More first impressions

[nrenka]

--- In the_old_crowd at yahoogroups.com, "davewitley" 
<dfrankiswork at n...> wrote:
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> By our correspondent Phil Space
> 
> Hm.  Same first thought for R.A.B as the others. 
> 
> Agreed that Snape still has wiggle-room - knowing that Draco was 
> after him, did Dumbledore discuss possible outcomes with Snape and 
> consider that this offered the best overall chance of doing 
> Voldemort in?

Here's the question I have about these events.

Bellatrix tells us that you have to mean it for Crucio to work.  Can 
surrogate anger/emotion be used to do an Unforgivable?  That is to 
say, do you have to want to make *that* person hurt/dead, or is it 
enough to have the general emotions of desiring hurt/death?

If it's the latter, Snape is possibly channeling anger at Voldemort.

If the former, his fundamental moral character is, ummm, shot.  And 
that's where I see all the wiggle room for the character but can't 
quite buy it.

-Nora has many more thoughts, but notes that most all Moral!Snape 
ideas seem sunk