Snape, a Deatheater.

[puduhepa98 at aol.com]

No: HPFGUIDX 163997

Pippin:
>> 
> Really, your theory has Snape figuring  out what he agreed to so
> early
> that it scarcely makes any  difference, unless what you're saying is
> that
> he wouldn't have  agreed at all if he'd known. 
> 
> But then we should not only see  something which we could later
> recognize as the moment when he realizes  what he's agreed to do,
> we should see Snape trying desperately to undo  his mistake. That
> doesn't happen.
> 
> 
>lealess

>I have a slightly different view of the whole scene. When Snape  
says "..he means for me to do it," "he" could be Dumbledore, not  
Voldemort. Dumbledore has already been injured by the ring and has 
been  treated by Snape, for a curse that is no doubt deadly. Snape 
has probably  succeeded in putting a stopper in death, but death may 
still be inevitable,  only waiting for that cork to pop. Previous to 
the events at Spinner's End,  Snape and Dumbledore may have already 
discussed Dumbledore's eventual demise  and the uses that can be made 
of it to further the cause. So, Snape could  have understood 
Voldemort's intention, but may have already been prepared to  
unstopper Dumbledore in the end. (I don't think he wanted to do 
this,  however, which is why his hand twitched for the third clause of 
the Vow and  he was so agitated in the forest with Dumbledore.)

<snip>
 
Nikkalmati
 
Veeery interesting.  If Snape thinks DD means him to do "it", that  means 
that Snape does know exactly what Draco's task is and that part of the  eventual 
plan is for Snape to kill DD (if everything goes south and it comes  down to 
the last possible choice?). 
 
 The problem I have with that idea is that IMHO, my personal view,  that 
would not be a moral decision.  Now, as a friend at work told me, it  is her story 
and she can write it however she wants, and, yes, all kinds of  terrible 
things are done in war, but JKR has indicated she is writing a story  from a 
Christian viewpoint and having two main characters conspire to kill one  of them, 
whether it is collateral damage in wartime or whether it is  assisted suicide, 
it infringes on my moral code.  I used to get out of the  quandary by  
assuming (based in part of the phoenix rising from the fire)  that DD is not dead or 
will be revived.  I now think (after the New York  book reading) that JKR did 
not intend for DD to return, much as I might wish  it.  This may just be my 
problem, but I could never recommend the books to  children, if it turns out DD 
and SS conspired to end DD's life.
 
Nikkalmati



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]