DD trust in Snape again. WAS: Evil Hermione

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 154926

Amiable Dorsai:
> > Carol, Pippin, other Snape fans--again, I ask: Am I, one of
Snape's biggest critics, the *only* one who doesn't believe him so
devoid of sense, so insane, so utterly batsh*t crazy, that he would
rather see Harry dead than cement his position with Dumbledore by
saving him, or so shortsightedly reckless as to take an entirely
unnecessary risk of losing his position and what reputation he has?

> 
> Julie:
> I'm not sure I really understand your question. As a DDM!Snape 
> believer (which isn't exactly the same thing as a *fan* though I do 
> find the character fascinating), I don't think Snape wants to see 
> Harry dead, despite the fact that he may hate the boy for several 
> reasons. But as a DDM!Snaper I also don't believe that he wants or 
> needs to cement his position with Dumbledore, since it is already 
> secure (as he is genuinely on Dumbledore's side). So there's no real 
> conflict. He saves Harry because it is his intent then and throughout 
> Harry's years at Hogwarts to keep the boy from physical harm. I think 
> he made a promise to either Dumbledore or Lily to do so, but I also 
> think his own conscience wouldn't let him allow Harry (or any other 
> child) to die when he could prevent it. 
> 
> As for the unnecessary risk of losing his position, again DDM!Snape 
> doesn't want Harry dead so it is moot. But even if I believed in some 
> version of OFH!Snape or ESE!Snape, I don't think not acting would 
> necessarily risk his position. And since he suspected Quirrel was 
> after Harry, an OFH! or ESE!Snape could have just kept away from 
> Quirrel, making sure he wasn't present when the happy event occurred 
> and thus couldn't be accused of any part in Harry's demise. In other 
> words, that Snape had workable options if he really wanted Harry 
> dead, yet Canon!Snape didn't take advantage of those options. Instead 
> he put himself deliberately in a position to protect Harry.
> 
> Julie
>

Carol responds:
Just to add to Julie's point, it's unclear to me why Snape's position
would be in danger if he didn't protect Harry. He goes out of his way
throughout the books to protect Harry, but I don't think he'd be fired
if he didn't. As a DDM!Snaper, I think it's part of an arrangement he
and Dumbledore have made, but it isn't part of his job as Potions
master in Books 1 through 5. Certainly, none of the other teachers
lose their positions, or would have done so, for not using a
countercharm. Why would Snape be any different? ESE! or OFH!Snape
might have been concerned for what Dumbledore would think, but even
Dumbledore would not have fired him if, as someone suggested, he got
up to use the restroom and returned just as poor Harry had hit the
ground. Instead we have one instance of many in which Snape alone acts
to protect Harry and Dumbledore's trust in him proves to be justified.

If anyone would be expected to protect a student from Dark Magic as
part of his teaching postion, it would be Quirrell, the DADA teacher.
Snape makes the potions as needed, whether it's mandrake solution,
wolfsbane potion, or veritaserum, while he's Potions Master. In HBP,
as DADA teacher, he removes curses from necklaces and saves three
people from deadly curses. (Yes, I know that he wasn't yet officially
the DADA teacher when he saved Dumbledore, but DD knew that Snape was
the only qualified person for the post and IMO fully intended to give
it to him. And certainly, Snape was the only person qualified to save
DD's life.) As DADA teacher, it was Lockhart's job to save the school
from the monster in the Chamber of Secrets, or at least to discover
what it was. Obviously, he failed abysmally. It was Lupin's job to
save Harry from Dementors. Crouch!Moody considered it his job to help
Harry through the TWT (though he had ulterior motives, of course). It
would have been Quirrell's job, not Snape's, to protect a child from
Dark Magic--at least if we go by the job description and not by the
personal relationship between Snape and Dumbledore, which is clearly
different than that betwwn DD and any other teacher.

As for "what reputation he has," look at the way the other teachers,
including McGonagall, listen to him in CoS and follow his lead. He
seems to be perfectly respected for both his position and his
abiliities. He was evidently made HoH at a very young age. He is not,
as I've said and you've conceded, widely known as a former DE. The
whole arrangement, whatever it's nature, is between Snape and
Dumbledore. No one else except Quirrell, the real guilty party, knew
Snape's motives for refereeing the next game. They put it down to
Quidditch rivalry, and he (temporarily) *became* unpopular. That this
situation is indeed temporary is shown by the close working
relationship of McGonagall and Snape in CoS, mentioned above.

I've suggested, and haven't yet read all the posts to see whether I've
been answered, that McGonagall may have found out about Snape's Dark
Mark when Fudge did. In OoP, we see them together only once, when
McGonagall returns from St. Mungo's. He seems genuinely glad to see
her, and shows the first signs of cordiality he's ever demonstrated,
but they address each other as "Professor" and there's a slight
formality to the exchange. Earlier, she addresses him at least once as
"Severus" and speaks of their Quidditch rivalry in terms of an
ongoing, friendly competition. Has he changed, in her mind, from a
former student and trusted colleague to a former Death Eater whom she
trusts only because of Dumbledore? 

Carol, who thinks that Snape could have been a researcher for St.
Mungo's had he so chosen and would have fit right in with the
Unspeakables, Croaker and Bode