What Harry "knows", Was Why we'll get no further revelations Snape was Evil

[wynnleaf]

No: HPFGUIDX 169864


> Dana:
> DD never stated that it had nothing to do with Harry; he just stated 
> that it was a matter between him and Professor Snape.

wynnleaf
Typically that phrase implies "It's none of your business.  It's only
between me and the other person."  Unless Dumbledore was lying, that
means that his reasons for trusting Snape *aren't* over Snape's
remorse over taking the partial prophecy to Voldemort, because that
obviously *isn't* just a matter between Dumbledore and Snape.  

Dana
> And because DD never had any intention to ever reveal that 
> information because he did not hold Snape responsible for LV's 
> choices, it would never be anything else then between him and Snape.

wynnleaf
Dumbledore would have known that at any time Harry might have asked
who the Death Eater was who took the partial prophecy to Voldemort, as
Harry would have realized that Dumbledore must have known who it was.
 Since that *is* Harry's business, Dumbledore could not deny him that
info if he asked.  So, no I don't think Dumbledore would have no
"intention to ever reveal that information."  
 > 
> Dana before:
> > > DD did explain the reason for Snape's return in HBP when he 
> > > specifically states he believed that it was Snape's greatest 
> > > regret and the reason that he returned (HBP pg 513 UKed 
> > > chapter "the seer overheard"). Harry's point of view has nothing 
> > > to do with it because it does not change what DD said, we 
> > > witnessed what DD said.

wynnleaf
However, Dumbledore *never* said that Snape's remorse is why he
trusted him.  Not at all.  Period.  Immediately after telling Harry
that was Snape's greatest regret and the reason that he returned,
Harry asks Dumbledore specifically why he could be sure of Snape. 
"Dumbledore did not speak for a moment; he looked as though he was
trying to make up his mind about something.  At last he said, "I am
sure.  I trust Severus Snape completely."  

Now if Dumbledore had just finished telling Harry why he *trusted*
Snape, as opposed to simply saying why Snape "returned," then he could
have answered Harry by repeating that he trusted Snape because of his
great regret.  But that's not what happened.  Dumbledore considered
telling Harry something more, decided against telling Harry, and then
repeated that he trusted Snape completely.

So no.  Dumbledore never said that he *trusted* Snape because of his
regret.  

> Dana:
> It specifically states that DD believed that it was Snape's reason 
> for his *return* not turned. Harry does not stop DD in mid-sentence. 
> He is talking about Snape greatest regret. Snape himself states the 
> same thing in Spinner's end that he told DD a story of his deepest 
> regret.  

wynnleaf
To repeat:  Dumbledore never said that the reason Snape returned was
the reason he trusted Snape.  

Dana
JKR states that Snape told DD his story and DD believe it.

<snip>
> Ali: Why specifically does Dumbledore trust Snape?
> JK Rowling replies -> Another excellent and non-answerable question. 
> I shall merely say that Snape has given Dumbledore his story and 
> Dumbledore believes it.

Wynnleaf
You seem to assume that the story JKR is refering to is regarding
Snape's regret over the prophecy.  Unfortunately for this argument,
JKR never said that.  She only said that Snape had told Dumbledore his
story -- which could refer to practically anything.

> Dana:
> Maybe I totally misread the books but didn't Snape returned to the 
> side of good while he was a DE and still was a DE which made it 
> possible for him to spy for DD? Snape came to DD before LV's downfall 
> and him giving DD information is what made DD trust Snape. After that 
> Snape didn't do anything specific for DD but was merely a teacher at 
> his school. The trust issue comes from Snape's return to the side of 
> good and DD trusted Snape enough to give him a job as a teacher.  
> Snape was still in LV's service because otherwise Snape would never 
> have lived long enough to take the teaching job because that too was 
> started before LV's downfall. 

wynnleaf
Yes, Snape came to Dumbledore prior to Voldemort's fall.  In fact,
since the Potters learned they needed to go into hiding around the
time of Harry's Christening, Snape may have come to Dumbledore as long
as a year before the Potter's deaths as the Potters appear to have
been alert to Voldemort targeting them about then.  This, by the way,
makes it clear that Harry got the story wrong in the hospital wing,
because he said that Dumbledore trusted Snape because of his regret
for the Potter's deaths, where it is obvious that Dumbledore trusted
Snape well *before* their deaths.

> Dana:
> Well I disagree I think DD did take Snape at face value and because 
> Snape did nothing to break that trust before LV's return to power, 
> there was no reason for DD to re-evaluate that trust. 

wynnleaf
Because Snape may have done nothing to *break* Dumbledore's trust
during his time as a spy, doesn't mean that Dumbledore initially
allowed him to spy for him simply because of his remorse.  I'm sure
working together over a long period of time *cemented* that trust, but
it surely didn't originate just in believing a sad story.  

Remember that Dumbledore did not solely trust Snape to spy for him. 
He also trusted him to take over in locus parentis for 1/4 of the kids
in the school -- we're talking lots of kids.  I don't know what your
view of Dumbledore is.  He *does* allow a certain amount of risks to
occur in the school.  But making a former Death Eater a Head of House
isn't just a minor risk, or even a temporary risk -- we're talking
about someone who would directly affect hundreds of kids, not just as
a teacher, but as their head of house.  No, I certainly *don't* think
that Dumbledore did this just based on a sob story of how remorseful
Snape felt.  

And since, as we can see from Dumbledore's conversation with Harry, he
*never* said that Snape's remorse was Dumbledore's reason for his
trust, I think we can fairly well assume that it was something more
concrete than just regret.

Dana
> Sorry but I disagree with you that DD recruited Snape to spy on LV. I 
> believe Snape offered his service to DD so he could repay the debt he 
> owed James and I believe DD took the offer as an indication that 
> Snape truly wanted to help in the fight against LV and protecting the 
> Potters. 

wynnleaf
It is possible that spying was Snape's idea.  However, when Snape
first approached Dumbledore, admitting to being a Death Eater and
having served Voldemort, he would have to consider the strong
possibility that Dumbledore would hear his story and simply turn him
over to the MOM for Azkaban.

However, we don't *know* who suggested the spying.  The problem for
Snape is that once he was willing to go to Dumbledore, there weren't a
lot of options.  If he openly left Voldemort, he could be hunted down
like Karkaroff.  Or he could go to Azkaban.  Or he could go into
hiding.  Or he could spy.  If Dumbledore believed Snape had really
turned, he would realize that Snape had few options.

Dana
 Only at the end of GoF 
> did DD send Snape back to LV. 

wynnleaf
That's speculation without canon support.  Dumbledore could just as
well have sent Snape to spy in the first place.

Dana
> I believe that Snape only gave DD specific information concerning the 
> Potters and nothing more then that. He never closed the door behind 
> him and it even is specifically suggested that he held the door wide 
> open by his association with Lucius. 

wynnleaf
Actually, this is highly unlikely.  Dumbledore said that Snape was a
spy for them, not that he just brought one piece of crucial
information.  If Snape had only come to Dumbledore with one piece of
info, and then went out to spy, but never actually brought any spy
info to Dumbledore (the initial info on Voldemort targeting the
Potters being before Snape became Dumbledore's spy), then Snape really
wouldn't have been a true spy at all -- just a one-time informant.

Dana
> Also Snape specifically states that he was sent to spy on DD and if 
> you look at the definition of a double spy then he only pretends to 
> work for one party while actually working for the other (not for 
> both) and mostly it are people who are captured or pretend to have 
> defected and then are send back to spy on the camp of origin and they 
> pretend to spy for the camp who send them there. 

wynnleaf
Luckily for us, this objection is easy overridden by JKR's quote below
from the Melissa and Emerson interviews:

Melissa: It goes back to the question of whether Snape is a
double-double-double-triple-

JKR: [Laughs] Double-double-quadruple-to-the-power-of - yeah. 

wynnleaf
So even JKR admits that Snape isn't really just a "double agent" in
the technical sense of the word, but a multiple-double agent.

>Dana 
> I do not think there was more to the story of DD's trust in Snape. I 
> might be proven wrong in DH but I actually do not believe it will be 
> so because DD is no longer there to tell the story himself and why I 
> think JKR included it in HBP. 

wynnleaf
Considering that JKR has already said that in writing DH, Dumbledore
was giving her trouble, I think we *will* be hearing from him --
whether in pensieve memory or whatever.  

Dana
DD isn't stupid but that doesn't mean 
> that he can't believe in a person that did not deserve to be believed 
> in or not for the reasons DD believed in him. DD was very noble to 
> give so much unconditional trust to Snape

wynnleaf
If Dumbledore trusted a Death Eater just because the Death Eater
showed up and said "I'm really sorry," then he wasn't "noble," he was
incredibly foolish.  Can anyone imagine Dumbledore trusting Barty Jr
or Peter just because they claimed they were sorry, and then putting
them in charge of 1/4 of the school kids?

Dana
> I think it is much more crucial then for whatever reason DD trusted 
> Snape because like I stated above it is not up to DD to live up to 
> the trust he gives but the person he gives it to. 

wynnleaf
Not when Dumbledore is a leader of many people, with the safety of
others entrusted to him.  No, it *was* Dumbledore's responsibility to
place his trust with great care.  After all, he put Snape in charge of
many, many children.  It's one thing to decide that the children will
be okay with a sarcastic and difficult teacher.  It's quite another to
decide that they'll be safe with a Death Eater just because the Death
Eater said he was sorry.  Yes, it's still Snape's part to live up to
that trust, but it was Dumbledore's responsibility to choose carefully.

Dana 
> Snape claims to have helped in the disposal of Black himself

wynnleaf
I am uncertain anyone would consider Snape so very, very untrustworthy
and yet place so very *much* trust in his comments to a woman (Bella)
who he dislikes and who very clearly dislikes him and would like to
bring him down from his position with Voldemort.

wynnleaf