[HPforGrownups] Re: Trusting Snape - Susan and Tammy

[P J]

No: HPFGUIDX 149066


SSSusan:
>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!

PJ:

Maybe they're just the loudest voices and the most determined to "convert" 
others to their way of thinking?  While there may be actually more than a 
couple who see Snape as you see him, you tend to get drowned out by the 
"misunderstood, damaged but inherently good as gold Snape" group.  At least 
for me.  I sometimes sit here wondering if we're all reading the same books!

SSSusan:
><huge snip>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.

PJ:
And here, as I've said,  is where I lose any possibility of agreement on 
DDM!Snape in a *big* way.  I don't believe Snape tried to teach Harry 
occlumency as Dumbledore wished as even DD tells Harry (paraphrased) that he 
didn't count on old wounds getting in the way. and I don't believe 
Dumbledore would ever ask Snape to kill him on the tower.  Dumbledore is 
never said to have killed anyone... vanquished yes, but killed, no.  Why 
would he insist that someone, even an ex DE, do something he wasn't willing 
to do?  Especially if he were already dying?

And while Snape's actions on the tower physically got Draco off of it, it 
did nothing to ensure his *future* in the Wizarding World.  Quite the 
opposite actually.  Now they're both on the run and going to Azkaban if 
caught.  What was the purpose of saving Draco's life simply to see him spend 
it wasted in prison?  That would be so very cruel.

It also does nothing for the House Unity situation other than make the gulf 
between them wider still.  The entire WW will soon know, whether by word of 
mouth or Daily Prophet, that 2 Slytherin Death Eaters (and yes, it will be 
assumed they're both Death Eaters whether they are or not) have conspired to 
kill their beloved headmaster and put the future of Hogwarts in jeapardy.

SSSusan:
>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.

PJ:

Sorry, I'm not trying to be objectionable at all.  I'm just trying to work 
out the story like everyone else.  :-)

Tammy:

>Aahhhh, NOW I see some of your problems with the
>DDM!group, PJ.  NOW I understand what you were saying when you mentioned
>'twists and turns'.  I see.  It seems that you think that *any and all* DDM
>theorys MUST include the caveat of Innocent!Snape.  That couldn't be 
>further
>from the truth, PJ.  Please, don't group ALL of us DDMers with those
>desperate few who need Snape to be Pure As The Driven Snow.

Sorry I wasn't clearer sooner but I have periodic cognitive difficulties and 
it takes me awhile sometimes to find a way to put my thoughts in order so I 
can get them out in an easily understood manner.  I thought I'd explained my 
thoughts fairly well as I didn't want to seem to be throwing out theory 
roadblocks just for the sake of doing it though that may have appeared to be 
the case anyway.  Believe me, it's frustrating for both of us.     :-)

And yes, I can better understand the basic Snape character both you and 
Susan have brought to the table and, to a degree I could even find points of 
agreement, just not the ones I've mentioned.  :)

PJ