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

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 150037

> >>Neri:
> I think you are missing my point. JKR doesn't use magic to replace
> feelings, but she definitely uses magic to represent moral values.

Betsy Hp:
Nope, that's exactly what I think your point is.  And I strongly 
disagree with it. <g>

> >>Neri:
> Lily's Ancient Magic represents Love as a feeling, but also the
> sacrifice of a mother for her son as a moral value. Petunia's pact
> represents responsibility to kin. The UV represents commitment. The
> Fidelius represents loyalty.

Betsy Hp:
Except that it doesn't.  The Fidelius is a pale shadow of loyalty, 
and *not* something to be depended upon.  The secret is only as 
strong as it's keeper, so the moral value of loyalty *is* 
represented by the very human characters populating the 
Potterverse.  Peter Pettigrew was not loyal and the Fidelius was not 
strong enough to force it upon him.

Actually, magical loyalty *never* sticks in the Potterverse.  Look 
at Dobby and Kreature.  They should be the most loyal creatures in 
the Potterverse and yet they both betray their masters.  However, 
Dobby's non-magical loyalty to Harry is quite strong.  Strong enough 
to overthrow the magical kind.

Which is why the idea of Dumbledore depending upon a magically 
forced version remorse just doesn't cut it for me.  As, again, Peter 
Pettigrew illustrates.

Magic is nothing to the human heart.  JKR makes this point again and 
again throughout the series.

> >>Neri:
> <snip>
> Why can the UV kill you if you break it? Because it symbolizes     
> extreme commitment.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Hmm, actually I see the Unbreakable Vow as a symbol of *lack* of 
commitment.  It's holding a gun to the head of someone you don't 
trust to do as you'd like, or as they say they'll do.  Which is why 
I don't see it as a form of magic Dumbledore would ever use.

I see the Unbreakable Vow as a deus ex machina.  It's what puts the 
players into their positions for the Tower scene.  That's how JKR 
uses her magic, IMO.  Not as a stand in for her characters' humanity 
or their moral values.
 
> >>Neri:
> I'm certainly not saying that JKR doesn't have some complex        
> characters with sometimes conflicting feelings and actions, but    
> none of them gets even close to the paradoxes of DDM!Snape. 
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Please explain to me then, why Lupin is willing for Harry to die?  I 
mean, the straightforward, non-paradoxial reason why he chooses his 
secrets over his best-friend's son.

Since all of JKR's characters are so easy to understand, and all. <g>

I'd also love to hear your explanation of Hermione's continuing 
cruelty to Marietta.  The non-paradoxal one, remember.

> >>Neri:
> Oh, I don't see "hates you, but doesn't want you dead" as schizoid.
> Quite normal, actually. I'm sure most of us (certainly myself) have
> several people that they hate but don't want dead. But Quirrell
> doesn't even begin to describe here the paradox that is DDM!Snape. 
> He doesn't mention that Snape owes his life to James...

Betsy Hp:
How is this a paradox?

> >>Neri:
> ...that he revealed the prophecy to Voldemort

Betsy Hp:
Again, I'm missing a paradox here.

> >>Neri:
> ...that he's supposed to feel so much remorse over this that even 
> 15 years after the case Dumbledore had trusted him completely, 

Betsy Hp:
A dangerous assumption, Neri.  Dumbledore never actually explains to 
Harry (and therefore us) why he trusts Snape so completely.  Though, 
again, I'm not sure why Snape isn't allowed to feel remorse here.  
I'm not getting the paradox.

> >>Neri:
> ...that he stopped the Occlumency lessons

Betsy Hp:
Actually, a Snape with a strong sense of feeling prefectly explains 
the halted Occlumency lessons.  What doesn't make sense is 
unfeeling, automaton Snape letting a mere emotion get in the way of 
his paying back that inconvienient Debt.  Your Snape is paradoxial 
here.  DDM!Snape is quite human.  (See Lupin and his ability to let 
Harry die as an example of this sort of weakness.)

> >>Neri:
> ...and AK'ed Dumbledore after saving his life

Betsy Hp:
Now *this* is a paradox.  But one that LID!Snape fails to explain.  
DDM!Snape explains it beautifully -- the Master & Commander, kill 
one man to save the ship, thing.

> >>Neri:
> ...and taking a UV to kill him

Betsy Hp:
A Snape ready to die for what he believes in, and one who agrees 
with Dumbledore's philosophy, would be quite willing to take an 
Unbreakable Vow that put him into a position to protect a student 
Voldemort is after.  It's the *other* sort of Snapes that I have a 
hard time understanding the reasoning behind taking the Vow.

> >>Neri:
> ...supposedly because of some extremely stupid mistake although    
> he's also supposed to be that hotshot secret agent.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Well, Snape *is* hot <eg>, but yeah, I disagree with the whole Super!
Snape thing where he's the best! Spy! Ever! And totally kick ass in 
everything he does and absolutely incapable of doing anything 
wrong.  I've never actually seen anyone arguing *for* that 
particular flavor Snape, but since so many people spend so much time 
arguing *against* that particular Snape I guess there must be some 
supporters out there.  Somewhere.

But again, JKR loves to trip up her characters using their own 
foibles and their humanity against them.  I mean, look at 
Dumbledore's many mistakes in his wish to keep Harry's burden from 
him for just a few more years.

People do make mistakes in the Potterverse.  But they're *human* 
mistakes.  So any theory that takes the humanity out of a character 
and replaces it with magic is heading in the wrong direction, I 
think.

Betsy Hp