Justice to Snape WAS: Re: Werewolves? There Wolves!

[pippin_999]

No: HPFGUIDX 170606

> Alla:
> 
> Well, not to me. Actually scratch that - if I will **see** that Snape 
> is living with guilt indeed, not hear through second party word that 
> he is, I may revise my opinion.
> 
> 
> Right now Dumbledore's *greatest remorse* is countered by Snape's 
> spinned him a  tale of the deepest remorse in my mind.
> 
> If I hear from Snape that he is sorry for what he helped doing to 
> Harry's parents and Harry and that he regrets it, I may think it 
> counts, but I want to hear it from Snape's mouth.

Pippin:
I don't know why you would believe Snape if you didn't believe 
Dumbledore. Surely Dumbledore is the more reliable of the two?
If Dumbledore said that Snape felt remorseful, I would believe
Dumbledore, even if Snape denied it and laughed. 

But in any case, Snape's account in Spinner's End rings
false.  First, we've never seen Dumbledore taken 
in by false remorse. Of course JKR could still show us that,
but more likely the whole question is a red herring. Because
secondly and more important, none of Dumbledore's
second chances have  been conditional on remorse or
anything else. 

Riddle wasn't remorseful.  He didn't look remotely abashed
at being caught thieving, and though Dumbledore ordered him
to apologize to his victims, he did not insist that the apology
be sincere. In fact he said he didn't think Riddle had repented.
It was enough that it was possible.

Draco was offered his second chance unconditionally. All
he had to do was accept it. He was not asked whether he
felt sorry for any of the harm he had done, or even whether 
he was willing to atone for it. 

*Why* Dumbledore did this,  I don't know, but I expect 
JKR to explain it to us shortly. I'd hazard
a guess it has something to do with her faith. Dumbledore
*believes* in second chances. He believes in the power of love.


Voldemort, OTOH, would be a sucker for  Snape's tale 
of false remorse because genuine remorse is beyond him. 
He has to believe that Dumbledore is foolish and gullible, 
because he thinks that only foolish and gullible people 
would trust in the power of love.

Nor has remorse ever been  what it took to win Dumbledore's
trust. We've seen how Dumbledore's trust in Harry  developed,
culminating in the words, "I am not worried, Harry.
I am with you."  Harry did not win  that trust by apologizing
or by undergoing punishments. 

He won it  by actions of unquestionable courage, moral fibre 
and loyalty, some of which Dumbledore witnessed first
hand, others attested  by  the results and by the accounts
of those whom Dumbledore trusted. Was that second
hand trust? Should the WW have refused to believe
that Harry had fought Voldemort because they didn't
see it with their own eyes?


As for the wrong Snape did by bringing information to
Voldemort, how many lives did he save by bringing 
information to the good side? Was that not worthy of
some reward? Karkaroff won his freedom just for turning
over one name when  the danger was over and everyone
thought they were safe. Snape turned spy while Voldemort
was still in power. Crouch was satisfied of that, so
I don't see why we shouldn't be.

Dumbedore's  word alone would hardly have been enough.
Heck, it couldn't even persuade Fudge not to arrest Hagrid.
Crouch turned his own son over to the
dementors despite his pleas of innocence, and you think
he would release into the community an admitted 
Death Eater while getting nothing in return?

If JKR wants us to believe that happened, she's going to
have to overturn the whole character of Barty Sr, and he's
just not important enough for that.  

Pippin