Sirius and Snape parallels again and Dumbledore of course LONG

[montavilla47]

No: HPFGUIDX 185055

> Montavilla47:
> <SNIP>
> What Dumbledore is faulting Snape for isn't that Snape is
> trying to manipulate the situation. He's finding fault because
> Snape is indifferent to James and Harry--because Snape lacks
> the greatness of heart to care about a person he hates and
> one he doesn't know. <SNIP>
> 
> Alla:
> 
> Hm, when you phrase it like that, it is indeed hard for me to think 
> that Snape should care about them. However, when I phrase it for 
> myself, I am saying that Dumbledore (and me) is faulting Snape not 
> for just **not caring** for James and Harry. I mean, really why 
> should he care about his school nemesis who stole a girl from him and 
> his son? But no, I think Dumbledore is faulting Snape for not giving 
> a damn about their lives, whom he Snape helped to endanger. 

Montavilla47:
You're right, of course.  Snape isn't innocent in this situation 
and has a greater responsibility to care than if Voldemort had 
targeted James and Harry for some other reason. 

Interestingly, Dumbledore also had a hand in this situation.  
After all, he caught Snape listening at the door and allowed
him to take the prophecy to Voldemort.  Of course, that's not
nearly as bad being the one taking it, but he was smart
enough to know that Voldemort was likely to target 
*somebody* after hearing it--even if Dumbledore thought
it was poppycock (which he probably didn't, since he took
the precaution of safeguarding Trelawney.

Even if Dumbledore didn't know that Snape was a Death
Eater during the incident, he was taking a very big chance
allowing *anyone* to walk away with that information.  

I mean, even if Snape were the most innocent, kindly
person in the world--like, say, Bertha Jorkins, he could
easily have dropped a hint in the wrong place and have
ended up like Bertha did--subjected to memory charms
and then fed to a convenient animal.


> Pippin:
> > But that meant DD would lose two fighters -- was it wrong for him to
> > ask what Snape could offer in return?
> 
> Montavilla47:
> Really, all I can say to that is that if Dumbledore was thinking
> only about the number of his fighters, then he has no business
> faulting Snape for his indifference to James and Harry.
> 
> Alla:
> 
> I have no clue whether Dumbledore was thinking in terms of his 
> fighters only or not, I would not be surprised if he did. However, 
> even if he was thinking only in terms of losing two fighters, I would 
> still say that he has an absolute right to fault Snape for his 
> indifference to James and Harry. Because to me there is a ton of 
> difference between thinking that "Oh man, if Lily and James die, I am 
> not sure I care that two wonderful or not so wonderful human beings 
> may die, but I care that I can lose two experienced fighters" AND 
> thinking " Oh man, I gave the prophecy to Voldemort and now Lily and 
> her husband and baby  may die. I am so sorry that Lily may die, but I 
> do not give a flying fig if that bastard James and Harry will"
> 
> Dumbledore did not endanger Lily and James that would warrant them to 
> go in hiding. He may not see behind loosing his fighters, but I do 
> not believe that he should feel a huge remorse about his behavior, if 
> that makes sense. I mean, I do not LIKE it one bit, but I cannot 
> compare his (if it is his mindset) and Snape's at all. 

Montavilla47:
Well, but he did endanger Lily and James by engaging them as members
in his order--as Voldemort endangered his Death Eaters by recruting
them.  It's unavoidable, of course, that when you engage soldiers 
(whether legitimately, secretly, or however), some of them are going
to die and their families are going to grieve.

And you may end up orphaning their children.  But when their children
are being targeted, then you really can't expect them to put that aside 
and continue being soldiers.  Am I off-base here?  I would think that
the moment Dumbledore finds out that Voldemort is trying to kill
Lily and James's child, then they stop being soldiers and start being 
people you'd protect at all costs.

And, while it's complicated because Snape is partially to blame for
the situation, he's also "just the messenger" right now.  He's giving
Dumbledore important information about who are numbers one-
three on  LV's hit list, and he's asking that Dumbledore protect the
one (number three on the list) that he cares about.  But it's not really a 
tit-for-tat thing--until Dumbledore makes it so.

I mean, let's suppose that Sirius has a mad secret passion for 
Lucius Malfoy.  He finds out that the Ministry is planning to arrest 
Lucius and, desperate to prevent that, he goes to Voldemort to 
let him that.  Wouldn't *anyone* assume that Voldemort would 
try to prevent that, even it meant taking Lucius out of action for 
a time?  Who in their right minds would expect even Voldemort
to say, "Hmm.  Well, I guess I could let Lucius know to hide the 
Dark Artifacts, but only if you make it worth my while."

You have to hand it to Dumbledore for sheer gall in the Prince's
tale.  Not only does he demand that Snape deliver "anything"
in exchange for something he has every intention of doing
anyway, he manages to finesse the moment when he lets
down his end of the agreement and to sign Snape up for an 
open-ended extension of the contract in which Snape has
to protect some kid he couldn't care less about.  And then
he lets Snape down *again* by telling him that Harry has 
to be sacrificed!  At which point, he's already upped the payment
to tearing of Snape's soul, and an indefinite period of playing
the villain in order to protect an entire school full of students!