Kovixen

This is a little long and keep in mind that the following is actually
quite a few seperate posts tens of pages apart. But they're all on
the same topic, ie: Snape good or bad and how to prove it? I'll try
repost them in chronological order and number them. Most people at
diagonally seem pretty firmly in the "Snape is good" camp, myself
included.
Please forgive any improper abbreviations or grammatical errors, I
did try to proofread, but it's an awful lot to proof and I'm certain
that I've missed a few mistakes. Without further ado (and slightly
edited for brevity...in a manner of speaking)...
----------------------------------

Post #1:

Something just seems off to me about Evil!Snape and Naive!Dumbledore.
I'll admit that Snape is my favorite character, so it might seem like
I'm digging desperately for reasons to prove that he's not evil.
However, Snape isn't my favorite character because I like him, he's
my favorite character because he's intriguing. And after all is said
and done in this book, I still don't feel as if I'm any closer to
understanding him than I was before. There are a number of things
about his behavior and relationship with Dumbledore that just don't
add up. I, for one, figured that Dumbledore probably wouldn't make it
to Book 7 and I had a sneaking suspicion that Snape would kill him. I
just could never figure out the circumstances that might surround
such a scenario (and boy, was I ever wrong in my guesses!). Except
that Snape would have to do it in order to prove his loyalty to
Voldemort...even though he was still loyal to Dumbledore. So, here
are my issues: [edit]: I feel I should add that I too still believe
that Snape acted on Dumbledore's orders. The following list is why I
still believe this.

1) I simply can't believe that Dumbledore would trust Snape for such
an unconvincing reason as, "Snape felt really, really bad about
getting Lilly and James killed. No really, he felt super bad about
it. Ok, let's give him a second chance!" I refuse to believe that
Dumbledore is that stupid; he wouldn't have lived so long if we was
that easily taken in. Even Remus is incredulous. I know that
Dumbledore's "weakness" is looking for the good in everyone, but Tom
Riddle didn't fool him even when Riddle was young, I'm sure Severus
Snape wouldn't be able to fool him either. It just doesn't make any
sense to me. There has to be another absolutely iron-clad reason that
Dumbledore trusted Snape. Harry's only assuming that he knows what
the answer is. I still think a magical binding of some sort is
involved, I just don't know what. [HPFGU Note: For the record, I
don't really think it was an Unbreakable Vow.]

I mean, say you're Dumbledore. You know you've got a guy with some
nasty tendencies, you want to keep him on your side. Furthermore,
you're trying to lead the charge in a really important war. Would you
just blindly trust him on good faith. Uh uh. I'd make him swear by
magic or some such that he would be loyal to me. And Order of the
Pheonix members. It would make sense if they had to sign some sort of
magically binding agreement or something to keep their mouths shut.
They've already seen what happens when people have lose tongues
(Wormtail, though I wonder if he was actually in OOTP), I can't
believe Dumbledore would risk making the same mistake twice. This is
one of the reasons why I can't believe that Snape would be able to
pass on any truly revealing information to Lord Voldie.

2) Now, why did Snape save Harry's life so many times? Sure, he tells
Bella that he didn't want Dumbledore to suspect him, but c'mon. All
he had to do was do nothing when Harry's broom was being cursed by
Quirrel. Harry would've been out of everyone's hair. He didn't have
to referee that Quidditch match later on. He didn't have to lie to
Umbridge about the Veritaserum. None of this fits in with his
seemingly "true" loyalties in Book 6. In fact, his actions in Book 6
seem a complete reversal and OOC from his actions in Book 5. I think
that there's a hidden plan somewhere that's veered sharply to the
left and I think I must've missed the veering. Something just doesn't
add up.

The Veritaserum and flat out lying to Umbridge in Book 5 really stick
in my mind. And yes, Snape is a skilled Oclumens, but we've been led
to believe that Dumbledore is an even more skilled Ligilimens.
There's just no way that Dumbledore wouldn't have know something was
up. And I can't belive for one instance that Snape saved Harry in
Book 1 because he thought he might be the next Dark Lord whom he
could follow. That's a really lame line of reasoning. The kid was 11
years old! And if Snape was saving Harry to be killed by the Dark
Lord...well, the Death Eaters who go along with that always baffled
me. And Why did he show Fudge his Dark Mark in an attempt to convince
him that Harry and Dumbledore were telling the truth in Book 4? If's
he's completely on Voldie's side, wouldn't he want to be covert about
it? Why try to warn the Minister of Magic? You'd be better served by
letting the Minister lull the masses into a false sense of security.
Doing otherwise just makes your Evil Overlord job harder.

Although, I still think he was in that group of Death Eaters at the
Quidditch World Cup (the flip-upside-down curse and all) in order to
keep his cover. But now that I think about it, I wonder. Who was it
that said that the flippy curse thingie was widely used during their
Hogwarts years?

I can't shake the feeling that there are still some very important
pieces missing to the Snape/Dumbledore puzzle.

3) I would expect that if Snape was passing Order information onto
Lord Thingie, more Order members/allies would be dead. Easy to make it
look like a series of valid targeted attacks without letting on that
you're the one passing information. After all, no one is safe now and
half of the group are Aurors. Aurors would be natural targets. The
other members are known Dumbledore allies, also natural targets.

4) Dumbledore didn't seem at all suprised that Snape showed up. In
fact, I think someone mentioned this already, he really seemed to
waste an awful lot of time that could've been spent getting away
talking to Draco. I mean, the conversation went on for 5 minutes and
all the while, you could clearly hear the battle moving closer and
closer. Why the heck would Dumbledore just chill there knowing that
Draco's reinforcements are coming? And why keep Harry from
interfering? Dumbledore could've stupified Draco as he came through
the door, grabbed Harry and taken off on a broom. Why immobilize
Harry, let Draco disarm him, and then waste 5 minutes talking to
Draco while knowing that, not only is Draco not going to kill you,
but that there are plenty of people coming behind him that could? And
when did Dumbledore go front standing confidently and strongly while
addressing Draco to slumping on the floor looking weak? Did I miss
something? It was only a span of a few minutes! I mean, I know he was
weak from the trip and all, but still... Speaking of which, I got the
feeling very early on in the book that Dumbledore knew he didn't have
that much longer to live. How did he know this? Why did he think
this? What was the argument with Snape about? Snape said he couldn't
continue to do "something", whatever "something" is... Whatever it
was, he promised Dumbledore that he'd do it. They never said
what "it" was. And the look of revulsion and hatred on his face. Was
directed towards Dumbledore? Or towards himself? Angry at Dumbledore
for making him do it? And I have an idea that Dumbledore was well
aware that he was walking into a trap of some sort.

5) Begging Dumbledore? Dumbledore never begs. It seemed a bit of a
put on. There's no way that he was begging for Snape not to turn bad;
if Snape turned bad, Dumbledore would've known well before hand and
wouldn't have wasted time begging. He also couldn't have been begging
in general for his life to be spared. Dumbledore was never afraid of
death. He just faced lord knows what on rock surrounded by Inferi(?)
and now he gets all teary-eyed? No way. I think he knew what was
coming and wasn't at all suprised. Combing numbers 3 and 4, it seems
more like Dumbledore was putting on a bit of a show for whatever
reason. [HPFGU Note: I later reconsider this view and now believe
that Dumbledore was pleading with Snape to keep his promise and kill
Dumbledore.]

6) Why didn't Snape inflict more damage on Harry when Snape was
running with Draco? Most Death Eaters would pause and at least cast a
Cruciatus on someone. Snape just kept blocking the curses, if I
recall. He only lashed out once after being called a "coward" and
that curse didn't really do all that much damage. And what's with
the "save him for the Dark Lord" bit in this specific case? Stupify
Harry and take him with you. If anyone asks, Harry got injured and
you're just getting him to safety. Simple. No one suspected Snape at
that point, he could've done that. His only threat was Harry chasing
him. Instead Snape just takes a prime opportunity to kidnap Harry and
deliver him to the Dark Lord and wastes time throwing shielding
spells instead of going on the offense. [HPFGU Note: As someone said
on DA, I think this was Snape's final formal lesson to Harry,
(paraphrased slightly) "Blocked again and again and again until you
learn to keep your mouth shut and your mind closed."]

7) This bit just confuses me. Why offer your enemies a weakness by
binding yourself to someone so that if they die, you die too? I
refer, of course, to the Unbreakable Vow. That's just stupid. There's
a bigger reason for it. And why did he agree so readily? I know it's
to keep Draco from getting killed, but what will the Voldemort say if
a) he finds out that Draco didn't kill Dumbledore and b) Snape did
something completely insane like helping out Draco by agreeing to an
Unbreakable Vow. That shows an bizarre amount of disrespect for
Voldemort...and that's unusual and dangerous for someone who
professes to be a loyal servant. It also implies that said servant
isn't quite as loyal as one might think. That's an act of total
treachery against Voldemort, particularly since Voldemort was trying
to punish the Malfoys. Voldie's bound to be a bit irate at Snapes
interference.

-----------------------------------

Post #2:

I just had a crazy thought upon seeing this text from the book:

"He intends me to do it in the end,i think. But he is determined that
Draco should try first. You see in the unlikely event that Draco
succeeds, i shall be able to remain at hogwarts a little longer,
fufilling my useful role of spy." [edit HPFGU: Haven't got a specific
page number for this, sorry!]

Now, who's this "he"? Snape seems the type of person, as any spy
would be, who is skilled at saying one thing, while meaning another. I
don't have my book in front of me at the moment, but based on the text
above, I do wonder who "he" is. Bella and Cissy think "he" refers to
Lord Thingamajig, but you could just as easily insert "Dumbledore" in
every place where "he" occurs. A foreshadowing to the events
surrounding Dumbledore's death that we missed, perhaps?

It seems like something Dumbledore would do. Let Draco try to kill
him first for two reasons: a) The Dark Lord won't suspect that
Snape's clued Dumbledore in on the assasination plot and b) Teach
Draco a lesson and make him think. Throughout the whole book, as I
said before, Dumbledore acts as if he knows his time is up. His
reaction time is slower and Harry's almost ready to trek out on his
own. Rather than get killed at a really inopportune time or become a
hinderance, Dumbledore opts to check out early. Who better to do the
job than a trusted and loyal ally? Rather that than an enemy. And it
has the added bonus of keeping Draco alive; Dumbledore knew well
ahead of time that Draco isn't really the sort of murderer that his
father or Lord Thingy are. However, if Draco had succeeded in killing
Dumbledore somehow, Snape could've kept his cover a little longer.

Yeah, I know the above theory is wandering dangerously into left
field, but hey. *shrug* I just can't accept that Snape's bad, it just
doesn't fit. It doesn't make sense and if he truly is bad, then it's
a total cop out and Dumbledore's a mere fool. I don't believe that
Dumbledore has ever been a fool.
--------------------------------------

Post #7 (3-6 are inconsequential):

Chicky841 Said:

I personally think that R.A.B. is still alive, and that he is going
to help Harry to find the rest of the Horcruxes. I mean how is Harry
going to find the rest of them. He only has the barest idea of what
the Horcruxes are, and I mean look how hard it was for Dumbledore to
find out where they were hidden. And we actually expect Harry to be
able to find them? In the note R.A.B. didnt say for sure that he was
dead so there is still the possibilty. I think that for sure Harry
will have some better help than Ron and Hermione. I also think that
R.A.B. may be someone that we don't even know.

Now me:

I'm wondering if Snape won't somehow help Harry anonymously. [HPFGU
Note: See below for my Patronus theory] Lord knows Harry's gonna need
it, he's only a mediocre wizard and for all the books that Hermione
reads, she's never going to know enough in the time given to help
Harry figure this stuff out. I don't know what he's thinking striking
out on his own without a gameplan. But I digress.

How much did Dumbledore confide in him (Snape)? Snape knew about
Dumbledore's hand, I'm assuming he had to have known what caused the
injury. How would he have helped Dumbledore if he didn't know what
cursed him? And why always Snape in particular? This makes me think
that Snape knows about the Horcrux...whatever the plural is. If this
is so, then this implies to me that Snape also has to still be on the
good side because he had every opportunity to tell Bella and Cissy
that Dumbledore hunting these things down and actively trying to
destroy Voldie. But all he told Bella/Cissy was that Dumbledore
wasn't as quick as he used to be and had a serious injury. I'm sure
there are other explanations for why Snape mightn't have said
anything, like he didn't want Bella to know the Thingie's weakness.
But if so, you'd think he still would've said something
like, "Dumbledore got injured when he was trying to find a way to
defeat the Dark Lord. Serves him right, the stupid old Muggle Lover."
Or maybe he did and I just don't remember.

I'm skeptical that RAB is going to be the one to help Harry because I
think RAB is already dead. It's not McGonnagle (sp?) because she
hasn't a clue what's going on with the Horcruxes (Horcruxi,
Horcruxen???). That could leave Aberforce since someone was
mentioning that we still don't know what's up with him. But I think
the person who seems most in the know, next to Dumbledore, is Snape.
It seems that he's always been Dumbledore's right hand man.

I also think that whoever said that Harry wasn't supposed to see who
killed Dumbledore was absolutely right. I'm now wondering if, had
Snape not known that Harry saw him kill Dumbledore (or if Harry just
plain hadn't seen), Snape still would have run away with the other
Death Eaters. It would be just as easy for him to tell the rest of
the DE's to, "Go report back to Voldie. I'll clean up here and spread
some misinformation. Draco stay with me here at Hogwarts and shut
up." And yes, I think Snape's still on the side of good. It's funny
because he is the right hand man of Voldie-poo and was the right hand
man (I think) of Dumbledore. But I'm wondering why, if Harry wasn't
supposed to see Dumbledore's murderer, Dumbledore didn't just Stupify
him instead of Petrificus Totalis-kinda him (I don't think it was
exactly a Petrificus Totalis spell because don't people hit with that
spell freeze and fall over? Harry just froze and stayed upright. But
that might just be movie contamination about the PT spell). Come to
think of it, the simplest explanation might be that the "freeze
against the wall" spell was the first one that Dumbledore thougth of,
or perhaps he was afraid that if Harry fell, the Invisibility Cloak
would move about and uncover part of him.

Ok, I think that's it for now. Oh, I also don't think Snape used the
AK curse because, as others have said, people don't fly up in the air
when they get hit with AK. I think the fall killed him, which is nice
in that Snape could say, "I didn't kill him and neither did the fall.
It was the landing that got 'im." Alright, I'm just amusing myself
now. Naturally, everything that I've just said and most probably
completely wrong. [HPFGU note: See below about my crazy Horcrux
theory involving the pseudo-AK curse casting]
-----------------------

A few more thoughts that I haven't posted elsewhere...

First off, the topic of Wizarding debts. Does the debt end when the
Wizard to whom the debt is owed dies? If not, does Draco now owe a
debt of some sort to Dumbledore or Snape? Dumbledore for showing him
mercy and Snape for saving his hide? Or, in Snape's case, is the debt
negated due to the Unbreakable Vow.

Secondly, Snape's Patronus. I think I mentioned in a post above about
how I think Snape's going to help Harry with the
Horcruxes/i/en...whatever. I'm thinking he might send information or
communicate with the order via Patronus. JKR *did* say that Snape's
Patronus would be important.

Lastly, the spell that Snape used to kill Dumbledore didn't behave
the like the AK curse. Did we witness the creation of a Horcrux for
either Snape or Dumbledore. If so, and I think this theory is quite
wrong, but interesting nonetheless...anyway, if so, was it a Horcrux
for Snape or for Dumbledore. Snape seems more likely, but if both he
and Dumbledore killed Dumbledore at the same time. I mean, Dumbledore
drank that potion in the Pensieve-like bowl, which I happen to
believe was a slow-acting and fatal poison, so he basically committed
suicide. And then Snape went and offed DD for good, meaning that both
Snape and Dumbledore had a hand in killing Dumbledore. Again, I
think this theory is really convoluted and completely wrong, but
there ya go.

That's it for now. Sorry for the length of this!

"I believe in Severus Snape."--Albus Dumbledore

Okay, to make myself feel better about Book 6, I am going to
construct a brief defense here of Severus Snape--an argument for us
to hold on for Book 7, at the very least. In other words, I want to
make the case that there's reasonable doubt in this book before I
start bawling from the destruction of my favorite character!

So, a list of objections to the assumption that Snape is as bad as we
think by the end of Book 6.

1.) Everyone, *everyone*, says that Dumbledore is absolute in his
trust of Snape *and* Snape's own colleagues/associates' (for years!)
initial reactions are (paraphrased) "Not Severus." The idea that
Snape killed Dumbledore in cold blood does not agree with anybody--
save Harry's--sense of Snape's character. And as we know Harry's
inclinations here, he's not a reliable character judge. Whom do you
believe: Harry or Dumbledore? Which of the two do you truly believe
to be the better character judge?

2.) "Why Dumbledore trusted Snape"/why what we know doesn't fly.
Harry believes Dumbledore took Snape back in to the fold after he
confessed to hearing the prophecy and spilling the beans; Dumbledore
believed Snape to be so sorry about that incident that he decided he
was absolutely trustworthy from then on.

*However*, what Harry's theory misses is that while Dumbledore thinks
that the prophecy interpretation "may" have been the trigger to bring
Snape to the side of the good, Dumbledore *never* says, anywhere,
that it was because of his confession alone he trusted Snape. That
is, there may still be another reason, a more compelling reason, for
Dumbledore's absolute trust in Snape.

In that vein of thought--

3.) Dumbledore is kind but not stupid. Do we really believe Snape
showed up in his office one day, a boy with mastery of the Dark Arts
*and* practical skill in it, whimpered a bit about having passed on
that prophecy to Voldie, and Dumbledore just said, "Oh, well, that's
a boy, have a lemon-drop and let's forget about it"? Dumbledore is
not Dumbledolt.

Let's review:

Snape (and JKR, too) has suggested that Dumbledore didn't give Snape
the DA job before because it might've prompted a "relapse" into bad
behavior. Is this somebody who has turned a completely blind eye to
Snape's past?

Dumbledore, I should point out, also has a history with homicidal
psychopaths in the making, and as we saw with his memory sequence of
Voldemort, just because Dumbledore gives a person a chance doesn't
mean he doesn't keep his eyes open. One would think, especially
after Voldie, that Dumbledore would not be inclined to issue a blank-
check of forgiveness to anybody without unbelievably compelling
proof of loyalty.

4.) Have we forgotten Dumbledore gave Snape a command in the last
book, one that was never clarified in this book--"You know what I
must ask you to do, Severus", and a somewhat frightened Snape
nodded? Why would that scene be necessary, especially the scared
Snape? Why include it, unless it is to plant the idea in our heads
that Snape isn't trotting off to join the masked boys of his own
inclination?

5.) Behaviorisms: When Snape uttered the curse, his face twisted with
"hatred and revulsion." Let's say you are Voldie, or a follower of
his. Are you *revolted* by the sight of your enemy on his knees?
"Revulsion" has the sense of pulling back, of being sickened (in a
nauseated, not sarcastic, sense); what's more likely to make you
feel ill--having to kill your most unspeakable enemy, or having to
kill a man you love?

6.) Later on, when Snape faces off with Harry, he's likened to the
frightened Fang in the burning house--trapped, desperate, dangerous
because of his extreme emotions. It is a sympathetic image, and a
strange one to direct to a man who's a stone-cold murderer, if we're
truly meant to join Harry in hating Snape.

7.) The words exchanged between Snape and Dumbledore are intriguing.
If Dumbledore's belief in Snape is ironclad, he would not feel a
need to "plead" for his life. He might not outright *say*, "Oh,
Severus, how nice of you to stop your double-agent work and come
help me again" in front of the DE squad, but he definitely wouldn't
start off pleading. Meanwhile, if Dumbledore's belief in Snape has
been fundamentally shaken, he'd either come out with some statement
of love for Snape--like with Draco, "This is not you, my son," etc.--
or disbelief. We'd see some sign of surprise in Dumbledore as Snape
raises his wand.

Note:Dumbledore does try to talk to Draco, to talk him out of an
act of murder--but he doesn't plead, ever, with Draco, for his life.
He does his best to dissuade Draco from murder, to talk him to the
side of the good, and though he knows Draco's life, and his family's
lives, are on the line, Dumbledore does not resort to becoming a
pleading old man before him. Why would he plead, to use Harry's
word, to Snape, but not Draco?

8.) If Dumbledore believes so absolutely in Snape, again, and his
desire is to escape the situation with his life, why didn't he free
Harry once Snape entered the room? He would believe at the time that
he had two of the world's best wizards, armed, at his side, and if
he could recover his own wand (likely, vs. the likes of Draco--and
who's saying Dumbledore truly needs a wand, anyway), numerically,
the Hogwarts boys definitely stood a chance of defeating the DE in
that room.

9.) When Harry and Dumbledore return to Hogwarts, Dumbledore says,
then, as he did before in Hogsmead, that he needs Snape, not
Pomfrey. Since she worked on Katie (as well as Snape), you'd think
Dumbledore wouldn't just automatically waive getting the nurse in,
too. So why just Snape?

10.)JKR never lets Snape say, at the end, "Ahh, the old man got
what he deserved!" or "Take that, Dumbledore! Here's for denying me
that job for all those years!" etc. She doesn't give him the moment
to explain that all JKR villains before have had. Even when he faces
off with Harry, the only comments he makes are to deny he's a coward
(with obvious emotional distress here) and to take a shot at Harry's
father for his quadruple-teaming of Snape. There's no sign anywhere
that Snape is on some sort of high from having thrown off his mask,
that he wants Harry to see his acts as a rejection of the Dumbledore
value system. Zippo. All he wants is to get out, and get Draco out safely.

11.) We have reason to believe Dumbledore is dying before the AK
hits. That's not an excuse for Snape doing it, of course. But
what's the point of Dumbledore so obviously weakening at the end--
isn't that extraneous? Is it not enough to have Dumbledore at a
disadvantage, somehow, but *dying* when facing his own murder? Isn't
that a bit of overkill (literally)? What plot point would that serve-
-unless to give us the idea that Snape wasn't entirely responsible
for the death, that there was something else going on in the scene?

12.) This is connected to #11. We know Dumbledore can be vicious
with those he loves. Note how he makes Harry swear to obey him
before they go off on the mission, and then he makes Harry--using
that vow--give him, forcibly, a potion that puts him through grave
torment and pain. Does that sound to anybody else a bit like the
scene Hagrid reported, of Snape and Dumbledore arguing, of Dumbledore
reminding Snape of his vows to do as Dumbledore said, even if Snape
doesn't want to do "it" anymore?

13.) Draco himself says Snape had no idea that Draco had, at last,
found the way to get the DE into Hogwarts. While Snape knows of the
earlier efforts (after the fact), Draco cuts Snape out of the loop
on the one that works. Hmmm, interesting, eh?

14.) In his vow to Narcissa, Snape seems to act in a
paternal/protective light that isn't consistent with a black-and-
white villain. It's too sympathetic. You feel a bit sorry for him,
swearing to look after Draco, and then getting the tag-on, *after*
they've started the vow, "And, oh, by the way--kill Dumbledore, too."
(Come on, even without them saying what the job was, we all knew it
was bad!)

15.) How can so many intelligent readers walk away with the same
frustrating sense that there's more to the story, if the author
thinks it is all crystal-clear by now? JKR *wants* us not to accept
the ending as clear.

16.) As Ron, I believe, pointed out, Snape never does take Harry's
book from him. Given that Harry never found anything worth of being
expelled in the book, why wouldn't Snape demand it back? So it has a
bit of silly grafitti in it, a stupid nickname. What harm would
there be to Snape in insisting on the book's return? (And wouldn't
there be a lot of good, from a DE POV, if such a guide didn't fall
into the hands of Voldie's arch-enemy, training him against Voldie?)

Note well: Snape's own teaching saved Ron's life, according to both
Harry and Hermione.

17.) Is Snape a turncoat, a secret blood supremacist, as Harry
thinks? Is the "Half Blood Prince" a positive title or a negative
one? (I could see it being a sarcastic taunt from his peers in
Slytherin, which Snape then jotted in his book sarcastically.) We
don't have a lot of background on Snape's views on this. Note that
he never takes a Mudblood crack at anybody save Lilly in that one
memory, when she's embarrassed him by standing up for him--and he
never takes the obvious shot at Harry's parentage. I just don't
think we get enough info from Snape and Hermione's research to
establish more than that Snape was a genius in school. (And
apparently, he can teach well and informatively through his class
*and* his old book...) Harry's use of the book--which Harry admits
he wouldn't have done if Snape had still been Potions Master!--may
not have been ethical for his schooling, but the book itself doesn't
show any signs of an evil character behind it, I'd argue--just a
really smart kid with an interest in fighting.

18.) Why is it necessary for JKR to drop the bomb that it was Snape
who heard the infamous prophecy right before Dumbledore and HP
leave, not giving them a lot of time to discuss what Harry's heard
and/or HP to demand more answers about Snape's trustworthiness? Why
is it necessary to do so just *then*, if not to color our moods for
later and make us, like HP, more inclined to jump to the conclusion
that Snape is DE through-and-through? And to cut off the amount of
time for pondering/explaining just why Dumbledore held Snape to be
trustworthy after he came to confess his deeds?

19.) Snape is *still* saving HP as of the end of the book! Nor does
he attempt to haul HP off to meet/be killed by Voldie, as he could
easily have done. Why is that? Why did HP and AD flourish for five
years, if SS wanted them bumped off, as a matter of fact?

20. For what reason does Dumbledore want Harry to go along on *this*
particular Horcrux mission? Beyond AD's reluctance to put a child in
danger, Harry's vital to the overall "Defeat Voldie" plan, too
valuable by far to put in harm's way for no reason. If the
invitation is for back-up, note, he didn't ask Harry previously to
go with him, and he has other, more experienced wizards around him
he could take if he just wanted back-up. (In fact, by making Harry
swear to run if Dumbledore tells him to, AD implies he's not going to
put Harry in harm's way and so he probably *isn't* there just for
back-up.) He certainly didn't ask Harry along simply for the joy of
traumatizing him with the force-feeding of the potion bit. And by
the end of the sequence, when Harry and AD go home, Harry really
can't do anything for AD--he only wants Snape. Why didn't AD bring
somebody else along, if all he wanted was a person to force-feed him
that potion?

So why didn't he bring Snape all along, hmm? Snape's scrawny, so his
weight in the boat wouldn't have been a problem; you can't make me
believe, seriously, Snape's magic will register in the cave and
Harry Potter's *won't*; and Snape's the one AD wants in the end
(when Harry seems to think AD wants a person to heal him), anyway.

So why not just take Snape? Taking Harry makes no sense--unless--
Harry was a back-up, not for Albus, but for
Snape. Harry was dragged into the mission without foreknowledge of
what it would really entail--do you think AD would rush off into
doing something without doing some research first, hmm?--because
Albus knew any adult who knew him and the context would be highly
suspicious/resistant to participate ("Go with me to a cave and do
whatever I say. No, I won't explain what this entails beforehand.
Yes, I already nearly lost my hand by trying this on my own earlier,
but that's all you need to know." Sound like a suicide mission to
anybody else?) Note, Harry tried to back out of the force-feeding
idea once AD told him about it--would he have even gone on the
mission if he knew he'd have to do *that* at the end, let alone if
he knew it would kill AD? My idea is that AD had already broached
the idea to Snape that he was going to drink that potion--perhaps he
injured his hand by sticking it into the water earlier and then
decided to drink it on the next go-round?--and Snape balked at the
idea of force-feeding him/possibly finishing him off. Knowing he
couldn't get Snape into that cave with him, Albus instead took
innocent Harry, brutally manipulating him into following through
with his obedience vow (and still not telling him the worst possible
outcome of the potion). By drinking the potion without Snape's
presence or consent, AD was running an end-game around Snape's
disagreement to the plan and forcing Snape to follow through
with the next step, killing off AD.

---------

My gut theory: Dumbledore had to die. Either for reasons we don't
know about, or to save Severus for the next book (who is more
valuable? AD or the spy at Voldie's shoulder? We know AD does think
in terms of "value," as he constantly explains to HP that AD has to
do the blood-sacrificing etc. because he's of less value), AD had to
die and he knew it. This isn't Sirius II, where somebody gets cut
down out of the blue. Snape was acting on orders to kill AD--AD's
orders. Maybe it was to stop Voldie from getting the murder-energy
to stash away another bit of his soul--because the kill wouldn't be
a murder on Snape's hands (acting on orders from AD), as opposed to
how it would be if Draco did it--and maybe, too, it was to spare
Draco from becoming a murderer. But because of all of the above
points, I suspect strongly that AD's end wasn't because SS double-
crossed him as HP believes.

And to reiterate:

Reason #21. As has been beaten into our heads by now, AD believes
in Snape. Do you think, at the end of the story, JKR intends us to
see AD as just a trusting old fool? Or as the symbol of love
triumphant? As Lupin--who ranks *very* highly in JKR's eyes--
says, "If you believe in Dumbledore, you believe in Snape."