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

[Renee]

No: HPFGUIDX 170642

--- In HPforGrownups at yahoogroups.com, "justcarol67" <justcarol67 at ...>
wrote:
>
> 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.)
> 
<snip>
> 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. 


Renee <delurking for a moment>:

Well, er, JKR *did* write about Harry saving himself plus the others:
by casting his stag patronus from across the lake to drive the
Dementors off. And this takes place *before* Snape regains
consciousness & conjures up the stretchers, etc. 

Due to the paradoxes of time-turning, Harry2 and Hermione2 were
already there when the events following the Shrieking Shack scene
unfolded. They *were always there*. (The events of that night don't
happen twice, it's Harry and Hermione who happen twice.) So
theoretically, they could have done what Snape did - except that they
knew Snape had already done it - and they weren't supposed to
interfere. They knew they could safely leave and get on with their
mission.  

Carol:

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.) 

Renee:
True, Snape took them to the safety of the Hospital Ward. The question
is, what did he save them from? At the moment he woke up, there was no
immediate danger that we hear of, either from the Dementors or the
werewolf. Snape himself actually tells Fudge that the Dementors were
heading back to their positions at the entrances of Hogwarts when he
came round. 

Nor does Dumbledore in any way suggest that Snape saved anyone's life
or soul that night. Claims that Snape saved Harry's life and soul are
therefore grossly exaggerated. Harry1 was saved by Harry2, and by no
one else.

Renee