Prophecy musings...Was: Snape's the Rescuer - Really?/Justice to Snape

[colebiancardi]

No: HPFGUIDX 170787

 
> > colebiancardi:
<snipping more>
> > LV interpreted it correctly, as a baby about to be born. But Snape?
> > Did he really know it was a future hero, one yet to be born? He may
> > have felt it was a wizard already here, a powerful one in fact. At
> > that time, Snape doesn't know, at least I think he doesn't, the
> whole
> > past of LV and who LV battled with.
> >
> > Could it be, that once Snape found out that it was a baby and not
> an
> > adult wizard who could defend himself/herself, that was Snape's
> wakeup
> > call? That he could deal with battling against wizards and witches
> who
> > could strike back, but to kill in cold-blood, a defenseless baby?
> No
> > matter who the parents were, 
<snipping more out>
> 
> 
> Biff
<snipping>
> I also like your thought that perhaps the straw
> that broke the camel's back for Snape was finding out that the
> prophecy was about a baby and his Master inteneded to kill it.
> However, I still have the opinion that Snape didn't go to Voldemort
> with this information without understanding possible repercussions.
> I believe he knew what he was doing, he knew someone could die and
> he did it to please his Master.

colebiancardi:

oh, don't get me wrong.  I do think that back in Snape's DE days, he
was fully aware of the War that was going on and that people are dying
and going to die.  I think that Snape had *no* problems with the death
of wizard who could defend themselves.  It is part of war.  However, I
think, if what I had proposed is true, that Snape could not stomach
the killing of those who were not part of the war - innocent children,
civilians - those types.  A soldier who fights in a war expects to
kill the enemy soldiers;  A soldier doesn't not expect nor wishes to
kill those who are not engaged in the war.  
 
We've never heard or seen Snape actually *kill* anyone(well, with the
exception of DD in HBP and that is still open to debate until DH comes
out)  In fact, Bella mentions that Snape "slithers" out of doing
"actions" (Spinner's End), which leads me to believe that Snape
*never* has murdered or killed anyone before.  He is a spy - not all
spies kill;  most spies probably do not and his role was gathering
intel, not to kill.  I am sure, if push came to shove, Snape could
kill - in fact, most of us could probably kill someone if our own life
was in danger and that was the only way to survive.  However, it
doesn't seem to be Snape's MO.  And to murder a baby - that could have
tipped the scales for him.  This would be someone who could not defend
themselves nor even put up a good fight.   I know Snape is a snarky,
cruel man - but his cruelty is in his *words* - we don't see him
beating any one up for no reason in the series.  He may give *harsh*
punishment to student's, but no more than other Professors.  He is
nasty to those outside of his own House, but again, his cruelty is in
his *words*.  He threatens, he bullies, but again, all talk, no action
at this point in time in the series.

I don't believe Snape to be a cold-blooded killer, despite the events
that happened on the Tower.  

colebiancardi
(I know, I know, there is the other side of the reading on the Tower
scene.  Don't think I don't know it - LOL)