I agree -- Snape being Really The Bad Guy seems way too easy. It would make more sense if there was something else that we aren't seeing.
The argument with Dumbledore in the woods? I think Snape's intent was that if he wound up in a position where upholding the unbreakable voew meant something awful, he was willing to die for not fufilling it. It reminded me of Jesus arguing with Judas in Last Temptation of Christ.
As others have noted, Snape and Dumbledore are both accomplished at Occulemency -- what do you think was passing between them in that moment, huh?
I have two theories:
1) SNAPE=GOOD rollick is right, and the liquid Dumbledore drank was actually the Horcrux. He was asking Snape to kill him.
or
2) SNAPE=BAD EXACTLY. Dumbledore was good, but Snape was better. In that moment, Dumbledore found out that Snape was the better Occulemencer, and had been fooling him all that time.
Regardless of what side he's on, these are the actions of a man who does not expect to be alive in a year's time.
Wouldn't it be cool if Snape took the Unbreakable Vow knowing that it would kill him, just to prove his loyalty to Dumbledore?
no subject
The argument with Dumbledore in the woods? I think Snape's intent was that if he wound up in a position where upholding the unbreakable voew meant something awful, he was willing to die for not fufilling it. It reminded me of Jesus arguing with Judas in Last Temptation of Christ.
As others have noted, Snape and Dumbledore are both accomplished at Occulemency -- what do you think was passing between them in that moment, huh?
I have two theories:
1) SNAPE=GOOD
or
2) SNAPE=BAD EXACTLY. Dumbledore was good, but Snape was better. In that moment, Dumbledore found out that Snape was the better Occulemencer, and had been fooling him all that time.
Regardless of what side he's on, these are the actions of a man who does not expect to be alive in a year's time.
Wouldn't it be cool if Snape took the Unbreakable Vow knowing that it would kill him, just to prove his loyalty to Dumbledore?