feeling better today
Apr. 6th, 2005 02:14 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
gmonkey42I don't know anything more about what's going to happen with my job but I feel better today anyway because:
1. I sent in my tax returns
2. the sale of my house is set to close on Friday and there's nothing further I have to do
3. we had lab meeting today and I got permission to buy something that I need.
4. it's nice and sunny out
5. I have a burrito
I thought of something else with the whole Knight to King thing (which JKR recently debunked) that, in hindsight, make it look pretty implausible (I never heard about it until today so just pretend I said all this stuff before JKR said the theory was wrong):
Dumbledore has a brother. If Ron would have gone back in time, where would Alberforth have come from? Maybe there was an Albus Dumbledore and Ron went back in time and murdered him and assumed his identity. Seriously, though, this, like the Changeling hypothesis, just doesn't make sense to me. Ron and Dumbledore seem to have very different personalities, more different than even 130-odd years would account for. And why would Ron, finding himself stranded in the 19th century in his late teens, assume a new identity at all, let alone the identity of his headmaster who, as far as he knew, was not in fact himself. You know? People put so much effort into looking for clues in the narrative that they seem to forget about the characters being human beings who have to have motivation for their actions.
Also, memo to North Tower: if Voldemort believed that Snape was trying to get the Sorcerer's Stone for himself then he'd want Snape dead just as much as he'd want Snape dead for trying to protect the Stone. The same goes for Snape saving Harry. Voldemort can't have believed that Snape had any valid reason for preventing Harry's death when Harry's death would have been in Voldemort's best interest. See, this is what I'm talking about. Clues are fine but a theory isn't going to hold up if it insists on the characters behaving in a way that isn't consistent. They can behave irrationally if they're irrational people but they aren't going to behave in a way that doesn't fit with who they are. We don't know whether Snape knew all along that Quirrel was posessed or even that he was working for Voldemort. But at that point, Voldemort wanted Harry dead and he had to assume that Snape would know that. It wasn't until later that Voldemort decided to try plan B and use Harry to get the prophecy. Therefore, Voldemort would have to be pissed off at Snape for preventing Harry's death. You know what'd happen? It would go like this:
Voldemort: "Why did you save Potter?!"
Snape: "I had to or else Dumbledore wouldn't have trusted me and I wouldn't have been able to continue spying on him for you. Uh, even though he trusts all the other teachers and none of them tried to save Potter..."
Voldemort: "You suck at spying." (kills Snape)
See?
The other argument I've heard put forth to justify the Snape's-a-double-double-double-agent hypothesis is that Snape kept Harry alive so Harry could get the prophecy for Voldemort. Except that wouldn't work either because Voldemort himself wanted Harry dead in book 1 and he wouldn't care if Snape thought he had a better idea:
Voldemort: "Why did you save Potter?!"
Snape: "So he could get the prophecy for you. I just assumed that's what you would have wanted, my lord."
Voldemort: "No, dumb-ass, I wanted him dead, that's why I was trying to kill him." (kills Snape)
Anyway, the fact that Voldemort in Quirrel's body didn't try to recruit Snape to help him means Voldemort didn't completely trust Snape to begin with. Snape's actions throughout the year would only have made Voldemort trust him less.
Everyone's making the whole Death Eater!Snape thing way too complicated. Yes, it's possible that the three people Voldemort referred to in GoF were three completely different people and he wasn't talking about Snape, Crouch Jr. or Karkaroff. And it's possible that Snape was present in the graveyard and that being on nobody's side but his own means standing there like a moron doing nothing either way while Voldemort tries to kill Harry. But I don't see Snape being like that. He acts behind the scenes, often outside of Harry's awareness but he does act. Standing around trying to be on everyone and no-one's side at the same time, passively waiting to see how everything pans out isn't Snape's style. How do we explain what he did at the end of OotP in that context? How he went looking for Harry and when he couldn't find him, figured out what was happening and alerted the rest of the Order? If he didn't care who won, you'd think he'd prefer a quick resolution and therefore he'd let Harry and his friends go to the Ministry undefended and wait for Voldemort to kill him so Snape could settle down and stop having to worry about all the double agent crap. If Dumbledore and the other Order members hadn't been there, Harry definitely would've died that night. One can't argue that Snape warned the others out of a desire to stay in Dumbledore's good graces, when it would've been so much easier for Snape to let Harry die, effectively ending the war with Voldemort the winner.
In conclusion: Voldemort knows that Snape is working for Dumbledore and Snape and Dumbledore know that Voldemort knows. That's why I think an undercover mission like we've all imagined is unlikely. Voldemort wouldn't tell Snape anything important and he'd only keep Snape alive as long as he found Snape useful, which might not be terribly long. An alternative is that Snape is in contact with other Death Eaters like Lucius but not with Voldemort himself. I can't see Snape going to the usual Death Eater meetings. No good would come of it and he'd probably wind up dead.
Man, the vampire thing made so much sense as an alternative. Oh well.
This calls for an update to my theory page. I'm thinking like a major rewrite. Not that I believe I have anything badly wrong (except the vampire thing. *sigh*) but I'd like to add a lot. On top of everything else I have planned for the site.
1. I sent in my tax returns
2. the sale of my house is set to close on Friday and there's nothing further I have to do
3. we had lab meeting today and I got permission to buy something that I need.
4. it's nice and sunny out
5. I have a burrito
I thought of something else with the whole Knight to King thing (which JKR recently debunked) that, in hindsight, make it look pretty implausible (I never heard about it until today so just pretend I said all this stuff before JKR said the theory was wrong):
Dumbledore has a brother. If Ron would have gone back in time, where would Alberforth have come from? Maybe there was an Albus Dumbledore and Ron went back in time and murdered him and assumed his identity. Seriously, though, this, like the Changeling hypothesis, just doesn't make sense to me. Ron and Dumbledore seem to have very different personalities, more different than even 130-odd years would account for. And why would Ron, finding himself stranded in the 19th century in his late teens, assume a new identity at all, let alone the identity of his headmaster who, as far as he knew, was not in fact himself. You know? People put so much effort into looking for clues in the narrative that they seem to forget about the characters being human beings who have to have motivation for their actions.
Also, memo to North Tower: if Voldemort believed that Snape was trying to get the Sorcerer's Stone for himself then he'd want Snape dead just as much as he'd want Snape dead for trying to protect the Stone. The same goes for Snape saving Harry. Voldemort can't have believed that Snape had any valid reason for preventing Harry's death when Harry's death would have been in Voldemort's best interest. See, this is what I'm talking about. Clues are fine but a theory isn't going to hold up if it insists on the characters behaving in a way that isn't consistent. They can behave irrationally if they're irrational people but they aren't going to behave in a way that doesn't fit with who they are. We don't know whether Snape knew all along that Quirrel was posessed or even that he was working for Voldemort. But at that point, Voldemort wanted Harry dead and he had to assume that Snape would know that. It wasn't until later that Voldemort decided to try plan B and use Harry to get the prophecy. Therefore, Voldemort would have to be pissed off at Snape for preventing Harry's death. You know what'd happen? It would go like this:
Voldemort: "Why did you save Potter?!"
Snape: "I had to or else Dumbledore wouldn't have trusted me and I wouldn't have been able to continue spying on him for you. Uh, even though he trusts all the other teachers and none of them tried to save Potter..."
Voldemort: "You suck at spying." (kills Snape)
See?
The other argument I've heard put forth to justify the Snape's-a-double-double-double-agent hypothesis is that Snape kept Harry alive so Harry could get the prophecy for Voldemort. Except that wouldn't work either because Voldemort himself wanted Harry dead in book 1 and he wouldn't care if Snape thought he had a better idea:
Voldemort: "Why did you save Potter?!"
Snape: "So he could get the prophecy for you. I just assumed that's what you would have wanted, my lord."
Voldemort: "No, dumb-ass, I wanted him dead, that's why I was trying to kill him." (kills Snape)
Anyway, the fact that Voldemort in Quirrel's body didn't try to recruit Snape to help him means Voldemort didn't completely trust Snape to begin with. Snape's actions throughout the year would only have made Voldemort trust him less.
Everyone's making the whole Death Eater!Snape thing way too complicated. Yes, it's possible that the three people Voldemort referred to in GoF were three completely different people and he wasn't talking about Snape, Crouch Jr. or Karkaroff. And it's possible that Snape was present in the graveyard and that being on nobody's side but his own means standing there like a moron doing nothing either way while Voldemort tries to kill Harry. But I don't see Snape being like that. He acts behind the scenes, often outside of Harry's awareness but he does act. Standing around trying to be on everyone and no-one's side at the same time, passively waiting to see how everything pans out isn't Snape's style. How do we explain what he did at the end of OotP in that context? How he went looking for Harry and when he couldn't find him, figured out what was happening and alerted the rest of the Order? If he didn't care who won, you'd think he'd prefer a quick resolution and therefore he'd let Harry and his friends go to the Ministry undefended and wait for Voldemort to kill him so Snape could settle down and stop having to worry about all the double agent crap. If Dumbledore and the other Order members hadn't been there, Harry definitely would've died that night. One can't argue that Snape warned the others out of a desire to stay in Dumbledore's good graces, when it would've been so much easier for Snape to let Harry die, effectively ending the war with Voldemort the winner.
In conclusion: Voldemort knows that Snape is working for Dumbledore and Snape and Dumbledore know that Voldemort knows. That's why I think an undercover mission like we've all imagined is unlikely. Voldemort wouldn't tell Snape anything important and he'd only keep Snape alive as long as he found Snape useful, which might not be terribly long. An alternative is that Snape is in contact with other Death Eaters like Lucius but not with Voldemort himself. I can't see Snape going to the usual Death Eater meetings. No good would come of it and he'd probably wind up dead.
Man, the vampire thing made so much sense as an alternative. Oh well.
This calls for an update to my theory page. I'm thinking like a major rewrite. Not that I believe I have anything badly wrong (except the vampire thing. *sigh*) but I'd like to add a lot. On top of everything else I have planned for the site.
