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

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 165423

Betsy Hp wrote:
> <snip> 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.

Carol responds:

I understand what you're saying, and I agree that if Snape is doing
what DD wants him to do, he's already redeemed. (I think he's being
set up for forgiveness, not redemption, though that may not be the way
he views it himself, given the intensity of his mental anguish in
"Flight of the Prince.")

But with regard to the supposed necessity for his death to cleanse
him, I, too, hope that you're wrong. Just because it's a familiar
trope doesn't mean that JKR will use it, and we need to remember that
she's a Christian. "Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who
trespass against us, and lead us not into temptation but deliver us
from evil." There is no God or Christ per se in the WW (except in
terms of secularized Christian holidays and Christmas carols and minor
oats like "good Lord"), but forgiveness and mercy are still valued by
the wise, personified by Dumbledore. DDM!Snape has been trying all
these years to atone for the sin of revealing the Prophecy to
Voldemort, which led to the deaths of the Potters, deaths that he
evidently tried futilely to prevent by telling Dumbledore of LV's plan
to kill the Potters (and Longbottoms?) and revealing that a spy close
to the Potters (obviously he thought the spy was Sirius Black) was
revealing information on the Potters (and other Order members?) to
Voldemort. And since Harry entered Hogwarts, Snape has been trying to
protect him, at the same time hating him or, at least, resenting his
rule-breaking and "arrogance" (in part his own creation--in my
experience, you get the behavior you expect from people, especially
kids, at least, to some degree).

Without question, the plot requires some sort of confrontation between
Harry and Snape, and IMO, Harry has to forget revenge and forgive
Snape as a step toward defeating Voldemort through Love. But Snape is
probably the only person aside from Bill Weasley who can help Harry
with Horcruxes and the only one who can help him locate them. There
are plenty of ways in which Snape can redeem himself in his own and
Harry's sight if Harry can only learn to understand who Snape really
is, what he has been doing all along, and why he killed Dumbledore (if
indeed the AK and not the poison killed him). If JKR can accomplish
that, she can certainly find a way for Snape to survive. If God can
forgive the sin of murder in the Christian religion (and perhaps
others I'm unfamiliar with), then Harry can forgive Snape and Snape
can forgive himself--and live a productive life after being forgiven.

As for the WW, with Madam Bones dead, it may be difficult for Snape to
find justice, but again, JKR can find a way, such as a few years in
Azkaban, followed by some community service at St. Mungo's, and a
quiet early retirement writing Potions and DADA textbooks under an
assumed name. Or just follow eighteenth-century tradition and ship him
out to the "Colonies," preferably the U.S. ;-)

BetsyHp:
> 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.

Carol:
Exactly. For Snape as well as Harry. It's only the British WW that's
out for Snape's skin, AFAWK. Why not go somewhere where he won't be
recongized? Or better yet, isn't Durmstrang in need of a headmaster?

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.

Carol:
Exactly. Lots of characters have died who don't deserve to die,
starting with Cedric (or the Potters, if you want to go that far
back). And others have died unredeemed, notably Karkaroff. (He only
switched sides to get himself out of Azkaban. He remains a coward to
the end, in marked contrast to Snape, who is risking his life in one
way or another from the time he turns to Dumbledore onward.)

> Betsy Hp:
> This is, of course, an area we'll *never* see eye to eye (you
[Lupinlore] 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.

Carol:
I agree with your first paragraph but disagree with the second.
Granted, there's no atonement through the sacrifice of Christ in the
HP books, but why not atonement through genuine contrition and
self-sacrifice? Snape has already lost everything--job, reputation,
freedom, mentor. Why have him lose his life, too, just to send him on
the Next Great Adventure? Mad-Eye Moody has killed, too, apparently
(Evan Rosier, certainly,  and perhaps Wilkes, who is also dead), and
yet we don't see him atoning for these necessary killings. In fact, I
see no evidence to support your idea that "only death will cleanse" a
the soul of a sinner, especially, a *repentant* soul. Not even death
will cleanse Barty Jr., whose soul is lost forever. Possibly a
similar fate is in store for Bellatrix, and just plain death,
repentant or otherwise, for Wormtail after saving Harry to repay the
life debt. But death for Snape for doing what Dumbledore wanted him to
do, saving Draco and Harry and getting the DEs out of Hogwarts and
(presumably) helping to bring Voldemort down? I can't see JKR doing
that any more than I can see her killing off Harry. As for a
Boromir-style redemptive death, we have a prime candidate in Percy
Weasley.

Carol, who thinks that JKR either planned from the beginning to have
her "gift of a character" survive and live a productive life or
couldn't bear to kill him off and granted him a reprieve