Guest post: Good Snape/Bad Snape, by t’wife
John H July 17th, 2007
Jeremy at Eating Words has posted some sensible predictions for the final Harry Potter book, in response to the questions posted by Travis Prinzi at Sword of Griffindor. I’m not remotely qualified to answer these myself, so I asked my wife – our resident Harry Potter expert – to give her answers.
The only question that Emily decided she wanted to answer is the first one, relating to Snape’s allegiance. Emily is a vehement proponent of “Good Snape”, even if that leaves her feeling like Elijah in the cave at times (“I alone am left!”). Here are her thoughts on this, and responses from other Potter scholars are invited in the comments. (NB: if you’ve not yet read Book Six, then this post contains major spoilers.)
My sole question is this: I just don’t get it – what’s the actual objection to Good Snape? All the evidence is for it. Rescued Harry from the Cruciatus curse as he fled (What Dumbledore Would Have Wanted), failed to take Harry to Voldemort (WDWHW), rescued repentant Malfoy (WDWHW), killed Dumbledore (despite feeling “revulsion” at it) and thus maintained his cover (WDWHW), acted only after reading Dumbledore’s mind (WDWHW), refused to help Umbrage (WDWHW), tried to teach Harry occlumency (WDWHW), sent the Order of the Phoenix to the Ministry of Magic after Harry’s tip (WDWHW). Plus he saved Dumbledore’s life after Dumbledore was injured decommissioning the ring horcrux.
If Snape is Bad Snape, then none of these was necessary to maintain his cover. And if Voldemort knew about any one of them, he would have had Bad Snape killed summarily.
The only objection to Good Snape I can see is he killed Dumbledore. But given Dumbledore (a) sought his own death in place of Harry only slightly before this, and (b) is utterly unfazed by the prospect, then if Dumbledore doesn’t mind dying, why should we object?
