LID!Snape rides again and LOLLIPOPS

dumbledore11214 dumbledore11214 at yahoo.com
Sat Mar 25 03:46:31 UTC 2006


No: HPFGUIDX 150007

> > Sydney:
> > And duh, Snape doesn't bring up Lily.  Snape never, ever, brings 
up
> > Lily.  Don't you think that's just a little odd, in 6 books, when
> > Snape throws every thing else he can think of at Harry?  I'm 
pretty
> > sure oxen and wainropes couldn't drag it out of him.
> > 
> 
> Neri:
> This is a typical LOLLIPOPS tactics – when there's no canon, argue
> that the absence of canon strengthens the theory. I shudder to 
think
> what you would have said had I dared using such an argument for 
LID!Snape.
> 

Alla:

Right, Neri, I basically snipped your whole post, because you know 
by now that I REALLY dig your theory and think that you will be 
proven right in many aspects of it, BUT as I wrote in the recent 
past, I reluctantly came to accept the LOLLIPOPS. Trust me, I will 
be very happy if I am wrong, but I think that Snape loved Lily ( one 
sidedly, of course IMO).

So, my question is whether LID!Snape works with LOLLIPOPS at all? 
Please say that it does? :-) I know that you are not buying it, but 
I don't see why LOLLIPOPS will contradict your theory in a big way 
or would they?

As to Snape never bringing up Lily, well, through gritted teeth I am 
forced to agree with Sydney - it IS significant, IMO. It is not just 
absence of canon, it is vicious unwarranted NON-STOP attacks on one 
of Harry's parents and NOTHING about another parent, AT ALL.

And you did use the similar argument, no? JKR does not tell us much 
about how Life debt works and I DO think that it is very 
significant, just as the fact that Snape never badmouths Lily.

Alla,

who once told someone off list that she at least hopes that when 
Snape would confess to Harry his love for Lily, he will hopefully 
not talk about her "long mane of red hair", would make me very ill 
indeed. :-0
 









More information about the HPforGrownups archive