![[info]](https://www.insanejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
Regardless of the emphasis JKR places on bravery, it is not the *only* virtue in her universe. And it is not the one that Severus' journey specifically revolves around.
The issue of Severus' *moral* standing specifically is a major question in the books, while his *bravery* is not. He is called coward at various points, because the issue is meaningful to him personally, but the huge question on readers' minds was never "Is Snape brave or cowardly?" It was "Is Snape good or evil?"
Calling him brave at the end may indeed be granting him a virtue that JKR holds highly. It does not, however, have anything to do with the central question of his development that she set up throughout the story. The question that the issue of his redemption revolves around. How can you be redeemed from a particular sort of fallen state you were never in? It's not a question of having him be seen as cowardly and then redeemed as brave; it's a question of him having been seen as *evil* and then....seen as brave? The answer one would expect in a redemption scenario for a character whose *moral goodness* was questioned would be to acknowledge his moral goodness. Not his bravery.
It's a non sequiter, and therefore feels (to me at least and, I gather, many others) *hollow.* The question we all were hoping would be answered was *Is Severus good? Is his goodness acknowledged?" Which, in the end, it is not. We are given his bravery, which was never in serious doubt, and told that that is supposed to be enough, even though it's palming us off with the answer to a different question.
The issue of Severus' *moral* standing specifically is a major question in the books, while his *bravery* is not. He is called coward at various points, because the issue is meaningful to him personally, but the huge question on readers' minds was never "Is Snape brave or cowardly?" It was "Is Snape good or evil?"
Calling him brave at the end may indeed be granting him a virtue that JKR holds highly. It does not, however, have anything to do with the central question of his development that she set up throughout the story. The question that the issue of his redemption revolves around. How can you be redeemed from a particular sort of fallen state you were never in? It's not a question of having him be seen as cowardly and then redeemed as brave; it's a question of him having been seen as *evil* and then....seen as brave? The answer one would expect in a redemption scenario for a character whose *moral goodness* was questioned would be to acknowledge his moral goodness. Not his bravery.
It's a non sequiter, and therefore feels (to me at least and, I gather, many others) *hollow.* The question we all were hoping would be answered was *Is Severus good? Is his goodness acknowledged?" Which, in the end, it is not. We are given his bravery, which was never in serious doubt, and told that that is supposed to be enough, even though it's palming us off with the answer to a different question.