Snape Survey, Snapeity, Dumbledore's sacrifice.

[Sydney]

No: HPFGUIDX 149149


> Sydney:
> <SNIP>
> > So I'll say it again.  The Dumbledore who is pleading with Snape is
> > the same one who trusts him completely.  The only alternative is a
> > typo that transposed the line where Harry is frightened by
> > Dumbledore's pleading voice to the wrong part of the passage, to
> > before Snape could have formed an evil plan or Dumbledore could 
> have
> > anticipated it. You are free to theorize such a typo, or you are 
> free
> > to theorize a JKR who was simply careless and forgot to put the
> > pleading in the logical place. Or you are free to say, 'at the 
> expense
> > of what the text clearly says, I'm going assume, because of what
> > happens afterwards, that Snape gave some sort of cue to Dumbledore
> > that he had switched sides, and that Dumbledore absorbed this cue 
> and
> > did a 180 on his assessment of what Snape was likely to do-- BEFORE
> > SNAPE HAS DONE ANYTHING OTHER THAN ENTER THE SCENE. 
> 
> Alla:
> 
> No, sorry, I disagree. First of all, it is NOT a fact that JKR is 
> obligated to describe in details DD change of mind about Snape's 
> loyalties. Yes, yes, I know rules of storytelling, etc. I don't 
> think that JKR is obligated to follow all rules of storytelling, if 
> such rules exist.
> 
> Second of all, even if JKR wanted to show DD shock, she as I said in 
> the earlier post IMO she had shown it VERY clearly, through Harry's 
> eyes. You may think it is not enough for you, you may think it 
> breaks some rules of storytelling, but IF the shock that Harry feels 
> from DD pleading is genuine, it is quite enough for me to see DD 
> shock even if through Harry's eyes.

Okay, I'm sorry, was my post not clear?  I can't figure out where I'm
going wrong here.  My point is not that JKR doesn't show Dumbledore
'showing shock'.  My point is that Snape doesn't do anything for
Dumbledore to be shocked ABOUT, before Dumbledore beings pleading.  
Comprende?  Snape does not do anything but come through the door,
stop, and look around-- and he does this all QUICKLY.  He runs.  He
bursts.  He sweeps.  Then Dumbledore begins pleading with him.  Harry
is shocked and frightened BECAUSE Dumbledore is pleading.   Sequence
of events:  Snape, in. leads to,  Dumbledore, pleading.  leads to,
Harry, frightened.  

*presses fingers to temples and contemplates making a martini.  Better
make that a double*

How is this my asking Rowling to "describe in details DD change of
mind about Snape's loyalties"? I typed the whole passage out, at great
personal risk to my fingers, showing how you COULD make the passage
read ambiguously without even ADDING a line, by moving the descrption
of Dumbledore's pleading a couple of lines forward.  I'm not asking
for detail.  I'm asking for basic logic. Like, "Colin Creevy fell in
the lake and then was wet" as opposed to  "Colin Creevy was wet and
then he fell in the lake".   I honestly don't care how wet he is, how
lovingly it's described, how Harry is getting wet from his proximity
to Colin's wetness.  I'm asking for the bit where Colin falls into the
d**n lake to come BEFORE the bit where he's wet.

This is not a rule of storytelling.  THIS IS A RULE OF FREAKIN' MAKING
SENSE.  Not just story sense, ANY kind of sense. Like, getting through
the day remembering that your trousers go on over your underwear
sense.  Saying that we're shown enough by having Harry's shock, is
like saying, we are, for the sake of this scene, ignoring the
principle of CAUSE AND EFFECT.  Harry CANNOT BE SHOCKED BY
DUMBLEDORE'S SHOCK UNTIL DUMBLEDORE IS, IN FACT SHOCKED.  Is he
shocked by Snape coming in in an Evil fashion?  Is Snape wearing an
"I'm Evil!  Ask me how!" button that we're not told about?  Did he
foolishly leave his Evil!Socks on? Did Dumbledore, some time before
telling Draco that he trusts Snape, LIKE 3 PAGES AGO, get a
timeturner, go forward in time, witness his murder, then go back to
where he was, so that he would have the appropriate emotion when Snape
came in? Or maybe, JKR for the purposes of this scene, is doing a
DADAist experiment in narrative inversion!  'Cause we're all
avant-garde and not about the rules of storytelling or even logic or
any of that square stuff!  

Or, gee, here's a shock-- maybe Dumbledore's not shocked at all. Maybe
he's pleading for a reason unconnected to shock.  Because, to be
shocked, you have to surprised, right?  Maybe, as I said in the post
that just possibly you didn't absorb fully:

" The Dumbledore who is pleading with Snape is
the same one who trusts him completely. "


I take it, then, that you're admitting:

>> neither
> > Snape's 'I'm evil' cue, nor Dumbledore's change of mind, are in the
> > text OR EVEN GIVEN A REASONABLE VACUUM TO EXIST IN THE TEXT, but 
> this
> > is fine with you.  If you just say that, then I'll leave you 
> alone. <g>

I'll copy/paste just the important bit for you, so you don't miss it:

OR EVEN GIVEN A REASONABLE VACUUM TO EXIST IN THE TEXT

--Sydney, taking the gin out of the freezer