An interesting perspective on Snape has been posted by Jeremy at his new Eating Words blog.
It occurred to me last night that it might not be possible for Snape to use Avada Kedavra without malicious intent. I’m working from memory so correct me if I am wrong. When pseudo-Mad-Eye was teaching the class about the Unforgivable Curses he said that in order for them to be effective one must mean them. He said something like if one of the students tried one on him it would do no more than give him a nosebleed. And when Harry attempts the Cruciatus curse on Bellatrix in the Ministry of Magic it had little effect. She told him that he needed to desire to cause pain – to enjoy it.
This would cause problems for the good-Snape advocates.
Good points. And what about all the evidence throughout the series that Snape is good and has been doing the right thing?
So how do I see Snape generally and the murder specifically? I believe Snape’s repentance was genuine – and I think his devotion to the Dark Arts was genuine. All along he has been conflicted. On the fateful night on the tower his loyalty had swung to Voldemort, perhaps because of either his unbreakable vow to Narcissus or something else.
I started some conversation in the comments section, and feel free to chime in over there (and/or here as well).
woman_ironing on 
korg20000bc on 
revgeorge on 
Red Rocker on 
Loading ...
{ 10 comments… read them below or add one }
Deborah
06.13.06 at 4:10 pm
Wow, I never even though about the need to “mean it” for Snape to kill DD. That adds some extra pieces to the puzzle that makes it a little more challenging to figure things out. Snape sure has a lot of anger and hatered though. I would think that it wouldn’t be hard for him to channel it towards DD though, if he wanted it enough, after all he has to be good at controlling his thoughts to be an accomplished Occlumens and Legelmens.
Morganna
06.21.06 at 1:14 pm
I think Snape is conflicted more than we realize concerning Dumbledore. I believe Snape loves DD as a father. Knowing as we do from Harry’s dip in the pensieve, Snape’s own father was nominal at best, and DD is probably the only person (besides his mother, perhaps) who believed in him. One question I have (there are many) is whether a person could enter into more than one unbreakable vow. If such is the case, perhaps he entered into one with DD, contingent upon developments. Dumbledore’s strange reaction to the Avada Kedavra curse could be due to the fact that the potion/charm keeping DD alive was destroyed, the locomotor mortis hex on Harry was severed, and the unbreakable vow was fulfilled. Food for thought.
Travis Prinzi
06.21.06 at 1:36 pm
I think a second unbreakable vow is very much a possibility. My best guess is this: Snape made an unbreakable vow or loyalty to Dumbledore WAY back after LV killed the Potters. So if “stoppered death” is true, ultimately, Snape fulfilled both unbreakable vows on the Astronomy Tower, remaining simultaneously faithful to Dumbledore’s plan and to his vow to Narcissa.
It’s the unbreakable vow with Dumbledore that would then give Dumbledore sufficient reason for trusting Snape as much as he does.
korg20000bc
06.21.06 at 10:47 pm
I don’t think it’s Dumbledore’s style to ensure someone’s loyalty by using an unbreakable vow. The unbreakable vow keeps someone true by fear of the consequences if they do break it, ie. death. In my understanding of Dumbledore he’d want and wish for someone to be true to their own concience and loyal out of love and respect and not subject to fear in their life.
Matt
Stephen J.
06.22.06 at 4:38 pm
Bear in mind that the only person to tell Harry that it takes willful sadism to make ‘Crucio’ work well is Bellatrix Lestrange, who would have (I suspect) been a sadist whether she ever learned that curse or not. It may well be that she’s convinced of this simply because she’s never used the spell herself in any other spirit.
She also has every reason to want Harry to believe he can’t do it. Harry’s inability to achieve a lasting result with Cruciatus may well have been simple inexperience with a spell he’d never done before.
Still, assuming Bellatrix is telling the truth and is right, the question is, is it possible to be sufficiently resolved upon someone’s death, for reasons *other* than personal hatred or malice, to make the Avada Kedavra curse work? Could you do it if you knew, for example, that the target of the curse *wanted* you to do it, for good reasons both you and he shared?
(My own theory on why Dumbledore trusted Snape, why Snape went back to Dumbledore after telling Voldemort about the prophecy, and why Snape is so irrational about Harry, is that Snape was in love with Lily - the only person who ever stood up for him against the Marauders, a fellow star in Potions, and the one person who is conspicuously left out of any discussions about the relationship between Snape and Harry’s family.)
Dana C.
06.27.06 at 8:38 am
Stephen J.,
I agree with you about Snape and Lily. I have suspected that for a while, too - though the love he has for her would certainly not be a silly romantic thing. One line in the book that made me stop and think is in HBP when Slughorn says something like (forgive me, I’m writing from memory here) “I have seen the power of obsessive love.” It just makes sense to me. We know Snape HATES James. We know that Snape had a role in Lily’s death, although she didn’t have to - or wasn’t “supposed” - to die, just James and Harry seem to have been the targets. If Dumbledore knew all this, it might help explain his acceptance of Snape’s agonized repentence - at least for Lily’s death if not for James’ death. It helps explain Snape’s burning hatred of Harry.
Also, it would certainly provide an opportunity for JKR to explore the different facets of love in novel 7 - a major theme in the books.
phoenix_rises
07.03.06 at 9:40 am
Dumbledore would have anticipated Snape being forced into an Unbreakable Vow in the course of proving his Death Eater loyalties, so I have no doubt that Snape’s behavior at the tower was predicated on a second vow, to Dumbledore himself.
On to the Avada Kedavra. Two possibilities I see: (1) Snape could have spoken the words, but cast another spell non-verbally. He probably has the skills to do so. However, I don’t think JKR is going to let us (or Harry) off the hook like that.
(2) Snape killed Dumbledore, on Dumbledore’s orders (the ones over which they argued in the forest). Like Judas in the recently discovered gospel, Snape reluctantly performed the act that would make Dumbledore’s phoenix-like rebirth possible. Dumbledore was weakened and injured, perhaps dying. Snape loves him and is loyal to him. He meant the words “Avada Kedavra,” but there is a world of difference between Voldemort’s murderous intent, and the strength of will to kill out of mercy, compassion, and loyalty.
Travis Prinzi
07.03.06 at 9:45 am
Hmmm…the parallel to the “Gospel of Judas” (which, of course, is another late gnostic document and not an early “gospel” at all) makes me suddenly cringe at the whole idea of Dumbledore ordering Snape to kill him…
But then again, if “stoppered death” is correct, Dumbledore was already dead. So it wouldn’t really be a parallel to the strange fictional story of the Judas gospel.
Jeremy
05.22.07 at 4:23 pm
Travis:
Would you mind deleting my last name from this post? Thanks.
Travis Prinzi
05.22.07 at 9:25 pm
Jeremy, done. Sorry - thought I had cleared this blog completely of your last name.