Would Harry forgiving Snape be character growth for him? Re: CHAPDISC: HBP 29,

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 164210

Alla wrote:
<big snip>
> How is it relevant to Snape not changing? Well, just that as in case 
> of Slytherin house, it is just possible that Snape has not changed 
> **yet**, but that he may change at the end, to commit one redemptive 
> act, but not because that he was DD!M all along, but because he 
> would see Harry in new light. OR he may not change indeed because 
> that is who he is.

Carol responds:
I thought the discussion wasn't about Snape changing but about Harry
seeing who he really is and has been all along, not a nice person
(does *anyone* think that?) but loyal to Dumbledore and genuinely
remorseful. It isn't necessary to the point I've been trying to make
for Snape to change, only for Harry to see him clearly, feel
compassion for him, and forgive him. (As for Magpie, I *think* she's
referring to young Snape's change of heart and loyalties, which
happened before Godric's Hollow.)

> Alla:
> <snip>
> I do not see that author specifically works against of the evidence 
> that someone who treats you like dirt in classroom is working for 
> Voldemort.
> 
> It may not be so, but I think that it is way too early to say so 
> with certainty.
> 
> Sure, Fake Moody treated Malfoy badly and he is Voldemort servant, 
> but Lupin treats everybody nicely and he is not Voldemort servant ( 
> unless you are Pippin of course ;))
> 
> I just do not see the trend, I think she deals with every case 
> individually and in case of Snape I sure can see the possibility 
> that he was treating Harry badly AND Voldemort's servant.

Carol:
What about Umbridge, who treats Harry much worse than Snape does but
overprotects the other students by refusing to let them learn DADA?
Just as Fake!Moody cultivates a gruff friendliness toward Harry, in
keeping with the real Mad-eye Moody's personality and to conceal his
true loyalties, Umbridge pretends to be sweet, even to the point of
wearing pink Alice bands, speaking in a little-girl voice, and
decorating her walls with gamboling kittens? Despite appearances,
she's sadistic and despotic, as evil in her way as the Voldie fanatics
Barty Jr. and Bellatrix Lestrange, and yet she's not a Voldie
supporter. Snape, in contrast, is sarcastic toward Harry, never
cultivates the appearance of kindness or friendliness (at least, not
when Harry is watching), but never physically abuses him. Umbridge
tries to Crucio Harry; snape saves him from a Crucio. Umbridge insists
that Voldemort is not back and the students are in no danger from him;
Snape reveals his Dark Mark to Umbridge's boss, Fudge, in a vain
attempt to prove to him that Voldemort is back.

As Sirius Black says, and Umbridge demonstrates, "The world is not
divided into good people and Death Eaters," Harry. And I think that
Snape is the best illustration in the books of that point. 

> Alla:
<snip>> 
> And Snape may have been doing exactly what he tells Bella and 
> Narcissa in Spinner end, no?
> 
Carol:
Funny how he doesn't tell them that he sent the Order to the MoM and
saved Dumbledore from the ring Horcrux. He doesn't even tell them the
nature of DD's injury and tells them the same story that DD tells
everyone (or lets everyone assume), that his reflexes have slowed.
Nope, I don't think that Snape is telling the truth--certainly not the
whole truth--in Spinner's End. He certainly has not remained at
Hogwarts as a way of staying out of Azkaban; the charges against him
have been dropped. (He lets Bella and Narcissa think that he used the
 same defense as the DEs who were found innocent by reason of
Imperius, when, in fact, he was never even tried. The charges were
dropped before the trial when Dumbledore revealed to Crouch Sr. that
Snape was spying for him "at great personal risk.") Snape is
concealing a great deal from Bella and Narcissa. I don't think we can
take him completely at his word when he explains his reasons for
thwarting Quirrell or not killing Harry. Even if it were true in the
first place (and I've shown why it isn't), the reason he gives Bella
for not killing Harry no longer applies at the end of HBP, where he
gives a different reason why the DEs should not Crucio Harry, or by
implication kill him). Why not just tell Bella that Harry is for the
Dark Lord if that's his real reason? And if it isn't, why not just
kill Harry himself now that DD is dead?

Carol, noting that we've strayed a bit from the subject line and are
back on Snape rather than Harry