Snape

[HoopyFrood]

I'd think that the Harry Potter books are aimed more for children who are past the idea of straight forward good and evil. Besides I think that's clearly set out with Voldemort, ultimate evil (shown clearly in his aversion to love) and the good guys like Dumbledore. Therefore that leaves room for an ambiguous character like Snape. At the very least it's certainly made a long running conversation topic just trying to work out whether he is good or bad. I'd like to think that in the end he'll be a bit of both...I wouldn't want him to suddenly become this shining figure of niceness...although I doubt that would happen, the way he's acted in all the previous books! But what I mean is I wouldn't want some kind of soppy moment between him and Harry, after all these years of the fantastic tension between them both.

[sanityassassin]

personally I think Snape is just weak. I think once he got away from V he needed protection and who better than Dumbledore to protect him and when V comes back Snape goes running back (eventually) to V who he sees as the stongest wizard which is typical of a small bully which I think Snape is.

[PTeppic]

I'm still with the equally traditional literary plot of having "good pretending to be bad"... but I'm kind of a romanticist and ever hopeful.

[BookStop]

Come on, people! Snape is a jerk, but that doesn't make him evil. Ok, so he killed the grandfatherly old wizard who was the only one strong enough to save the wizarding world. I'm sure he had a perfectly good reason. Remember in book 1 when he saved Harry's life (until Hermione mistook what he was doing and set his robes on fire). Snape had no idea V was even back, so it's not like he was trying to save Harry so V could have him later. Think, all he had to do was not help. Nobody would've been the wiser.

[carrie221]

Originally Posted by BookStop

Come on, people! Snape is a jerk, but that doesn't make him evil. Ok, so he killed the grandfatherly old wizard who was the only one strong enough to save the wizarding world. I'm sure he had a perfectly good reason. Remember in book 1 when he saved Harry's life (until Hermione mistook what he was doing and set his robes on fire). Snape had no idea V was even back, so it's not like he was trying to save Harry so V could have him later. Think, all he had to do was not help. Nobody would've been the wiser.

Very, very good point

[keeron_man_boy]

snape is a good bloke...

now its been some tiem since ive read this book.. so please dont go flamming me :P

the whole begging thing...

remember when harry caught dumbledore and snape arguing about something in the forbidden forest?? i believe dumblesore needed snapes promise that if anything happens to kill him.. or something like that.
so dumbledore begs snape to kill him..

why did snape attack flitwick?? acting on dumbledores orders so that no one gets hurt... or maybe it was his choice to try and get out of there with out hurting anyone.. hmmm


it seemed clear when harry took chase after snape on the oval, that snape was hintin to harry to practise his occlumency.
snape was using locclumency to read harry mind and was able to flick away his attacks before he could complete the spell...

hmmm thats all i got.. cant remember anything else.. maybe i shoul read it again

[YoYo]

Originally Posted by BookStop

Come on, people! Snape is a jerk, but that doesn't make him evil. Ok, so he killed the grandfatherly old wizard who was the only one strong enough to save the wizarding world. I'm sure he had a perfectly good reason. Remember in book 1 when he saved Harry's life (until Hermione mistook what he was doing and set his robes on fire). Snape had no idea V was even back, so it's not like he was trying to save Harry so V could have him later. Think, all he had to do was not help. Nobody would've been the wiser.

I like your point and I tend to agree with you because he's always been my favourite character. Just that kill at the end of HbP is troubling me (not as much as it troubled Dumbledore, though) and I still haven't heard an admissible explanation... anyway... people, stop investigating, make some popcorn and wait until book 7 release...

[Sharkey]

I think part of the reason why people have trouble accepting Snape as a good guy and as a bad guy was because of how evil killing Dumbledore was. Surely he can't be good, but at the same time Dumbledore had to have died with purpise, so this makes think Snape is playing sides. I think he is still good.

[Digger]

I agree that Dumbledore sacrificed himself to save Harry. He might not have known who it was that was about to burst through the door at the top of the Tower, but he would have known they were an enemy of both him and Harry. That must be why he put the Freezing Charm on Harry, so that he was prevented from being involved in whatever happened next. Harry would never have accepted being asked or ordered to just keep quiet and out of trouble, even if Dumbledore had the chance!

If things had gone well then he would have just unfreezed (?unfrozen?) Harry when the danger was past - but if he knew he would have to die, he would have had to make certain Harry would be safe.....

[The Pelagic Argosy]

I think the best evidence for the "Snape is good" theory is that Dumbledore had always said he trusted him.

Case closed.

[Digger]

I've seen some suggestions that Snape is really RAB, aka Regulus. For a host of reasons, I can't see how Snape and Regulus could be the same person, but I can see how Snape and Regulus could have been friends (of the type and intensity that James & Sirius were friends). If Regulus was older than Sirius, I think the ages / dates would match (especially because I don't think you can assume that people who were in the same year at Hogwarts are necessarily the same age!!).

Such a friendship could explain how Regulus was indoctrinated into the Voldemort camp, and why James and Sirius despised Snape so much (ie, if he influenced Regulus into taking a path which led to his downfall). The impression of Regulus which we get from Sirius implies he was easily led, and we already know that the Black family (with the notable exception of my hero Sirius!!!) were Dark Wizards............

[CatKid]

i disagree totally
i think things would be getting a bit far-fetched if Snappe turned out to be regulus
for one thing, why would he have stolen the horcrux.. we know that snape is voldemorts most loyal, it says so witht he convo between him bellatrix and narcissa in book 6.
my opinions of course, but i'd be very surprised if thats who it is, i think it;s the unnamed large blonde death eater..

[HoopyFrood]

Yes, that seems to be the idea being thrown around at the moment. I very. very much doubt that Snape is Reg. But the blonde deatheater...perhaps.
Reg may not even be alive...we aren't told how old the note actually is (I don't think...I haven't got HP on hand to check) and Sirius did say he was killed by Voldemort...but hey, this is Harry Potter we're talking about, a small thing like apparently being killed isn't going to stop someone from reappearing in the story if they want to

[CatKid]

i guess
anything can happen
but i doubt very much that she would be so far fetched

[Digger]

I thought Sirius said he doubted whether Regulus was important enough to have been killed by Voldemort personally? We don't know when this supposedly happened, but if it was at the time that the Death Eaters were slaughtering people left right and centre, then it's entirely plausible that he isn't dead at all! Sirius can't have known how close Regulus was to Voldemort (in terms of knowing about the Horcruxes and even finding one), so it follows that he also might not have known he wasn't dead - especially if at the time Sirius was a bit preoccupied by being in Azkaban......