Hermione and 'Evil is a strong word' (WAS Re: CHAPDISC: HBP30, The White Tomb)

[Zara]

No: HPFGUIDX 165794

> a_svirn:
> But we are not discussing whether he was or wasn't a loyal death 
> eater. For all she knows he could have been as disloyal to 
Voldemort 
> as he was to Dumbledore. 

zgirnius:
I thought you were discussing Hermione's little objection to the 
word 'evil' to describe Snape. That's what I'm talking about, anyway. 
She says 'evil is a strong word'. She also, after a hesitation, 
agrees with 'murderer' as a characterization of Snape.

I could see her making the objection to the word 'evil' if she had 
started to have some doubt creep in as to whether Snape is indeed 
*as* evil as Harry painted him. (Harry painted a picture of someone 
whose every action was evil: he set up the Potters deliberately, he 
got them killed, he went to Dumbledore and lied, he killed 
Dumbledore.) The one evil action Hermione knows about for sure is the 
murder of Dumbledore. The whole Potters story is shaky. Hermione 
knows how vague the Prophecy was - could Snape really set them up. 
She knows Dumbledore trusted Snape before the Potters died (that is 
why I brought up GoF, not the 'personal risk' bit). 

> a_svirn:
> Yes, but we can easily dismiss any notion of remorse now, can we 
not? 
> Even if it was genuine, obviously it wasn't enough to prevent him 
> from committing a murder. 

zgirnius:
It comes down to what Hermione means by her little comment, then. I 
think she would agree with us both that murder is evil, and with you 
that Snape committed murder. However, calling a *person* evil is a 
bit different from calling a specific action evil. One might call a 
person evil for doing one evil thing, or one might think of the good 
the person has done/may do in the future and hesitate, especially if 
one can entertain the possibility the person's act was an aberration, 
or driven by highly unusual circumstances. Hermione is aware of 
seemingly good actions by Snape in the past.

> a_svirn:
> If you mean the phrase about "great personal risk" we know now that 
> he has a way to minimise any risks involved at the expense of other 
> people lives. 

zgirnius:
I'm not clear on how killing someone, other than Voldemort, would 
have helped Snape stay safe as a spy in the first war. 

If you are suggesting in a roundabout way that Snape killed 
Dumbledore to save his own life, that is certainly possible (in 
particular, that *was* one of the effects of his action), and 
possibly what Hermione believes as well. If so, I think it is part of 
the reason for her hesitation to label him evil.