Dumbledore Does Lie (Re: What turned Snape)

[Mike]

No: HPFGUIDX 158940

"The truth." Dumbledore sighed. "It is a beautiful and terrible 
thing, and should therefore be treated with great caution." (PS/SS 
US, p.298)

Dumbledore warned us in the very first book that the truth is not 
always the best road to follow. And, true to his words here, 
Dumbledore treats the truth with great caution. Which means if he 
has to lie He Will. The first time that I know of for certain that 
Dumbledore lied (on stage) happens in OotP US, p. 618:

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
"Well, the game is up," he said simply. "Would you like a written 
confession from me, Cornelius -- or will a statement before these 
witnesses suffice?"
......
"Statement?" said Fudge slowly. "What--I don't--?"
"Dumbledore's Army, Cornelius," said Dumbledore, ... "Not Potter's 
Army. *Dumbledore's Army*."
"But--but--"
.........
"You organized this?"
"I did," said Dumbledore.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

There it is plain as day, Dumbledore LYING. Of course, Dumbledore is 
doing it to protect Harry. He knows, in this scene, that he can't 
allow Harry to be expelled. But still he's lying to the Minister of 
Magic, no less. This tells us that Dumbledore will lie to protect 
the people he feels need protecting. Keep this in mind.

Now, let's look at the whole prophesy scenario. (I credit Red Hen 
with the main thesis of the following theory). After Harry hears the 
prophesy and he and Dumbledore discuss the meaning of the words, 
Harry asks DD why Voldemort had chose him in such a hurry, why he 
didn't wait. This is where DD explains the situation he found 
himself in with Trelawney, then adds:

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
"My--our--one stroke of good fortune was that the eavesdropper was 
detected only a short way into the prophesy and thrown from the 
building."

"So he only heard...?"

"He heard only the first part, the part foretelling the birth of a 
boy in July to parents who had thrice defied Voldemort. ..."
(OotP US, p.842)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

We didn't know who the eavesdropper was a this time so we don't take 
particular note of the fashion in which only part of the prophesy 
escaped. But we can now note that DD told us that this eavesdropper 
was discovered before the prophesy was finished. The implication in 
his words is that the eavesdropper was immediately expelled, didn't 
get the chance to hear the second half of the prophesy. Think back, 
when you read this the first time, did you not get the impression 
that the eavesdropper was hauled away from the door, down the steps 
and into the street, and his forcible removal precluded any chance 
that he heard the second half of the prophesy? That was my 
impression based on DD's words of explanation.

But that's not what happened. We now know a few more details about 
exactly what happened that night. Granted, they come from Sibyll, 
but I see no reason to believe she's lying about events. She doesn't 
even know that she made a prophesy that night. Besides, JKR is using 
her to introduce Severus Snape as the eavesdropper. It would be too 
confusing if we are to believe she is telling both the truth about 
Snape and lying about Snape, all within the same paragraph, when she 
doesn't even know the significance of the circumstances she is 
revealing to Harry and us.

So, what does she tell us? Here's Sibyll (HBP US, p.545):

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
"Yes, there was a commotion outside the door and it flew open, and 
there was the rather uncouth barman standing with Snape, who was 
waffling about having come the wrong way up the stairs, ..."
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Sibyll goes into a trance-like state during her prophesy telling, 
she is unaware that she even made them. She is unaware of what is 
happening until *after* she comes out of her trance. There is no way 
she can know Snape was there unless he was there *after* Sibyll 
*completes* the prophesy. (I'm not buying that Sibyll could be aware 
of her surroundings, but not hear her own words). Therefore, Snape 
certainly could have heard the entire prophesy, or if he heard only 
part, it would have been the last part.

And there is no way that Dumbledore could state positively that 
Snape didn't hear the whole prophesy. But, Dumbledore told us that 
he only heard the first part. He could have told Harry that Snape 
only heard the last part, the last sentence is essentially a repeat 
of the first sentence (it wouldn't include the "thrice defied" part, 
though). But Dumbledore didn't!?! Was Dumbledore telling Harry the 
truth here? It doesn't seem so, IMO. Why not?  

I think this all goes to, *when and why will Dumbledore lie?* He 
lies to protect those he feels need protecting. In this case, he 
feels that Snape's actual actions (and by extension, his own) 
need to be kept secret, even from Harry.


> In message #158904 Hickengruendler wrote:
> <snip>
> First of all, we have to assume that Dumbledore didn't lie. He    
> might withhold some information or make some unwise decisions,    
> but  I believe we have to take his word for the truth, as far as  
> he knows it. Meaning he might be mistaken about something (as in
> possibly about Snape's loyalties) but he does not deliberatly
> lie.  <snipped to below>

Mike:
I'm not picking on Hickengruendler here, this is just one post that 
is typical of a lot of people's opinion of Dumbledore. My 
counterpoint here is that Dumbledore *does* lie to protect others. 
And, IMO, Dumbledore lied about what Snape knew about the prophesy. 
The only person to protect Snape from is Voldemort. (He doesn't need 
protection from Harry). 

Put it together. What might really have happened that, if Voldemort 
found out the truth about, would put Snape in danger? I envision two 
possibilities.

1) Snape heard the whole prophesy but only told LV the first part.
(Was DD lying back in the Weasley's broomshed when he said that he 
and Harry were the only ones that knew the whole prophesy).

2) Snape heard none of the prophesy (or only the last sentence) and 
still only told Voldemort the first part.
(Maybe DD was just lying about Snape hearing any of the prophesy at 
all. Maybe Snape wasn't actually listening at the door and only came 
up the stairs and into the room when DD called him and Abeforth. 
Maybe Dumbledore was the only one who heard any of the prophesy and 
decided which part he wanted released.)

   (Alla, you might want to stop reading right here <g>)

Either of these scenarios requires that Snape was DDM *right now*, 
at the time of the prophesy. Because Dumbledore is not going to be 
lying about what happened that night if Snape is *really* still 
working for Voldemort at this time. If everything happened (Snape 
only hearing the first part. Snape still in Voldemort's and only 
Voldemort's employ) like we were told, Dumbledore wouldn't need to 
lie about it. But Dumbledore does lie about what happened. Ipso 
facto, everything *didn't* happen like we were told.


> Hickengruendler continued:
> And he told Harry, that Voldemort going after the Potters was the  
> reason for Snape's turning, therefore I am sure this is what      
> Dumbledore really believes, and Snape had to make it somehow      
> believable in front of him.

Mike:
Or, this is what Dumbledore wants Harry (and us) to believe. 
Dumbledore does not want it to get out that Snape had already come 
back to the side of light (if he ever left) before the time of the 
prophesy. This *likely story* of Snape's regret is the story 
Dumbledore wants out there in order to protect Snape. With this 
story Snape can claim he spun his story of regret to Dumbledore, 
playing on DD's "greatest weakness", and tell this to  Voldemort and 
the DEs (see Spinner's End).

If you follow to this point, you are left with some sure pieces of 
knowledge. Snape *turned* long before Godric's Hollow. Snape 
*turned* before the prophesy. Snape *turned* for some other reason 
than regret over what happened, was going to happen, could possibly 
happen to the Potters (including Lily. LOLLIPOPS you were fun while 
you lasted).

So, what did *turn* Snape? Here are two recent posts that IMO come 
the closest:

Abergoat offers:
If so, Snape would have grown up believing his mother was murdered 
by someome other than Voldemort...but perhaps Lily helped him 
uncover the truth. And perhaps Petunia overheard a boy discussing 
his determination to kill Voldemort in revenge by entering the Death 
Eaters to get close to him. This is information Voldemort would love 
to have if he knew Petunia had it...explaining Petunia's personal 
fear of Voldemort and Dumbledore's possible subject of prior 
correspondence.

Jazmyn:
Also. Snape might have turned because Dumbledore offered him a 
chance for real respect based on his talent and not just 'being part 
of a gang who didn't really care about him'. Maybe he wanted a real 
family as much as Harry. Maybe Snape was forced by Voldemort to kill 
his parents or his parents were killed by other DEs for being in a 
mixed marrage?

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was 
trying to make up his mind about something. At last he said, "I am 
sure. I trust Severus Snape completely." (HBP US, p.549)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Mike:
When did Snape *turn*? Well, we were told by JKR that we will hear 
more about the *werewolf caper*, weren't we? And with only one book 
left, with all the things that have happened between, what could we 
possibly *learn* from the werewolf caper that would mean anything to 
us by now? Could there be something about James or Sirius that 
Dumbledore does not want Harry to know, something that would tarnish 
the memories of one or both of them? Or is it simply that he doesn't 
want Harry to know *when* Snape *turned*, for Snape's protection?

Just a few open questions, out of a long list of open questions.
Mike