No: HPFGUIDX 164084
dungrollin wrote:
>
> CHAPTER DISCUSSIONS: Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince, Chapter
> 29, The Phoenix Lament
<snip admirably concise and objective summary>
> 1. This chapter is a nice opportunity for JKR to show us a variety
of characters' reactions to the same emotional upheaval -
Dumbledore's death. Did any of their reactions particularly inspire
sympathy in you? Which character reacted most similarly to you? Is
that character one you normally sympathise or identify with?
Carol responds:
I must confess that I was also in shock and felt betrayed, not so much
by Snape as by JKR. How dare she set up DDM!Snape and then blow him
away? But still, by the time I read this chapter, I was beginning to
get my hopes up again and to see holes in Harry's story. So I suppose
the character I sympathize with most in his reactions is Hagrid, who
clings to his belief in Snape's loyalty right up to the moment he sees
Dumbledore dead and never says a word against him after that. I also
sympathize with Mr. Weasley, who expresses shock at Dumbledore's death
but says nothing against Snape. I sympathize less with McGonagall, who
immediately after her initial shock states that she only trusted Snape
because of Dumbledore's faith in him (I think she trusted him until
she learned of his background at the end of GoF and then began having
doubts despite his having just helped Dumbledore deal with
Crouch!Moody before her eyes.) I sympathize even less with Lupin, who
mentions Snape's Occlumency skills and seems completely hardened
against him. Mrs. Weasley's reaction is interesting--she's only
interested in her son's injury and seems oblivious to Dumbledore's
death. I understand that but I'm torn between sympathy and irritation
at her behavior. Slughorn's "I taught him. I thought I knew him" is
also interesting because it resembles Lupin's "Yes, I knew him. Or I
thought I did" with regard to Sirius Black in PoA. I don't normally
*empathize* with any of these characters but I normally feel some
*sympathy* for Molly and Lupin, and I like Mr. Weasley. The only thing
I really like about Hagrid is his steadfast belief in Snape. I like
him more and McGonagall and less after this scene. Needless to say,
I'm a DDM!Snaper and I should have more sympathy for these characters
than I do because my own faith in him was temporarily shaken. (Blame
the Harry!centric pov. :-p!)
> 2. (Take off your DDM!Snape hats for this one, please.)
Carol:
What? I'm not sure that I can.
Dungrollin:
In this chapter, McGonagall and Tonks ask the same questions that
fans have been asking for years, namely: what did Snape tell
Dumbledore to make him trust him? Do you think, given Lupin,
McGonagall and Tonks's astonishment at Harry's story, that *even if
Snape really has* betrayed the Order and rejoined Voldemort, there
still must have been more than a `tale of remorse' to how he
hoodwinked Dumbledore? How do you think ESE!Snape (or similar
variants) could have convinced him? What themes that the books have
already visited would Snape's tale (and the fact that it was fake)
resonate with, and how could his ability to fool Dumbledore reflect
upon Harry's story?
Carol:
Let me just say that I do think there's more, much more, than a tale
of remorse behind DD's complete trust in Snape, including Snape's
saving Harry in SS/PS, watching over him throughout the books,
reporting faithfully to DD on numerous occasions (some of which we
know about or can deduce from canon) and repeatedly risking his life
for Dumbledore. And I'm sure there was something else, possiblty
Regulus Black's death, that caused young Snape to go to Dumbledore and
persuade DD that he rejected Voldemort completely. And we can suppose
with Lupin that Snape's Occlumency could somehow fool Dumbledore, all
of which would "resonate with" and corroborate Harry's story. (At any
rate, Lupin's Occlumency remark and his comment that Snape hated James
make Harry's story more plausible to the hearers, as does the fact
that Harry was an eyewitness to DD's death.) I can see how the hearers
would believe in ESE!Snape, not realizing that Harry's version has
Snape's supposed remorse coming after GH, which is inconsistent with
his spying "at great personal risk" before GH. I can see why the
hearers would conclude from Harry's story that Snape is ESE. His
version of Snape's belated and fake remorse makes the story credible
and fits with DD's belief in second chances. Unfortunately it also
makes Dumbledore look like what Draco calls him, a stupid old man. (I
can't see Snape as ESE! myself, but I can certainly understand why
McGonagall, Lupin, et al. would think so given Harry's story.)
>
> 3. Assuming Hermione's account of events in Snape's office is
> accurate, what do you make of her and Luna's gullibility?
Carol:
But *can* we make this assumption? Flitwick has a bruise on his
forehead and has to stay in the hospital wing until after the
conversation at Bill's bedside. Unless you're seventy-something
mcGonagall hit with four Stunning spells at once, the spell usually
requires only a countercurse (Ennervate!) and a few moments to recover
from disorientation. And wouldn't a Stunning spell fired at someone's
head or chest cause them to fall over backwards, not forwards? Maybe
Flitwick really did faint? As for gullibility, they weren't gullible
at all. True, Harry distrusted Snape, but he wasn't doing anything to
help Draco, and he was a member of the Order of the Phoenix and a
teacher. Flitwick did need their help. It made perfect sense to do
exactly what Snape said (which also kept them out of danger for
awhile). Nothing gullible about it. Hermione *thinks* after the fact
that it's gullible, but she's doing exactly what McGonagall does,
blaming herself for trusting Snape. Whether it was her own instinct or
the Felix Felicis that made her do it, it was the right thing to do.
And, on the off-chance that Lupin is right that Snape would have
killed them rather than merely Stunning them if they disobeyed him, it
also saved their lives. (But why bother to give them an order if he's
ESE? Why not just Stun them as he Stunned Flitwick? Killing them would
take too much power and energy and unnecesarily complicate matters. He
didn't yet know what he would find on the tower.)
Dungrollin:
Are you annoyed that they didn't realise immediately that Snape had
> stupefied Flitwick and try to stop him?
Carol:
Heavens no! Then he *would* have Stunned them. He couldn't have two
kids trying to duel him or following him. Hermione and Luna duelling
Snape? Impossible and ridiculous, whether he's DDM! or ESE! Besides,
as I said above, I'm not even sure that he *did* Stun Flitwick though
I do understand that he would want Flitwick and everyone else out of
the way in case he had to go through with the UV. (BTW, I still think
the Flitwick-as-duelling-champion idea is absurd, a joke or silly
rumor circulated among the students that we hear of only once with no
corroborating evidence--skill at Charms is not skill at DADA.
Incapacitated by a Stunning spell if it is one? And he's so light that
a simple Summoning or Banishing Charm sends him zooming across the
classroom. Best to keep him out of harm's way.)
Dungrollin:
Since Ron, Neville and Ginny weren't much more use when confronted by
the Peruvian Darkness Powder, and only made it through the fight
because of the Felix Felicis, have your views on how useful the DA
really was changed?
Carol:
Hm. I agree that the kids weren't much use in the battle and it might
have been even worse if others, unprotected by the Felix Felicis, had
shown up. I never thought very highly of the DA, to tell the truth.
Four of the five DA members who accompanied Harry to the MoM were
incapacitated, and all of them would have died if the Order hadn't
shown up. Also, it's not much use to teach the kids to cast a Patronus
without a Dementor!Boggart (and they'd already learned Expelliarmus
from Snape in CoS). Facing a real Dementor is much different from
casting a Patronus for fun in the RoR. Protego, Stupefy, and
Impedimenta are better than nothing, but not enough in themselves to
protect against a crazy DE casting AKs in every direction, especially
backed by his friends. The main purpose of the DA was to undermine
Umbridge, in which it succeeded despite Marietta's snitching, and it
allowed kids from three of the four Houses to work and learn together
and enabled Ron and Harry to at least become acquainted with a few
Ravenclaws and a few more Hufflepuffs. That will come in handy in DH,
I'm sure. So, no. HBP didn't alter my view of the DA. It confirmed it.
>
> 4. What do you make of McGonagall saying (of Snape) "He must have
> known a spell we didn't [
] After all, he was the Defence against
> the Dark Arts teacher?" We all know Snape had been teaching potions
> for fifteen years before that, so what do you make of this sudden
> respect for his knowledge of DADA? Do you think the teaching posts
> confer something special on their holders? Does this give us any
> clues as to why Voldemort particularly wanted to have the DADA job?
> Or do you think McGonagall could be alluding in some way to the
> curse?
Carol:
It's an odd remark given that just being the DADA teacher would hardly
confer special abilities on Snape given the string of incompetent or
corrupt DADA teachers in the last few years. Lockhart, for example,
was completely inept and fled in disgrace when he was supposed to deal
with the monster in CoS, and if being the DADA teacher means Snape
knows spells that the rest of them don't, why wouldn't Lupin, a former
DADA teacher, know the same spell? Maybe she realizes that Snape is
the first really qualified DADA teacher they've had, at least when it
comes to duelling rather than minor Dark creatures. Certainly, she
trusted him earlier to deal with the cursed opal necklace (and a good
thing, too, since he saved Katie's life). I don't think that
Mcgonagall's words have anything to do with Voldemort or the DADA
curse, only, IMO, with her recognition that Snape really does know
DADA. (BTW, we aren't told who's right, Harry or McGonagall.)
>
> 5. Molly doesn't give one single sign that she cares at all that
> Dumbledore's dead, she doesn't react when McGonagall assures Arthur
> that it's true, nor does she ask Harry or the others if they're all
> right; she only has eyes for Bill. Do you find that surprising? How
> do you interpret her different reactions to the dramas at the ends
> of CoS, GoF and HBP, and how do they reflect upon her assertion in
> OotP that Harry is as good as her son?
Carol:
I commented on this reaction earlier. I'm sure that she'd have reacted
much like Madam Pomfrey or maybe McGonagall to DD's death if her son
hadn't been injured, but for Molly, her family takes precedence over
everything. (Remember her Boggart.) Bill is probably her favorite son,
the oldest, handsome, intelligent, good at everything. Dumbledore, in
contrast, is an old man and unrelated. Any sadness she feels for his
death, any anger at Snape's supposed treachery, is forced to the back
of her mind by her son lying unconscious and mutilated in front of
her. It's natural and human and to be expected. It has nothing to do
with Harry, who was part of her Boggart, too. After all, Harry is
alive and uninjured. If he'd been mauled by Greyback, she'd be as
concerned for him as she is for Bill, IMO.
>
> 6. In ch5 p92 (UK ed.) Molly says (of Bill and Fleur) "It was the
> same last time he was powerful, people eloping right left and
> centre –" yet Lupin seems here to be an exception, holding out
> against this all-too-human reaction in times of war. Do you find
> this consistent with his character? Given the close friends he has
> lost, do you understand him wanting to keep Tonks at arm's length,
> or do you agree with Molly that he's being ridiculous? How does his
> behaviour regarding Tonks compare with Harry's later break-up with
> Ginny?
Carol:
First off, I can't reconcile Molly's remark about eloping right after
Hogwarts with the earlier remarks on Ogg and Apollyon Pringle, but,
oh, well. It fits with the Potters, anyway. But Remus Lupin, like
Sirius Black (and PP), appears to be a loner except for his small
circle of male friends. Lupin would see himself as an Untouchable, not
suited for love and marriage because of the danger he would present to
a wife and children, and probably steeled himself against romantic
feelings long before. And, certainly, Tonks would seem an odd match
for him, some fifteen or so years younger and temperamentally opposite
(when she's her normal self as presented in OoP). Losing his close
friends would, as you suggest, add to his sense of isolation and his
fear of making--and losing--new friends, much less falling in love and
losing the loved one. It's different from Harry, however. Harry craves
normality. He wants to be Just!Harry, to have a family and a
girlfriend and not have the burden of being the Prophecy Boy, the boy
with the scar, the Chosen One. He envies Ron as much as Ron envies
him, or at least, he envies Ron's way of life. So giving up Ginny is a
sacrifice, a duty. He's setting aside his attraction and affection for
her (not yet mature love) before it's too late in hopes of protecting
her. (Of course, such protection is somewhat condescending and
probably futile, but he's doing what he thinks is right for Ginny.)
Lupin is preventing, or trying to prevent, any such bond from forming
in the first place, and ignoring or repelling Tonks's feelings for him
without allowing any such feelings in himself, or at least not
recognizing and acknowledging them if they exist. I don't know who's
right, Lupin or Molly, but I do think his treatment of Tonks is harsh.
He seems to be placing his own doubts and fears above her love. He
could take measures to protect her (surely there's some way to obtain
Wolfbane Potion is he's really too hopeless at potion-making to brew
it himself), and she's at as much risk of dying in battle as he is. So
I'd say that if he really does care about her, if there's really a
chance that he could love a younger woman with pink or purple hair and
no domestic skills and completely different tastes and sensibilities,
he ought to give the relationship, and Tonks, a chance. He ought, for
once in his life, to make someone else happy for her own sake and
forget about himself and his failings.
>
> 7. Do you think that the fact that Dumbledore's portrait is sleeping
> peacefully and looking untroubled is significant? If so, what do you
> think it signifies, and if JKR had wanted to signify the opposite,
> how do you think she would have done it?
Carol:
Absolutely. Portrait!Dumbledore is untroubled by his own death and by
Snape's supposed treachery. He's sure that Snape has done what was
right rather than what was easy. He knows that only Snape could have
gotten Harry safely off the tower without being detected and killed by
the DEs, saved Draco, and gotten the DEs off the Hogwarts grounds. He
knows that his time is up; that he's made all the necessary
arrangements, from informing the Dursleys about 12 GP to placing Snape
with the DEs and providing a substitute for him as Head of Slytherin.
He's instructed Harry about Horcruxes and Voldemort and knows that
Harry will do what he has to do without him. Peacefully sleeping
Dumbledore reinforces the image of dead Dumbledore looking as if he's
asleep (not at all the usual expression on the face of an AK'd
person). There's more to DD's death than meets Harry's eye, and it's
not nearly as horrendous as Harry thinks it is. Death, we're reminded,
is merely the next great adventure. Harry desperately needs to talk
with Portrait!Dumbledore and hear what he has to say about Snape and
death (and just possibly about Horcrux locations). If JKR had wanted
to indicate otherwise, she would have had dead!Dumbledore looking
horrified and bewildered, with open eyes, and Portrait!Dumbledore
awake and warning Harry against Snape. Just my reading of the canon,
but it's pretty clear to me that wise old dumbledore retained his
wisdom and serenity to the end because his death was unavoidable and
occurred in the best possible way, the way he wanted it to, given the
potion and the DADA curse and the UV and whatever he wants Snape to do
in DH.
>
> 8. What do you make of McGonagall's statement about closing the
> school: "
I must say that Professor Dumbledore's murder is more
> disturbing to me than the idea of Slytherin's monster living
> undetected in the bowels of the castle
" Do you find this statement
> surprising? Do you agree with it? Do you think it might reflect the
> fact that she was a student at Hogwarts the first time the Chamber
> opened? Do you think it reflects JKR's opinion?
Carol:
I hadn't thought about McG's being a student the first time the
Chamber opened, but that certainly didn't deter her from continuing to
attend the school or teaching there or becoming deputy headmistress. I
think that closing the school is both her greatest fear and her
instinctive reaction to protect the students, but I think she's wrong
and Sprout and Hagrid and Slughorn are right. The school is at least
as safe, probably safer than most homes (McG herself listed the
protections they'd placed on it). All they need to do is destroy or
disable the Vanishing Cabinet and, if necessary, reinstate the
anti-flying protection. Certainly, the school is the best place for
people like Theo Nott, whose mother is dead and whose father is in
Azkaban, and who might be in danger of joining the DEs if he's not in
school. It's also the best place for Crabbe and Goyle, who will be at
loose ends without Draco but can be kept out of trouble at Hogwarts.
It's the best place for Muggleborns, who'll be out of touch with the
WW at home. It's the best place for Hannah Abbott, whose mother has
been murdered. And so on. I think Hogwarts will be open and Ginny
Weasley will be there. It's the only hope for the future of the
British WW; it's a sanctuary; it's the place where the four houses can
learn to work together at last. McGonagall is as wrong about Hogwarts
as she is about Snape, IMO.
>
> 9. What do you make of Slughorn's reaction to Dumbledore's death,
> his shock at Snape's culpability, his ambivalence about the school
> reopening, and his seeming reluctance that the students should stay
> for the funeral? How does this compare with his manner with
> Dumbledore in chapter four? If the school reopens, do you think he
> will stay on as potions master and head of Slytherin, and do you
> think Dumbledore's death will affect his decision?
Carol:
I prefer his reaction ("I taught him. I thought I knew him") to
McGonagall's. He doesn't claim to have trusted Snape only because of
Dumbledore; he trusted him for himself. He overcomes his ambivalence
about the students staying for the funeral, and he himself points out
that Hogwarts is as safe as anyplace in the (British) WW. I think the
whole point of DD's hiring him as Potions master (aside from
protecting him and getting that memory) was to replace Snape in that
post and as HoH of Slytherin after Snape's inevitable departure (and
his own anticipated death). So, yes. Slughorn will stay. We won't see
a new Potions master, and who else can they find to be Head of
Slytherin House?
>
> 10. Do you think Harry was right not to tell McGonagall where he
> went with Dumbledore? Would you have had the courage (or
> stubbornness) to do the same at his age? Do you think that he did
> what Dumbledore would have wanted? McGonagall will almost certainly
> ask Dumbledore's portrait where he took Harry when it wakes up; what
> do you think it will tell her? Since all the portraits are sworn to
> help the current head, do you think they will tell her about the
> horcruxes? If they refused, do you think she has the potential to
> turn into an Umbridge, or worse?
Carol:
I think that Harry was right to remain loyal to Dumbledore, and if DD
had wanted McGonagall to know where he was going, he would have told
her. She worries too much, and she wouldn't approve of Harry's taking
such terrible risks. She might be captured and tortured and reveal too
much. Best that she keep to her important job of running Hogwarts and
keeping it safe without too much knowledge of what Harry is up to, or
up against. ("Oh, well, Professor, we went up to this seaside cave on
a cliff and crossed an underground lake full of Inferi. I forcefed
Professor Dumbledore this horrible potion on his Orders so we could
retrieve one of Voldemort's Horcruxes, which turned out to be a fake.
. . ."). Nope. I can see why Dumbledore wouldn't want McGonagall, of
all people, to have any idea what happened in the cave or any hint of
the Horcrux hunt to come. (Now Snape is another matter; he almost
certainly knows about the Horcruxes and what Harry will be facing, but
there's no need to warn Harry not to confide in him.)
>
> 11. Do you find it surprising that McGonagall didn't ask how Harry &
co. knew that Malfoy was in the room of requirement? Harry didn't
tell her what he knows about the Unbreakable Vow either (despite the
fact that it didn't have anything to do with the Horcruxes). Do you
think she will find out, and if she did how do you think she would
react? What story about Malfoy and Snape should Harry be able to piece
together from the information he has?
Carol:
I didn't think about McGonagall not being told how Harry knew about
the RoR. Maybe the Order members will put their heads together and
figure out the holes in Harry's story. But, no, it's not surprising
that she didn't ask that particular question. Her head was full of
Snape's "betrayal" and the future of Hogwarts. Portrait!DD will
probably tell her as much as he thinks she needs to know (assuming
that a portrait has full knowledge of its subject's past) and reassure
her that keeping Hogwarts open is the right decision. As for what
story about Draco and Snape Harry should be able to piece together
from the information he has, give me a whole day to write that post!
>
> 12. Hagrid is inconsolable; did you find his reaction to
> Dumbledore's death moving? We don't get to see what he thinks of
> Snape's apparent treachery, do you think this omission is
> conspicuous? Hagrid insists that he's staying whether the school
> opens or not, because Hogwarts is his home, even though his hut has
> just been burned down. Do you think he only wants to stay because of
> Grawp, or do you think he might have another reason that we don't
> know about?
Carol:
I'm not sure that I found his reaction moving considering how often he
cries in the books. But, yes, the omission of a condemnation of Snape,
following on the heels of his earlier defense of Snape, is both
conspicuous and significant. Maybe Hagrid will tell us the real reason
that DD trusted Snape (and why he still does). He can mourn for DD
without condemning Snape. The only person with a similar reaction is
Arthur Weasley, who is also dealing with the injuries of his son.
Hagrid's hut hasn't actually burned down; I think it can be magically
restored (as he expected DD to do). I think he wants to stay at
Hogwarts because it's his home; his job is there; the Forbidden Forest
is there; Grawp is there. What else does he know and what else can he
do? He's not a fully qualified wizard. He could run off and marry
Madame Maxime and take care of her horses, but I don't think he'd want
to do that. He has to stay and do what he can for the Order, take care
of the Hogwarts grounds, and teach COMC if they'll let him.
>
> 13. McGonagall will refer the decision to close the school to the
> governors; do you think that we have any canon to go on in guessing
> whether Hogwarts will reopen or not? Do you think that JKR ought to
> tell us one way or another before book 7?
Carol:
The only canon we have is the fact that Hogwarts has never closed down
in the past despite two sets of Basilisk attacks and VW1, and the
numerous statements by DD, snape, and McGonagall about how safe it is
(or would have been if not for the Vanishing Cabinet). I'm quite sure
that it will reopen, if not in DH thn the following year so that HRH
(I predict they'll all live) can continue their education.
>
> 14. Do you find any of the characters' reactions to Dumbledore's
> death suspicious? Do you think that we may find out something in
> book 7 which will make us view this hospital-wing scene in a
> different light (even if you can't imagine what it is yet)?
Carol:
Oh, certainly we'll read it in a new light after DH when we learn what
was going on with Snape and DD, just as we read the Three Broomsticks
scene in PoA differently after learning that Sirius Black wasn't the
SK and isn't out to murder Harry. The only person whose reactions I
find suspicious is Lupin, who is trying to find as much reason to
blame or suspect Snape as possible. I don't want him to be ESE, but he
certainly seems to be the most likely candidate. Everyone else is
either preoccupied by Bill, grieving for DD, examining their own
behavior and reactions, or (in the case of Tonks) sidetracked by Lupin
himself. Of course, ESE!Tonks is also a possibility, but I think her
OoC behavior throughout the book has been sufficiently explained by
her unrequited love. Lupin, though, ought to know Snape will and ought
to know better than anyone present about the DADA curse. I was
disappointed by his reactions. Either he'll notice the gaps and
inconsistencies in Harry's story and get him to fill them in so that
he can reexamine them, or he's ESE. I don't think he's just deluded or
distracted like the rest of them. He's too smart for that.
>
> 15. Did it surprise you that there was no mention of the
> Headmasters' and Headmistresses' portraits' reactions to McGonagall
> asking where Harry went with Dumbledore? They've often been vocal in
> the past when Harry and Dumbledore were alone together; is their
> silence in this scene conspicuous? How do you think Phineas
> Nigellus, for example, reacted to news of Dumbledore's death, and
> when did he hear?
Carol:
The portraits are probably stunned and may have the same reaction as
McGonnagall--but Dumbledore trusted him! They haven't heard anything
like the whole story yet, not even as much as McGonnagall has heard.
However, they've been privy to conversations between Snape and
Dumbledore that the teachers and Order members haven't heard, so I
expect Phineas Nigellus, at least, to speak up, especially since he
defended Snape to Harry twice in HBP (or called him impertinent for
questioning Snape) and he has a portrait in both Hogwarts and Harry's
house/Order HQ at 12 GP. I'll be very disappointed if Phineas Nigellus
doesn't speak his peace in defense of Snape in DH, even if Harry isn't
yet ready to hear it, after Portrait!DD has given him the facts of the
matter--or given them to McGonagall in the protraits' hearing.
>
> 16. "And he knew, without knowing how he knew it, that the phoenix
> had gone, had left Hogwarts for good, just as Dumbledore had left
> the school, had left the world
had left Harry." Did you find this
> ending to the chapter poignant? Does it wear off after the sixth re-
> read? If we see Fawkes again in book 7, do you think we will get to
> know him as a character in his own right, or will he always be
> associated with and symbolise Dumbledore?
Carol:
Yes, it was poignant and it's still poignant. It reminds me of a line
from Shelley, "Our sweetest songs are those that tell of saddest
thought," and of the James Baldwin story, "Sonny's Blues," which is
about turning the darkness in our lives into music, sorrow into
beauty. Fawkes's song transforms grief into beauty, making it bearable
and giving it new meaning, just as poetry and music have always done.
So, no, Fawkes's lament will never stop being poignant to me. For me,
Fawkes is already both a character and a symbol, but if he acts to
protect or aid Harry, unprompted by Dumbledore (who set up the
protections in CoS before he was sent away in case Harry opened up the
Chamber), he may become more of a character in other readers' minds.
(I think he healed Harry's injury on his own initiative in GoF, but
it's not as memorable as the similar moment in CoS. Whatever he does
in DH will probably be tied in with the brother wands, which have been
foreshadowed since SS/PS. We haven't heard the last of Phoenix song.
Carol, who has spent the entire morning on this post, thanking
dungrollin for her interesting and thought-provoking questions, which
actually reinforced rather than countered her DDM!Snape perspective