Is Snape good or evil?

[chrusotoxos]

No: HPFGUIDX 148526


Hi!

Well, I was asking myself the very same thing, having re-read book 6
for the umpteenth time. I've always thought that Snape was good, but
in the light of DD saying "being more intelligent than most, my
mistakes are bigger" (book 6), I'm starting to question my own
judgement. It seems that every female reader over 5 believes in
Snape's innocency, but it seems to me that the one good element we
have about this is DD's word. 

"eggplant107" wrote:
>
> Considering this "is Snape good or evil" business I can think of 5
> possibilities, I list them below from least likely to most likely. 

Ok, according to me there are only two possibilities out of this
situation:

> 1) Dumbledore is not dead (boring) so Snape is (yawn) good.

No, DD is dead, and Sirius too. We're just self-deluded if we think
they'll come back, certainty of death has been an important theme in
jkr, she wouldn't confuse her younger readers making them think that
magic can solve everything (remember in book 5, that useless sentence
of Nick, "only wizards, some of them, chose to come back"?)

> 2) Snape killed Dumbledore but it turns out that Dumbledore was evil
> so Snape is good. (after 6 books I don't think any writer could turn
> Dumbledore evil, not even JKR)

Ok, definitely not.

> 3) Snape killed Dumbledore but did so on Dumbledore's orders. (very
> difficult to find a viable reason Dumbledore would order such a thing
> and even if he did Snape would still be evil, at least in my book)

Actually I found a very good reason for him to order such a thing, and
I'm surely not the first: DD was dying. We know that "the duel with LV
shook him greatly", that "he's getting old", that "reflexes are not
what they were", and most of all, that "there are old curses which
don't heal, poisons without antidotes" (Snape, Snape, Slughorn,
Hermione, book 6). If LV had the ring, DD knew that Harry could not
succeed in stealing it away, and therefore there could have been no
victory of the Good Side. He sacrificed himself, just as he did in the
cave. Then it all makes sense: he knows he has 1 year to live, knows
about the LV plans for Draco, and the Unbreakable Vow of Snape and
makes him promise he'll kill him if it comes to that. Meanwhile he can
make Snape DADA teacher, well knowing that if Snape kills him he won't
be able to stay at Hogwarts anyway. Snape should flee back to LV, of
whom he's won the entire trust by now, and then stab him in the back
for Harry.

> 4) Snape killed Dumbledore to aid Voldemort so Snape is evil. (this is
> the conventional interpretation but JKR is seldom conventional)
> 
> 5) Snape killed Dumbledore to aid himself so Snape is evil. (Snape was
> the third most powerful wizard in the world but he wants to be number
> one, he killed one and made sure Harry was alive and healthy to kill
> the other)

These two come to the same point: Snape is really evil, DD has been
wrong all these years, but I still think, even in this possibility,
that DD asked him to kill him. Why make him DADA teacher, then,
knowing the job was cursed?

So I'm (very) sad, because it was good to believe in Snape, but I've
started to think he may be as evil as my niece wants him to be. Wasn't
he happy about his new job? And what about all the stuff he told
Narcissa and Bellatrix? Why has he such an important position into LV
circle? Mph....

Just my 2 cents

chrus