, can't he?  Anyway, I think Snape's delay
was explained in HBP. Snape is a true Slytherin and naturally 
phlegmatic. Oh, once the adrenalin is flowing, he's remarkably
quick, but it actually takes a lot to get it  moving, IMO. 

Without Dumbledore or McGonagall to spur him to act, Snape hesitated,  
much as Slughorn did when Ron was poisoned, not out of animosity but
out of confusion.  Knowing the consequences if he was wrong
and he  blew his cover and trashed sixteen years of thankless,
dangerous work for nothing, it took a while for him to accept that he
had no choice but to act. If Dumbledore and Snape assumed
that it *did* blow his cover, that would explain the need for
a murder ruse. The murder makes it impossible for the 
characters to believe in DDM!Snape, while OFH!Snape would be
perfectly acceptable to Voldemort, who doesn't understand or
appreciate loyalty anyway.

> 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.

Pippin:
But that's weak dramatically, because regardless of what the readers
think, Harry is thoroughly convinced that Snape is evil already, whether
for his own ends or because he is personally loyal to Voldemort.
Only a Luke Skywalker type character who  was still convinced that 
there was good in Snape could have such a reversal, but even 
Hermione and Hagrid seem resigned to Harry's point of view.


> 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?

Pippin:
Hmmm.... I don't usually indulge in real life conspiracy
theorizing, believe it or not, but I'm wondering if Salman Rushdie
didn't pull a fast one. 

My understanding is that questions were submitted in advance. 
If  Rowling didn't want to reveal  that Dumbledore was the character 
who had been killed, her usual policy just after release when many 
people haven't finished the book yet, then why would she have 
agreed to answer Rushdie's question at all? 

Not that it's on topic here, replies to OT-Chatter please, but  I'm 
wondering if Rushdie asked exactly the question he submitted.
It would be an interesting interpretation of Rowling's "That's not fair."
Oh well, we'll probably never know. (I mean no disrespect by
suggesting this, I'm only envious of the nerve and the prestige it
took to pull it off.)

Pippin