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

[Neri]

No: HPFGUIDX 149860

> Sydney:
> -- 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?  


Neri:
As for my hypothetical stage 2, I don't know when Snape was kicked
into it. If the Life Debt is indeed a bond that causes you to
empathize with the suffering of the victim, then it makes more sense
that the actual pain symptoms only started when James died, although
he would perhaps feel some remorse before that, maybe from James' fear
for his family. He'd be then in a state similar to that of Peter in
GoF. And Peter was certainly affected by the Debt in GoF. He was
risking a lot when trying to convince Voldemort to use another wizard
for the resurrection in GoF, Ch. 1. When he was tying Harry to the
gravestone his fingers were "trembling uncontrollably" and he wouldn't
meet Harry's eyes. But unlike Snape during VW1, Peter doesn't have the
option of going to the other side anymore, certainly not as a
double-agent the way Snape did. Peter has to rebel against Voldy
openly or continue following orders and hope that Harry would somehow
escape death. Of course, it's interesting that in HBP we see Snape and
Peter together in the same house, with apparently no plot reason. One
wonders what does this foreshadow for Book 7.

> Sydney:
> -- 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?

Neri:
You got me completely confused now. Here I am theorizing that Snape's
remorse is a very specific thing, only about saving Harry's life,
perhaps only once, and you say Snape killing Dumbledore is a problem
with that? How about your theory, saying Snape is generally remorseful
and absolutely on Dumbledore's side, and you think he killed
Dumbledore, no? It seems to me that this action of Snape poses a
considerably bigger problem in your theory than in mine.

> Sydney: 
> 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?  
> 

Neri:
As I have explained in recent posts, I think Snape didn't intend to
kill Dumbledore before he can save Harry's life and repay the Debt.
Draco's unforeseen action forced Snape to kill Dumbledore on the tower
or die. From his PoV this put him in a very bad situation, since he
was forced to commit himself to Voldemort's side while he still must
save Harry's life.   

> Sydney:
> -- 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.
> 

Neri:
In that case wouldn't JKR answer simply "no, she doesn't have a Life
Debt to Harry"? While English isn't my first language, I was under the
impression that when people say "not really" they usually mean
something like "nominally yes, but in practice no". Which would fit
better with my explanation than with yours. Plus my explanation also
accounts for JKR inability to expand on this nuance without giving
away the plot of Book 7. If Peter's Life Debt is the only Debt around,
and it's a done thing, then I don't see why JKR couldn't clarify the
status of Ginny's "not really" Debt. 

> Sydney:
> -- 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.  

Neri:
By my theory he's feeling the pain of another person, pain that he has
responsibility for. And he feels it against his will, but he's unable
to shut it down. A magic that in RL we call... yep, remorse.

Christianity – umm... no. I'd better not go there. I'd just point out
that Christian JKR made Lupin become a rabid monster once a month
since he was 5 yrs old kid. She made Sirius spend half his life in a
jail where everybody goes insane, and then killed him a short time
after he got out. Her main character she killed both his parents when
he was a baby, and put in his forehead a magical scar that connects
him directly with the mind of the sociopath evil overlord. And these
are the *good* guys. All things considered, I think LID!Snape got away
relatively cheap. 


> Sydney:
> -- If Snape is just feeling Harry's suffering generally, why haven't
> we seen more of this?

Neri:
If Snape loved Lily, why haven't we seen *any* signs of this?

> Sydney:
> 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?
> 

Neri:
Apparently all this stuff isn't significant enough to break Snape's
defenses. As Del noted, a Life Debt just might be about, you know... life.


> Sydney:
> -- 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.  
> 

Neri:
JKR used this cute expression "Snape goes ape" in a much more innocent
context – when Harry has difficulties learning Occlumency. I doubt
very much she would have used such a phrase for Snape trying to get
two innocent people soul-sucked (I guess you have to be a DDM!Snaper
to appreciate the cuteness of that). Snape in fact goes seriously
CAPSLOCK *three* times in the night of the Shrieking Shack. The third
time, in the hospital wing, it is indeed because Sirius had escaped.
The previous two times are in the Shack, when Snape is sure of his
vengeance. He has Sirius and Lupin in his hands, he's going to turn
them in to the dementors, and it doesn't look like he even thinks that
three students would prevent him from doing that. So why does he go
CAPSLOCK? This is worth looking into. The first time it's because
Hermione dares suggest that Sirius might be innocent:

**************************************
Hermione, however, took an uncertain step toward Snape and said, in a
very breathless voice, "Professor Snape — it wouldn't hurt to hear
what they've got to say, w-would it?" 

"Miss Granger, you are already facing suspension from this school,"
Snape spat. "You, Potter, and Weasley are out-of-bounds, in the
company of a convicted murderer and a werewolf. For once in your life,
hold your tongue."

"But if — if there was a mistake —"

"KEEP QUIET, YOU STUPID GIRL!" Snape shouted, looking suddenly quite
deranged. "DON'T TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND!" A few sparks
shot out of the end of his wand, which was still pointed at Black's
face. Hermione fell silent.
**************************************

Why does Snape lose control here? He has Sirius and Lupin in his
power, everything is quite dandy for him, and it's not even Harry who
opposes him here, it's Hermione. Is Snape having a problem
subordinating a student? Usually he relishes such opportunities. 50
points out of Gryffindor, detention, double detention, suspension, I
will personally see that you are thrown out of school. Snape can do
that stuff in his sleep.  

But you see, if Sirius is actually innocent as Hermione suggests, then
Harry wasn't in danger from him. And if Harry wasn't in danger, it
means Snape didn't save his life. And *this* is unthinkable for Snape.
Even if he gets rid of both Sirius and Lupin for good, Snape had
failed in repaying the Life Debt. Merely raising this possibility
makes him lose control. 

Lest anyone doubt this is the real reason, a page later Snape goes
CAPSLOCK again, madder than ever, and this time he says it quite clearly:

******************************************
"Professor Lupin could have killed me about a hundred times this
year," Harry said. "I've been alone with him loads of times, having
defense lessons against the Dementors. If he was helping Black, why
didn't he just finish me off then?"

"Don't ask me to fathom the way a werewolf's mind works," hissed
Snape. "Get out of the way, Potter."

"YOU'RE PATHETIC!" Harry yelled. "JUST BECAUSE THEY MADE A FOOL OF YOU
AT SCHOOL YOU WON'T EVEN LISTEN —"

"SILENCE! I WILL NOT BE SPOKEN TO LIKE THAT!" Snape shrieked, looking
madder than ever. "Like father, like son, Potter! I have just saved
your neck; you should be thanking me on bended knee! You would have
been well served if he'd killed you! You'd have died like your father,
too arrogant to believe you might be mistaken in Black — now get out
of the way, or I will make you. GET OUT OF THE WAY, POTTER!"  
***************************************

He has just saved Harry's neck. That's what important for Snape. Harry
would have died if not for him. Died like his father, who got himself
killed despite Snape's desperate efforts to prevent it, and left Snape
saddled with this Debt that he can't manage to repay. And BTW, since
we're already here, note how Lily doesn't even register on Snape's
radar screen, not even a mere hint that anybody but James had also
died that night at Godric's Hollow. It is always about James, for
Snape. Even 10 minutes after he AK'ed Dumbledore off the astronomy
tower, it is only about James. James and that unpaid Debt.

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

Neri:
Resorting to sound effects now, Sydney <g>? Answer Jen's question, why
did Dumbledore say he told Harry "everything" when he obviously didn't? 

> Sydney:
> 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!
> 

Neri:
But this is exactly what I'm saying. It *is* actual remorse, that the
Life Debt magic merely prevents Snape from shutting down.

And you know, when the prosthesis works better than "the real thing",
you might want to ask yourself if it *is* the real thing, and what you
think is the real thing is just a prosthesis. 

> -- 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.
>

Neri:
Umm... now you got me confused about your terminology. What *is* the
thing you call "the Life Debt theory" and what exactly is the
difference between it and what you call the "ankle-monitor" theory? 


Neri