Since 1997, you’ve been coming to BarnesandNoble.com to discuss everything from Stephen King to writing to Harry Potter. You’ve made our site more than a place to discover your next book: you’ve made it a community. But like all things internet, BN.com is growing and changing. We've said goodbye to our community message boards—but that doesn’t mean we won’t still be a place for adventurous readers to connect and discover.

Now, you can explore the most exciting new titles (and remember the classics) at the Barnes & Noble Book Blog. Check out conversations with authors like Jeff VanderMeer and Gary Shteyngart at the B&N Review, and browse write-ups of the best in literary fiction. Come to our Facebook page to weigh in on what it means to be a book nerd. Browse digital deals on the NOOK blog, tweet about books with us,or self-publish your latest novella with NOOK Press. And for those of you looking for support for your NOOK, the NOOK Support Forums will still be here.

We will continue to provide you with books that make you turn pages well past midnight, discover new worlds, and reunite with old friends. And we hope that you’ll continue to tell us how you’re doing, what you’re reading, and what books mean to you.

Reply
Frequent Contributor
StoryMing
Posts: 360
Registered: ‎02-06-2007
0 Kudos

the great Snape Debate

Okay here it is guys and girls, the chance for the GoodSnape and EvilSnape (and Snape-is-just-out-for-himself)partisans to duke out their theories and mount their defenses- all-out, full throttle, and no-holds-barred.
Thanks kpeterson for the idea (and the challenge)!

I'll start.

What is so great about Snape?
Okay, I'll freely admit, the guy is NOT very likable, not 'nice' in any sense of the word. He is truly vicious and cruel to Harry and his friends, and abusive of his position as a teacher. He can hold onto a grudge tighter than a Gringotts goblin clutches gold. Not to mention, he's a slimy git. --So, what's to admire?

Well, first of all, I believe that he on Dumbledore's side.
My conviction that, despite all appearances to the contrary, Snape is "one of the good guys", is based on a number of observations, a hundred little things that don't add up if Snape is indeed on Voldemorts side. He has had countless opportunities to undermine and sabotage Dumbledore's side and make it look like a genuine accident without blowing his cover. There are so many things he could have done, from tampering with Lupin's wolfsbane potion, to letting Harry get himself killed playing the hero at the ministry battle (by simply keeping quiet, rather than alerting the Order), to PRETENDING to try and save Dumbledore's life when he got injured dehorcruxifying Marvolo's ring instead of ACTUALLY saving him, to roughing up Harry (who was doing his best to curse him) when he made his final escape instead of protecting him from a death-eater's attack, and then merely shoving him out of the way. But in every case his actions tell for DD's side.

Furthermore, I believe in GoodSnape because I trust Dumbledore's judgement. DD may not be perfect, he may make mistakes like the rest of us, but he has NEVER yet been wrong in his intuition about other people- including Tom Riddle. If after all his adamant protestations of trust, DD could be THAT FAR wrong, THAT big a fool in his determination to trust, then EVERYTHING underlying the message which JKR has been telling us for 6 books(mostly through DD) about the need to look beyond appearances and prejudices, about the need for trust and cooperation, goes right out the window.

But- Snape killed him! Yes, I know he did: and the evidence we have indicates to me that DD PLANNED and INTENDED to die. That gleam of triumph in GOF, followed by a weary look; I believe DD saw at that moment some sure way of defeating Voldemort; one which would necessitate his death. Even as far back as book one Ron taught us about the necessity of sacrifices in chess, forshadowing the idea of someone allowing himself to be 'taken' so that Harry could go on to 'checkmate' the opposition. The fact that Snape hesitated before making that Vow, the argument that Hagrid reports between DD and Snape, and most of all, the parallel with Harry at the cave, reluctantly forcing that evil drink down DD's throat, loathing himself, but still acting because Dumbledore ordered him to, all tell me that Snape did NOT want to do what he did, and ONLY did so because Dumbledore begged him to follow instructions.

Now: IF we can assume, just for the moment, that my conclusion about Snape being DD's man is in fact correct, then what is admirable and heroic about Snape is this; first, that he is courageous enough to run terrible risks, if his true intentions become known; second, that he has been successfully able to fool the greatest legilimens known to wizarding history; and third, that he has sacrificed, in one blow, whatever of esteem or repute he may ever have had among respectable wizards, out of obedience and loyalty to Dumbledore. For all of his life Snape has been misunderstood, disliked, distrusted. ONE person had ever fully believed in him- and he is dead by Snape's own hand. If the theory is right and Snape is 'good', he is perhaps more devastated by DD's death than anyone- and he cannot afford to show the least hint of it. He has thrown away his good name, and no one will ever know the truth... until it is too late.
Frequent Contributor
maggie21
Posts: 82
Registered: ‎01-29-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

Could'nt agree more StoryMing,I think your spot on about Snape.Soon we will know the mystery behind the man.
Frequent Contributor
quidditch2323
Posts: 26
Registered: ‎02-03-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

I believe that Snape is good, because there is a lot of evidence to support it. However, I think that evil Snape is so much more fun to discuss than good Snape. I really just HATE Snape. By the way, there is a great book called The Great Snape Debate. It is a flip book. One side discusses Snape's innocence, while the other side discusses Snape's guilt. It is a Border's exclusive, so it can only be found at Borders.
"From this point forth, we shall be leaving the firm foundation of fact and journeying together through the murky marshes of memory into thickets of wildest guesswork."





AlbusDumbledore
Frequent Contributor
meggie
Posts: 94
Registered: ‎04-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

Ok I believe that Snape is evil. Here's why:

Snape knows that Dumbledore is the only one that Voldemort ever feared and the only person keeping Voldemort from bursting into Hogwarts and taking hostages, killing students, etc. Dumbledore was also the only person that could keep Voldemort from attacking Harry at Hogwarts.Now by killing Dumbledore Hogwarts is just as safe, if not less safe, as anywhere else.

Now if Snape is acting on Voldemort's orders, and Voldemort told Snape to save Harry for himself. Then it makes sense for Snape to "save" Harry from the DE.When he hesitated before making the Unbreakable Vow, it might have been because he was thinking about how angry Voldemort would be if he found out what he had done.

In the fifth book Snape passes information over to Voldemort. Snape could have just lied to Voldemort and say that the order had a secret keeper for the Order's information.
Frequent Contributor
kpeterson32
Posts: 1,053
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

[ Edited ]
StoryMing, I do like the bit you wrote about the chess match from SS and I think you are absolutely right that we will be seeing more of that idea of self-sacrifice later, but we did not see it with Dumbledore. He was murdered outright.

I hope those of you GoodSnapers can answer this question by first accepting the events atop the Astronomy Tower as written, without assuming this whole idea of a fake AK curse or anything else of the sort when you respond. You don't have to necessarily believe that, but when you answer this question, please do so as if everything that was written about those moments really happened that way: Slughorn tells Riddle that killing rips apart the soul. Why would Dumbledore allow anyone else to rip apart their own soul?

As for Dumbledore not being able to make that big of an error in judgment, this is from Snape's own mouth to Bellatrix and Narcissa:

And you overlook Dumbledore's greatest weakness: He has to believe the best of people. I spun him a tale of deepest remorse when I joined his staff, fresh from my Death Eater days, and he embraced me with open arms--though, as I say, never allowing me nearer the Dark Arts than he could help. Dumbledore has been a great wizard--oh yes, he has," (for Bellatrix had mad a scathing noise), "the Dark Lord acknowledges it. I am pleased to say, however, that Dumbledore is growing old. The duel with the Dark Lord last month shook him. He has since sustained a serious injury because his reactions are slower than they once were. But through all these years, he has never stopped trusting Severus Snape, and therin lies my great value to the Dark Lord." (HBP pg 31)

Snape could not afford to do anything that would make him look the least bit guilty. And, if Dumbledore really trusted Snape so completely, why did he always keep the Potions Master so far from the Dark Arts? After all, who better to prepare young witches and wizards against the Dark Arts than a reformed Death Eater? I know, I know, the position of DADA teacher was cursed, but surely someone as wise and powerful as Dumbledore could have found ways around that little problem. But he didn't. Because even though he trusted Snape's sincerity, he always knew it was possible that Snape had not completely denounced the old ways and could be turned back easily.

I think that psychee had a very good point on the Snape is EVIL thread about most of Snape's actions and reactions being completely ambiguous until we know the whole truth about him from Deathly Hallows. But for now, I maintain my position that Snape is a very bad man that murdered Dumbledore. He could have done it sooner, sure, but as he explained to Bella and Cissy, Voldemort always intended him to do it in the end, but wanted Draco to try first.

Thank you, StoryMing for this thread. I don't want anyone to think I'm trashing their opinion of a good Snape. I really, seriously am just looking for logical, non emotionally-based reasons why Snape could possibly be a good guy. Too many people just refer to the old notions that he must be 'misunderstood' or that he 'just needs to be loved'. I don't buy it for a second. Sure, he had a lousy homelife and he had enemies at school. But just because he endured ridicule from James Potter does not mean he has to inflict that torture on James's only son. Especially after Snape's partial revelation of that prophecy to Voldemort already led to the deaths of James and Lily. Hadn't Harry already suffered enough by Snape before he ever set foot in Hogwarts?

Message Edited by kpeterson32 on 05-27-200702:47 AM

---------------------------------
"Oooh, look, a Blibbering Humdinger!" -- Luna Lovegood
Frequent Contributor
meggie
Posts: 94
Registered: ‎04-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

I agree with kpeterson. Dumbledore wouldn't want somebody to split their soul. Here's another question for all of the SnapeIsGood balievers: How would Dumbledore know he was going to be weakened when he came back from the cave?
Frequent Contributor
Dkrupp
Posts: 702
Registered: ‎02-01-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate


kpeterson32 wrote:
Why would Dumbledore allow anyone else to rip apart their own soul?



With no evidence from canon, I suspect that we don't actually know the reason, or the full reason why Snape came to Dumbledore or why Dumbledore believed his remorse was sincere. I am not certain if Dumbledore was inable or unwilling to divulge this information to Harry, but I don't think we have the full story.

That said, my suspicion has been that Snape was given the task of killing another, to prove himself to Voldemort and the Death Eaters. My theory is his victim was Regulus Black after he had turned away from Voldemort. I am uncertain whether Snape actually killed Regulus or whether he enlisted the aid of Dumbledore and the two hid him completely. However, I think it was some sort of life-changing epiphany for Snape. The story Dumbledore tells Harry just doesn't seem substantial or complete.

I think the guilt Snape feels for the deaths he contributed to as a Death Eater, directly and indirectly, have caused his soul to be less intact than 16 year old Draco. Preventing Draco from going down the path of evil was more important and worth the sacrifice of any damage that might have occurred in Snape's soul when he killed Dumbledore.

As for the passage you cite from Spinner's End, I believe it is imperative that Snape remind everyone that Dumbledore's greatest weaknesses are trusting and loving. This shows Snape to be loyal to Voldemort and tricking Dumbledore. It helps back up his own case. I suspect he overstated the case, as I suspect Voldemort's arrogance will be a big part of his downfall. This information will add to that, as will Dumbledore's death.

I'm not emotionally involved with Snape in any way. :smileywink: I think he's an interesting character, but he's not one of my favorites, by any stretch. I wouldn't want him in my home or teaching my children! I don't see a lot of evidence to support that he was tortured, and he doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me based on the evidence we have.


I think we're all going to have to wait until DH to see where Snape's loyalties really lie: the Order, the Dark Lord, or himself. For the time being, I believe in Dumbledore's vision of the world, so I must trust Snape, even if I don't fully understand his motives.
Frequent Contributor
StoryMing
Posts: 360
Registered: ‎02-06-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

[ Edited ]
hi kpeterson, glad you've joined us!

I don't *think* my reasons for thinking Snape is good are emotionally based, although admittedly I would find an Evil Snape disappointingly 2-dimentional in character... but, as has been pointed out, Snape has deliberately been left ambiguous enough that one could argue either way, and one's reasons for choosing either position are as likely to be based on emotion as logic.

If "Potter is for the Dark Lord", then it makes perfect sense for Snape to keep the other Death Eaters (and himself) from killing Harry; but there is no reason whatever, so far as I can see, why they could not have had a bit of rough sport with him first, and still turned him over to their master not much the worse for wear.

I do not believe Dumbledore was murdered outright, because 1. he would NEVER, EVER beg for his life since he had no fear of death; and 2. since he trusted Snape, he would not have been expecting Snape to attack him; so why, after asking repeatedly for him, would he start pleading as soon as he appeared? Granted, there *is* in fact a possible EvilSnape interpretation of this: that DD was able to read Snape's murderous intent via legilimency, and that he was begging him not to do it, not out of a desire for self-preservation but because of the harm it would do to Snape's own soul. But considering the other points I've noted about Snape's behavior before and after the attack (and considering the fact that he has never actually begged Tom to desist ripping and tearing his soul to shreds), I consider the 'Good' interpretation more likely.

As to the question of murder ripping the soul, and how DD could ask such a thing of anyone; this is a good point that EvilSnape partisans have brought up. My only thoughts on this are, perhaps it does not qualify, magically, as murder, if the victim him/herself requested it- and then too, as a former Death-Eater Snape may not have had an entirely whole, intact soul anymore anyhow. At any rate I do not see that Dumbledore's "need to believe the best of people" placed him under any false illusions as to Tom Riddle; and I am absolutely certain it would have taken more than some sob-story to persuade him of Snape's sincerity. Remember too that we have NEVER been given the full, real reason for Dumbledore's trust in Snape.

So if DD trusts Snape, why then did he never give him the DA job? I'm not so sure that even DD could have found his way around the curse. He's the greatest wizard who ever lived, but his powers were not limitless, particularly where the dark arts is concerned; he never found the Chamber of Secrets, for example. It is *possible* that he had certain reservations about Snape, but if this were the case I do not see why he would always have been so adamant in his insistence that he trusted him completely.

And finally, as to Snape's abusiveness, yeah he did enough damage to be going on with, without adding to it by haranguing James' son, but in real life people are often inconsistnent. I can easily believe someone simultaneously not being able to stand someone, and at the same time doing their best to help them against a common enemy.

Message Edited by StoryMing on 05-27-200709:22 PM

Frequent Contributor
StoryMing
Posts: 360
Registered: ‎02-06-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

meggie, I don't understand your question, can you clarify? what does DD knowing/ not knowing he would be weakened after the cave have to do with Snape and which side he's on?



meggie wrote:
I agree with kpeterson. Dumbledore wouldn't want somebody to split their soul. Here's another question for all of the SnapeIsGood balievers: How would Dumbledore know he was going to be weakened when he came back from the cave?


Frequent Contributor
meggie
Posts: 94
Registered: ‎04-19-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

nevermind
Frequent Contributor
kpeterson32
Posts: 1,053
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

StoryMing, there's so much good stuff here that I'm not sure where to begin!

I agree with you that an Evil Snape does run the risk of being a very 2-dimensional story. But, remember that when JKR originally conceptualized the entire plot, she could not have fathomed how wildly popular these books would be among adults. For kids that haven't had much exposure to fantasy literature, the notion of Snape turning out to be a real bad guy after all would probably be a big surprise. I'm 30 years old and it shocked the heck out of me! I think that JKR has been very careful in how Snape's story plays out because whether he is good or evil, he is still a very fascinating character.

As to Dumbledore "pleading" with Snape on the tower, I've always taken that as more of a "Severus, you're better than this. You don't have to do this." Snape doesn't seem to need encouragement there, so the folks that have said that Dumbledore was pleading with him to go along with it...I just don't buy that. I don't think he was begging for his life, but begging for Snape's soul, if that makes sense.

I think you have a plausible point about Snape's soul already sustaining damage, but how and why would JKR go through the entire process of explaining that it was okay for Snape and Dumbledore to hatch this plan for Snape to kill him since Snape's soul wasn't completely intact to begin with? That just seems like unnecessary exposition to me, but considering how well she writes, I'm sure she could find a way of working this in well if this is the route she planned to take.

Now here's another question I have for you good Snapers. At the beginning of HBP, Lupin is at the Burrow visiting when they start talking about some of the folks that have been murdered. Lupin says, "And they've found Igor Karkaroff's body in a shack up north. The Dark Mark had been set over it--well, frankly, I'm surprised he stayed alive for even a year after deserting the Death Eaters; Sirius's brother, Regulus, only managed a few days as far as I can remember." (pg 106)

My question is: Why didn't the Death Eaters ever go after and kill Snape? Even atop the Astronomy Tower, they seemed to be following his orders, rather than including him in their list of people to get rid of. I don't think the question is why Dumbledore trusts Snape so much as why does Voldemort?

After all, Dumbledore "has to" believe the best in people. Voldemort only kills the people that he sees as a threat or as a nuissance. So why did he believe Snape? And not only believe him, but to the point that he actually gave him assignments.

I know that those questions can't be answered by canon, but I thought it might be fun to discuss. :smileyhappy:
---------------------------------
"Oooh, look, a Blibbering Humdinger!" -- Luna Lovegood
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate



kpeterson32 wrote:
.....My question is: Why didn't the Death Eaters ever go after and kill Snape? Even atop the Astronomy Tower, they seemed to be following his orders, rather than including him in their list of people to get rid of. I don't think the question is why Dumbledore trusts Snape so much as why does Voldemort?

After all, Dumbledore "has to" believe the best in people. Voldemort only kills the people that he sees as a threat or as a nuissance. So why did he believe Snape? And not only believe him, but to the point that he actually gave him assignments.

I know that those questions can't be answered by canon, but I thought it might be fun to discuss. :smileyhappy:




I'm not following your question here. What would trigger the Death Eaters to go after Snape? He was a double agent before the fall of Voldemort and a double agent again beginning two hours after the re-birth of Voldemort. Except for those two hours, his loyalty has never been questioned... at least by Voldemort, as far as we know.
Frequent Contributor
StoryMing
Posts: 360
Registered: ‎02-06-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

[ Edited ]
Thank you kpeterson! I'm flattered :smileyhappy:

It seems difficult to know why EITHER DD or V believe(d) Snape. Voldemort definitely seems to have HAD his suspicions, at least to begin with: on his return in GOF, he goes around the circle of Death-Eaters tallying up who's missing, and speaks of "One, who I believe has left me forever... he will be killed, of course.". Later, in HBP, Snape indicates to Narcissa that he is the one V was referring to ("Yes, the Dark Lord thought I had left him forever, but he was wrong." )

But it is questionable whether Voldemort does not, in fact, still harbor some lingering doubts; what is Wormtail doing at Spinner's End, exactly? Is Snape being spied on in his own house??? I feel Snape must be VERY clever, to have talked his way out of being killed outright (although his explanations to Narcissa do not seem entirely convincing to me), and I do not know why, if V does still suspect him, he did not kill him, but perhaps it was very useful, to have a spy in Hogwarts, and he was convinced enough that he wanted to be absolutely sure before making any moves. Now that Snape has killed DD, V will no longer have any doubts.



kpeterson32 wrote:
StoryMing, there's so much good stuff here that I'm not sure where to begin!

Now here's another question I have for you good Snapers. My question is: Why didn't the Death Eaters ever go after and kill Snape? Even atop the Astronomy Tower, they seemed to be following his orders, rather than including him in their list of people to get rid of. I don't think the question is why Dumbledore trusts Snape so much as why does Voldemort?

After all, Dumbledore "has to" believe the best in people. Voldemort only kills the people that he sees as a threat or as a nuissance. So why did he believe Snape? And not only believe him, but to the point that he actually gave him assignments.

I know that those questions can't be answered by canon, but I thought it might be fun to discuss. :smileyhappy:

Message Edited by StoryMing on 05-28-200709:50 AM

Message Edited by StoryMing on 05-28-200709:51 AM

Frequent Contributor
kpeterson32
Posts: 1,053
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

Snape must be one heck of a story-teller with the tales he had to have spun to convince both Dumbledore and Voldemort.

Personally, I think it's more likely for him to have fooled Dumbledore than Voldemort.

Psychee, I was merely trying to say that I think it's kind of weird that Lupin says that Regulus deserted the Death Eaters and was killed within days and Karkaroff deserted the Death Eaters and managed to make it a year before meeting his doom. How did Snape make it 16 years? I suppose you would have to assume that Regulus and Karkaroff were both killed on the orders of Voldemort, given what he says in the graveyard scene. But I hold to my previous thought that Snape has some sort of a leadership position within Voldemort's organization and that this is why Voldemort even took the time to listen to his explanation in the first place. That, and he must have shared some pretty good intel.
---------------------------------
"Oooh, look, a Blibbering Humdinger!" -- Luna Lovegood
Frequent Contributor
amm1
Posts: 702
Registered: ‎04-02-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate


StoryMing wrote:
But it is questionable whether Voldemort does not, in fact, still harbor some lingering doubts; what is Wormtail doing at Spinner's End, exactly? Is Snape being spied on in his own house??? I feel Snape must be VERY clever, to have talked his way out of being killed outright (although his explanations to Narcissa do not seem entirely convincing to me), and I do not know why, if V does still suspect him, he did not kill him, but perhaps it was very useful, to have a spy in Hogwarts, and he was convinced enough that he wanted to be absolutely sure before making any moves. Now that Snape has killed DD, V will no longer have any doubts.


I believe Wormtail is at Snape's house for a couple of reasons. One, Voldemort does not entirely trust Snape and Wormtail is there to keep an eye on him.

As for why Voldemort has not killed Snape yet? Snape seems pretty good at spinning stories, he's the double agent, but I believe there's more to it than that. Voldemort is using Snape as a pawn. When V's finished using Snape then he may try and kill him.

As for Voldemort no longer having any doubts about Snape after Dumbledore's death, that may be true but I also wonder if V. may now try and do away with Snape. Too much competition.
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate



kpeterson32 wrote:
Snape must be one heck of a story-teller with the tales he had to have spun to convince both Dumbledore and Voldemort.

Personally, I think it's more likely for him to have fooled Dumbledore than Voldemort.

Psychee, I was merely trying to say that I think it's kind of weird that Lupin says that Regulus deserted the Death Eaters and was killed within days and Karkaroff deserted the Death Eaters and managed to make it a year before meeting his doom. How did Snape make it 16 years? I suppose you would have to assume that Regulus and Karkaroff were both killed on the orders of Voldemort, given what he says in the graveyard scene. But I hold to my previous thought that Snape has some sort of a leadership position within Voldemort's organization and that this is why Voldemort even took the time to listen to his explanation in the first place. That, and he must have shared some pretty good intel.




Sure, Snape has a leadership role. I didn't think that was ever questioned. Were you thinking, though, that that in some way means that he couldn't be Dumbledore's man?
Frequent Contributor
kpeterson32
Posts: 1,053
Registered: ‎10-19-2006
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

I don't think it's impossible for Snape to be good or to be Dumbledore's man. If it was impossible, there wouldn't be a very good debate here. But I don't think it's likely, for a multitude of reasons which I have shared on this and other threads on this board.

The point I was trying to make there was that there must have been some specific reason that Snape wasn't killed by Death Eaters. I mean, he did go running off to Dumbledore, so if they thought he was a traitor, why didn't they kill him in the very beginning? Even if Voldemort wasn't around to tell anyone to. I guess that's really what I'm asking. Were they just trying to save their own skins? Igor Karkaroff tried to give him up but that didn't work out too well. And Lucius and Snape have always got on well, which would seem odd to me since one is supposed to be an undercover Death Eater and the other a reformed one. It seems like there should be some tension there. But maybe that's just me grasping at straws...
---------------------------------
"Oooh, look, a Blibbering Humdinger!" -- Luna Lovegood
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

I'm still confused here... Are you forgetting that Voldemort SENT Snape to work for Dumbledore? That Snape has always remained in the same place that Voldemort sent him? The Death Eaters knew that... consequently, to them, there was never any clear indication that he was on Dumbledore's side... they always assumed that he was a Death Eater working under cover at Hogwarts for Voldemort and was fooling Dumbledore into believing that he was working for him.
Frequent Contributor
StoryMing
Posts: 360
Registered: ‎02-06-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

The thing is, the Death-Eaters who were killed were those who plainly and clearly LEFT. Snape never outright defected; when he (really or apparently) switched sides, it was in secret, as a spy. Then, after Voldemort's downfall, nearly all of the Death-Eaters spent 13 years laying low, preoccupied with staying out of Azkaban; they were defeated, were being rounded up. Assasinating Snape would not have been high on their agenda; even for die-hards like Bellatrix the priority would be finding the master and returning him to power. Many might have thought he was just fast-talking his way out of trouble, like themselves. PLUS, Snape had Dumbledore's protection, which surely counts for something.
Inspired Bibliophile
Psychee
Posts: 7,307
Registered: ‎04-17-2007
0 Kudos

Re: the great Snape Debate

Also, Malfoy never doubted Snape's loyalty to the Dark Lord, and Malfoy is definitely one of the upper-echelon Death Eaters.