Question about the prophecy and a thought about Ginny

[Dana]

No: HPFGUIDX 171213

Magpie:
<snip>
> I don't think that's the logic. One *can* believe that DD believes 
> that Snape's remorse was the sole reason for his return. The reason 
> for DD's trust in him is presented as a separate question, one that 
> Dumbledore doesn't answer. Dumbledore has no issues about talking 
> about his feelings on Snape's remorse, but does not give that for 
> the reason he thinks he can trust Snape.
<snip>

Dana:
I'm just going to respond to this bit not because the rest is not 
worth responding to but I have to admit that I'm suffering from 
discussion fatigue and I just want that darn book to come out and 
release us from our delusion that we are able to interpret JKR's 
intentions and motivations for her characters correctly. This is my 
opinion and my personal interpretation. I do not expect to convince 
you to see it my way I just want to explain why and how I came to my 
conclusions. 

I'll ask you this, how do you know that DD was thinking about telling 
Harry his reason for his trust and that he did not need a moment to 
make up his mind if he still was sure Snape was indeed on their side 
still? Because Harry is not asking why DD trusts Snape, what Harry is 
asking is how DD can be sure that Snape is on their side. Especially 
because Voldemort is convinced Snape is on his (pg 513 UKed PB 
chapter "The Seer Overheard"). And then DD takes a moment as if he 
was trying to make up his mind. If he was sure without a shadow of a 
doubt that Snape is on his side, wouldn't you have expected DD to 
respond immediately to Harry's question? Because Harry is not asking 
an explanation for DD's trust in Snape. He only wants to know *how* 
DD can be sure Snape is truly loyal to him and DD's reason for 
trusting Snape will not provide an answer to this question for the 
simple fact that DD's trust will not keep Snape loyal if Snape 
decides not to be and neither will the reason for his trust. 

If DD had no issues about talking about Snape's remorse and the 
reason for his return then why does no one know that it was Snape 
that brought the prophecy to LV? Why does DD not allow people to make 
up their own minds about Snape and if they still would want to work 
with Snape if they had this information? Because DD does not trust 
that people could ever forgive Snape for what he has done no matter 
how truly sorry he was for it. 

DD does the same thing that readers condemn Lupin of doing in PoA. DD 
does not trust people to be able to handle the truth and then still 
have faith in him for giving Snape a chance. He does not trust people 
to see it his way. He does not trust they believe enough in him to 
follow him and trust his judgment if they know the truth about Snape. 
He made the decision for them and took away there ability to decide 
for themselves if Snape was trustworthy enough with vital information 
about their safety. Especially because Snape is working as a spy 
supposedly pretending to be a DE and this requires trusting that this 
person will not sell you out to the enemy to keep his own cover 
believable. People should have been allowed to know why DD trusted 
Snape and make up their own minds if they then would still want to 
put their faith in DD's judgment. 

We have seen various people in canon that are loyal to DD and DD 
trusting them and all of them have to some point done something that 
could be defined as betrayal of that trust but for some reason with 
Snape, DD's trust in Snape is somehow so binding that Snape could 
never betray DD's trust because DD must have a good reason to trust 
Snape and it needs to be bigger then Snape's story of remorse. That 
is defining logic to me. JKR might indeed have intertwined Snape's 
loyalty and DD's trust in Snape because that is what makes Snape 
ambiguous. She forces the reader to make a distinction between DD's 
judgment and Snape's loyalties and most people fail to do so (IMO) 
because she uses the support of other characters in canon to define 
that trusting DD's judgment is trusting Snape. She cleverly distracts 
the reader from the option that Harry might in this case be the only 
one who is right. 

Especially because she laid down the cards that Harry has been wrong 
so many times about Snape that the reader expects him to be wrong 
again. And she certainly makes the reader believe that Harry would 
never be able to judge Snape's character better then DD himself 
because of Snape's history with both James and Sirius. So Harry must 
hate Snape for the simple fact that he inherited a prejudice from 
both his father and his godfather as she makes Lupin remind us during 
Christmas in HBP and therefore Harry can't be considered a reliable 
judge of character. But you know what, he will be right and the 
revelation Harry will have in DH will not be about Snape being 
secretly loyal to DD and them together having concocted DD's murder. 
The revelation will be from a totally different kind because Snape 
was the true villain in HBP as LV will be the true villain in DH and 
the turn around that readers still expect to happen will not be 
Snape's but Kreacher's. JMHO

What Harry ends up doing will not have anything to do with him being 
proven wrong but everything with him being proven right and then make 
the only right decision that it is not up to him to make Snape pay 
for his mistakes and disloyalty and that believing in DD is not 
dependent on if he was right or wrong about Snape but about what DD 
has meant to each individual personally and the rest of the WW. Just 
because a person makes a mistake doesn't mean you should no longer 
believe anything about that person. That is what JKR showed us with 
Lupin. Yes, he was wrong about not telling DD about Sirius being an 
animagus but this still doesn't mean that the person Lupin therefore 
stands for nothing. If he had not acted that night then Harry would 
still not have known what he and his father meant to Sirius and DD 
would not have known the truth about who the real traitor was. 

Therefore I stand until proven otherwise with my so-called illogical 
assessment that DD's trust in Snape or his reason for it has nothing 
to do with Snape's loyalty and neither are DD's judgment skills 
dependent on being right about Snape. It is Snape that should have 
lived up to the trust given to him and it was Snape's choice to 
betray that trust. And nothing in canon supports that DD included 
Snape in everything he did and that he thought Snape was important 
enough for the cause that he could be excused murdering the person 
that stood up for him. DD would never ask Snape to make an evil 
packed to murder him to safe a student. DD would not have tried to 
help Draco if one of his clumsy murder attempts had led to the death 
of a student. To me Snape taking that vow will never be proof that 
Snape did it all for Draco and not to make himself more believable in 
the eyes of his fellow DEs because he was accused of being a traitor 
for living in DD's pocket. To help Draco he would not need to take a 
vow and if he was loyal to DD he would never agree to become his 
murderer. 

To me DD's hesitation and the argument in the forest where Hagrid 
specifically states that DD was angry with Snape is an indication 
that DD already had his suspicions about Snape. And I believe DD did 
not tell Snape where he was going that night and that Snape did not 
know Harry was a witness to the events on the tower until Harry 
revealed it to him later. Snape was caught in his own web of lies and 
his spun himself into a death end. And if we have to add a prediction 
of what Snape's patronus is then I would say a spy – spider. 

Magpie:
> Rather than analyzing and appreciating the text that's there, you 
> seem to be making a demand about what scene you need to see and 
> assume that any deviation proves your point. 
> Both with Draco and Snape unless the two of them declare for 
> Dumbledore in front of DEs 
> and die for it they can't possibly be anything but bad guys. One 
> obvious reason Draco doesn't do those things is that JKR is a 
> competent writer.
<snip>

Dana:
I am not really sure what you wanted to achieve with adding this to 
your post because I do not really believe that you know me well 
enough to be a judge on how I analyze or appreciate the text. It 
sounds really condescending to me. 

But tell me do you really believe that a person is actually a good 
guy if he kills, tries to kill or let someone be killed to safe his 
own life? That it is proof that these people have a strong moral 
value of doing the right thing? That they are actually the good guys 
because they put more then just one person into mortal danger just so 
they could themselves be saved? That JKR wanted to show that you can 
still be good if you sacrifice the life of someone else to safe that 
of your own? Or that it is okay to sacrifice the life of someone 
without that person knowing you have gambled his or her life? 

And that Draco therefore really can be relieved of the responsibility 
he had in almost getting two students killed, letting a murderous 
bunch of lunatics into the castle and then have them kill another 
person to serve as decoy to lure DD to the tower so he again could 
make an attempt to kill him, because he could not go through with 
killing DD himself? Or that Snape can be excused that he could do 
nothing about it because the vow prevented him from doing so. That 
the entire climax on the tower was not a direct result of the choices 
Snape made at the beginning of the year? 

Of course I know that you believe that Snape put his own life at risk 
with taking the vow and that he did it all to help Draco but to me it 
is forgetting that he sacrificed another man's life to do so. And to 
me this can never be good. And I know that half of fandom believes 
that Snape told DD all about the vow or that DD ordered or asked 
Snape to kill him or that Snape knew what DD was doing or that he 
knew that DD was dying but the text, that I do not seem able to 
analyze and appreciate, does not support any of these claims. They 
are all assumptions because if you really analyze the text and watch 
the little things then it actually supports the opposite. Not that 
I'm going to convince anyone that already fitted the text to support 
their own opinion but let's be fair shall we your opinion is as good 
as mine even if we disagree. 

Magpie:
> I believe you yourself pointed that out regarding Sirius and the 
> Prank.) If he's already almost killed without remorse I'd think it 
> would be that  much easier.
<snip>

Dana:
First of all that is still assuming that Sirius ever had the 
intention of killing Snape and canon never states this. Lupin states 
that Sirius found it amusing to tell Snape how to get passed the 
willow. It was still Snape's choice to do so. I know your view about 
being played a trick on so no need to rehearse it again. 
Snape never had to go to St. Mungo's to recover from a werewolf 
attack. There were no consequences because James prevented it. 
Because you do not know if Sirius would have had any remorse if 
things had turned out differently and looking at Sirius character I 
have no problem to believe that he would. 

Draco imperio'd Rosemerta (which is forbidden by law) to give a 
deathly necklace to an innocent girl (who alsmost died and not just 
could have) so she could deliver it to DD. He let Rosmerta send 
poisoned meat without ever knowing in whose hands (Ron almost died 
again not just could have) it would end up. He let in DEs without 
ever being able to control their behavior. It was even part of the 
plan to have someone killed (who could have died but still got hurt 
badly) to use as decoy to lure DD to the tower. So I'd say it is 
pretty much comparing apples with oranges. 

Draco never came to a resolution he would have stood there 
indefinitely if he would not have been shoved out of the way by 
Snape. I totally agree with you that Draco will learn something from 
it but he has not come to this point yet. The only thing that played 
a role at that point in time is that he could not do it. That he was 
too scared to just take someone's life. He then still has to take the 
responsibility that his choices caused someone his life. So Draco not 
being able to kill when he is faced with his intended victim face to 
face does not make him a good guy all of a sudden. Draco had many 
choices during the entire year and he still chose to try to do as 
ordered. Although it might be a lot to ask of a 16 year old to go 
against a Dark Wizard's orders and sacrifice himself for it, he could 
have gone to DD or he could have let Snape help him (well not that it 
would have gotten him very far but anyway) 

The same goes for Snape. Some might see it as a noble deed that Snape 
took a vow to help Draco but I do not because essentially if Draco 
had made a choice halfway through the year that he could not kill DD 
then Snape still would have needed to complete the task given to him. 
And Snape by taking the vow made himself incapable of helping DD. 
Snape with taking the vow did not help Draco because Snape with his 
action made sure that Draco is still on the wrong side of the fence. 
And because Snape was incapable of preventing Draco in trying to 
perform his task he willingly put other people at risk. It is not for 
nothing that people want to include DD in the killing scheme because 
as canon stands now it does not support Snape as one of the good 
guys. 

Magpie:
> Not having 'the nerve' slides over the whole question of why people 
> don't kill other human beings.

Dana:
Really, I though respecting other people's lives is why people do not 
go around killing other people and because in most cases when the 
stakes are high enough people mostly overcome their anxiety pretty 
darn quick. Hiring someone to have someone killed is still being 
guilty of attempted murder or murder and to me Draco did cross that 
line. It remains to be seen if he takes responsibility for his 
actions but indeed he probably will. 

Dana