LID!Snape rides again (was: High Noon for OFH!Snape)

[juli17ptf]

No: HPFGUIDX 149594

<big snip>

> 
> > Sydney: 
> > And, (I don't have my books with me, but off the top of my head),
> > Dumbledore testifies in court-- the sort of thing I presume he 
swore
> > an oath to -- that Snape came over to OUR side before V-morts 
fall,
> 
> Neri:
> But he doesn't say *why* Snape came over to our side. However, he 
did
> tell us that James saved Snape's life, and that Snape tried to save
> Harry's life in SS/PS because of his "debt" to James. So I ask you
> again – doesn't this imply Snape owed a Life Debt to James? And what
> part did this Debt play in Snape coming over to "our" side?

Julie:
This could certainly be part of it, though I can't see Dumbledore 
trusting Snape so completely if his switch was based only on the 
debt. Dumbledore does later imply that Snape's remorse played a large 
part in his switch, which, given Dumbledore's character, is much 
stronger support for trusting Snape completely (assuming Dumbledore 
knows that remorse is genuine, of course). 

Sydney:
> > that "he's now no more a Death Eater than I am".  

> Neri:
> Even if Dumbledore had testified under oath (which we don't know 
for a
> fact) I doubt that this particular statement was part of his
> testimony. We know that Snape has an active dark mark, so either
> Dumbledore means here that he (Dumbledore) also has an active dark
> mark, or we must conclude that Dumbledore words (warning: big 
surprise
> coming) should be taken with a grain of salt.

Julie:
Er, um...huh? Why doesn't Dumbledore just mean what he says, that 
Snape was loyal follower of Voldemort (i.e., a Death Eater), but he 
is no longer?

 
> > Sydney:
> And Harry asks him
> > in HBP, "How can you be sure Snape's on OUR side?", and D-dore 
says,
> > "I'm sure.  I trust Severus Snape completely".  He's saying, he's 
on
> > OUR side.  Meaning, yours and mine.  Our.  Side.
> 
> Neri:
> "*Your* side, because he has to save your life. *My* side, because 
he
> has to save *your* life". Dumbledore wouldn't consider his own life 
as
> part of the deal. It's Harry that matters.
> 
> The Dumbledore in LID is similar to the Dumbledore in DDM in that 
he's
> absolutely ready to give his life for the plan. The difference is 
that
> the Dumbledore of LID is a more moral man. He'd never want Snape to 
be
> a killer. He *trusts* Snape not to be a killer, not in the sense 
that
> he's 100% sure Snape wouldn't do it, but in the sense that he puts 
his
> trust in Snape, that he leaves the choice to Snape. But if Snape
> chooses *not* to justify this trust – Dumbledore's plan still works,
> because Snape is still InDebted. The fact the Dumbledore would die 
in
> such case is, for Dumbledore, immaterial.
> 
> It's moral *and* devious. No wonder Snape was furious.

Julie:
And here some talk about how DDM!Snapers must deviate from the 
straightforward to support their theories! Harry here certainly 
means "our side" to represent the Order's side/the Good side of the 
war against Voldemort in general. Dumbledore certainly knows what 
Harry means. Dumbledore answers Harry's question in a straightforward 
manner. Snape is on *our* side, i.e., Snape is on the side of teh 
Order, the side against Voldemort.

> 
> > Sydney:
>   This is another
> > argument that he's not actually saying he trusts Snape completely 
when
> > he says he trusts.. Snape ... completely... I dunno.  I think 
you're
> > clipping bits off the jigsaw-piece here.
> > 
> 
> Neri:
> I remind you we're talking about the person who said "I trust 
Severus
> Snape, but I forgot
 that some wounds run too deep for the healing. 
I
> thought professor Snape could overcome his feelings about your 
father
> -  I was wrong."
> 
> Evidently, Dumbledore saying he trusts Snape doesn't necessarily 
mean
> there isn't a but somewhere in there. A but that in certain
> circumstances might turn out to be a pretty big BUT. 

Julie:
Snape didn't betray Dumbledore's trust here. Dumbledore trusted Snape 
to try his best, and Dumbledore isn't implying that Snape didn't do 
exactly that. Instead Dumbledore admits it was *he* who incorrectly 
assessed that Snape's best could include overcoming his feelings 
about James, when it couldn't (some wounds run too deep). So, 
Dumbledore's complete trust in Snape remains intact.

> 
> 
> > Sydney: 
> > I still find Dumbledore's "Severus... please..." simply to not
> > fit in with this theory.  You say, he's asking Snape not to 
forget the
> > Life Debt.  But why would D-dore need to PLEAD for Snape not to 
forget
> > some sort of deadly magical compulsion that's been driving him for
> > over a decade? 
> 
> Neri:
> Because whatever the moral/magical mechanism of the Life Debt will
> turn out to be, for Dumbledore the moral meaning would always take
> first place. Dumbledore wants Snape to save Harry because it's the
> right thing to do, not because Snape is magically forced to.
> 
> The Dumbledore of LID doesn't plead with Snape to pay the Debt for 
the
> sake of the plan (which would probably work anyhow) but for the sake
> of Snape's soul.  

Julie:
This seems pretty non-supportive. Dumbledore is going to plead with 
any version of Snape to do the right thing. "Severus...please... Do 
the right thing, don't kill me and tear your soul... Do the right 
thing, finish me off to save Harry and Draco... Do the right thing, 
follow our plan for the greater good... Do the right thing and save 
Harry for the sake of your soul, which will also conveniently pay 
your Life Debt though don't let that be your primary motivation." 
Hmm, that last one is a little cumbersome though.

> 
> > Sydney:
> > Wouldn't he be using the 'stern and terrible' voice
> > he used to Petunia?  
> 
> Neri:
> No. Snape isn't Petunia. And like I said, Dumbledore is pleading for
> Snape's sake, not for Harry's sake.

Julie:
So, even though Dumbledore doesn't really completely trust Snape, and 
only *hopes* Snape will do the right thing, he's still more worried 
about Snape than about his protege and savior of the WW, Harry--who 
could well *die* if Dumbledore's trust in Snape is misplaced? For a 
man who doesn't completely trust someone, Dumbledore is putting a lot 
of trust in Snape...

I think I'm just getting confused! If your theory is the 
straightforward one, why is it giving me a headache?

>  
> > Sydney:
> > Why would D-dore be so upset when he was telling
> > Harry that he couldn't imagine the remorse Snape felt when he 
found
> > out the targets?  Seeing as by the LD theory Dumbledore's being 
kind
> > of cute here, wouldn't he be calm or even downright twinkly?
> 
> Neri:
> No. This is a matter of Snape's soul. Dunbledore would hardly been
> twinkly. Being upset here further suggests that Dumbledore wasn't so
> sure what would be Snape's choice after all.

Julie:
Why isn't Dumbledore upset for the obvious reason--he is relating the 
strength of Snape's feelings which he remembers all too vividly, and 
he can also see to his dismay that Harry is not accepting this well?

> 
> > Sydney:
> > Why would D-dore send Harry to get Snape and no one but Snape 
when he
> > was incapacitated by a poison?
> 
> Neri:
> Because Snape was the only person who could save him, and in 
addition
> to Dumbledore preferring to stay alive if possible, Snape must be
> given the choice.

Julie:
Snape must be given the choice to do what? Save Dumbledore from the 
poison, or let him die from it? As I recall, Draco isn't on the scene 
yet, so the choice relating to the UV isn't yet at hand.
> 
> 
> > Sydney:
> And where does the bit where Snape is
> > described as being in as much pain as a dog on fire fit in with 
Snape
> > having no problem AK-ing D-dore?
> 
> Neri:
> But Snape scorned Harry's inability to use an Unforgivable just the
> minute before. Doesn't look like he had any problem doing that
> immediately after he AK'ed Dumbledore. 

Julie:
Actually Snape first STOPPED Harry from even trying an AK, then 
scorned his *assumed* inability to use an Unforgivable. Snape 
scorning Harry is simply Snape. It is Snape stopping Harry from even 
making the attempt that is more interesting. After all, if Snape 
really believes Harry is incapable of doing it, why not let him try, 
then laugh at his failure? Because Harry might actually achieve an AK 
and harm his soul, something that Dumbledore has no doubt emphasized 
must *not* happen?

Neri:
> *When* does Snape haul with pain? It's when Harry shouts at 
him "kill
> me like you killed him". And I agree with Pippin that Snape was
> probably interpreting "him" to be James, not Dumbledore. It was 
Snape
> himself, after all, who had brought up James into this conversation
> just the moment before. Twice, in fact. Harry doesn't even mention
> Dumbledore's name at all. It's the thought about killing Harry like 
he
> he was responsible for the killing of James that makes Snape haul in
> pain. Smells like a one piece of strong Magic to me. Probably much
> stronger than that dark mark scar that was givind Snape pains in 
GoF. 

Julie:
Snape *just* killed Dumbledore, a man he respected to some degree, 
perhaps even loved. It doesn't really matter what Harry means, but 
what is foremost in Snape's mind, and I have no doubt Dumbledore is 
foremost in Snape's mind, and also a fresh and much, *much* more 
painful memory than James at the moment. (And I suspect Harry did 
mean Dumbledore, for the same reasons.)

As for the magic, again I'm not sure I follow. Snape thinks he wants 
to kill Harry, and feels severe pain because of the Life Debt? It 
doesn't track for me, because Snape becomes angry at being called a 
coward--and if he's so pained and infuriated by that appellation it 
logically must be because he thinks it's an unfair appellation. He's 
*not* a coward because he did something that in his mind took extreme 
courage. It sure wasn't getting James killed. But it could be killing 
Dumbledore for the greater good.


> > Sydney:
> Or the bit where Snape's face is
> > suffused with hatred and revulsion, gee, JUST like Harry's was 
when he
> > was force-feeding D-dore the poison?  
> 
> Neri:
> Er... where exactly is it written that Harry felt hatred towards
> Dumbledore in the cave?
> 
> The explicit repetition here is that when Snape stands above Harry,
> his "pale face, illuminated by the flaming cabin, was suffused with
> hatred just as it had been before he had cursed Dumbledore." So 
Snape
> felt towards Dumbledore what he feels towards Harry, and I don't 
think
> it was tender feelings. 

Julie:
We don't know the hatred Snape is feeling is directed *at* Harry. It 
may well be *toward* Harry as it was *toward* Dumbledore, while the 
focus of the hatred is the task itself--killing Dumbledore to save 
Harry and get the DEs away from Hogwarts--and Snape's own self-
loathing over what he was forced to do. 

> 
> > Sydney:
> Of course he's cold and angry
> > and jeering.  That's Snape's defense mechanism.  Hating Harry and
> > James is totally Snape's defense mechanism.
> 
> Neri:
> It's a defense mechanism that has never made much sense to me if 
Snape
> is DDM. A person has such a strong remorse about his part in making
> some boy an orphan, and he doesn't miss an opportunity to show his
> hatred to this orphan and to his dead father? It hasn't been just a
> defense mechanism for Snape, it's been a sport. His favorite 
pastime.
> Doesn't strikes me like a very believable characterization on JKR's
> part. But if Snape owes a Life Debt to James and is forced to 
protect
> Harry, then I find Snape's hatred and anger totally believable. 

Julie:
I think Snape did feel strong remorse over the deaths of James and 
Lily, and he also feels strong resentment toward Harry for being a 
constant reminder of his sins, and of his need for redemption. Add to 
that Harry's personality which is similar to James's in some of the 
most aggravating ways (to Snape), and that just feeds the resentment.

Neri:   
> 
> Throughout "The Flight of the Prince" all of Snape's behavior, if 
he's
> LID, is completely straightforward. His scorn of Harry's inability 
to
> use an Unforgivable, his anger, his hatred, bringing up James, his
> strange hauling in pain when killing Harry is mentioned, saving 
Harry
> from the Crucio – all fit with LID *perfectly*.  

Julie:
If you twist it to fit perfectly ;-) It's all too convoluted for me. 
Give me DDM!Snape, which explains the same things--stopping Harry 
from using the Unforgivable, Snape's pain at being accused of 
cowardice, saving Harry from the Crucio, *not* taking Harry back to 
Voldemort, not to mention Dumbledore's abiding and complete trust in 
Snape, Dumbledore insisting Snape was remorseful, Snape saving 
Dumbledore from the first Horcrux curse, Snape helping save Harry's 
life several times...it all straightforwardly supports DDM!Snape. And 
it doesn't make me reach for two Tylenol ;-)
> 
> > Sydney:
> And the next thing he has
> > to do is apparate on over to V-mort and talk him out of offing 
Draco.
> >  He has to have the Occlumency shields at full power for the
> > foreseeable future.  It cracks for a second-- dog on fire-- and he
> > refocuses by concentrating on the James/Harry hatred.
> > 
> 
> Neri:
> Ah, I knew the "Snape is acting" argument is going to come up soon.
> 


Julie:
No, it's the "Snape is hiding his true feelings and intentions" 
argument. But that one is true for all versions of Snape. We *still* 
don't know the real Snape, not by a long shot, so he is pretty good 
at hiding his real self, whether from Voldemort, from Dumbledore, or 
from both...

Uh, wait a minute. I guess you could call that acting, couldn't you? 
So no matter what else he is, I guess he's definitely 
AcademyAwardWinner!Snape ;-)

Julie