Trusting Snape

[cubfanbudwoman]

No: HPFGUIDX 149059

> > Carol, hoping that PJ will at least *understand* the DDM!Snape
> > position now even if he or she doesn't agree with it
 
PJ:
> Sorry, no.  
> 
> Trust me, it would be much *easier* to side with DDM!Snape since 
> the non-DDM! folks are so badly outnumbered and you can't turn on 
> the computer without tripping over 20 Ain't Snape Wonderful posts 
> an hour, but I can't pretend to understand something that makes 
> absolutely no sense to me.  
> 
> I've tried to see it from your(group you)point of view but all 
> these intricate twists and turns ie: It wasn't a *real* AK that 
> killed Dumbledore (huh??)or it was the *curse* rather than 
> stupidity and hubris that made him take the UV, or even a 
> smoldering passion for Cissy that just did the big guy in <sigh>.  
> All this to show him in a much better light than anything that's 
> *actually written* on the pages by the author! I'm too old to start 
> twisting myself into that kind of a pretzel.


SSSusan butts in:
PJ, you've got every right to not see or like the DDM!Snape position, 
so, believe me, I'm not trying to convince you of anything which 
makes no sense to you.

That said, I will point out -- as I've been known to do other times 
in the past <g> -- that NOT all of us DDM!Snapers do all that 
convoluting, twisting & turning stuff!!  For some reason, there seems 
to be a tendency to speak of all DDM!Snapers as if they've claimed 
that Snape is OverallGoodGuy!Snape.  There *are* Snape apologists who 
do that or believe that, but there are also DDM!Snapers, like me, who 
[gasp!] ACKNOWLEDGE Snape's many deep & varied flaws!  

This does not mean, however, that I can't believe in a Snape who is 
*essentially* Dumbledore's man.  He may well be loyal to the MAN over 
the cause, or he may be committed to the defeat of Voldemort 
without "liking" or wanting to help Harry and while simultaneously 
despising many members of the Order.  He may have made some decisions 
or taken some actions which didn't fully support the Cause or DD or 
Harry because of his own failings or weaknesses or "issues," but that 
doesn't mean that, at the core, he isn't TRYING to do the "right 
thing" of remaining loyal to DD and DD's wishes/plans.

For me, I *don't* need to believe the AK was anything other than an 
AK to believe in DDM!Snape. For me, I *don't* have to believe that DD 
is still alive in order to believe in DDM!Snape.  For me, I'm willing 
to consider that Snape *did* do something stupid or ill-advised in 
taking the UV.  Not necessarily but possibly. (The possibility that 
it was the DADA curse or the knowledge that he'd be "outta there" 
anyway at the end of the year is an interesting thing, but definitely 
not canon.) 

For me, it all comes down to a belief in a Snape who's very loyal to 
DD and who, most of the time, manages to do what DD expects of him, 
even if he doesn't agree with it.  SOMEtimes his emotions or 
personality weaknesses interfere with this (I keep thinking of 
Occlumency or his general teaching "strategies" with Harry), but on 
the big stuff, I've always believed Snape was doing essentially what 
DD wanted -- trying to keep Harry protected, attempting to teach him 
Occlumency, etc.  In the big tower scene, I simply believe that DD 
communicated to Snape his desire to have Snape AK him.  Why?  For all 
the reasons stated here many times before: the belief that DD was 
dying anyway and if his death could be used to further the cause, it 
should be; that Snape would be able to convince Voldy of his loyalty 
by murdering DD; that Snape could ensure Draco didn't become a 
murderer and simultaneously take care of that pesky UV by doing the 
deed himself; that Snape could find a way to get the DEs out of 
Hogwarts before they wreaked any further havoc.

Now, all of that might STILL strike you as not your cuppa tea, P.J., 
and that's hunky dory.  But I don't believe it involves theories that 
are all twisted up like a pretzel or adding a bunch of "showing Snape 
in a better light than he's actually written." In fact, it allows 
Snape to be the nasty git he is, to have truly committed the deed re: 
DD's death, and to still be a flawed individual attempting to do what 
his mentor wanted him to do.  

Are there assumptions in there?  Sure.  Convoluted ones?  I don't 
think so.  It's really only the folks who maintain that Snape's a 
NICE guy or that his motivations and actions are actually ALWAYS pure 
who have the tough argument to back, imo.  Those of us who see him 
as -- for WHATEVER reason -- being loyal to DD and (probably) the 
Cause (loyal enough to do something he despised doing, natch) don't 
have that difficulty, because we acknowledge those times when he's 
been cruel or ineffective or selfish or whatever.  

To me it's not a stretch, really, to think of a person who has a 
basic, core belief or goal that s/he's committed to but who struggles 
mightily at times with everyday things or with the means of achieving 
the goal itself.  Isn't that a lot of us??

And in no way, also, do I find it a stretch to believe that DD would 
have been willing to do WHATEVER he felt was necessary, including 
sacrifice -- esp. *if* he was dying anyway -- to advance the cause.  
I point folks to Sydney's recent post 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HPforGrownups/message/149049 

wherein she pointed out the possible similarity between Ron's chess 
sacrifice and DD on the tower.  I also point people to DD's 
*requiring* Harry to promise to do WHATEVER DD instructed him to do 
on the cave trip.  It's so easy for me to see the possibility that he 
also did the same with Snape.


PJ: 
> I sincerely believe all his loyalty is reserved for himself and 
> that you're all trying to make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.  
> The embroidery, while pretty, still can't quite cover up the smell 
> of pig.

SSSusan:
And you may well be right in the end -- that Snape's OFH and has been 
all along.  It's a distinct possibility, as is ESE!Snape.  OTOH, I do 
not consider myself as someone who's "trying" to make a silk purse 
out of a sow's ear; rather, I'm simply reporting the interpretation I 
have come to from reading and responding to what I've read.  The 
assumption that all DDM!Snapers are consciously, 
intentionally "forcing" or "trying to" fit things to some 
pretzelesque theory is objectionable to me.  I've never sat down and 
thought, "Damn! It looks bad for ol' Snapey. HOW can I take all this 
and MAKE it still fit DDM!Snape??"  Rather, the way I read the 
story... it just *does* fit that.

YMMV, of course. :-)


PJ:
> I have bought a crow and a cookbook just in case I'm wrong.  We'll 
> know in about a year if I need to defrost it.  :-) 

SSSusan:  
Me, too, PJ.  Me, too. :-)

Siriusly Snapey Susan