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

[Sydney]

No: HPFGUIDX 149820

Neri:

> Now, how does Dumbledore describe the Life Debt magic? When one wizard
> saves another wizard's life, it creates a certain *bond* between them.
> Dumbledore doesn't give us any details regarding the nature of this
> bond, but if the Life Debt is magic "in its deepest, most
> impenetrable", then naturally this would be a bond between the souls. 
> If you owe a Life Debt to another wizard, this bond will force you to
> feel his suffering as if it was yours, especially if you share
> responsibility for that suffering. If this wizard dies, you would feel
> the pain of dying, perhaps so strongly that you would die yourself.
> What the Life Debt magic does is to bind you to that deep part of your
> soul that empathizes with the other wizard. The Life Debt magic
> doesn't force a magically conjured remorse on you, it prevents you
> from denying your *own* remorse. 
> 
> Remember what JKR said when she was asked if Ginny has a Life Debt to
> Harry:
> 
> **********************************************
>
http://www.quick-quote-quill.org/articles/2005/0705-tlc_mugglenet-anelli-3.htm
> 
> No, not really. Wormtail is different. You know, part of me would just
> love to explain the whole thing to you, plot of book seven, you know,
> I honestly would.
> ********************************************
> 
> But of course, Ginny wouldn't hurt Harry, or if she hurts him she
> wouldn't fail to feel remorse about it. She has never detached herself
> from the part of her soul that must feel Harry's pain. The Life Debt
> magic is irrelevant to her.

 <snip>

> So young Severus, just like Draco, shuts down compassion – how else
> would he become a Death Eater? He is happy to work for Voldemort and
> supply him with critical information, because he is able to
> efficiently suppress the part of his soul that knows somebody is going
> to suffer because of that information. 


Very pretty.  Although, still not explained:

-- If Snape in your theory kicked into stage 2 when he reported a
conversation that endangered the Potters without even realizing he was
doing it, why is is this having no effect on Peter, despite going all
the way to Albania specifically to resurrect a guy who has a high
kill-Harry priority?  

-- If Snape is tortured with Crucio-level agonizing pain at the mere
thought of harming Harry by your "Snape was in actual, not emotion
pain in the burning-dog shot" theory, why doesn't this affect Peter
when he ties Harry to a rock and cuts him with a knife?  Or, geez,
when he spent a whole year on his fetus-Voldemort project?

-- If Snape is merely driven by a basic need to keep Harry alive for
his own selfish ends, why did he murder Dumbledore, Harry's greatest
protector, and in a such a way that he would have to leave the scene,
thus leaving Harry entirely exposed when Voldemort is at full power? 
Seeing as Snape's fear of James getting hurt would be what, by you,
"forced Snape to be effectively on Dumbledore's side", what's
different now?  

-- JKR's answer was that no, Ginny doesn't really owe a life-debt to
Harry, not that she just doesn't have to worry about it.  Something in
the life-saving event itself seems to be the key, not subsequent
events.  James and Harry both hated the person they were saving, this
seems more to the point.

-- Replacing compassion for another person with jolts of electric
shock and threat of death, still feels like Torquemada's version of
Christianity more than Rowling's.  By your theory, Snape still isn't
feeling even remorse, he's just feeling pain and fear of dying
himself.  I'm sure the Spanish Inquisition felt they had converted the
heretics;  Dumbledore, not so much.

-- If Snape is just feeling Harry's suffering generally, why haven't
we seen more of this?  Why could he give him pounding headaches for
hours in Occlumency lessons?  Why did he feel sure Harry was a
pampered kid when he came to Hogwarts, when presumably he would have
been lying awake at night in wretched pain because of little Harry's
suffering under the Dursely's, for which Snape is indirectly responsible?

-- In the Shrieking Shack, Snape goes ape (thanks JKR!) about
vengeance;  he does bark briefly at Harry about saving his life and
how he should be grateful, but where is the bit where Snape is
thinking, Ha Ha!  Now I can go evil again?  IIRC, Snape was totally
focused on his satisfaction at getting Sirius, and seemed more annoyed
than anything else at Harry not being on his knees for having his life
saved.  And he goes berzerk when he realizes that Black has escaped,
when you'd think he'd be a bit more focused on, yay!  14 years of
ankle-monitor slavery over!  I'll get that Sirius guy at some other
time.  

-- And (drumroll please) Why is Dumbledore saying that he trusts Snape
completely when he doesn't?   

I know!  Mabye it's not like, mutating magical-prosthetic remorse,
requiring random, purposeless lying from Dumbledore and serious
inconsistency with Peter's situtation!  Maybe it's, like, actual remorse!

You know, it's so crazy it just might work.


-- Sydney, who will call Neri's theory the "ankle-monitor" theory, as
opposed to the Life-Debt theory, seeing as it's a bit unfair to hijack
a name for an impenetrable magic thingie we know nothing about and
apply it to an elaborate spell essentially made up from whole cloth.