Why does Snape wants DADA job if it cursed? WAS: Re: Snape again

[Ceridwen]

No: HPFGUIDX 148907

Alla:
> 
> Right that is pretty much what I thought - that in your scenario 
the 
> curse works sort of like Imperio through circumstances, but I am 
> still unclear on how the curse will work in your scenario upon the 
> person without Dark Mark. Is in your scenario "brings the worst 
> secret or the worst part of their natures and oust DADA teachers" 
> still true?

Ceridwen:
Still true.  Worst secret, worst nature (and the two could be the 
same thing - look at Lockhart).  It has never been a good thing for 
the soul who holds that position.

Alla:
> Are you theorising in essense that if curse is unable to "force" 
> or "compel" DADA teacher directly or indirectly to kill Dumbledore, 
> then the curse still "outs" the person? Basically is it EITHER/OR 
> scenario? Because it seems that in Snape scenario curse did both ( 
> if we assume that this is curse's doing of course :))

Ceridwen:
Not kill Dumbledore necessarily, just get him out of the school in 
any feasable way.  Of course, Dumbledore being so powerful, that 
would almost make it a necessity to kill him, as he will never really 
leave while he is alive.  We saw that in OotP.

But, you know, OotP (book 5) was worse than GoF (4), which was worse 
than CoS (3), which was... maybe not worse, but farther reaching than 
PS/SS (1).  At least, that's how I see the DADA exposures.  Quirrel 
the victim, Lockhart the charlatan (sp?), Lupin the tragic victim of 
his 'furry problem', Moody the victim and Crouch the failed 
manipulator, Umbridge the truly evil, and now, Dead Dumbledore (YMMV 
on Snape's motivation).  This could be because of LV growing more 
powerful as someone suggested, or it could be that the curse is 
growing stronger, as someone else suggested.

Alla:
> What I am trying to say that it seems logical to me that IF your 
> scenario is correct or the way I see it, the curse should not be 
> able to work AT ALL upon someone who is not wearing DADA mark or 
who 
> is in his heart faithful to Voldemort. Makes sense?

Ceridwen:
It does.  Which means I'm not explaining it well.  Think of the curse 
as the TV signals you can receive on your set.  If you have an 
antenna, you can get the UHF and VHF stations, which don't go above 
70-something, IIRC.  This is the way the curse affects the non-DE 
DADA teacher.  He or she is affected by the curse, but only up to 70-
some-odd channels.

But the Dark Mark acts like an amplifier and superior signal catcher, 
like a cable box or satellite dish.  The DE holding the DADA position 
is affected more by the curse than the non-DE.  Five hundred 
channels, more or worse potential damage to Dumbledore, as well as to 
the DADA professor.

Crouch jr. couldn't pull it off, though he did almost create an 
international incident.  His own instability was a kink in the wiring 
of his receiver.  Every flaw we've seen in the DADA professors was a 
kink, I think, which affected the curse adversely.  Even LV couldn't 
circumvent it on the back of Quirrell's head, because of Quirrell's 
defect (being scared?  weak?  fighting LV for the stone for 
himself?).  IF this is true, and it's only just occurred to me as I 
think of this, then oddly enough, Snape is the only DADA prof. we've 
seen who didn't have some flaw that was capable of short-circuiting 
or otherwise misdirecting the curse.  Looking below to the respect 
part, maybe Snape was the only great wizard of the bunch, and 
therefore a purer conduit for the curse to work through.  But don't 
take me too seriously on this paragraph, it's only a thought.

Alla:
> It would be funny if what LL said earlier would turn true, but 
> partially - namely all previous DADA teachers left not because of 
> the curse and for the first time curse worked was on Snape and why 
> because Snape had the potential, the intent and/or Dark mark to 
make 
> the curse recognise him as true Voldemort's man /or simply 
compelled 
> him through Dark Mark.

Ceridwen:
But the curse did work.  Dumbledore was more powerful.  Each year 
that we have seen, there was the potential for Dumbledore's ouster 
from his position as headmaster.  We've only seen years when Harry's 
involvement was also a factor.  And I think that Harry's presence, as 
the only person who has survived an AK, and LV's AK at that, does 
throw a wrench into the works.  This is, in part, why Dumbledore said 
Harry has defied LV numerous times - he has defied the curse every 
year as well as outright attempts on his life.

But each DADA teacher has been outed under a cloud.  Lockhart didn't 
leave at the end of the year throwing kisses and handing out 
autographs, after all.  None of them left in good shape.  Quirrell 
even died.

Alla:
> 
> Oh, of course not - this respect was shown in neutral context, it 
> could EASILY be Evil Snape too :-). I was just trying to say that 
IF 
> we get DD!M Snape this could be used to support after the fact 
> Snape's respect of Dumbledore in a good way, if that makes any kind 
> of sense. :-)

Ceridwen:
Yes, it could, but only as a bit of supporting evidence.  The real 
denouement (sp?) will have to be something BANGY to Harry, and 
therefore to us.  Respect is something he already knows to be 
neutral, through Dumbledore's teachings, as well as the rest of the 
staff (*Professor* Snape, Harry...)  For any flavor of Snape, the 
respect will only serve to prove that, in his own way, he was a great 
wizard.  Because only the great can see the neutral viewpoint on 
respect, IMO, the petty or less worthy will grouse and complain.

Alla:
> Just another example IMO how one piece of canon can be intepreted 
in 
> TWO opposite ways and both interpretations would be correct till 
> book 7 comes out.

Ceridwen:
Absolutely!  Or even in three or four ways.  Or more.  That's why I 
like the HP series.  It can be a mental exercise, and there is 
certainly a lot to talk about!

Ceridwen.