Snape Survey, Snapeity, Dumbledore's sacrifice.

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 149199

Juli:
<SNIP>
> Also, while Legilimency might be a possible way Dumbledore came to 
> his sudden realization of Snape's betrayal *before* Snape actually 
> did anything, it presents several problems.
<SNIP>
> 3. Why do many ESE!/OFH!Snape advocates reject the notion of 
> legilimency between Dumbledore and Snape on the Tower while 
they're 
> INTENTLY STARING at each other, but are willing to accept 
legilimency 
> when they aren't even *looking* at each other if it will support 
the 
> theory that Dumbledore's pleading "Severus..." was an indication 
of 
> his shock at Snape's betrayal? (As we have read that legilimency 
> requires eye contact.) It seems the latter would be much more of 
> a "convoluted twists and turns" flimsy-canon type of support than 
the 
> former ;-)
> 
> I just added that third one to point out that ESE and OFH require 
> their own questionable leaps of logic, not because anyone has 
stated 
> it in such bald terms!

Alla:

I cannot speak for anybody else (by the way, I cannot give you 
statistical data of course how many lurkers share ESE! /OFH! Snape 
argument, but if I were to count more or less regular posters, off 
the top of my head I am not sure I will need fingers on my both 
hands to count them, so no there does not appear to be too many of 
us on the list, unfortunately :-)), but I said upthread, that I 
don't think that my position about Legilimency on the Tower is 
contradictory.

I absolutely argued in the past about Legilimency conversation being 
a stretch BUT , my main objection to the means ( conversation 
itself) was that we don't know that two legilimences could 
communicate by words.

I certainly have a problem with SUBJECT of such conversation, but if 
DD and Snape exchanged something more subtle, why not?

I think Zara offered that DD showed images to Snape. I still had 
problems with him doing it in the first place, but if he DID, I can 
totally see it. And there is another thing why I think DD picking up 
emotion of betrayal from Snape is significantly less stretch that 
concrete conversation - it does not require much time, if any, why 
whole conversation is much more time consuming, IMO.

Am I making sense to you, Julie?

Lupinlore:
<SNIP>
 And for those who are not yet willing to 
> believe that JKR would pull a, IMO, cheap trick like DDM!Snape, 
there 
> is nothing in your argument that is overwhelming.  Snape did 
nothing 
> in that instant, it is true.  But the events on the tower take 
place 
> in the context of all of HBP.  There is plenty that has happened 
> during that time to have given DD second thoughts about Snape, 
> whether he acknowledged them to Harry or not.

Alla:

You know  what I find interesting and indeed a  possible clue that 
MAYBE, just maybe DD indeed listened to Harry and despite him 
stubbornly insisting that he trusts Snape, his trust may have 
started wavering before the Tower and maybe because of that DD did 
not need much to figure out that Snape betrayed him when Snapey 
showed up.

Remember in "Seer overheard" when Harry confronts DD about Snape 
overhearing the Prophecy?

"But he is a very good Occlumenc, isn't he, sir?" said Harry, whose 
voice was shaking with the effort of keeping it steady. "And isn't 
Voldemort convinced that Snape's on his side, even now? Professor... 
how can you be sure Snape's on our side?"
Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was 
trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, "I am 
sure, I trust Severus Snape completely" - HBP, p.549.

Now the most widespread interpretation of this scene in DD!M Snape 
camp ( and I am speaking in general here too) is that Dumbledore 
hesitates whether to tell Harry about the reasons why he trusts 
Snape, right?

I think the EQUALLY valid interpretation would be that Dumbledore 
hesitates because he is actually NOT as sure in his trust of Snape 
as he claims to be.

JMO,

Alla