Snape and redemption WAS: Re: Would Harry forgiving Snape be character

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 164242

> Magpie:
> Sorry--even I can see I'm getting kind of confusing!
> 
> First, Snape is the *one* character who has allegedly changed and 
yet still 
> is unpleasant. It's not like he's just one more bad guy who 
remains bad, 
> he's the one living example of a bad guy changing sides despite 
obviously 
> still being unpleasant. We've got two other potential examples in 
Regulus, 
> who died before the series began, and Draco who could potentially 
stop 
> before he crosses the line.
> 
> For an example of someone who really switched sides, and went from 
being an 
> active DE to someone actively working against LV (at great risk to 
himself), 
> there's only Snape. So having him turn out to be bad through and 
through too 
> carries more weight than just some bad people not changing. It 
takes the one 
> central redemption story and ends it in failure. All the good guys 
were 
> always good.
> <SNIP>
> That, to me, makes it negative because it ultimately validates an 
emotional, 
> angry and simplistic judgment to a person over a judgment that's 
based more 
> on empathy and understanding the person from his own pov, even if 
it's 
> confusing. And the person in question is our one character who was 
a DE and 
> changed sides to become an agent for Dumbledore.
>

Alla:

I did rather big snipping and again it may have been rather 
arbitrarily, although I tried to make it as relevant as possible. I 
just wanted to leave another round of ** Snape and Snape again** 
with understanding that we do understand each other POV.

So, I **think** I get why Snape not changing  would be too negative 
for you.

Basically because you think that Snape story is the central story of 
redemption of the series, yes?

Without Snape you think there would be no redemption story, yes?

So, as I said I think I understand, you think that this is just too 
good of example for redemption for JKR to pass up upon, yes?


If I got it, just tell me, okay? I am not necessarily buying it, but 
at least I get where you are coming from.

I am not necessarily buying it because IMO JKR is quite clear now 
that Draco is headed for redemption ( oh boy, did I just say that?) 
and that implies for me that the story of redemption, the central 
one **may be** the story of someone from Harry's generation.

Now, I suspect we differ plenty here, because you think ( I know I 
am on a dangerous road here telling you what you think, so feel free 
to smack me if I am wrong) that Draco really has nothing to be 
redeemed from ( again, this is my assumption based on our past 
discussions, so feel free to correct me if you do not think so), but 
for me Draco has **a lot** to redeem himself from, especially after 
HBP.

I think that would be the central story of redemption. Now, granted 
there is nothing that stops JKR from writing more than one story of 
redemption, but I just do not see how JKR is obligated to do that 
with Snape, even if he is a nasty guy, who supposedly changed sides.

Maybe his story is not the story of redemption, maybe it is, but 
maybe it is falling from grace story.

Yes, I think the redemption story should play out in older 
generation as well, but despite the fact that we never met Regulus, 
I suspect that the amount of information we actually ** know** not 
assume about Snape on page and about Regulus are not  that different 
in size, so I think it is plausible if Regulus has a redemption 
story, maybe instead of Snape yes.

JMO,

Alla