Snape, The Death Stopper

Good Morning!
We didn't know it at the time, but Dumbledore did.
He could not kill Voldemort because of the horcruxes.
He would have been crazy to try.
Mystery solved.

I agree with Pysduck about the whole Dumbledore not killing Voldemort thing due to Dumbledore knowing about the horcruxes.

Oh, and to argue some more against the whole Dumbledore switching places with Aberforth....where did the body that they found and burned come from? And don't say an illusion of some sort, because they felt him and the illusion wouldn't have lasted that long.

Who felt him? How and where?

=============================

I think she pretty much spells it out for us.

HP-3, page 1, "Witch burning in the fourteenth century was
completely pointless." The "...burning had no effect what-
soever. The witch or wizard would perform a basic Flame
Freezing Charm and then pretend to shriek with pain while
enjoying a gentle, tickling sensation..."

HP-2, page 207 "...when the bird burst into flames. Harry yelled in
shock and backed away... the bird, meanwhile, had become a
fireball; it gave one loud shriek and next second there was
nothing but a smoldering pile of ash on the floor... 'It's a shame
you had to see him on a burning day... phoenixes... They can
carry immensely heavy loads, their tears have healing powers,
and they make highly faithful pets.'"

HP-5, page 622 "Fawkes...swooped low over him.
Dumbledore...grasped the phoenix's long golden tail. There
was a flash of fire and the pair of them had gone."

HP-6, page 645 (At the funeral) "Bright, white flames had erupted
around Dumbledore's body and the table upon which it lay;
Higher and higher they rose, obscuring the body. White
smoke spiraled into the air and made strange shapes: Harry
thought, for one heart-stoping moment, that he saw a phoenix
fly joyfully into the blue, but next second the fire had
vanished."


HP-1, page 189, Snape helped to control Harry's bucking broomstick.

HP-3, page 181, ...when the dementors came onto the Quidditch
field, Dumbledore "...ran onto the field as you fell, waved his
wand, and you sort of slowed down before you hit the ground..."
HP-6, Page 596, "...as Dumbledore was blasted into the air. For a
split second, he seemed to hang suspended beneath the shining
skull, and then he fell slowly backward, like a great rag doll,
over the battlements and out of sight."

HP-6, page 591, "He cannot kill you if you are already dead.
Come over to the right side, Draco, and we can hide you more
completely than you can possibly imagine.

HP-1, page 213, Dumbledore said, "I don't need a cloak to become
invisible."

Oh -- I forgot --

HP-1, page 137, Snape spoke of "...the beauty of the softly
simmering cauldron with its shimmering fumes, the delicate
power of liquids that creep through human veins, bewitching
the mind, ensnaring the senses... I can teach you how to bottle
fame, brew glory, even stopper death -- If you aren't as big a bunch
of dunderheads as I usually have to teach." He also mentioned
that "...asphodel and wormwood make a sleeping potion so
powerful it is known as the Drought of Living Death. A bezoar
is a stone taken from the stomach of a goat and it will save you
from most poisons."


It's all in there. We just need to put it together.

Good Morning!
We didn't know it at the time, but Dumbledore did.
He could not kill Voldemort because of the horcruxes.
He would have been crazy to try.
Mystery solved.
[/b][/quote]
You are SO clever!! I did not put this together. Makes so much sense now you've said it.
I'll let you get on with your conversation now. Just wanted to say thankyou

This topic has given me a lot to think about. After five books I thought I had a small idea where JK was heading. Boy, was I wrong! But I've been thinking that I'm hanging on to too much sentiment... the things I wanted to happen had no relation to the story that was meant to be written. Does that make sense?
So, I sat here thinking about Dumbledore's death scene. JK was reported (somewhere, I don't remember where) as being very sad, and crying because she'd just bumped off a significant character. That's a huge thing. You don't get emotional about "pretending" to kill a character, it just doesn't happen. Therefore, Dumbledore must really have been killed off. JK meant to do it, because she'd said Harry's task must be finished alone, one on one.
But I do think there was more going on at the lightning struck tower than meets the eye. We know, because of the Unbreakable Vow, that either Snape or Malfoy had to do the deed or die. Dumbledore admitted he knew all about Malfoy's plans, had sent Snape to try and stop Malfoy.
Time and again, Dumbledore had said he doesn't fear death or dying. He's certainly intelligent enough to know there must have been numerous plots to get him even if you remove Voldemort from the whole series. I felt it was absolutely out of character for Dumbledore - at the height of climax - to plead with anyone for his life. Bear with me here... I think Dumbledore highly suspected that the horcrux could only be retrieved by two people. He would never ask anyone to give up their life to get that horcrux - he had to sacrifice himself. Back at the tower, when Snape saw Dumbledore's condition and heard his plea, it was their signal to kill Dumbledore. Dumbledore was poisoned, dying, and knew he was beyond help. BUT! It was imperative because of the Unbreakable Vow that Snape do the actual killing - that's why Dumbledore insisted that he be brought to him. Snape did actually kill Dumbledore, but was that act so terribly henious if Dumbledore was moments from certain death? And they could see a way to use his death to their advantage?
Replies welcome

Hey Ottery.
I totally agree with you and, may I say, nicely written. Great point about Jo crying as she killed Dumbledore off. That kinda clinches it for me. You gotta admit though that all these references to pheonix's and 'stopping death' is kind of inticing? Psyduck makes a great argument but I gotta agree that Dumby is dead and was killed/ sacrificed for all the reasons you gave.

Interesting question about Snape. I was certain that he was a white hat. I was sure that the argument Hagrid overheard in the forrest between Snape and Dumby, meant that Snape was on Dumby's side and was being told that he had to kill Dumby to stop anyone else doing it. Snape is like a poor Judas HAVING to play his part in order for the right outcome to happen -do you know what I mean?? BUT then I read Jo's responses to questions about Snape. She referred to us 'Snape's not bad' shippers as 'wishful thinkers'! ?????

The interview is the HBP release date interview at http://www.mugglenet.com/jkrinterview.shtml
The comment about Snape is in part one, halfway down the page. REALLY cryptic!! Very annoying. I need your help to try to figure out WHAT she's implying here
In part two she says some bizarre stuff about Dumby that i can't figure. Thoughts???

ps. hey psyduck!! keep reading this interview. In part two she talks about Reggie - really interesting stuff!! I think you particularly might enjoy it- it just might backup the reggie's alive thread

Ottery: Awesome points, and I know I can't ignore them. But there are still a ton of other clues that point to Snape being the bad guy.

Psyduck: I've already responded to points like those before. First of all, Hagrid had been the one that picked up his body. And the witch burning thing wouldn't work in this situation, mostly because there was at least a body after all those witch burnings, but with Dumbledore, there wasn't. And with the pheonix thing, I thought long and hard about that one. But maybe, since Harry's never been to the burning of a dead wizard, the wizards patronus kind of, I don't know, exalt (I guess you could say) from the body. And with Fawkes, I think we would have seen a more definite shape. It does still confuse me about why Dumbledore actually flew up into the air after Snape did the curse, because it's never been said that the bodies of the victims have ever done that before. And I understand the whole thing where he can go invisible, but it was OBVIOUS that Dumbledore was too weak to really do anything at that time because of the potion.

I rest my case. (wow, I feel like I'm in court or something....creepy.)

Okay, this one is to clarify my post from earlier. I guess everytime you think you got the thing figured out, someone'll come along with another sticky question or hitch that ruins your lovely little theory. Oh well, lol.

I suppose, if anyone asked me, I'd have to say Snape is about the cruellest character in the series, followed closely by Umbridge. But I don't think he's quite on Voldemort's level, in regards to being literally evil. The examples JK has given us of each of their childhoods don't show Snape and Voldemort as being parallel. For example, when Voldemort was told to give back his "trophies" to the children at the orphanage (back when he was still Tom) he wasn't the least bit ashamed of himself. Yet, Snape had let his humiliation boil to the surface as fast as anything (when Harry had seen him in the Pensieve after taking his OWL's). And you can't say that isn't an equal comparison because that's my whole point - Voldemort didn't allow anyone to draw an emotion from him.

I think Snape wants people to revere him and be in awe of his magical expertise. I think, way back when he started at Hogwarts, he thought people would be deeply impressed at how good he was at the Dark Arts and Potions. Instead, he got labeled as "Snivellus", the oily-haired kid, up to his eyes in the Dark Arts, and he's been fighting against that reputation ever since. That's what obsession is, that's what it does to a person - it clouds their judgement. A sensible person would've laughed off James and Sirius, washed his hair once in a while, and offered a small flag of truce by not calling Lily names when she was only trying to be nice.
Those are pretty rock solid examples of blinding, stubborn pride. Years later, Snape's pride has only intensified. Old wounds and injustices have festered, and Snape absolutely takes it out on Harry.

But Snape still wants to be the one to get all the glory, when it's all over. He's definately a double-agent, but I don't think he's decided for himself where his loyalties lie. JK likes adages and cliches, to an extent. I wouldn't be surprised if "Snape" was her interpretation of "pride cometh before a fall". Once Snape realizes -at the very end of the story - which side won (Harry or Voldemort) it'll be too late for Snape to snatch up that bit of loyalty, put it with the winning side, and take all the credit for it. He'll never get the glory he so desperately wants. His loss, aw! we'll all feel horrible about that one, Snivelly.

Replies welcome

I can't believe this. I swore to myself that I was just coming on for a minute to read and DEFINATELY not post!! Thought I'd give you'll a break from my inane - or is that insane? - ramblings for a minute. Then you seduce me. You chat tramp you!

Nice psychoanalysis ottery!

Thing that is interesting to me is that Snape really loses it when Harry calls him a traitor. I can't help but think that such outrage would not come from a guy who had just committed a murder of which he was proud or even from a guy who has just been uncovered as a master triple agent (been fooling 'em all for years). It sounds more like a reaction from a guy who has just performed yet another very difficult, brave, selfless act for which he is being given no credit -again!- and it finally gets to him. Do you know what i mean?? There's a kind of agony in his anger rather than pride or any sense of victory.