Speaking of McGonagall's behavior in OoTP, wouldn't she have been more supportive of axing Trelawney if she were a servant of Voldy? I seem to recall her as protecting the nutty professor, despite her dislike of her and her subject.
That's what I remember too. Mind you, if I were trying to defend the McGonagall's a traitor theory I could go for the obverse of part of why I think Snape's behavior doens't make sense if he's evil.
Basically, if Snape truly were a spy, I'd think he would act more like Slughorn. Cultivate the famous and powerful and up and coming--seem to be friendly to all Houses rather than champion his own--seek to be beloved rather than hated. Even Crouch as Moody *acted* kind to Neville as well as Harry--it better fit his purpose.
And there's the argument in the essay that just because one's a Nazi one can still be a good parent so to speak. So that one isn't 100 percent evil all the time.
Or simply that though McGonagall would want to discredit Trelawney, she would still want her at Hogwarts where she can see her and control her.
I think what we're left with is that the evidence *for* Snape is such that it makes sense of things, but that the only reason to buy the McGonagall theory is that it can't be disproven--and it would be cool.
I know this from writing, and reading about writing. You want to kill a character, or have a character be the betrayer--it needs to be one you care about--or should be for maximum effect. So that Minerva's beloved doesn't argue against her being the traitor. In fact she's in the perfect and most effective position for her betrayal to have maximum impact.
You know, at one point there was a quote from JKR that was circulating that seemed to imply *someone* would "betray" Harry and I remember bringing it up in WIKTT Chat. All sorts of possibilities were mentioned--even wild ones we didn't want to see: Percy, Ron, Lupin, Neville, even Molly.
No one thought of McGonagall--no one. Which is part of what makes me wonder if JKR just might do it.
I do admit, it would definitely be cool if McG were the big baddy. And have maximum effect. And the question of "who will betray Harry" has been pricking at me since I heard about it. Hmmmm...
That's what I remember too. Mind you, if I were trying to defend the McGonagall's a traitor theory I could go for the obverse of part of why I think Snape's behavior doens't make sense if he's evil.
Basically, if Snape truly were a spy, I'd think he would act more like Slughorn. Cultivate the famous and powerful and up and coming--seem to be friendly to all Houses rather than champion his own--seek to be beloved rather than hated. Even Crouch as Moody *acted* kind to Neville as well as Harry--it better fit his purpose.
And there's the argument in the essay that just because one's a Nazi one can still be a good parent so to speak. So that one isn't 100 percent evil all the time.
Or simply that though McGonagall would want to discredit Trelawney, she would still want her at Hogwarts where she can see her and control her.
I think what we're left with is that the evidence *for* Snape is such that it makes sense of things, but that the only reason to buy the McGonagall theory is that it can't be disproven--and it would be cool.
I know this from writing, and reading about writing. You want to kill a character, or have a character be the betrayer--it needs to be one you care about--or should be for maximum effect. So that Minerva's beloved doesn't argue against her being the traitor. In fact she's in the perfect and most effective position for her betrayal to have maximum impact.
You know, at one point there was a quote from JKR that was circulating that seemed to imply *someone* would "betray" Harry and I remember bringing it up in WIKTT Chat. All sorts of possibilities were mentioned--even wild ones we didn't want to see: Percy, Ron, Lupin, Neville, even Molly.
No one thought of McGonagall--no one. Which is part of what makes me wonder if JKR just might do it.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment