Snapedom

Snape's role in Dumbledore's Death

torino10154

8/19/08 11:32 am

My question this week has several parts-if Snape had lived, would Harry's testimony before the Wizengamot have exonerated Snape (as fanfic often attests)? Would he have ended up in Azkaban? Another commonly held belief before DH was that Dumbledore did ask Snape to kill him-did you find the explanation in DH satisfying? What are we to make of Dumbledore telling Snape it was he that would determine whether killing Dumbledore would split his soul? Does this endorse Euthanasia or is that not the point?

Please feel free to expand on this.

• Tags:
  torino's question challenge

• Send your Patronus

• (Anonymous)

  8/19/08 04:21 pm (UTC)

  I actually find it possible for the Killing Curse to be used in euthanasia without harming the caster. I disagree the Killing Curse requires hatred, it never sais so anywhere. It requires really wanting the death of the intended victim. The reason for wanting the death to happen can be anything as long as it is true and strong, including wanting to end the misery of a loved one. It is murder, not necessarily killing, that rips the soul in the Potterverse. But for all we know, Dumbledore may have been bluffing in order to manipulate Severus, as usual.
  
  But I was disappointed that the killing was planned in advance. I would have preferred for it to have been Severus' painful choice as a result of his assessment of the potential consequences of either option because I wanted him to have been more in a position of control than Rowling let him. Because even without knowing about the pre-arranged death pact, killing Dumbledore was the choice that had the better chance than its alternative to lead to a positive outcome for the war effort in general. (BTW so many of those who before DH were sure Snape's killing of Dumbledore was the incontrovertible proof of his evil nature after DH started saying that any hesitation by Snape in executing the plan was a sign of cowardice. Yeah, sure.)
  
  As for what would have happened at a trial - all depends on when such a trial would have been held, public opinion at the time, Harry's popularity, etc.
  
  - Oryx

  • Reply
  • Parent
  • Thread

  • bohemianspirit

    8/19/08 06:48 pm (UTC)

    But I was disappointed that the killing was planned in advance. I would have preferred for it to have been Severus' painful choice as a result of his assessment of the potential consequences of either option because I wanted him to have been more in a position of control than Rowling let him.
    
    As I read it, it really did come down to being "Severus' painful choice." Right to the moment of being confronted with that choice, it appears that he was still debating within himself (and with Dumbledore) whether he would actually go through with it--this, in spite of generally being a man of his word, so clearly he had enough development of ethical reasoning at that point (age 37) to realize that sometimes one moral principle outweighs another. In this case, he seems to be thinking that, yes, he made a promise (as Dumbledore so kindly reminds him) to kill Dumbledore, but Severus clearly sees killing Dumbledore as more ethically objectionable than breaking a promise to kill Dumbledore.
    
    And, too, what we are discussing in this thread may well have occurred to Severus. ;-) "If I kill Dumbledore, it will put me in good standing with the Dark Lord, but it also means my name is shit among the opponents of the Dark Lord, and if we win and I survive this war, I am screwed."
    
    So what we are seeing, there on the Astronomy Tower, is Severus making a hateful and wrenching decision to go through with the AK, because he is, as the saying goes, caught between a rock and a hard place and it's really the best option under the circumstances. For one thing, I don't know if he expected Draco Malfoy to actually be present when the "opportunity presented itself" to kill Dumbledore, and sparing Draco would certainly have been a strong motivator for Severus to do what he normally would not be willing to do.
    
    

    • Reply
    • Parent
    • Thread

    • (Anonymous)

      8/19/08 07:41 pm (UTC)

      Quote:
      As I read it, it really did come down to being "Severus' painful choice." Right to the moment of being confronted with that choice, it appears that he was still debating within himself (and with Dumbledore) whether he would actually go through with it--this, in spite of generally being a man of his word, so clearly he had enough development of ethical reasoning at that point (age 37) to realize that sometimes one moral principle outweighs another. In this case, he seems to be thinking that, yes, he made a promise (as Dumbledore so kindly reminds him) to kill Dumbledore, but Severus clearly sees killing Dumbledore as more ethically objectionable than breaking a promise to kill Dumbledore.
      -----------
      
      I think what I meant to say was that I wanted readers to be able to evaluate the situation and see that Severus chose the path that although painful for him was the one most likely to bring the most benefit to the anti-Voldemort effort. By having the killing pre-ordered by Dumbledore many readers who were quick to condemn Snape before DH simply avoided the question. Oh, he did it on orders so of course it was OK, or not that bad or whatever. People who did not want to see Severus' POV can still avoid it because there's this 'Dumbledore's orders' card which allows them to avoid seeing his dilemma.
      
      - Oryx

      • Reply
      • Parent