Snape's the Rescuer - Really? WAS: Justice to Snape

[justcarol67]

No: HPFGUIDX 170628

Mike wrote:
> > And my original post was about time-turned H & H doing what Snape
did, to wit, gathering up Ron, Harry-1, Hermione-1, and Black to take
them up to the castle. Even if they couldn't conjure stretchers, they
could have used Mobilicorpus to take the 4 unconscious people to 
safety. I'm saying Harry-2 and Hermione-2 could easily have done what
> Snape did, just using different magic. IOW, I don't think Snape's 
*saving* the children was the only way they could have been *saved*. 
But, of course, Dumbledore told them not to be seen, so they had to 
let Snape affect *his* rescue.
> >  
> > Like I said, Snape got credit for "saving" the kids, but we know
the whole story. It would have happened without him. But, he did do
it, so he does get the credit, I must accede to that truth.
> 
> colebiancardi:
> 
> LOL!!  The ageless question: which came first, the chicken or the
egg? If Snape hadn't saved the kids, they probably would not have
survived with a werewolf on the loose, time-turner or no.  If there is
no H&H  version 1.0, there is no H&H version 2.0.
> 
> You can't go back into the past if you don't have the present(ie you
are dead)  So, the whole story is that Snape saved the children.  I
doubt it could have happened any other way.   And Snape does deserve
the credit for that.

Carol responds:

Exactly. Time-Turned Harry and Hermione couldn't have saved their
unconscious selves (along with Ron and Black) because they had to have
been taken to the hospital wing and revived before they could
Time-Turn. If Snape hadn't gone after Lupin, no one would have known
they were out there on the grounds, unconscious and in the company of
a werewolf, and they would certainly have been soul-sucked or killed
because Time-Turned!Harry wouldn't exist to send the Patronus and save
them a second time. (Snape saved them first.)

Snape's presence during the Shrieking Shack scene seems unnecessary
(he only overhears part of the conversation and then gets knocked out)
until we realize that he had to be there to save all four of them so
that Harry and Hermione, in turn, could save "more than one innocent
life," including their own. Without Snape, there would *be* no
time-turned H and H to rescue Sirius and Buckbeak (and save Harry from
having his soul sucked), even if Harry and Hermione could get four
unconscious people to the hospital wing without knowing how to conjure
stretchers or being attacked by a werewolf, in itself a doubtful
proposition. (What were TT!H and H supposed to do, let themselves be
seen and knock out Snape, who was doing a better job than they could?
They wouldn't have been there if he hadn't saved them in the first
place! They'd have been messing with time, undoing something that had
already happened, and who knows what the consequences would have been.)

If they could have saved themselves, JKR would have written it that
way. Instead, like it or not, they owe their lives (and souls) to
Snape. And even if they *could* have saved themselves, they didn't.
Snape did. (Thanks for acknowledging that, Mike.) 

Carol, who likes the story as it is and hopes that Harry will come to
realize just how often Snape has helped or protected him, preferably
before it's too late