Characters inconsistencies (mostly Snape's) WAS :Re:What did you like

[dumbledore11214]

No: HPFGUIDX 183835

Magpie:
<HUGE SNIP>
It's not
that hard to see why someone might think killing someone as a 
strategic
move with their encouragement in order to prevent far more deaths 
would
get judged differently than torturing someone out of anger.

Alla:

Yes actually it is very hard for me to see that. I mean again, it is 
a strange argument for me, since I cannot criticize either Snape or 
Harry as I wrote before. BUT had Snape performed that for anybody 
else, you bet I would criticize Snape more, much more than Harry. It 
is just given their relationship as depicted in book 7, I cannot 
imagine Snape disobeying Dumbledore, I really cannot. Somebody 
killing another person seems to me to be much more permanent action 
than somebody torturing the sadist who tortured kids during the whole 
year for how much time? Couple seconds? Not cool, but does not come 
close to killing in my mind, asked for or not. Sorry, I would think 
that taking a life of the leader of the resistance with unforgiveable 
no less is much more horrible offense than what Harry did. 

But imagine a hypothetical for a second, and I know that it is going 
out of realm of the story and into the wild AU, but bear with me for 
a second. Say somebody else would have asked Snape to kill him, be it 
Arthur or Moody or anybody else and that somebody else would have 
also told Snape that it may be needed to strengthen Snape's status or 
something like that. You bet I would have expected Snape to say no. 

Killing enemy in the battle? Sure. Killing in self defense? Yes of 
course. Doing what Snape did?  As far as I am concerned he only gets 
a pass because *Dumbledore* asked him to do it. I would not doubt for 
a minute that Snape would indeed do ANYTHING for him, whether he 
wants to or not. The action itself does not become admirable in my 
mind at all, I just agree that there was nothing Snape could do 
without breaking his word, his honor, etc.


Montavilla:
<SNIP>
What changes is his political affiliation. Lots of people change
"sides" without changing their character. (Most of them
would probably insist that it's the party that's changed--not
them.) <SNIP>


Alla:

I strongly disagree. I mean sure Snape' s political affiliation had 
changed, but I would argue that it is the showing of Snape changing 
his values and therefore yes, to me it is a deep change in his 
character. It is not like Snape changed say from being Democrat to 
being Republican or vice versa, because well, those are just 
political affiliations. To me it is more like Snape changing from 
being member of KKK to being democrat or being republican or any 
other party in any other country.

I cannot say that going from being member of terrorist organization 
to being, I don't know legit member of whatever political party is 
just changing your affiliation. I think it is learning to value human 
life finally. So, no, to me constant Snape is not. He goes to me from 
being on very low stage of human beings ( yes, I have no respect 
whatsoever for members of terrorists organizations) to, well being 
deemed worthy to call himself a human being. I mean I still hate him, 
but as I said, I will not call him what in my mind I call terrorists 
whose favorite past time is torture and killing. Recently only those 
I cannot save
 I cannot imagine Snape even thinking in these terms 
when he started with Voldy. I really cannot. He IMO was worried about 
Lily and no other human being meant anything to him. 

JMO,

Alla