Killing Snape (was Re: Snape and Dumbledore on the Tower: A Defense of Snape)

[horridporrid03]

No: HPFGUIDX 165400

> >>Betsy Hp:
> > I'm hopeful that it wasn't a real AK for one reason and one      
> > reason only: I want Snape to live.  If Snape really *did*        
> > actively kill Dumbledore (rather than merely removing the life-   
> > support if you will) than I suspect he's going to die for moral   
> > reasons.  As a murderer, JKR will have to kill him off, no matter 
> > the reason for the murder. 
> > Sort of like how in a gothic story, if the ingenue is actually    
> > raped by the villain she dies. 
> > <snip>

> >>Lupinlore:
> The situation with Boromir in LOTR, much discussed in other        
> threads, is perhaps more to the point.  That is that offering up    
> one's life is the final act of penance.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Hmm, actually I think it misses the point.  I'm not talking about 
penance at all, because I'm assuming that Snape's actions on the 
Tower were taken on the orders of Dumbledore (implied if not 
implicit).  If Snape *did* murder Dumbledore, he did so because 
Dumbledore told him to do so.

Just as the gothic maiden was raped by the villain and didn't 
*choose* to serve his evil lusts, Snape murdered because of another's 
will.  However, based on the moral rules of the tale, just as the 
maiden's stolen virtue will never be restored in this life, Snape 
will never be clean until he dies.  So in killing them, the author is 
actually being merciful.

Do I *like* that view point?  No.  But it's a familiar trope and one 
I think JKR would play.  Murder is a massively big deal in 
Potterverse.  The good guys aren't supposed to do it.  And if a good 
guy is forced to do it, to become so unclean, I'm betting only death 
would cleanse him.

> >>Lupinlore:
> So, to this point we have plentiful precedent for moral harshness   
> and uninventive and standard plot developments.  What would be the 
> narrative purpose?  To close off Snape's story, I suppose.  After   
> all, what place would he have in a world where all the developments 
> that define him, all the questions that frame his story, are        
> resolved?
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
Death as a definitive "the end"?  JKR has an epilogue planned, so I 
don't think she needs to kill characters just to end their story.  A 
retirement to the south of France would serve the same purpose.

> >>Lupinlore:
> What would be the moral purpose?  I guess to illustrate redemption 
> and its price.  Redemption, perhaps, is a moral necessity, but      
> nothing about its necessity makes it cheap.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
I honestly don't see that death is enough of a price for redemption.  
It actually strikes me as a fairly cheap way to go.  (I'm betting on 
that sort of cheap end for Pettigrew for that reason.)  Since I'm DDM!
Snape I think Snape has been walking the (long and painful) road of 
redemption since the opening chapter of PS/SS.  So I don't see 
Snape's death as necessary for redemptive reasons. 

> >>Lupinlore:
> And certainly Snapey-poo has plenty to pay for since the death of   
> the Potters (i.e, the whole problem with his abuse of children),   
> and even DD has not claimed to see contrition and penance for that.
> <snip>

Betsy Hp:
This is, of course, an area we'll *never* see eye to eye (you say 
abuser, I say strict teacher <g>).  None of Snape's actions during 
Harry's time at school strike me as needing something as intense as 
redemption.  I'm not expecting (nor would I want) a squeaky clean 
Snape at the end of the series.

However, if circumstances conspired to force Snape into a position 
where he had to murder on that Tower, if it really was an AK that 
Snape threw at Dumbledore, then I do think Snape is tainted with 
something only death will cleanse.  As per the rules of JKR's world, 
anyway.

Betsy Hp (nips Snapey-poo under the chin; wanders off to peel him 
some grapes)