HPLF WX Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Severus Snape

Page 9 of 19 Previous  1 ... 6 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 14 ... 19  Next

Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 2781 to 2820

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 5:19 am


Solitaire - Jul 17, 2006 9:26 am (#2781 of 2969)
Edited Jul 17, 2006 10:40 am
Since this is not a thread about Emma, I hate to pursue this too far. I do feel, however, that just because this particular critic feels the reader is being lead toward a specific but invalid conclusion does not mean every reader of Austen must agree. Mr. George Knightley was, from the very beginning, my "voice of reason" throughout the novel. Even his brother, John Knightley, provides interesting insight into Elton's behavior, which Emma completely misinterprets. If one pays close attention to the Knightley brothers' comments, there are many, many clues throughout the book that things are not what they appear to be. Such clues are apparently there, too, for the discerning HP readers. I know a few people who are able to pick up on clues too obscure for many of us to see.

Where I will agree that Harry is like Emma is that he takes up an idea--in his case, the idea that Snape is evil--and makes everything that happens bend to it. Now, I am not saying that Harry is wrong, as Emma was wrong. He may well be right (I distrust Snape, as well). I agree, however, that when he cuts off all discussion of other possible interpretations of Snape's behavior--which Snape himself shows us are possible in "Spinner's End"--he limits his scope considerably.

I also agree with Catherine--Harry's feelings about Snape are legitimate. They are his feelings, and I believe it must be acknowledged that Snape's treatment of Harry throughout the series has not been calculated to engender trust. And even if, in the end, Snape proves to be Dumbledore's man through and through, I agree he is still a nasty piece of work. JM2K, of course ...

Solitaire
edited


Magic Words - Jul 17, 2006 10:14 am (#2782 of 2969)
We only see what Harry sees, and we fall into many of the same traps Harry does. --Wynnleaf

Actually, as I said in my previous post, we DO see things that Harry does not see. -Catherine

This is true. However, I think Wynnleaf's point still stands, because of her distinction between Harry and the Harry-centric narrator. The things we do see, e.g. Spinner's End, are carefully choreographed so that they easily fall in line with all the things Harry sees. JKR uses "omniscient narrator" scenes the same way she uses Harry-centric scenes, to guide us towards the same conclusions. I do think it interesting that Spinner's End has no point-of-view character. We don't see Snape's thoughts or anyone else's.

By the way, I'm not saying viewing Snape as nasty is a trap. He is nasty. I do think the trap is viewing him as evil, as Harry does.


Honour - Jul 17, 2006 2:30 pm (#2783 of 2969)
"By the way, I'm not saying viewing Snape as nasty is a trap. He is nasty. I do think the trap is viewing him as evil, as Harry does." - Magic Words

Very well put Magic Words.


Dane Hardy - Jul 17, 2006 2:38 pm (#2784 of 2969)
Wow, almost 3000 posts to read. I did a quick search but I didn't see this question so I'll ask it. If Severus was a known DE why didn't LV have Quirrell go to him for help in SS. The fact that he stood in Quirrell's way suggests that he may be DDM. Has this already been discussed?


Catherine - Jul 17, 2006 3:30 pm (#2785 of 2969)
The fact that he stood in Quirrell's way suggests that he may be DDM.

Please spell out DDM. I'm not sure what that means!


Solitaire - Jul 17, 2006 3:56 pm (#2786 of 2969)
I think DDM means Dumbledore's Man ... I believe it popped up on the "controversy" thread, up above the chat thread.


Magic Words - Jul 17, 2006 4:57 pm (#2787 of 2969)
Yes, DDM is Dumbledore's Man.

Voldemort may have suspected Snape's loyalty from the start, seeing him comfortably ensconced at Hogwarts taking orders from Dumbledore. Snape was yet another death eater who hadn't bothered to look for Voldemort once he vanished.


Ann - Jul 17, 2006 7:53 pm (#2788 of 2969)
Snape explains that in the Spinner's End chapter--Voldemort knew that Snape had been supported by Dumbledore and thought it would be dangerous (in his then weakened state) to approach. Snape says, since he didn't know Quirrell was trying to get the stone for Voldemort, he opposed his attempts to do so. He says quite explicitly that if Voldemort had trusted him, he would have got the stone and come back two years earlier. Of course, he's telling all this to Bella, and many of us think he was probably lying about his own loyalties and his reasons for his actions (I think he and Dumbledore were quite aware of who was under that turban), but there's no question about Voldemort's motivation.


rambkowalczyk - Jul 19, 2006 1:45 pm (#2789 of 2969)
Why Voldemort didn't have Quirrel ask Snape for help.

I don't think Voldemort trusted the other Death Eaters, (Snape, Malfoy, etc) because they didn't seek him out. He expected the Death Eaters to act as he would which would be to kick a person when down.


Die Zimtzicke - Jul 20, 2006 7:57 am (#2790 of 2969)
Yes, Voldemort was very leery of the followers that he felt never tried to help him or find him.

Potter Ace - Jul 20, 2006 9:04 am (#2791 of 2969)
I think we are looking at the relationship between Snape and LV incorrectly. If it were me and I had a spy in my enemies midst, the last thing I would have done is told anybody about it. The other DE's know that Snape was able to avoid Azkaban because of DD but knew nothing of LV's orders. Having too many people in on the secret tends to lead to it becoming known.

Given this thought, I would think that LV trusts Snape more than any other DE. Surely he has seen how far Snape has gotten into the inner circle of DD and is most likely pleased. LV never asked Quirrel to seeks Snapes' help because he had a mission of higher priority. He probably also thought that with his help, even a bumbling wizard like Quirrel could get the stone.


haymoni - Jul 20, 2006 9:06 am (#2792 of 2969)
Snape says that Voldy told him to take the position.

If we are to believe him, then Voldy could have thought that Snape had enough on his plate.


Vulture - Jul 20, 2006 1:54 pm (#2793 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2006 3:10 pm
I think he and Dumbledore were quite aware of who was under that turban (Ann Jul 17, 2006 8:53 pm (#2788))

This reminds me _ one thing I've never seen explained is why Harry's scar went nuts that very first time when Snape looked at him in Book 1, at the start-of-term feast. Presumably it means (to quote a different context from Tolkien) that "the Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him", but why the exact moment that Snape looked at him ? The only thing I can think of is that Voldemort/Quirrell was able to do Legilimency on Snape and suddenly sensed his hostility to that face resembling James Potter. But surely, given Snape's Occlumency ability, Voldemort's weakness, and what we've always assumed to be Quirrell's lesser abilities, this makes no sense. So what is the answer ?

I know Snape appears to favor Draco, but I often wonder if this is not in conjunction with his spy job - he tries to impress Lucius and stay close to him by favoring his son - that way he is in with Lucius and can gain insider information from him. (Choices Jul 15, 2006 1:22 pm (#2761))

Well, oddly enough, on this one I rather favour Snape. I've no real proof as such _ it's just a feeling from watching the interplay of characters. I'm not saying that Snape would normally (i.e. without an Unbreakable Vow breathing down his neck) take huge risks for Draco _ he might, but we don't have clinching evidence either way. But I think that at those moments when he's not scheming, plotting and calculating ( whomsoever he's doing that for ), Draco is one of the few people he can be bothered to actually like , in an ordinary human way. I'm reminded of Heathcliff in "Wuthering Heights", who admits _ despite his thirst for revenge against the young man as representative of his family _ that he actually likes Hareton Earnshaw on a personal level. (Not that I'm saying that Snape is trying to ruin Draco _ it's not the same situation.)

(Mind you, I do think you're right in thinking that Snape has a whole agenda about keeping in with Lucius _ so yes, he would cultivate Draco's regard anyway.)

I agree that Snape is not a fair teacher, but that was not the point of my post. What I was trying to point out was that over and over, regardless of what Snape does, even on the many occasions when his actions or punishments are not unfair, the narration is written as though they are unfair, or the students comment on it as though it's unfair. I believe that it's written that way because JKR wants us to only see Snape's actions through the pov of "everything he does is mean or unfair," and she also wants the students to only be viewing Snape that way. (wynnleaf Jul 16, 2006 7:35 am (#2764))

I don't think that's quite true, at least as far as how we view Snape is concerned. I would agree that, for most of Book 1, that's how we see Snape, because it's all designed to throw us at the end when Quirrell turns out to be the villain and Snape is revealed as having tried to save Harry. Harry doesn't react with disbelief to that information _ I felt that he was as open-minded as could be expected about Snape from the time of learning that Snape tried to save him to when Snape catches his eye at the feast "and Harry knew at once that Snape's feelings towards him hadn't changed one jot".

With regard to the Quidditch book incident, I don't think any presentation is needed to make Snape look petty in the situation. Think about it _ if the rule really exists, then surely the point of it is to prevent Library books getting outside school grounds , not a couple of yards outside the castle door when the student concerned is quite clearly on a break and about to return to class with the book. Once again, you've only to ask yourself how Snape would have acted if it had been Draco with the book _ be honest, what do you think ?

After Book 1, I don't agree that the narratives make out that "everything he does is mean or unfair": that's not just because of my own view of Snape, but because each book has its own individual mood, and, as it happens, this shows particularly in how each book treats Snape. So he comes across differently in each one _ yes, Harry dislikes him in all of them, but this isn't as important as you think. In fact, for most of the time, it isn't as important to Harry as you and other pro-Snape people think.

So then, each Book has a different approach to Snape _ or perhaps more accurately, a different tone.

In Book 2, I would say that most of its treatment of Snape has a slight tinge of black comedy about it _ certainly, most of what he did in Book 2 amused me. For example, in that very first flying car incident, I don't think I was the only one to smile wryly as Harry and Ron's own words walked them into a trap:

"Maybe he's left !! I mean, everyone hates him !!" "And maybe", said a cold voice behind them, "he's waiting to hear why you two didn't arrive on the train".

Later, when Draco magicks a snake out of his wand, Snape amuses himself (and us) by saying "Don't worry, Potter; I'll get rid of it" and moving extremely lazily. (Indeed, over six books, I've noticed that the words "Snape" and "lazily" occurring together is usually a prelude to something amusing (except in his last Book 6 fight with Harry).)

In the duel with Lockhart, the foolish Gilderoy says "Neither of us will be trying to kill, of course". "'I wouldn't bet on that' said Harry, watching Snape baring his teeth" _ I don't think the effect is to turn us against Snape: I think that whole scene is amusing, and that we're all delighted when he blasts the clown Lockhart off the stage.

Admittedly, there is that one scene where Snape puts Our Trio on the spot publicly about being near Filch's cat _ but as he tries to use it to prevent Harry playing Quidditch (which even the ultra-strict McGonagall regards as ridiculous), I think his own words backfire on him somewhat.

Then, finally, his role in the staff room scene (when we hear Ginny has been taken by the monster) show him in a very positive light, if not a joint leading role with McGonagall. He grips the chair hard when he hears that a student has been taken _ in neither the Lexicon or any of the books have I seen any reason to see this at other than face value. Then there is his denunciation of Gilderoy, channelling how the teachers feel and how we feel. Now _ being honest about this latter point _ later books are bound to make us wonder if his motive was simply his desire for Gilderoy's job, but that didn't occur to me at the time (I didn't think of Quirrell at that point _ maybe some of ye did ?).

So overall, I think what we see of Snape in Book 2 is an intriguing, amusing and not unfair way of looking at him. A lot of it is not meant to be taken seriously, I feel.

(Continued in next post ...)


Vulture - Jul 20, 2006 1:56 pm (#2794 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2006 3:18 pm
(... continued)

In the Book 3 werewolf class scene that you mention, you forget the key point of the scene _ which is sensed, but not known, at the time: that Snape is simply there to do the dirty on Lupin and wave a big "WEREWOLF !!" flag. Incidentally, it's interesting to reflect for a moment that what Snape does here, covertly, with Gryffindors, he later does openly with Slytherins. Gryffindor, as it were, avoids the bait fashioned for Lupin's downfall whereas Slytherin accepts it. And what is it that hides what Snape is doing from most of the Gryffindors' eyes, and that causes the one Gryffindor who does see to refuse what Snape offers ? Why, love, of course _ the only power that protects against evil, as Dumbledore might say.

The students (particularly Harry) sense that Snape dislikes Lupin (we know this from Snape's glare at the start-of-year feast), and are extremely on edge when he suddenly turns up to teach Lupin's class. Then there is the fact that Lupin is a well-loved teacher whose methods have brought out the best in his students _ anyone knows that this establishes a constructive routine which students hate having disrupted _ particularly by a teacher who's practically the complete opposite. Add in (a) the fact that Gryffindors don't like Snape anyway, and (b) that he deliberately provokes them by turning to a chapter he knows they haven't done and jeering them ( and their teacher _ which is just not on, in any school worth the name) _ well, nothing that results is a major surprise to me, or unfair to Snape. (And Snape himself doesn't care, because we later realise that the class itself is not what he's there for.)

(I've seen allegations that what Snape says about Lupin is just tit-for-tat after Neville's Boggart turned out to be Snape _ but this won't wash. What Lupin does _ if we can even say he , rather than Neville, does it _ to Snape is equivalent to what Dumbledore later tries to do to him: get him to wear a silly hat. (See how things connect, in JKR's better books ?) Lupin never tries to undermine Snape's teaching reputation _ if I recall correctly, he sticks to Dumbledore's rule that Snape should be called "Professor Snape" by the students. Snape, on the other hand, explicitly attacks Lupin's reputation as a teacher. In short, there is an edge of malice to Snape's approach to Lupin which is not present in Lupin's to him.)

In all this, it is not Book 3 which sets out to make Snape seem unfair _ Snape does it to himself. How different it all would have been if he could have found within himself that which could have worn that silly Christmas hat. But overall, I would say that the main point of Book 3 as regards Snape is not to cast him as The Enemy, but to make us curious about his past and what it has to do with Harry's dad. Mind you, I ought to point out that we go for much of Book 3 without thinking about Snape at all. But when we do, I feel that, until the Shrieking Shack confrontation, we are prepared to give him some benefit of the doubt _ we're curious about James saving his life, and about Snape's allegation that James was only saving his own skin and did not deserve gratitude. (I suppose that last point also makes us wonder, at the back of our minds, how right or wrong Dumbledore was in Book 1 about this incident.)

It's true that we do see Snape in a bad light at the end, but this is because he let his own hatred make him try to deny justice to Sirius. At this point, I can't help thinking of something C.S. Lewis wrote: "Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one's first feeling, 'Thank God, even they aren't quite so bad as that', or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies as bad as possible ? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which will make us into devils."

In the end, though, I think Book 3 makes us feel a certain pity for Snape rather than dislike. In fact, Book 3 as a whole is so raw and emotional, full of rage and sorrow over family ties and bonds of friendship, that Snape is far from being the only one we feel this about.

For most of Book 4, I suppose I can't disagree that we see Snape largely as Harry does, but again, this is tinged with curiosity about his past _ this time, his connection with Karkaroff. Then, near the end, we're introduced to a debate that has become familiar: his spy role, which side he is on, etc.

I think Book 5 is probably the most sympathetic to Snape of all the books. It leans very heavily towards the feeling that Snape is on the good side, and thus we stop the whole "which hat is he wearing" stuff, and start looking more deeply into his inner nature. In fact, apart from the mystery of the prophecy, in Book 5 JKR seems to have stopped trying to pull the wool over our eyes, which was enjoyable in Books 1 (Snape-Quirrell) and 3 (Sirius-Peter), but which has become a bit of a bore. Book 5 really looked as if it was developing beyond the whizz-bang conjuring trick mysteries, and its treatment of Snape is part and parcel of this. The Snape Pensive scene teaches Harry _ well, a lot of things, actually, but briefly, that actual hatred (of Snape or anyone else) is not what he wants. At no point is he able to even feel tempted to enjoy Snape's humiliation (aghast at his own new attitude to James, he tries to feel tempted and can't). In this, by the way, Harry is, I feel, better than most of us _ at least, I know he's better than me !!

Anyway, as a result of this incident, we watch Snape with more careful eyes _ not for clues about this silly which-side-is-he-on thing (which seems resolved) but for his inner personality. Every stare, every moment, becomes weighted with significance. Incidentally, in this we are taking a different line from Harry himself _ yet by Book 5's design.

"Spinner's End" is yet another development in how we see Snape _ I don't think it makes us view him negatively: in fact, from the way people in here talk about that chapter, I know it doesn't. Briefly, I feel that, influenced by our view from Book 5, our reactions are to smile wryly (at his outplaying of Bellatrix at mental chess) and be intrigued (at the details of the case for Death Eater Snape, as put by Snape himself). Then, with the Vow, I think we end with a question in our minds as to whether Snape has got in over his head _ whether, in fact, the cunning Spinner has met the End of his spinning.

But unfortunately, Book 6 flips back to a more surface, Snape-versus-Harry, tone from the moment Harry arrives back at Hogwarts. We go back to the "which side is he on" business too, which looks superficial after Book 5's moving beyond it. For much of the rest of the book, Snape doesn't appear that much, which is a bit of luck for his characterisation, if Book 6's mangling of the ones who do appear is anything to go by.

Finally, there is Snape's arrival on the Tower and the Avada Kedavra on Dumbledore. Oddly, it is the moment of his arrival, not his AK on Dumbledore, that provides the strongest writing of that scene. Thereafter, if anyone thinks that Book 6 is trying to present Snape in an undeservedly bad light, all I can say is that several active threads on this Lexicon prove that it certainly hasn't succeeded.

(Continued ...)


Vulture - Jul 20, 2006 1:59 pm (#2795 of 2969)
(... continued)

Well, sorry to go on so long _ ideas kept sprouting as I went from Book to Book. My basic point is that it's too simplistic to say that the narration is written as though all Snape's actions are unfair. In fact, if the narration really was like that, I don't think there would be so many debates and arguments about him. I think our feelings about Snape develop something like this:

Book 1 _ suspicion and hostility, followed (and replaced) by surprise and a little bit of hope.

Book 2 _ mostly amusement, and at the end, agreement with him.

Book 3 _ conflicting feelings (in a book that is a storm of them), but in the end, pity.

Book 4 _ curiosity, mystery, a little suspicion.

Book 5 _ empathy and identification with him.

Book 6 _ I don't think Book 6 is as well-written as the others, so you can fill this bit in yourselves !!


Mrs Brisbee - Jul 20, 2006 7:38 pm (#2796 of 2969)
Edited Jul 20, 2006 8:40 pm
Vulture, where do you find the time to write your posts?

I have to agree that Snape is presented differently in each book. And I know a lot has been made of the so-called Harry Filter, but I was aware that most of the scenes were written from Harry's perspective from the first, and just in case any readers missed that point then they should have gotten it by the end of PS/SS when Quirrel and not Snape is revealed to be the Bad Guy.. That hasn't stopped me from disliking Snape, or thinking him an unfair jerk and horrible teacher. Just because Harry is seeing something or thinking something doesn't make it illegitimate.

To tell you the truth, I'm often laughing at Harry and his preconceptions. Harry's my favorite character because I can get in his head. He's entertaining. Sometimes he jumps to the wrong conclusions. Sometimes he is right. But usually I can see how he got from point A to point B, and I don't feel misled at all, and I may have gotten somewhere else all on my own.

We don't get to see into Snape's head. We actually know very little about him. I think he's been presented as an interesting enigma, but as a character I actually find him a bit boring. I think book 5 did the best give him a bit of character development. The more I know about a character, the more they are fleshed out, the more I tend to like them. He might be more interesting retrospect, because surely in book 7 Rowling will have to explain what makes him tick.


journeymom - Jul 21, 2006 7:55 am (#2797 of 2969)
"This reminds me _ one thing I've never seen explained is why Harry's scar went nuts that very first time when Snape looked at him in Book 1, at the start-of-term feast. Presumably it means (to quote a different context from Tolkien) that "the Dark Lord was suddenly aware of him", but why the exact moment that Snape looked at him ?"

Vulture, I believe that Harry simply misunderstood who the vibes were coming from. I hope I don't have movie contamination here, but Snape and Quirrell were sitting next to each other, Snape facing Harry, Quirrell away from Harry. So the back of Quirrell's head was faced out, and of course manky old Moldymort was under there. Because of Quirrell's proximity to Snape, Harry thought Snape was making his scar tingle.


Solitaire - Jul 21, 2006 9:26 am (#2798 of 2969)
Journeymom, that is exactly what I've always thought. It was just a coincidence that Snape happened to look at Harry when his scar burned. It was really Voldemort ... he was probably saying something to Quirrell or attempting to probe Harry's mind at that time.

Solitaire


Choices - Jul 21, 2006 9:50 am (#2799 of 2969)
Also, it was a plot device to make us suspect Snape of being evil and trying to get the stone. JKR had to make him look guilty so we didn't suspect Quirrell.


haymoni - Jul 21, 2006 10:03 am (#2800 of 2969)
Just like when Harry's stomach jumped when he was with Umbridge.

Coincidence.


Solitaire - Jul 21, 2006 11:47 am (#2801 of 2969)
Who knows if it was coincidence with Umbridge? She did turn out to be pretty evil in the end. For the record, even though I do not like Snape, I do believe it was a coincidence with him.

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Jul 21, 2006 12:40 pm (#2802 of 2969)
Vulture,

Your post, while very interesting, is so long I can't address everything on it. Anyway, I hardly need to. I was in no way saying that every time JKR has the text read as though Snape is unfair, that he is actually fair. What I was saying was that, as far as I can see, every time she has anything in the text regarding Snape's classes, his interactions with students, etc. -- in other words, anything that pertains to his interactions with students -- it is always presented as though whatever he said was unfair, or overly harsh, or otherwise just generally bad.

You are correct in noting that in many of his interactions with other adults -- such as with Lockhard, or with other staff when Ginny was taken -- he doesn't seem much different in attitude or demeanor than the other staff members. Well, not much, anyway.

But with whatever pertains to the students, any mention of Snape is always from a sort of "us and him" perspective -- as though he's the enemy.

You may not agree with some of my examples -- how Snape dealt with Hermione when he substituted for Lupin in the DADA class, for instance. But there were a number of other examples I gave as well.

The point isn't whether or not we may disagree with whether one or another example was really Snape being fair or unfair. The point is that every instance of Snape's interactions with students is presented as unfair, or overly harsh, or -- as I said before -- generally bad.

Yet some of those examples are practically impossible to deny that there really isn't anything wrong with or particularly unusual in what Snape did, but it's still presented as though it was mean and nasty. I mean, how about we're told that the students were "forced" to learn about antidotes? Forced? Sounds like standard potions class fare I'd think. The word is used to make even the passing mention of what the students were learning for the day appear to be something malicious on Snape's part. We're supposed to view everything Snape does when interacting with the students as mean and nasty. So even the everyday ordinary things any teacher, and particularly any strict teacher might do are presented as though they are just Snape being mean.

However, I do think it's interesting that when we are given a scene with Snape interacting with other adults, he appears somewhat differently. I'm fairly sure JKR is being intentional in that, just as she is with making him always look mean and nasty if it relates to students.


Catherine - Jul 21, 2006 1:58 pm (#2803 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2006 2:58 pm
However, I do think it's interesting that when we are given a scene with Snape interacting with other adults, he appears somewhat differently. I'm fairly sure JKR is being intentional in that, just as she is with making him always look mean and nasty if it relates to students. --Wynnleaf

Hmm...is this an example of judging a man by how he treats his inferiors versus how he treats his equals? Sirius didn't always uphold that as an ideal, but that doesn't mean he was wrong.

The private interaction of Snape and Draco at the Christmas party in HbP shows that Snape knows that Draco is up to something. Yet, he does not treat Draco in the manner in which he treats other students. Draco, as I read him in that scene, is being disrespectful. Snape chooses to treat Draco in a far different manner than he has treated Harry.

Snape was certainly not mean and nasty in his interaction with Draco. Harry's life has hung in the balance, much the way that Draco's does in HbP. Snape certainly seems more sympathetic to Draco.

It's rather ironic--Snape relayed the partial prophecy to Voldemort, thereby setting Voldemort's plan to eliminate Harry into action. Harry had no choice in the matter, but Snape has treated him nastily since Harry's first day at Hogwarts. Horrid, especiallly when it is through Snape's actions that Voldemort learned of the prophecy in the first place. Draco, though, was attracted to the Dark Arts, and appears to have chosen his path.

Snape may be working to aid both young men, but his treatment of Draco is far superior to his treatment of Harry. I really would like to know more about this.


Magic Words - Jul 21, 2006 2:34 pm (#2804 of 2969)
Good point, Catherine. The thing is, I'm not sure Snape is even capable of viewing the situation rationally like that, at least anymore. He hates Harry on principle, and if I'm correct in my assumption he also blames Harry for being the subject of the prophecy--as a means of taking the blame off himself. This attitude (paradoxically) would make it impossible for him to regret messing up Harry's life by relaying the prophecy.

On the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised if he sees a good deal of himself in Draco. Yes, they're from different backgrounds and have distinctly different personalities. But both were seduced by the Dark Arts at a young age, and that's really the issue with Draco right now. Snape can see where Draco's coming from and empathize with him because he must have had a lot of the same thoughts at one time. Also, if he really is trying to keep Draco off the wrong path, he'd know how important it is not to antagonize him.


wynnleaf - Jul 21, 2006 3:58 pm (#2805 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2006 4:59 pm
I agree that Snape rather obviously treats Harry and Draco very, very differently. In The Unbreakable Vow chapter, Snape is actually speaking to Draco very forcefully. Snape's voice descriptions include curt, spat, coldly, quietly and low. Without quoting the whole thing, he uses words toward Draco like "clumsy and foolish," and does a lot of criticizing Draco's actions, etc. There is a personal nature to the way he talked to Draco and Snape himself admits to Draco that he treats him differently from the other students -- even the other Slytherins.

But it's clear from Snape's initial willingness to take an unbreakable vow to protect Draco that he almost certainly cares personally about him, so this more personal approach is not surprising and is easily explained.

Magic Words may be correct. Snape may see some of himself in Draco. Or also likely is that he sees in Draco something of the young Lucius, who was perhaps really a friend of Snape's. And Snape turned (I assume) from LV, while Lucius stayed on the dark side and it clearly ruined his life and that of his family.


Solitaire - Jul 21, 2006 4:33 pm (#2806 of 2969)
Nice post, Catherine.

He hates Harry on principle, and if I'm correct in my assumption he also blames Harry for being the subject of the prophecy--as a means of taking the blame off himself. This attitude (paradoxically) would make it impossible for him to regret messing up Harry's life by relaying the prophecy.

Good point, too, Magic Words. I hadn't thought of it that way, but it certainly does make sense. It also allows Snape to rationalize away the fact that he hates Harry.

Solitaire


Magic Words - Jul 21, 2006 4:36 pm (#2807 of 2969)
Actually, Wynnleaf, that may be more likely than my scenario. But the basic idea is the same. Snape knows where Draco is headed because he's seen it before, and it's ruined someone he cares about (himself or Lucius). So he wants to save Draco from that.


wynnleaf - Jul 21, 2006 8:05 pm (#2808 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2006 9:05 pm
We actually don't know exactly why Severus hates Harry so much. That's always been such a question, that I expect the revelations in Book 7 will include an explanation for us.

We often (myself included) comment on Snape's holding a grudge against James and Co. as though he's holding onto petty grievances from the past. However, I recently paid attention (probably for the first time) to what DD told Harry at the end of OOTP.

He didn't say, "I forgot. Some people just can't get over grudges." He didn't say, "I forgot. Snape has problems with petty grievances." He didn't say, "I forgot. Some people just can't forgive."

It's rather interesting what he did say. "But I forgot -- another old man's mistake -- that some wounds run too deep for the healing."

That's actually so very different from the meanings of the possible, but unused comments I gave above. DD did not even imply that Snape was being petty, holding a grudge, or unforgiving. He did not use words that blamed Snape for being unable to "overcome his feelings" about James. The implication of DD's comments was that Snape had been wounded in a very deep way that ran too deep for healing.

I never noticed that before.

Of course, one might say, "those wounds of Snape's were self inflicted," -- another way of saying "it's his own fault." But actually DD didn't put the blame on Snape in his comment. To re-interpret the comment as though Snape was to blame (although certainly he is to blame for many of his problems), is to read into DD's statement what DD didn't say.

Anyway, my point is that we don't really know for sure why Snape hated James, what deep wound was the cause of the hatred, or why that hatred is transferred on to Harry. Hopefully, and probably, we'll find out in Book 7.


Saracene - Jul 21, 2006 8:39 pm (#2809 of 2969)
Edited Jul 21, 2006 10:05 pm
"Anyway, as a result of this incident, we watch Snape with more careful eyes _ not for clues about this silly which-side-is-he-on thing (which seems resolved) but for his inner personality."

I'm not sure what you mean by "resolved". It's true that in the fifth book JKR doesn't use Snape as a red herring the way she used him in the first or fourth. But I don't think that the fifth book moved beyond the issue of his allegiances either. We still have Harry ask Dumbledore the same question he did in the previous book, namely how he can be sure that Snape is on their side - which Dumbledore declines to answer once again; we have Sirius say that though Dumbledore trusts Snape he knows better; we have Ron speculate on whether Snape was doing something dodgy with those Occlumency lessons. Even Snape's actions at the end of the book which help to save Harry's life is something that's been debated many times and is not conclusive evidence. And aren't Snape "inner personality" and the matter of his loyalties interwined anyway?

Regarding Dumbledore's comments to Harry about "wounds that run too deep": I think that the bottom line was that Dumbledore held himself responsible for what happened and believed that the failure of Occlumency lessons was largely his own fault. Therefore, he wouldn't talk of it in terms that would put blame on either Snape's grudge or Harry's curiosity.

And Dumbledore often has a way of phrasing things delicately. Like the time he told Harry in HBP that at the time of the Prophecy Snape was "still in Voldemort's employ". Is it me or is it an extremely diplomatic way of saying, "Professor Snape was still a Death Eater"? Smile


Laura W - Jul 22, 2006 2:44 am (#2810 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 3:48 am

"Anyway, my point is that we don't really know for sure why Snape hated James, what deep wound was the cause of the hatred, or why that hatred is transferred on to Harry. Hopefully, and probably, we'll find out in Book 7."

So, do you discount that whole conversation in PS between Harry and Dumbledore in the hospital wing, wynnleaf? P.217 (Raincoast): (DD) "... And then your father did something Snape could never forgive. ... He saved his life. ... Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt. ..."

I'm not saying that is "the wound" or is the only wound, but Jo made such a point about letting us know about that incident and how Severus felt about it. Are you discounting completely its significance in how Snape feels about and treats Harry? After all, Snape owes James a life debt; one he feels he shouldn't have to owe since, as he sees it, James just saved his life so that the Maruaders wouldn't be expelled.

Again, I am not saying this is the only wound inflicted upon Snape by James. There was also the Snape's Worst Memory one, and who knows what else. But it seems to me that owing a debt to a person who loathes and despises you, and who is part of a prank that almost gets you eaten by a werewolf is possibly, in itself, "a wound too deep for the healing." Especially for a petty and vindictive personality such as the Potions Master.

Laura


Catherine - Jul 22, 2006 4:19 am (#2811 of 2969)
That's actually so very different from the meanings of the possible, but unused comments I gave above. DD did not even imply that Snape was being petty, holding a grudge, or unforgiving. He did not use words that blamed Snape for being unable to "overcome his feelings" about James. The implication of DD's comments was that Snape had been wounded in a very deep way that ran too deep for healing. --Wynnleaf

It is not Dumbledore's way to tell students that professors in his employ are "petty," "holding a grudge," or "unforgiving." Dumbledore didn't, for example, allow Snape to discuss Remus Lupin on the night that Sirius Black broke into the castle in PoA.

Dumbledore did, as Laura pointed out in her last post, tell Harry in SS/PS that Snape could not forgive James. Even then, Dumbledore discusses the feelings rather than labeling Snape. This may prove more about Dumbledore's character than it does about Snape's.

And Dumbledore often has a way of phrasing things delicately. Like the time he told Harry in HBP that at the time of the Prophecy Snape was "still in Voldemort's employ". Is it me or is it an extremely diplomatic way of saying, "Professor Snape was still a Death Eater"? Smile --Saracene

It's not you--I think Dumbledore glosses over that a bit, yes.

Anyway, my point is that we don't really know for sure why Snape hated James, what deep wound was the cause of the hatred, or why that hatred is transferred on to Harry. Hopefully, and probably, we'll find out in Book 7. --Wynnleaf

Snape may just be a very damaged individual. His hatred doesn't really have to be rational. Transferring hatred onto a child is difficult for me to comprehend. I do think, though, that JKR has told us why Snape hated James. What I haven't fully understood, though, is why Snape would not forgive James, or James's memory.


wynnleaf - Jul 22, 2006 5:19 am (#2812 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 6:30 am
So, do you discount that whole conversation in PS between Harry and Dumbledore in the hospital wing, wynnleaf? P.217 (Raincoast): (DD) "... And then your father did something Snape could never forgive. ... He saved his life. ... Professor Snape couldn't bear being in your father's debt. ..."

No, I don't discount it at all. But DD has never been willing to fill Harry in on the entire story of Snape, so there's no reason to think that his comments about the life-debt encompass the whole reason for Snape's hatred. Further, being in a life-debt to James doesn't particularly constitute a wound or create a scar. So, no, I don't think DD told Harry the full story.

I do think, though, that JKR has told us why Snape hated James.

I think we've been told some of the reasons Snape hated James. I do not think we've heard anywhere nearly the full story. I don't think we've been told the deepest reasons for Snape's hatred of James. And I certainly don't think we've been told why Snape transferred that hatred to Harry. We've got so much speculation, it often feels like we must know, but we haven't really been told.

Even though we are able to see Snape interact some with Sirius, and we know he hated Sirius quite deeply, it always seems to me that he hated James even more. Yet Sirius is the one that played the prank that could have killed Snape. You'd expect Snape's hatred of Sirius to be even greater than James. Perhaps in POA it was, especially in the Shrieking Shack when he thought that Sirius was the Potter's secret keeper. But later, by OOTP, Snape thoroughly disliked Sirius, but he doesn't talk the same way about him as he does James.

Snape knew that Harry admired and liked Sirius and that Sirius was his godfather, but he isn't nearly so apt to insult and ridicule Sirius, or Sirius' memory in HBP, to Harry. Yet he does do that about James quite frequently.

So the hatred he has for James seems to me greater than his hatred of Sirius, even though it is Sirius that Snape feels tried to kill him. In the pensieve scene, Sirius was just as much to blame as James. So why hate James more? While I can see (given what we know of Snape) that he would thoroughly resent James "saving his life" from Sirius' prank, one would expect him to hate Sirius even more for being the one to pull the prank. There is almost certainly some other reason for his hatred of James, especially since it appears greater than his hatred of Sirius.


Magic Words - Jul 22, 2006 6:12 am (#2813 of 2969)
I see a pattern developing here. It looks like one of the worst things you can do to Snape--what makes him angriest--is to offer him help. James saves his life, and it's given by Dumbledore in PS/SS as the main reason Snape hates James. Lily sticks up for him, and is insulted and told he doesn't need her help.

Can anyone think of other examples where Snape's in trouble and offered help?


wynnleaf - Jul 22, 2006 6:16 am (#2814 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 7:18 am
Yep. DD helped him in a huge, huge way -- and he apparently (if he's on DD's side), is willing to do anything for him.

Oh, yeah -- except get over James and Sirius.

Also, I don't really include his response to Lily as part of a "pattern." I don't think that the way he reacted in the heat of an extremely stressful situation should be compared to his long-term reaction to James. And his anger toward James continued for decades, whereas we don't know that he was angry at Lily beyond that moment.


Magic Words - Jul 22, 2006 6:28 am (#2815 of 2969)
But he was angry at the moment. I'm suggesting this as a reason he lashed out in the first place.

And I think Dumbledore is a slightly different case. Snape came to him first, didn't he? It's not like Dumbledore showed up and assumed that Snape couldn't handle the situation he was in. Plus, Snape was able to give Dumbledore useful information, so it wasn't so much Dumbledore's charity as a mutually beneficial transaction. I'm not saying charity had nothing to do with it, but Snape could avoid seeing it that way if he chose.


Soul Search - Jul 22, 2006 7:40 am (#2816 of 2969)
I think we have seen more behind Snape's treatment of Harry, but in pieces we have to put together.

Snape hears part of the prophecy and relays it to Voldemort. He learns Voldemort is going after the Potters, regrets his role, and goes to Dumbledore and switches sides. Snape incurs great risk to help correct his mistake.

As a spy, Snape discovers that someone close to the Potters is a traitor, tells Dumbledore, who tells James. But James is arrogant, won't believe one of his friends would betray him, the secret is compromised, and Voldemort goes to Godric's Hollow.

Now, Snape blames James for the disasterous results of Snape's original mistake of telling Voldemort about the prophecy. If James had believed one of his friends was a traitor and used someone else as secret keeper, they wouldn't have been killed, and Snape's telling Voldmeort wouldn't have had any dire consequences. Snape's switching sides would have been the action of a hero.

As it turned out, Snape became the cause of the Potter's deaths. He feels great guilt. But, Snape blames their deaths on James' arrogance and sees the same traits in Harry.


Solitaire - Jul 22, 2006 9:09 am (#2817 of 2969)
James is arrogant,

I still have a hard time seeing James as arrogant. Yes, I do see him as stubbornly loyal to a fault, but that is different (in my eyes) from being arrogant. If James thought he was so wonderful that no one would betray him, that would be arrogance. Thinking so highly of his friends that he trusts them implicitly certainly turned out to be foolish, but I cannot classify it as arrogant. Without different evidence than I have, I do not think I ever shall.

Solitaire


Soul Search - Jul 22, 2006 9:47 am (#2818 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 10:48 am
Solitaire,

It's how Snape views James that directs his feelings toward Harry. Snape views James as so arrogant he wouldn't believe one of his friends would betray him. James could really be arrogant, stubborn, or whatever; doesn't matter to Snape.


wynnleaf - Jul 22, 2006 10:28 am (#2819 of 2969)
I think, too, that when Snape considers James arrogant in not believing a friend could be a traitor and using a friend as secret keeper, he is not basing that opinion solely on the notion that "it's arrogant to trust your friends over a warning from a spy." Snape already considered James arrogant. Our only real picture of James-Snape interaction is the pensieve scene. From that perspective, James does look very arrogant. Even Harry thought so. Of course, there was probably a lot more to their enmity/relationship and a lot more to James that Snape would never see or admit. But I think it's pretty clear that Snape already thought of James as arrogant, and therefore interpreted his rejection of DD as secret keeper, and use of a Marauder in spite of warnings, as symptomatic of an already arrogant disposition.


Solitaire - Jul 22, 2006 10:32 am (#2820 of 2969)
I'm not balking at Snape's description of James as arrogant. I know how he feels. I'm just disagreeing with forum members who see him as arrogant ... that's all.

Solitaire
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 2821 to 2840

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 5:21 am

Catherine - Jul 22, 2006 11:47 am (#2821 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 3:11 pm
I'm replying to this from the Irma Pince thread.

Choices,

You said It is sort of interesting to note that the two people at Hogwarts who seem most determined to get Harry expelled are Filch and Snape.

This isn't exactly true about Snape (haven't checked about Filch). It's a sort of myth that even I believed until recently. We actually have only one time where Snape directly suggested to DD that Harry be expelled. That was flying car incident, which even DD said would warrent expulsion if they did anything like that again. See my post #2768 in the Severus Snape thread. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] --Wynnleaf

I do not understand why you say this is a myth.

In addition to the flying car incident, Snape stared right at Harry after the firework incident in Potions class in CoS and said that he would make sure that the culprit would be expelled. I think Snape knew, but could not prove, that Harry was responsible--otherwise, why would he bother to stare at him during his threat? I say that this episode 'counts' as Snape threatening to have Harry expelled.

In GoF, when Crouch/Moody was stealing from Snape's private stores, Snape threatened to make Harry "pay." I think Harry would be reasonable to assume that Snape would see him expelled if Snape could prove that Harry stole from the storeroom.

Then, as Solitaire mentioned, there is Snape's claim in HbP that he has tried to have Harry expelled. I believe him--it has the ring of truth.


Choices - Jul 22, 2006 1:05 pm (#2822 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 2:14 pm
Thanks for your comments Catherine. I was confused at first when I read your post - I thought you were disagreeing with me, but I looked back at the Eileen Prince thread and I realized that this is a quote from Wynnleaf......

Wynnleaf - "This isn't exactly true about Snape (haven't checked about Filch). It's a sort of myth that even I believed until recently. We actually have only one time where Snape directly suggested to DD that Harry be expelled. That was flying car incident, which even DD said would warrant expulsion if they did anything like that again. See my post #2768 in the Severus Snape thread. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ....."

I don't think it is a myth either - Snape is constantly on the lookout for opportunities to catch Harry at something, and so is Filch. The implication is even stronger in the movies that Filch and Snape both would relish the opportunity to catch Harry doing something wrong and have him expelled. It may not specifically say, "have him expelled", but they want to catch him at something that would ultimately lead to his expulsion.


wynnleaf - Jul 22, 2006 2:06 pm (#2823 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 3:12 pm
Yes, it's a myth.

Expulsion sends the person completely out of the school for good. As far as we know, Snape has only ever suggested that once to anyone with the actual power to do it (DD) -- at the beginning of COS. For the flying car incident, DD did not, of course, go for expulsion, but he did say that if Harry and Ron did anything similar in the future expulsion could result.

In PS/SS, Snape warns Harry about again sneaking out at night, going into the Restricted Section of the Library, etc. and he threatens getting Harry expelled if he should continue doing that.

Then there's the POA incident where Harry intentionally set off an explosion into students cauldrons which injured other students, with the express purpose of stealing from Snape's stores. While what Harry did was pretty bad, I don't think Snape was "trying to get Harry expelled," by threatening expulsion if he ever found out who did it. How was the threat accomplishing getting Harry expelled? A threat like that doesn't accomplish anything about actually expelling the perpetrator of the incident. All the threat is actually doing is saying, "I know you probably did this, but I can't prove it and you better never do it again or you'll get expelled." It's then up to the person who did the deed to make sure he doesn't do anything like that again.

Actually, what Harry did was pretty bad. Imagine a chemistry classroom where a kid intentionally sets off an explosion in a volitile solution, so that he can create a diversion and steal from the teachers' storeroom -- and in the process students are injured. What do you think would happen to the kid if he was caught? Would the teacher be out of line to threaten, "if I ever catch who did this, I'll have him expelled?" Many people might say that, even if they knew that in reality they might not actually recommend anything more than a suspension.

Okay, after that -- No More Threats of Expulsion. Period.

At the end of POA, Snape said (to Fudge, I think) that a kid who would lead his friends into that kind of danger should perhaps get suspended. Suspended isn't anything like expulsion. Where I live, kids get suspended for one day to several days depending on how bad it is. That's very far from expulsion.

In GOF, Snape does not suggest or threaten expulsion. However, in that book Harry considers how Snape has tried to get him suspended, in years past, not expelled. So Harry remembers Snape's threats more in the vein of suspension -- although I'm sure even Harry would agree that Snape definitely meant expulsion over the flying car incident.

After that, in OOTP and HBP, Snape doesn't even suggest suspension (so much more lenient that expulsion), much less expulsion.

If Snape is so interested in getting Harry expelled, why didn't he even suggest it after the Sectumsempra incident? After all, even McGonagall said Harry was lucky to not get expelled. Yet Snape, who comes up with Harry's punishment all on his own, doesn't suggest either expulsion or suspension.

So -- Snape threatened it once to Harry his first year in a "if you do it again, I'll get you expelled," kind of threat -- but we're never told he followed through to actually try to get Harry expelled.

Snape did suggest it to DD in COS for an offense that even DD thought could, if repeated, be worthy of expulsion.

And Snape threatened it once more in POA, again in the "if I ever catch you I'll have you expelled" kind of threat, but once again, we never hear that Snape actually tried to get Harry expelled.

Not again.

Snape is not trying to get Harry expelled. If he was really trying to, he'd have actually suggested it to DD, especially over the Sectumsempra incident.

It's a myth that we readers believe. It may sound right, but it doesn't actually fit what we know from canon.

By the way, Snape looking for things to catch Harry on isn't anywhere nearly the same as trying to get him expelled. Certainly, Snape does look for anything that he can take points on, give detention, or criticize Harry over -- but that's not at all the same as trying to get him expelled.


Catherine - Jul 22, 2006 2:18 pm (#2824 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 3:20 pm
If Snape is so interested in getting Harry expelled, why didn't he even suggest it after the Sectumsempra incident? --Wynnleaf

Perhaps because it might expose his own adolescent experimentation with that spell? Snape is very good at saving his own skin thus far in the novels.

Snape himself says that he did try to get Harry expelled. What better way, if Snape is a double agent, to fool Bellatrix than by claiming the truth?

If Snape didn't have the power to expel Harry himself, as Wynnleaf suggests by saying that only Dumbledore could expel Harry, than I'm confused about why we're even debating this. Snape very well could have desired and worked toward Harry's expulsion. Perhaps that's one reason why he baits and taunts Harry.

It's a myth that we readers believe. It may sound right, but it doesn't actually fit what we know from canon. --Wynnleaf

Canon does show it. It is perfectly reasonable to believe that Snape desires Harry's expulsion and that he may have actually worked toward this goal.


Soul Search - Jul 22, 2006 2:33 pm (#2825 of 2969)
It looks like Snape actively tried to get Harry expelled up until Voldemort returned, then stopped. A little word from Dumbledore, maybe?

Snape has, recall, heard the first part of the prophecy.


rambkowalczyk - Jul 22, 2006 3:00 pm (#2826 of 2969)
I suspect Dumbledore already knows that Snape invented the Sectumsempera spell. If the stuff in Snape's old potion book was something that Dumbledore would hold against him, then Snape would not have left it in Hogwarts.

does Snape secretly FEAR Harry? Deb Zawacki post #357 Problems in book 6 Kip Carter, "+ Problems in Book Six" #, 2 Sep 2005 11:16 am

I don't think fear is the right word. I don't believe it when he says Harry is only ordinary. I think in his own understated way he does recognizes that Harry is skilled. He knows Harry can resist the Imperious Curse, that Harry defeated a basilisk, has faced Voldemort and survived. And since he knows that Harry was using his old potions book, he might even be secretly pleased that Harry is learning from him.

Notice when Snape confronts Harry after the Sectumsempera Spell, he doesn't accuse Harry of being vicious, cruel, or being a hypocrite. He accuses him of lying because he lied about how he found out about the curse. Would we have gotten an entirely diffent reaction from Snape if Harry actually told Snape the truth?

Deb, to go back to your suggestion that Snape chose not to encourage Harry because he feared what Harry could do,... I would say that the reason Snape doesn't encourage Harry is because he's afraid that Harry would be more like James.


wynnleaf - Jul 22, 2006 4:51 pm (#2827 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 5:53 pm
If Snape is so interested in getting Harry expelled, why didn't he even suggest it after the Sectumsempra incident? --Wynnleaf

Perhaps because it might expose his own adolescent experimentation with that spell? Snape is very good at saving his own skin thus far in the novels.

He'd be afraid DD would learn he put the Sectumsempra curse in his potions textbook in 6th year??? DD knows he was the DE that took the prophecy to LV two or three years later. If DD knows he was a DE, who would be almost bound to have done some Unforgiveables (not that we know for sure), why would DD be so shocked over the potions book? But how could anyone possibly expect DD to be upset about him creating that spell in 6th year, when DD already knows he was moving toward becoming a DE by 7th year or the year after? Talk about old news... And then I've heard the idea that somehow DD would be so terribly distressed that Snape kept that book in his storeroom. I doubt it. DD might think of it as a mistake to leave it in there, but after all, it wasn't a public access place to keep it and anyway, DD's certainly done his share of allowing students access to dangerous things.

If Snape didn't have the power to expel Harry himself, as Wynnleaf suggests by saying that only Dumbledore could expel Harry, than I'm confused about why we're even debating this.

I suppose maybe there are schools where an individual teacher has the ability to expel a student without administration's approval, but I don't know of such a school. Perhaps Hogwarts is one, however it seems unlikely, otherwise I'd think Umbridge would have done more to individual students prior to DD's leaving.

Still, a teacher could bring a student's offenses to the headmaster and request (or demand, or beg, or insist) that the student be expelled. That would certainly qualify as "trying to get him expelled," in my opinion.

Anyway, we're debating it because the assertion is made occasionally and I happened to mention that it really isn't correct, only to have others question that.

By the way, I didn't say that Snape had never suggested that Harry be expelled. He did suggest that to DD at the start of COS. But it doesn't seem to be something that he's actively engaged in trying to achieve every year. After all, he never even mentioned it again after the start of POA.


Catherine - Jul 22, 2006 4:56 pm (#2828 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 5:58 pm
After all, he never even mentioned it again after the start of POA. --Wynnleaf

Aside from Snape's own statemtn in HbP...that remains to be verified, although my initial feeling is that this is correct. Although, as I mentioned, he does threated to make Harry "pay" in GoF. Interpret that as we will....

If true, if he never mentioned it...perhaps that means he realized that verbalizing his wishes wasn't advancing them. Perhaps he just kept his thoughts to himself and still worked for Harry's expulsion?

I don't think Snape was lying to Bellatrix in HbP. He has to be careful, very careful in his speech. Therefore, I think he spoke a version of the truth in order to sway her.

Anyway, we're debating it because the assertion is made occasionally and I happened to mention that it really isn't correct, only to have others question that. --Wynnleaf

Others question it because it is, to their interpetation, correct.


Choices - Jul 22, 2006 5:10 pm (#2829 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 6:11 pm
Wynnleaf, I have to concede, that in your opinion, you are totally correct. However, in my opinion, we will just have to agree to disagree. :-)


Honour - Jul 22, 2006 8:34 pm (#2830 of 2969)
Well I agree with Wynnleaf, the occassion where Harry should have been expelled in COS, Dumbledore saved him and Ron. (Which is just as well otherwise we wouldn't be here today discussing the next 4 books and awaiting book 7) Harry and Ron risked the secrecy of the magical world.

JKR always writes to give Harry special license to break rules and then compensates by saying he is doing this for the good.

For a teacher to threaten expulsion of a student who has put his fellow students in danger and stolen from his teacher is also warranted. Breaking school rules and being put on detention for doing this is also part of a teacher's job description.

Harry from the very beginning disliked Severus (waranted or not) and has gone out of his way to constantly bait and sometimes be quite rude and obnoxious in his dealings with Severus. Yes, yes it goes both ways. Blah, blah blah ... But this is exactly the way JKR wants us to read the relationship between Harry and Severus.


Solitaire - Jul 22, 2006 9:22 pm (#2831 of 2969)
Edited Jul 22, 2006 10:23 pm
Harry from the very beginning disliked Severus (waranted or not) and has gone out of his way to constantly bait and sometimes be quite rude and obnoxious in his dealings with Severus.

I am curious ... how has Harry gone "out of his way to constantly bait" Snape? Baiting indicates that Harry has taken pains to plan confrontations. I have not seen any indication that this is true. Usually Harry has taken pains to fly below Snape's "radar." Can you give me some examples?

I will admit that Harry has dropped the pretext of politeness to Snape, given Snape's surly demeanor toward him. I'm not sure I like that part of things, because for better or worse, Snape is still his teacher. He isn't a very nice teacher, but he is a teacher. I don't think it would matter much even if Harry were polite, but that's beside the point.

As to Harry's dislike of Snape, I believe it is warranted. Snape singled out Harry on the very first day of class and humiliated him. He has maintained that posture throughout the books. If anyone has "baited" anyone else, it is Snape who has continually "baited" Harry, IMHO.

Solitaire


Honour - Jul 22, 2006 10:30 pm (#2832 of 2969)
Actually if there is anyone who has "baited" anyone it is JKR, but then this is why we read, discuss and enjoy her books Smile


Solitaire - Jul 23, 2006 3:08 am (#2833 of 2969)
LOL Very true!


Choices - Jul 23, 2006 12:13 pm (#2834 of 2969)
Edited Jul 23, 2006 1:26 pm
My first comment simply said that the two people at Hogwarts who seem bent on getting Harry expelled are Snape and Filch. In no way did I say that they are either wrong or right, but just that they are the ones who seem to want Harry tossed out and they never miss a chance to catch Harry when he is "up to something". Wynnleaf seems to think that it is a "myth" that Snape has a grudge against Harry and that he in no way wants Harry to leave Hogwarts in disgrace because of his rule breaking. Wynnleaf is, of course, entitled to her opinion and I respect that. I just happen to disagree and feel that both Snape and Filch would be very happy to see Harry tossed out, bag and baggage.


*Thanks, Pam!** Smile


Solitaire - Jul 23, 2006 12:48 pm (#2835 of 2969)
For what it's worth, Choices, I agree with you.


wynnleaf - Jul 23, 2006 3:11 pm (#2836 of 2969)
I believe that Snape dislikes Harry and might be perfectly happy to see him in detention for his entire school career. But since, regardless of all the trouble Harry's gotten into, Snape hasn't even mentioned expulsion since the start of POA, there is no evidence to show that Snape ever tried to get Harry expelled after that point. And since Snape passed on the perfect opportunity (Sectumsempra incident), I think there's more evidence now to say that he is not trying to get him expelled, than there is evidence that he is.

So why wouldn't he want him expelled? Well, since he never seemed to really pursue expulsion (that is, bringing it up to DD), after the start of COS, my guess is that it's because Snape knows that Harry has to stay in a place of safety, and putting him out of Hogwarts really isn't an option. Whether Snape is just going along with DD's directives on this, or whether Snape actually cares about Harry staying alive I guess depends on whose side you think Snape is on. But Snape knows -- just like probably all the Order members do -- that Harry has to stay in a place of safety or risk getting killed.


Soul Search - Jul 23, 2006 4:45 pm (#2837 of 2969)
I think you stated the situation quite accurately, wynnleaf.

I might suggest that before Voldemort returned, Snape could indulge his hopes to get back at James through Harry, but after Voldemort returned, Snape was integral to Dumbledore's plan for Harry's staying alive and defeat of Voldemort.

In HBP, at the time of the "Sectumsempra incident," Dumbledore had already planned to for Snape to kill him and become Voldemort's favorite. All to help Harry.


Vulture - Jul 23, 2006 6:04 pm (#2838 of 2969)
Edited Jul 23, 2006 7:19 pm
"Anyway, as a result of this incident, we watch Snape with more careful eyes _ not for clues about this silly which-side-is-he-on thing (which seems resolved) but for his inner personality."

I'm not sure what you mean by "resolved". (Saracene Jul 21, 2006 9:39 pm (#2809))

_ Hi,Saracene: I'm glad you asked, because I want my meaning on that to be very precise and clear. What I meant was that the tone of Book 5 (which I accept is a nebulous thing) seemed to be indicating that Snape, though having his own style, his own way of doing things, and personality clashes with Harry and most of Harry's friends, is nevertheless on the good side. It's true that Harry, Sirius, Ron and others continue to question which side Snape is on, but my feeling is that the open-minded reader of Book 5 does not give as much weight to their view of Snape as to Dumbledore's and Hermione's.

I want to be clear that I'm only talking about Book 5 here. I think that it was very carefully put together, with a great deal of thought about how every single incident or passage of writing related to every other _ both as regards Snape and as regards everything else. I think that the Snape Pensieve incident is a jolt for us as it is for Harry, and thereafter, I feel that the reader does not have the same viewpoint as either Harry or Snape. This is largely because they continue to be enemies, whereas the reader knows what Snape does not, that Harry was not "having fun" (Snape's words) watching that memory.

Of course, in terms of practical fact, what Snape suffered then does not have to mean that he's on the good side now. But I'm talking about mood, not fact. The next stage in our view of Snape comes in his mocking performance in Umbridge's office after she captures Harry & Co. Incidentally, this is very relevant to wynnleaf's comment in #2802 that "The point is that every instance of Snape's interactions with students is presented as unfair, or overly harsh, or -- as I said before -- generally bad." Well, in this incident, Snape, having psychologically wiped the floor with Umbridge, turns his mockery on Harry in answer to the latter's cryptic "Padfoot" comment. This is interaction with a student _ is it being presented as "overly bad" ? I don't think so. Is it being presented from Harry's point of view ? Again, I don't think so: Harry takes Snape's comments at face value. But is there a single reader who does so, even before Dumbledore's verdict at the end ? _ I doubt it. (I haven't even mentioned how, almost as an afterthought, Snape saves Neville from being accidentally strangled by Crabbe, but in such classically "Snape" style that neither Umbridge nor the Slytherins even notice.)

By the time Snape stares at Harry on the steps in their last Book 5 scene together, I feel that we're seeing him in a very different way than Harry does. Apart from their usual feud, Harry is now overwhelmed with the loss of Sirius, and feeling the pull towards Sirius's attitude to Snape. We can understand all that, but it's not our own view. The paradox here is that, at the end of Book 5, we're more interested in Snape than ever, but surer of his loyalty _ which (despite Harry's doubts) seems about to become an incidental question.

Unfortunately, of course, it didn't _ and in my opinion, this was one of many mistakes in the writing of Book 6. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Then there's the POA incident where Harry intentionally set off an explosion into students cauldrons which injured other students, with the express purpose of stealing from Snape's stores. (wynnleaf Jul 22, 2006 3:06 pm (#2823))

_ I thought this happened in Book 2, not Book 3 ?

Your post, while very interesting, is so long I can't address everything on it. Anyway, I hardly need to. (wynnleaf Jul 21, 2006 1:40 pm (#2802))

Well, if you don't want to address the lot, I rather hoped that you'd at least address the summary _ in the last of my three posts. I think my take on Book 3 was worth a line too.

What I was saying was that, as far as I can see, every time she has anything in the text regarding Snape's classes, his interactions with students, etc. -- in other words, anything that pertains to his interactions with students -- it is always presented as though whatever he said was unfair, or overly harsh, or otherwise just generally bad. (wynnleaf Jul 21, 2006 1:40 pm (#2802))

_ Well, what I chiefly disagree with is the "every time" in the above statement. In #2764, you said "I believe that it's written that way because JKR wants us to only see Snape's actions through the pov of "everything he does is mean or unfair," and she also wants the students to only be viewing Snape that way."

So, I think that when you said "every time", you meant every time: I disagree, and I set out to prove this by showing that the different books have different outlooks on Snape's interactions with students. The whole thing has so many angles that trying to prove my point was bound, I'm afraid, to take ages. (By the way, I just realised what you meant by "pov" _ been wondering all night !!)

In my reply to Saracene above, I include one example of a Snape interaction with students which I don't feel is being presented as unfair _ though the students themselves probably do (though their predominant feeling at the time is no doubt that Snape, even at his worst, is as friendly as a bunny rabbit compared to Umbridge).

I may be jumping to conclusions (and if so, I apologise), but I feel that, in this as in many other debates, you (and others) seem to be constantly trying to get Snape 'off the hook'. Nothing wrong with that as such, but if that is your motivation, I feel that you ought to constantly bear in mind two things about Harry:

(1) Firstly, Harry did not start the feud with Snape _ Snape did. In fact, Snape had started it before Harry knew of his existence. No doubt you will argue that the first point Snape ever took from Harry was all correct and above-board, but however arguable that is, the second certainly wasn't. Besides, Snape's glare at Harry's first Hogwarts feast was no fault of Harry's.

(2) Harry hates what he sees being done to Snape in the Pensieve in Book 5: go back and read his reaction carefully: it's beyond revulsion. At that moment, it's as if he is Snape in that situation, and as if the Marauders are Dudley and his gang. Perhaps this is an example of what Dumbledore means in Book 6 (one of the bits I liked !!) about Harry being "special" _ it's not that Harry resists the temptation to enjoy his enemy's humiliation; it's that he has no such temptation _ he cannot enjoy it. In a funny way, this discovery almost horrifies him: out of loyalty to his dad, he tries to make a case for Snape deserving what he got _ and can't. Never for one moment does it occur to Harry to harden his heart, or dwell on the fact that Snape and he are enemies: for Harry, this is irrelevant _ even though they remain enemies.

Now, this is pretty special: I know that most of us would, with our heads, subscribe to abstract fine notions that even enemies have rights and so on, but be honest _ if you actually saw your worst enemy, perhaps a real bully, being humiliated without suffering major physical harm, wouldn't a tiny part of you be tempted to enjoy it ? But Harry isn't _ and as I keep saying, this is one of his finest moments. It's also one of JKR's !!

(Stayed within one post for a change _ wow.)


haymoni - Jul 23, 2006 6:22 pm (#2839 of 2969)
I just wanted to mention that Filch seems to want lots of students expelled - not just Harry - while Snape doesn't seem to mention wanting anyone else gone.

You'd think SOMEBODY else would be mentioned - all those dunderheads he has to teach!


Deb Zawacki - Jul 24, 2006 3:36 am (#2840 of 2969)
Snape is hghly critical of "Early Neville" as well--so you suppose that, other than normal teacher obliations, he is supposed to look out for him as well? Just in case Voldemort guessed wrong.... Neviile was never arrogant nor did he challenge Snape on anything so the confrontations Harry experienced wouldn't have come his way...
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 2841 to 2880

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 5:24 am

Solitaire - Jul 24, 2006 10:33 am (#2841 of 2969)
Edited Jul 24, 2006 11:35 am
Neviile was never arrogant nor did he challenge Snape on anything so the confrontations Harry experienced wouldn't have come his way...

Unlike Harry, Neville was not attacked by Volemort and marked by him ... so we can't possibly know whether or not that would be true of him, can we? It is impossible to say how Neville would have acted until his past and present circumstances are identical to Harry's and he has been placed in the same situations as Harry has since entering the Wizarding World.

Solitaire


ctgretzky99 - Jul 24, 2006 11:57 am (#2842 of 2969)
I am not going to read through 2k posts to find if this has been hinted at, but I believe that Snape was told my DD to kill him instead of Malfoy, if circumstances called for it.

For support of this theory of Snape's reasons for killing DD, in the HBP, it is obvious to anyone that DD is quite aware of Malfoy's situation with Voldy. Anytime HP mentions his suspicions to DD, it is passed over by the wise headmaster as a known entity. Had DD been truly worried, or not been in the know, he would certainly have entertained HP's hypothesis with greater concern.

In addition, a scene between Hagrid, HP and Hermoine, Hagrid slips and gives a detail that he overheard Snape and DD arguing over "Snape agreeing to do something, but having second thoughts" along those lines. I believe this is a conversation between SS and DD recounting what is expected of SS.

DD is accomplishing many things with this instruction to Snape.

He is protecting the "innocence" of Malfoy, who obviously, due to his many delays, is truly on the fence between good and evil. DD likes to believe in the best of people, and is quite good at judging this goodness (or lack of.) and probably sees the scared little boy who likes to be mischevious, but not evil in Malfoy.

He solidifies Snape's stature as the right hand man of Voldy...the one who killed DD. Talk about a person who can be in Voldy's inner circle!! SS can than aid HP in the end.

He is unifying all good wizards in his death. Those who were still doubtfull, have now reason to fear dark times are ahead, and now is the time to join forces or be destroyed.


haymoni - Jul 24, 2006 12:03 pm (#2843 of 2969)
It is completely possible, Deb, that Snape knew who the 2 babies were that fit the prophesy.

Snape thinks he is a pretty talented wizard himself who probably could take on Voldy if he really wanted to.

However, there is this stupid prophesy that says only 1 of these babies could do it and now Snape has to teach both of them and neither one of them has shown themselves to be great.

Gosh!

Could Snape really be evil??


Ann - Jul 25, 2006 5:58 pm (#2844 of 2969)
haymoni: Could Snape really be evil??

No. It would be way too boring if he were. I mean, imagine: JKR spends an entire book (6) showing us that Snape is evil, and finishes it off by having him kill Dumbledore. And in Book 7, it turns out that, yes, indeed, he is evil. Fizz... sputter... silence.


Mrs Brisbee - Jul 25, 2006 8:44 pm (#2845 of 2969)
No. It would be way too boring if he were. I mean, imagine: JKR spends an entire book (6) showing us that Snape is evil, and finishes it off by having him kill Dumbledore. And in Book 7, it turns out that, yes, indeed, he is evil. Fizz... sputter... silence. --Ann

Ah, but isn't Snape-Not-Evil-Afterall! the expected plot twist for Book 7? I think it would be grand if he turns out to be evil afterall, and Rowling throws something completely unexpected at us for a plot twist instead.

But I think that Snape will turn out to be Not-Evil-Afterall!, just as expected. I just hope it comes with a really good explanation.


journeymom - Jul 26, 2006 12:23 am (#2846 of 2969)
The way Snape could fit both your expectations, Ann and Mrs B, is if he's His Own Man, rather than Dumbledore's man OR Voldemort's man. That way he could be evil but still actually be doing some things that benefit the good guys. If he's out for himself then protecting Harry and trying to take down Voldemort would fit into his agenda.

And he doesn't even have to be doing this to be the next Dark Lord or take over the world or anything that grand. He can still be an evil, nasty guy and want to get rid of that yoke around his neck, Voldemort. Protecting Harry is a means to that end.


Honour - Jul 26, 2006 12:40 am (#2847 of 2969)
Just playing devil's advocate here journeymom, but, couldn't "that yoke around his neck" also be Dumbledore?

...and, "Protecting Harry" could definately be the "means to that end" because Voldermort is so busy chasing after and trying to kill Harry that he doesn't see Severus as his true enemy?


wynnleaf - Jul 26, 2006 1:58 am (#2848 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2006 3:02 am
The "expected" plot "twist" of Book 7 is that we'll find out the truth about Snape -- twisted in some way from whatever.... -- after all, there are numerous theories about him.

What I'm very strongly suspecting is that JKR will truly surprise us in Book 7 by a major plot twist that will not be about Snape's loyalties, but about someone else altogether.

Sure, I think we'll find out about Snape. But whatever we find out about him -- loyal, true DE, out-for-himself -- won't be a surprise because we're expecting that JKR is going to have some big revelation about him.

But I can't believe that the person that has shocked us so many times with the true loyalties of various characters is going to depend on such an expected revelation as her big plot twist. I am guessing that it will be someone else altogether whose loyalties and/or motivations will shock us in Book 7.

Like the magician who keeps you looking one way while making the "magic" somewhere else, I think JKR wants us to think only of Snape when we consider whose loyalties might be up for question. Meanwhile, I think she's working on a much bigger surprise revelation where we either learn that someone we thought was evil is really on the good side, or someone we thought was good has been disloyal.


Mrs Brisbee - Jul 26, 2006 6:42 am (#2849 of 2969)
I like the way you think on this, wynnleaf. I hope something like that happens.

In Book 7, the question of Snape's loyalty needs to be resolved. Harry's hatred of Snape needs to be resolved. I really want to find out why Dumbledore trusted Snape. But I will be very disappointed if every plot point ends up revolving around Snape. If he is actually a literary decoy, I'll be very happy.


Solitaire - Jul 26, 2006 9:42 am (#2850 of 2969)
Perhaps the big plot twist will be that Lily was engaged to or dating Snape before she married James. We are supposed to find out something "huge" about Lily. Could that be it? I'm not a Lily-Snape shipper, but it has occurred to me that this could be the real reason Snape hates James ... because James stole Lily away from him.

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Jul 26, 2006 1:06 pm (#2851 of 2969)
Solitaire,

Could be.. I posted another theory that would be a Huge plot twist, over on the Lupin thread (very controversial), but I can't figure out how to get that thread back into the main part of the Forum. Does it do it automatically?


journeymom - Jul 26, 2006 3:36 pm (#2852 of 2969)
"Just playing devil's advocate here journeymom, but, couldn't "that yoke around his neck" also be Dumbledore? "

Absolutely, Honour! Especially if Snape is His Own Man. Working under Dd's eye for the past 17 years must have seriously chaffed Snape.

I like the idea that Snape won't be the only plot twist. One idea, perhaps Lucius Malfoy is fed up with his lot and will turn against LV. He didn't sign up for a tour of duty in Azkaban when he joined the DE's, I'm betting. And now Draco and probably Narcissa have been threatened.

The only problem is that he's never been publicly affectionate with Draco. I do firmly believe the way Jason Isaac's character treats Tom Felton's character is approved by JKR (just a hunch), and Lucius has at least 3 times that I can think of treated Draco poorly.

Oh well, this is definitely off topic.


Honour - Jul 26, 2006 3:44 pm (#2853 of 2969)
But very interesting journeymom, I always thought about Severus being Voldermorts hidden enemy, but could it be Lucius instead? hmmm:)


Solitaire - Jul 26, 2006 4:23 pm (#2854 of 2969)
Wynnleaf, it will not come up to the top for me, either, even though I posted on it. I do not know why ... usually a post brings a thread back out into the "open."

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Jul 26, 2006 5:27 pm (#2855 of 2969)
Edited Jul 26, 2006 6:28 pm
I thought of Lucius turning to the good side. I could see him do it (assuming he got out of prison), primarily to protect himself and his family from LV. Or he could make the switch secretly while in prison and get out of Azkaban on the condition that he goes to work against LV (in secret, naturally). Just a possibility.

What's the worst Lucius has done? Putting the diary in with Ginny's books? Do we know that he's done some particularly heinous things? (Sorry, I can't recall.) Oh, yeah -- MOM battle.


haymoni - Jul 26, 2006 5:28 pm (#2856 of 2969)
Just a spot of Muggle torture, twirling the Roberts family.

I know we don't know for SURE that he was one of them, but I'll bet my wand arm that he is.


Choices - Jul 26, 2006 5:35 pm (#2857 of 2969)
....And I wonder what he does with all those poisons he is hiding under his diningroom floor - the ones he was selling at Borgin and Burkes.


journeymom - Jul 26, 2006 7:07 pm (#2858 of 2969)
There's no reason Lucius and Snape couldn't both be LV's hidden enemies. Doesn't mean they're working together. Though if they truly are friends I can imagine Malfoy coming to Snape for help going underground, or least asking him to help Narcissa go into hiding. Can you imagine, Chapter 1 of Book 7 begins with Hermione reading an article in the paper about Draco and Narcissa being found dead, apparently killed by DE's. But we'd know it's only a story...

Also, Malfoy doesn't need to get out of Azkaban to have any influence. He probably still pulls strings from his cell.


Solitaire - Jul 26, 2006 8:06 pm (#2859 of 2969)
Lucius has lied and lied and lied ... who would ever trust him again? He is Slytherin to the bone ... totally out for himself. I think Azkaban is a great place for him.

What's the worst Lucius has done? Putting the diary in with Ginny's books?

What? Lucius intended that Chamber to be opened, and you know what that means. Had Harry not gone down into the Chamber and killed the Basilisk and destroyed the Diary, Ginny would have died. Eventually, I believe more Muggle-borns than just Myrtle would also have died. As I see it, Lucius's actions must be seen as intent to commit murder, plain and simple.

Solitaire


Catherine - Jul 27, 2006 4:58 am (#2860 of 2969)
If we would like to debate about Lucius Malfoy, we do have a dedicated thread for him.. Lucius Malfoy


aggieamy - Jul 27, 2006 6:23 pm (#2861 of 2969)
Hi. Long (really long) time lurker, first time poster. I was reading a link I found on the Death Eater thread (http://www.madamscoop.org/themes/snape.htm) and found a really interesting JKR quote about Snape.

-- JKR thinks that that the thought of Snape in love is a "very horrible idea" and is stunned that someone wonders if Snape might fall in love. We will find out why in book 7. --

Any ideas on why the thought of Snape in love would be very horrible? I'm undecided on the Snape evil or just misunderstood issue but it seems either way I can't see how he being in love would be horrible. The greasy hair might be kind of a turn-off and I can't imagine him being romantic but even those people deserve love, right? Any thoughts?


Die Zimtzicke - Jul 27, 2006 9:25 pm (#2862 of 2969)
Coming late to the party again! (Born to write; forced to work.)I do not think Snape regularly tried to get Harry expelled. I certainly do not think he had the power to expell him. If he did want him expelled, he could have done it when Umbridge took control of Hogwarts. It would have been easy to goad her into expelling Harry after his Quibbler interview. Snape was noticable absent for most of the time when Umbridge was running the school. If he really wanted Harry out, he could have been working toward that then.

The problem with Harry and Snape is that Harry lets his own bias against Snape color every judgement he makes about the man, with the exception of the slight sympathy he feels for Snape in the "worst memory" scene. We're usually seeing Snape through Harry's own personal prejudices. This could possiblly be incorrect or based on false facts. Harry thinks Snape is evil and always out to get him and incabable of either goodness or redemption, so most of the readers do too, but Harry is not always right.

We'll have to wait and see if he's right this time.


journeymom - Jul 27, 2006 10:45 pm (#2863 of 2969)
Edited Jul 27, 2006 11:48 pm
" One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.

JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

[Interviewer] There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape.

JKR: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say."

Jo has described him as just a mean, nasty person. Well, let's think about what a mean, nasty person is like if he's in love. Maybe he's obsessive or possessive. I have a really hard time with this scenario because unfortunately, I've read soooo many Snape/'ship fan fictions that it's contaminated my thinking. But harken to what she said in a later interview, where she laughingly groaned in frustration with the fans who love Draco and Snape.

"I make this hero— Harry, obviously —and there he is on the screen, the perfect Harry, because Dan is very much as I imagine Harry, but who does every girl under the age of 15 fall in love with? Tom Felton as Draco Malfoy. Girls, stop going for the bad guy. Go for a nice man in the first place. It took me 35 years to learn that, but I am giving you that nugget free, right now, at the beginning of your love lives."

Maybe she's implying that Snape simply would be a horrible mate. Maybe he'd be abusive. This is HER Snape we're talking about. I have to admit, I've read many stories that convincingly portray Snape as a man redeemed by the love of a good woman. I eat them up like chocolate chip cookies. But isn't that what's at the base of many abusive relationships? The woman thought she could change him. He'd be different for her, somehow.

Jo I think has a different Snape in mind than many of her readers do. And definitly, Alan Rickman has affected the way I think about Snape. The -real- Snape, as I have to remind myself, is who Jo insists he is, somebody I wouldn't want in love with me. Who wouldn't I want in love with me? An emotionally stunted, witheringly sarcastic, slippery, sneaky, grudging man who is mean to children.

It would help if Rickman's Snape weren't dressed all in buttoned-up black, just a hint of white at the neck and wrists, billowing robes.


Solitaire - Jul 27, 2006 11:04 pm (#2864 of 2969)
It certainly does not sound, from that exchange, as if Snape is going to turn out to be a good guy, does it?


wynnleaf - Jul 28, 2006 4:06 am (#2865 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 5:07 am
It certainly does not sound, from that exchange, as if Snape is going to turn out to be a good guy, does it?

I suppose, Solitaire, it depends on what JKR was referring to. It obviously has to do with Book 7.

Suppose for instance that we learned in book 7 that Snape had a very obsessive love for Lily (I like the idea of friendship better, but I'm using this as an example). His very obsessive love for her is what causes him to turn from LV to DD in an effort to prevent her being hurt through LV's targeting of the Potters. It also is the reason why, after her death, he continues to want to bring down LV.

But his obsessive love of Lily also causes him to hate the memory of James, as well as to hate Harry because he sees Harry as a reason for Lily's death.

In that scenario, you've got a very obsessive kind of love -- not the kind of love you'd want someone to have for you -- which would fit JKR's warning. You also have an explanation for his hating Harry. But you also have a motivation for turning away from LV and working toward his downfall.

So, no. In my opinion JKR's comments do not in any way make it sound like Snape would be on the evil side. Particularly after her reaction to the comment about a redemptive pattern to Snape.


aggieamy - Jul 28, 2006 5:18 am (#2866 of 2969)
journeymom - I have to agree with your description of Alan Rickman's Snape and how our impressions of his character changed because of it and other factors like fanfic. Smile Good thing they made Voldemort look truly horrible in the film otherwise there'd be an indecent number of women thinking Voldemort's an evil git but Ralph Fiennes as Voldemort ... not bad. But I'll get back on topic for fear of getting booted off the Lexicon.

The problem I have with Snape and Lily is that I can't possibly see him being attacted to her. I picture Lily as a very beautiful, charming, and mainstream girl while Snape was deffinetly the kid in the black trenchcoat that sat in the back of the room creeping everyone out. To continue with my highschool analogy it was very rare that the weird creepy kid ever had enough interaction with the cute popular girl have any kind of love for her. There was more of a resentment. I can see that being the case with Snape and Lily. I image his type is more someone with his own dark and brooding personality. Please feel free to disagree with me though!


Magic Words - Jul 28, 2006 7:14 am (#2867 of 2969)
Aggieamy, I agree with what you said about the weird creepy high school kid never having much interaction with the cute popular girl. But that doesn't mean he can't be attracted to her. I think the major difference is that (at least in my experience) the cute popular girl tends to be part of a clique and would not hesitate to ignore or insult the weird creepy kid if he ever did try to interact with her. Lily wasn't like that at all. Snape wouldn't have needed to build up that defensive attitude that says "she doesn't like me, but that's ok because I don't like her either," which I think is often the case with unpopular students. So he was open to admiring and liking her.


Ann - Jul 28, 2006 8:14 am (#2868 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 9:16 am
" One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.

JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

If you actually listen to this snippet (which you can hear on a QuickTime link given on Lexicon page on Snape under Which Wizard), you'll notice that the transcript isn't quite correct. The "(JKR laughs)" is actually a "Yeah" that turns into a laugh. The quip that follows sounds a bit to me like a cover up. And it's the Internet person who asked about Snape falling in love (not the interviewer talking about redemption) that receives her final comment about being stunned at the suggestion and that you'll find out why when you read book 7. To me, that makes it likely that Snape will fall--or, more probably, has fallen--in love. We've learned since that interview that Snape has been loved (possibly by his mum, but maybe someone else), and I would suspect those two loves are reciprocal. Love is a huge theme in these books, and I don't think Snape is going to be at all exempted.

As for Solitaire's comment (It certainly does not sound, from that exchange, as if Snape is going to turn out to be a good guy, does it?), of course it doesn't sound like it from the exchange. All JKR's comments recently and going back for some time have been aimed at making us believe Harry's conclusion at the end of book 6 that Snape is inalterably evil. This can mean one of two things. Either she is fearful that young female readers will think that Snape is really good and be enticed into bad relationships in consequence; or she doesn't want to spoil our surprise when Snape turns out to be good. I think the second possibility is far more likely. But she has no cause to worry--Solitaire is definitely going to be surprised! (Just kidding!)


HungarianHorntail11 - Jul 28, 2006 8:47 am (#2869 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 9:56 am
Just wanted to add a quick bit, even though I am 120++ posts behind.

wynnleaf, you mentioned here, and most members probably agreed - including myself, that it seemed foolish for James to choose Sirius over DD as secret keeper. It seems so, but if DD told James that Snape informed him there was a rat among them, (EDIT: or if James found out on his own - remember, Harry found out it was Snape who overheard the original prophecy on his own) and that DD, himself, trusts Snape (not having given James an explanation) then I think it follows suit that James's trust in DD would wane - especially if James found out on his own (that could make James feel betrayed by DD, as we've seen Harry feel on occasion). End EDIT and run-on sentence! I know it sounds far-fetched, but James and Snape despised each other to the point where it could break down other more significant relationships.


wynnleaf - Jul 28, 2006 9:00 am (#2870 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 10:03 am
I think it follows suit that James's trust in DD would wane.

HH11,

I agree that James may not have trusted DD's information, at least if he knew who the spy was. But to me, if I was trying to protect my family from death, that wouldn't be the question. I'd tend to consider that even on the outside bare chance that one of my friends could be leaking information (even perhaps unknowingly or unwillingly), that it would be better to choose the surest person to keep the secret. Even if James didn't trust DD's info, he'd certainly know that DD was the very last person who would ever betray the Secret of their location. I mean, it wasn't like James was trying to protect his bank vault. He was trying to protect the lives of his family.

Back to Snape and JKR's quote.

Ann, I'm glad you brought up the audio. I had listened to it some time ago and couldn't recall the particulars. But you're right. It sounds more like she was trying to cover up and and dissuade the questioner from the idea that Snape could love someone. First she says "yeah," but then she says "who would want Snape in love with them" as though no one would be in love with Snape. But then, if that's so, why act so amazed that someone would ask about it and then say that her amazement relates to Book 7?

As for the likelihood of Lily liking Snape at Hogwarts. Well, we really don't know exactly what he was like other than Marauder ideas of him, which were obviously biased. And then there's the pensieve scene. Based on that, I can't understand why she'd like James. In that scene, Snape just looks like an unattractive, nerdy, sort of geeky introvert. But since I actually know of several beautiful, popular girls who fell for not-so-attractive, nerdy, introverts, this doesn't really seem too hard to believe. Still, I'm more leaning toward the idea of friends, but I suppose Snape could have loved her.


Choices - Jul 28, 2006 10:48 am (#2871 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 11:54 am
It is so fascinating to speculate about our beloved characters and who they loved or didn't love, etc. I hope we all realize what a deliciously delightful dilemma we are all in. Once book 7 comes out, it will all be over.....the waiting and the speculating and the wonderful anticipation. I have enjoyed every minute of it - the theories, the what if's, the mystery, the not knowing, the yearning for the next book. We have been privileged to be a part of it all. We know what it is to wait, to pass the time wondering what surprises await us.

Once book 7 comes out, future readers of the series will have all the books at their fingertips - they can read through to the end and have all the answers (hopefully). They will not know the full enjoyment of coming to the forum, reading all the ideas, partaking in the friendly arguments, and simply trying to figure out this, or that, or the other, about the books. It's been a long ride, but the company and the discussions have been great and I, for one, have enjoyed it tremendously. I eagerly await the last book, yet at the same time, I will really miss this opportunity we have had to read and to discuss what we think is coming next.


journeymom - Jul 28, 2006 11:03 am (#2872 of 2969)
Choices, I think I'm going to cry! Lol!


Soul Search - Jul 28, 2006 11:05 am (#2873 of 2969)
Well said, Choices.

There are forums discussing books and series that have long been published. We don't have to stop, as long as we have the Lexicon, of course.

I wonder though. I think most of my interest has been in trying to figure out what is going to happen in the next book. My activity may wane after book seven.


Choices - Jul 28, 2006 11:14 am (#2874 of 2969)
Edited Jul 28, 2006 12:39 pm
Soul Search - "I wonder though. I think most of my interest has been in trying to figure out what is going to happen in the next book. My activity may wane after book seven."

That's exactly my point - we can still come here and discuss, but it just won't be the same. We have been able to look at the story from a unique perspective - looking forward, but after book 7 our perspective will change forever - never again will we look at the story with the same wondering and anticipation that we have enjoyed up to now.


Soul Search - Jul 28, 2006 11:52 am (#2875 of 2969)
Unless JKR decides to write more Harry Potter books!


Saracene - Jul 28, 2006 4:57 pm (#2876 of 2969)
Vulture: thanks for answering my question.

I understand that this is how you feel about the tone of the book and the way Snape is written in it, but I'm not sure though if you can make these very broad assumptions about how "we" or "the reader" see the Book 5 or what "our view" of Snape is like after Book 5. If only because I myself, who is also "the reader", didn't really see the Book 5 that way. For one thing, I didn't feel that the tone of the book was indicating that Snape was on the good side and I wasn't any surer about his loyalties by the end. I only became firmly convinced that Snape was on the good side after Book 6. Until then I felt that Harry's scepticism about Snape was perfectly valid, because after the fourth book it wasn't just a matter of Snape looking like an overgrown bat and being mean to Harry - the man used to be a Death Eater and that's some serious skeleton in the closet to have.

And yes, I totally took Snape's Padfoot comments to Harry on the face value, at the time.


Solitaire - Jul 28, 2006 8:59 pm (#2877 of 2969)
I'm not going to be surprised, Ann. Just because I do not like Snape doesn't mean I expect her to make him Voldemort's number one guy. Besides, I was not shocked with Sirius died, and I wasn't shocked when Dumbledore died. I hated the fact that they died, but I was not shocked. Nothing Jo does would shock me ... unless it happened to be making Remus bad. That would be far more disturbing to me than having Snape fall in love or be loved by Lily.

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Jul 29, 2006 2:11 pm (#2878 of 2969)
Edited Jul 29, 2006 3:13 pm
Vulture,

I'm sorry. I got off on my Lupin tangent in the Lupin thread and forgot to get back and answer you.

In broad terms I'll address a few things.

1. I think a lot of whether or not we see Snape being portrayed as unfair, mean, nasty, etc. in particular scenes has a lot to do with our personal "take" on the text. So I can clearly see that there are scenes where you might think of him as coming off fairly well, but I still see JKR continuing to have the readers as well as the student characters convinced of his nastiness. You seem to see it in his actions; I think I'm often looking at some of the descriptive adjectives. But certainly there are scenes, particularly with adults, where Snape comes out looking rather well.

2. I agree with you that in OOTP, the status of Snape is left as "Snape is a spy for the Order," -- for the most part. However, we still see Harry and Ron having considerable doubts, particularly as occlumency lessons appear to leave Harry more open to LV getting in his mind. I, as a reader, never had any doubts in OOTP about Snape's loyalty -- but then, I didn't in HBP either, so I can't use me as anything to go by. Still, it has a lot to do with how one approaches the character. My two older teenagers have told me that they always liked Snape best and always thought he was loyal. Obviously, they were getting their understanding from the same authorial intent that made other readers hate him. Still, I tend to think the overall direction of the writing is to put a more negative slant on his character than positive.

3. Do I try to let Snape off the hook for everything? No. I suppose it appears that I see no wrong in Snape. But it's really a matter of what needs to be defended and what is so patently obvious to everyone that it needs no comment. I occasionally affirm that Snape is unfair or mean to HRH and others; that he won't forgive Sirius and James, even in the face of DD's huge forgiveness of him; and that he almost certainly speaks from his own experience when he talks about LV using emotions to turn one. I often comment on his taking out his hatred of James onto Harry. But frankly, there's not much to discuss in terms of saying "Snape is mean." So what? There's nobody out there that disagrees and it doesn't make for much discussion.

When the author presents Snape as mean and nasty, and especially now as a murderer, then if one believes that the character is actually loyal, almost certainly highly courageous, etc., then it's in defending Snape where the discussion usually goes. Unlike many who think Snape's loyalties are unknown, I think it's really pretty clear -- so I see no need, for me, to check out the possibilities of his disloyalty, since I think those are practically non-existent.

However, I sometimes think that other posters assume that I think Snape is just wonderful, not nasty at all, completely fair, etc. Well, I don't think that.


winlia - Aug 2, 2006 6:38 pm (#2879 of 2969)
Regarding Snape as a romantic interest--We really don't see him in social situations with adults. He may be more personable than he appears to the kids. More to the point, he may like the company of adults more than he likes teaching.

I agree than Alan Rickman and the fan-fic influence my perception of Snape, but the character as he's written must have something going for him given that so many of us like him so much. (The extent to which I worry about the possibility of his demise in 7 is irrational considering that he's a fictional character.)

One of life's lessons that has taken me a long time to learn is that people can be beastly to some, and fine with others. I have a couple of co-workers with whom I (and many others) have had years of positive business-related interactions, yet I've known them to be nasty and unfair to at least a couple of individuals. Wouldn't want those folks as friends.


Solitaire - Aug 2, 2006 8:09 pm (#2880 of 2969)
people can be beastly to some, and fine with others

You are so right, Winlia. This happened with someone I'd considered one of my three closest friends for several years. It was not until I got into a working situation with her that I discovered how inconsiderate she could be with other people (not me). Because I cared for her like a sister, I tried to talk with her about how her behavior was making her appear to others. She didn't care ... she was in a power position with these particular people and she felt entitled to abuse that power. The whole thing spelled the end of our friendship.

Solitaire
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 2881 to 2930

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 5:30 am

wynnleaf - Aug 2, 2006 8:53 pm (#2881 of 2969)
I would really love to know what Salman Rushdie said tonight.

JKR answered Rushdie's question tonight by saying "your opinion is correct." But so far, reading on both Mugglenet and the Leaky Cauldron, everyone who has mentioned what Rushdie said has mentioned that it was difficult to figure out just what he meant. Apparently he seemed to be talking about a theory of Snape's basic goodness, but it was hard for people to be sure. I'd love to read a transcript. Hope there is one.

I know it seems amazing that she'd actually answer that question directly, but it sounded like she was just a little amazed to be getting that question from Salman Rushdie who came up to the microphone as a regular audience member.

Does anyone know more about what Rushdie actually said?


wynnleaf - Aug 3, 2006 5:13 am (#2882 of 2969)
I'll add something.

Even though we don't yet have a transcript, once we do get a transcript I think it will be important to remember that JKR didn't actually read Rushdie's question, she was listening like everyone else in the room. Everyone that I've seen comment on it said that it was confusing and that JKR's "your opinion is correct," may not carry much weight since she may not have understood his question any more than the audience appeared to. Her "correct" comment may have referred to his comments about DD or some small aspect of his question, or just be mistakenly answering what JKR thought he meant.

Still, I want to see what Rushdie said.


Laura W - Aug 3, 2006 5:34 am (#2883 of 2969)
"(The extent to which I worry about the possibility of his demise in 7 is irrational considering that he's a fictional character.)"

Not on this Forum it isn't, winlia! That just shows you are in the right place.

Laura


Wizadora - Aug 3, 2006 5:36 am (#2884 of 2969)
Mugglenet report says "He spoke of how Severus Snape had always been unlikable, but still one of the good guys. However, now, he seems bad although we don’t really want to believe it, because Snape’s wickedness would indicate that Dumbledore is dead. Finally the question ended in: is Snape good or bad?"

Is she confirmed that DD is dead and said his theory is correct, does this then confirm Snape's "wickedness"?


Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 3, 2006 6:21 am (#2885 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2006 7:22 am
Wizadora, the nature of the Salman Rushdie's question seems to me after reading both the The Leaky Cauldron summary and the Mugglenet summary us based on the supposition that Snape is intrinsically good even though he may be unlikable and unpleasant and so possesses a redemptive quality, which Voldemort lacks. I would assert that in light of this the exchanges between Severus and Albus on the Tower and Severus and Harry during his flight make more sense.


wynnleaf - Aug 3, 2006 6:31 am (#2886 of 2969)
Yes, Nathan, I had that impression. But without the transcripts it's hard to tell -- and even with the transcripts, it may be hard to tell exactly what JKR was answering, or if she even completely understood the question.

Mugglenet has a recent report where that observer seemed to think that Rushdie was saying that we readers don't want Snape to be evil because that would mean DD was really dead. Of course, JKR could answer "your opinion is correct," to that sort of comment without it meaning one way or the other anything about Snape's loyalty. If he's loyal, he could AK DD at DD's orders and DD be dead. But if Snape's really evil, then his AK of DD also certainly killed him.

It does appear that observers thought Rushdie was theorizing that Snape is intrinsically good, but that doesn't mean that's what JKR was agreeing with.


Wizadora - Aug 3, 2006 7:21 am (#2887 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2006 8:22 am
My head hurts now. I just need to know if he is good or not!!!!!!!!!!!! I had a funny dream recently after watching the Da vinci code. I was running around random places trying to save the world from something which all hindged on whether Snape was good or not. Very disturbing indeed and made my husband roll his eyes when I told him in the morning.

I am sure that JKR would never spill the beans on Snape even to fellow great authors. As it would as she said too "ruin 16 years of work". But one can hope.


Snuffles - Aug 3, 2006 7:52 am (#2888 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2006 8:52 am
Anyone got any Veritaserum lying around?....


So Sirius - Aug 3, 2006 8:58 am (#2889 of 2969)
I think that the answer to his question where JKR answered "your opinion is correct" is her way of saying, he's good and bad and that whatever opinion you, the reader, has of him, will turn out to be correct. Perhaps he exhibits both qualities at given times, with different people. For some he's good, for some he's evil.

Maybe his wrestling with his own demeanor has merit. I listed in the forum a while back that I think that Snape made an unbreakable vow with DD. I think perhaps that the reason DD trusted Snape was because DD knew that Snape couldn't break this vow. I think the vow was to protect the prophecy or keep it secret and to protect Harry. But, Snape is not a good guy and wrestles with this vow. Given that he must, based on this, do the good or right thing ultimately, he will have no choice but to be good, although he's not.


Solitaire - Aug 3, 2006 10:57 am (#2890 of 2969)
Interesting ideas, So Sirius! Since I have to believe Snape was perfectly capable of taking Harry out in the battle, perhaps that is why he spared him ... because he had no choice.

Solitaire


Dobby Socks - Aug 3, 2006 11:34 am (#2891 of 2969)
wynnleaf and all, I definitely would like to see a direct quote on the Salman Rushdie question instead of a paraphrase. And I agree that if everyone else was confused by his question, JKR might have been as well. If she had no foreknowledge of the questions and who was asking them, I can definitely see her being a bit discombobulated by Rushdie standing up in the audience and asking her a question. :::chuckles::: So I agree that her answer has to be taken with a grain of salt due to the circumstances.

Mugglenet has been reporting that the event will be broadcast on MSN, so maybe we’ll be able to tell then.

Basically, as far as I can tell, the heart of what Rushdie stated was, if Dumbledore isn’t dead, then can we assume that Snape’s good? And, we don’t want to think Snape is bad, because that would mean DD is truly dead. So what he wanted to know was, 1. Is Dumbledore dead? 2. Is Snape good or bad? and 3. Can the readers assume a direct correlation between the two things? I think she only answered #1.

I want to believe Snape is good for many reasons. But most of all because if he’s evil, it will undermine, in my opinion, the best writing in HBP (the parallels or mirroring of the DD/Harry and the DD/Snape interactions, and “The Flight of the Prince.”)

For all of that to be set up as a red herring just doesn’t make sense to me. I guess because these were the factual actions her characters performed (well, and dialogue, etc.)

Does that make any sense?

Anyway, the more I read reports of Rushdie’s question and her answer (if she understood it,) the more I think she managed to dodge the question. The answer “your opinion was correct” can be taken in too many ways.

OK… I can’t find my link to the page that explains how to make a link, LOL, (and I’m getting tired.) Gina’s now posted a detailed version of Rushdie’s question as she heard it. It’s at Meeting Up at Radio City post #390. And journeymom’s post #400 is interesting too.


wynnleaf - Aug 3, 2006 1:49 pm (#2892 of 2969)
Edited Aug 3, 2006 3:21 pm
Dobby Socks,

Here is a link to the page with your post and Gina's post describing the event:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

I'm not any good at doing links, so that's just a basic link.

I agree with your above post.

What Rushdie was apparently not saying was, "if DD is dead then Snape is bad," however, it sounds like people heard him saying that basically, "if DD is alive, Snape is good; if Snape is bad, DD is dead." Rushdie seemed to think DD and Snape were working together on a plan. It's hard to tell if JKR was agreeing with that or not. Based on Gina's description, it would sounded like JKR was agreeing that the two were working together, but that DD was in fact dead. It's hard for me to believe that JKR would give that much away, although she was probably somewhat flustered with Rushdie coming up to ask such a detailed question.


Ann - Aug 4, 2006 3:13 am (#2893 of 2969)
Journymom had a post later in that same thread, based on Gina's transcription of the change. Rushdie apparently ended his question saying (I paraphrase), so, is Snape good or bad, because everything flows from that question. Journeymom suggested that JKR's response (your opinion is right) just addressed that last statement; she was agreeing that Snape's goodness or badness is crucially important. After all, the only other opinion he offered was the theory that Dumbledore and Snape had worked out some way to keep Dumbledore alive, and she directly contradicted that, saying, no, he's dead.

It seems to be a difference between talking and writing. When you answer a question in writing, you can go back and read it over and deal with all of it or whatever parts interest you. But I've noticed (in listening to transcripts of interviews after reading them) that in a spoken exchange, it tends to be the last bit that gets answered.


cindysuewho45 - Aug 4, 2006 11:43 pm (#2894 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2006 12:49 am
Hi all, I find all the new stuff interesting. But I still seem to think back to the interview, The Leaky Cauldron and MN Interview JKR. " MA: OK, big big big book six question. Is Snape evil?" "JKR: (Almost laughing) Well, you've read the book, what do you think?" "ES: She's trying to make you say it categorically." "MA: Well, there are conspiracy theorists, and there are people who will claim." "JKR: Cling to some desperate hope (laughter)-" "ES: Yes!" "MA: Yes!" "ES: Like certain shippers we know!" "(All laugh)" "JKR: Well, okay, I'm obviously - Harry - Snape is now as personal, if not more so Harry - Voldemort." ETC..ETC..ETC.. Now that said, I can not help but think that she was telling us, without telling us, that Snape is evil. She has said before that she loves the theories, and will not say to much so that people will not share there theories. Or something like that. But it seems to me that the shippers they were talking about, were not right about Hermione and Harry. So I was thinking that, the conspiracy theorists about Snape being good, were not right. And where she says "cling to some desperate hope (laughter)" this puts me over the line to Snape is or was evil. I could be wrong, but this was my take on this interview. What do you all think?


Saracene - Aug 5, 2006 12:49 am (#2895 of 2969)
Well, I thought that JKR was simply employing the time-honoured technique of answering a question with a question to avoid answering the original question, Smile

You could also look at it this way: would JKR say any different if she -did- plan to reveal Snape to be ultimately on the good side in the final book? I doubt it.


Ann - Aug 5, 2006 3:55 am (#2896 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2006 4:56 am
I agree with Saracene. I think, however, that she didn't envision this controversy at all. By having Snape kill Dumbledore, she thought she'd ensured that we'd all to think Snape was evil without question. I certainly have friends who thought, okay, that's decided the issue. That way we'd all be tremendously surprised when he turns out to be good, and then we could go back and see the clever clues she has planted all along that point to that.

But by the mere fact that Melissa and Emerson (both analytical, suspicious people who read carefully) asked *whether* he was evil first off, she was thrown for a loop. She couldn't say, yes, of course he's evil, because he isn't. (If he were evil, I would expect her to have said, what are you talking about? He murdered Dumbledore! Of course he's evil.) So she equated any question at all to the shippers' wild theories. The fact that there's any question at all, and she hasn't squashed it, actually argues *for* Snape's goodness, cindysue. And then, of course, there are all those clever clues that we weren't supposed to notice until we'd finished Book 7....


Saracene - Aug 5, 2006 4:55 am (#2897 of 2969)
Heh, I almost wish sometimes that they could conduct a world-wide HP poll and ask every single reader whether they thought that Snape was truly evil after HBP. After all, the HP boards and a few accounts of what my brother/sister/parents/significant other/friends etc. thought can't really give a full picture of what the majority of the readers think, IMO.


Ann - Aug 5, 2006 9:41 am (#2898 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2006 10:43 am
I've noticed a huge difference, actually, talking to people on these discussion boards and reading the interviews and web sites. I would say that, here, the prevailing opinion is that Snape is going to turn out, if not good, at least acting to help destroy Voldemort. At least half of the posters seem to think so.

On the other hand, more... er... ordinary people (including kids) who I've talked to, who aren't as into it as we are, just seem to share Harry's viewpoint. And I'm sure that's really what JKR wanted. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition...!


Solitaire - Aug 5, 2006 11:52 am (#2899 of 2969)
By having Snape kill Dumbledore, she thought she'd ensured that we'd all to think Snape was evil without question.

I disagree. Jo reads the fan sites (we know she has read this one, since it has received an award) often enough to know that there are plenty of fans who will attempt to work out why Snape's actions are not evil. I believe she also knows there are people who will never admit Snape to be good--AND people who will never admit that he is truly evil--until everything is thoroughly explained and clarified at the end ... and maybe not even then! Throwing in that Vow muddied Snape's motives for AKing Dumbledore, and I believe Jo knew it when she wrote it! **imagining Jo giving an evil chuckle here**

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition...!

LOL! Actually, where HP is concerned ... I think she expects a lot more than she has gotten!

Solitaire


Saracene - Aug 5, 2006 5:38 pm (#2900 of 2969)
"Jo reads the fan sites (we know she has read this one, since it has received an award) often enough to know that there are plenty of fans who will attempt to work out why Snape's actions are not evil."

Of course there are. But I think the point is that people who visit and post on HP fan sites and discussion boards would not be casual fans who IMO constitute the majority of the readers. I think that, as with any fandom, there's a larger circle of fans who simply enjoy the books and then there's a small minority who have this extra level of involvement with the story and characters and who obsess over the small details and look at the books analytically. Besides, spending time on the net discussing books/music/TV/whatever is not something that every person would choose to do with their time.

In any case, I think it all comes down to the fact that it is Harry's story and that the majority of the big twists JKR pulls are mainly meant for Harry first and reader second. Of course, ideally any writer would want to catch their readers by surprise but it's impossible to have 100% control over that (I figured out straight away that Snape was a red herring in the first book, for instance).


Solitaire - Aug 5, 2006 7:23 pm (#2901 of 2969)
she thought she'd ensured that we'd all [to] think Snape was evil without question

Saracene, I was responding to the above sentiment only. I do not think she thought we all would think Snape was evil without question. I think she knew some would continue to think it ... and some would change their minds and think it ... and some would continue to think there were extenuating circumstances and believe Snape is still essentially good. That's all!

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Aug 5, 2006 9:02 pm (#2902 of 2969)
I don't imagine JKR thought that everyone would think Snape was evil after HBP. However, I'd bet that she did think support for Snape among the stronger fans would at least diminish somewhat. Gina and Dobby Socks both (I think) seemed to think the level of Snape support the other night surprised JKR.

She's spent five books showing us what a mean, nasty person we're supposed to think he is, and still a large number of the stronger fans supported him. Then she has him AK DD, and I imagine she thought that at least would break the high level of confidence that so many fans had in Snape. I do think the continued level of support for Snape has surprised her.

What was she supposed to say to Melissa and Emerson, or to Rushdie for that matter? "Yes, Snape is loyal. Don't worry." She has to continue to present him as the evil traitor.

But if Snape was truly evil, then HBP proved it, right? And if Snape's being evil was proved in HBP, why continue to be so cagey about it? After all, JKR is now coming out and saying "DD is dead." So if Snape being evil was really clear in HBP, just as DD is dead, why not just say so? Why not answer Rushdie with, "Well, you saw him AK DD. He's evil, of course," just as she answered Rushdie with "DD is dead."

In a way, continuing to skirt the issue of Snape's supposed evil, even after it's been "proven" by his AKing DD, makes it rather clear that it isn't proven in HBP.


cindysuewho45 - Aug 5, 2006 9:18 pm (#2903 of 2969)
Hi all, I feel that JKR is not saying alot about Snape, because along time ago, in a interview she said that Snape has a redemptive quality about him. So I feel that to be redemptive, you first have to do something wrong. And then try to make it right. So I can see Snape as evil, but I also feel that he will end up doing something for Harry, that will help him. I think that is why JKR is not saying anything.???????????


Solitaire - Aug 5, 2006 9:32 pm (#2904 of 2969)
Edited Aug 5, 2006 10:33 pm
along time ago, in a interview she said that Snape has a redemptive quality about him.

Are you sure it was Jo who said Snape had a redemptive pattern? This is what I found on Mugglenet:

The fascinating character that he is, Snape has come up in many an interview with J.K. Rowling. For example, on Snape's "redemptive pattern," Rowling said this:

There's so much I wish I could say to you, and I can't because it'd ruin... I promise you... whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I'm -- I'm slightly stunned that you've said that -- erm -- and you'll find out why I'm so stunned if you read book 7. And that's all I'm going to say (October 12, 1999, The Connection).

It sounds to me like the interviewer brought up the concept of Snape having a redemptive pattern, and Jo was responding that she was surprised that someone would feel that way. Perhaps I am misunderstanding her. Of course, a lot has happened since 1999, too. Perhaps she has changed Snape ...

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Aug 6, 2006 7:51 am (#2905 of 2969)
Edited Aug 6, 2006 8:52 am
Actually, if you listen to the audio of that interview, it sounds a lot more like JKR was responding to the question about whether or not Snape had ever been in love (or maybe it's whether he'd been loved?). Anyway, I can't remember who, but someone recently pointed us toward where we could listen to the audio. When you read it, it looks like JKR was responding to the redemptive comment, but when you listen to it, it sounds like her response is about the love question.

I found the quote

One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love. JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape JKR: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say.

Thing is, when JKR says "I promise you, whoever asked that question..." she's talking about the person that asked if Snape was ever going to fall in love.

Maybe someone who knows where it is can tell us where to find the audio again.


Fawkes Egg - Aug 6, 2006 12:15 pm (#2906 of 2969)
Interesting point about Snape inadvertently helping to destroy Voldemort: rather a Gollum-like figure in many respects, isn't he? Lonely, shunned and now shunning others with his sarcasm and nastiness - plus he was/is a Death Eater and there seems no redemption from being a DE. In fact as Sirius once said, "It's a lifetime of service or death."

Not much of an outwardly redemptive pattern there, if we consider that if Sirius knew that being a DE was all or nothing, Snape must surely have known it too. That's not to say that Snape won't somehow unwittingly play into Harry's hands during the hunt for Horcruxes or the final battle with Big V.


Ann - Aug 6, 2006 7:08 pm (#2907 of 2969)
Edited Aug 6, 2006 8:09 pm
wynnleaf & Solitaire, the link to the audio of that snippet is on the Lexicon "Which Wizard" page for Snape, just before the section on "Appearance." It is quite clear that she's not talking about the "redemptive pattern" the interviewer proposed--it's pretty clear that she's ignored that (why, I wonder?) and she's still answering the internet question about Snape falling in love.

The link is: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] (Perhaps by giving you that, I'll make up for the typo that was pointed out in my previous post. Ooops!)

Why should Snape's helping Harry destroy Voldemort be "unwitting"? He made a bad choice (at about 19 years of age, and which of us can't relate to that?), but according to Dumbledore, he regretted it an changed sides. Certainly, helping Harry to get rid of Voldemort would be "redemptive"; although, if you listen to the snippet referenced above, you'll see that she herself has said nothing about redemption. But I think his help is going to be completely "witting."


Solitaire - Aug 6, 2006 7:59 pm (#2908 of 2969)
Edited Aug 6, 2006 9:02 pm
Ann, it still looks that way to me from this site:

One of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.
JKR: (JKR laughs) Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea.

There’s an important kind of redemptive pattern to Snape.
JKR: He, um, there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it would ruin. I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say.

Well, I suppose ... but I think her answer also pertains to the "redemptive pattern" remark. JM2K ...

Edit: Why should Snape's helping Harry destroy Voldemort be "unwitting"?

Because Snape has heard the Prophecy--or part of it--so he must know that it is not his job to kill Voldemort.

Solitaire


Dobby Socks - Aug 7, 2006 7:33 am (#2909 of 2969)
Ann: Why should Snape's helping Harry destroy Voldemort be "unwitting"?

Solitare: Because Snape has heard the Prophecy--or part of it--so he must know that it is not his job to kill Voldemort.

Dumbledore’s heard the prophecy, and he’d been out Horcrux hunting for at least a year (and destroyed one of them.) He’s also told Harry that “the power the Dark Lord knows not” is, in his opinion, love. He’s done much to help Harry.

And I think we’re all expecting, at the least, that Hermione and Ron will be helping Harry to locate and destroy the Horcruxes.

So I don’t see why Snape can’t purposefully help if he has the inclination to do so.

My read is that Harry will have to destroy the soul bit that resides in Voldemort himself. I would have thought he’d have to destroy all of LV’s soul, but since DD took care of the ring, I guess not. Unless DD did so “unwittingly,” which I doubt.


Solitaire - Aug 7, 2006 9:35 am (#2910 of 2969)
You are right, Dobby Socks. I was thinking of Snape actually entering into battle with Voldemort alongside Harry. He could still help, though--if he were so inclined--without doing that. My apologies to Ann, Fawkes Egg, and anyone else ...

Solitaire


Ann - Aug 7, 2006 2:54 pm (#2911 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2006 3:56 pm
Solitaire, there's no need to apologize at all. My point is that if you listen to what is actually said (using the link on the Lexicon's Snape page, you'll find that what is said is not exactly what is transcribed. This is my, less coherent, but more accurate take on what is said.

Interviewer: Uh... One of our Canadian... one of our internet correspondents wondered if Snape is going to fall in love.

JKR: Yeah-ha! (Yeah turns into laugh.) Uh... Who on earth would want Snape in love with them? That’s a very horrible idea. Um...

Interviewer: But he’s got an important kind of redemptive uh... pattern to Snape and he...

JKR (talking over him from the word redemptive: Yes, it is, isn’t it? I.. I've got... there’s so much I wish I could say to you, and I can’t because it ruins.... I promise you, whoever asked that question, can I just say to you that I’m... I’m slightly stunned that you’ve said that and you’ll find out why I’m so stunned if you read Book 7. That’s all I’m going to say.

So she does agree about the redemptive quality, but what really seems to have stunned her is the question about his falling in love.


haymoni - Aug 7, 2006 3:36 pm (#2912 of 2969)
I'm pretty sure there was a similar conversation in the Melissa/Emerson interview.


Solitaire - Aug 7, 2006 3:39 pm (#2913 of 2969)
Edited Aug 7, 2006 4:40 pm
I think the "yes it is" is her referring back to the "very horrible idea," although that whole spot in the interview seems a bit muddled. The way I see it, the part where she says, "I'm slightly stunned that you've said that and you'll find out why" is moving ahead and referring to the redemptive pattern comment. As I said, I guess it is how one interprets what is said. It's hard when one is not there to ask for a clarification of what was just said! (Still no email, Haymoni!)

Solitaire


haymoni - Aug 7, 2006 3:47 pm (#2914 of 2969)
I just tried again Solitare - I had used HotMail earlier but I tried the other one at the top of your profile this time.


cindysuewho45 - Aug 7, 2006 9:39 pm (#2915 of 2969)
Hi all, I just got back from re reading almost all the interview's I could find on Snape that JKR has given, so far. And I have to say that it did not make me feel that Snape is a good guy. This was in the Lexicon-Madam Scoops-by Theme- Snape. There were things like, Deeply horrible person, Sadistic teacher, more to him than meets the eye, Snape in love "very horrible idea", "You shouldn't think Snape is too nice", Harry-Snape is now as personal, if not more so, than Harry-Voldemort. In all that I read, I did not find anything that made me feel like Snape is a good guy. This stands true for the books also. Do not get me wrong, I like reading the books and all about Snape. He is one of the best wizards in the books, just as I see it,not a good guy, but a evil one.


wynnleaf - Aug 8, 2006 1:16 am (#2916 of 2969)
JKR has made the true loyalties of Snape one of the big mysteries of the series. She certainly can't say nice things about him in interviews. Because she wrote the character to be sarcastic, caustic, and hating Harry, and sometimes cruel to other students, it is very easy for her to only speak of his negative characteristics in interviews. I certainly wouldn't expect her to do anything differently.

But would you really expect to believe JKR is giving you the full story on her biggest character mystery when she focuses on the negative about him in interviews? For me, the very fact that she focuses so much on his negatives in interviews is a pretty strong indicator that she's hiding the positives from us.

Oh, that's not true about every character she talks about -- naturally. The other character's loyalties aren't particularly up for question, so there's no need to focus on the positive side of Voldemort, or the negative side of Dumbledore, just to trick us. She is not, after all, trying to hide anything about most of the character's loyalties.


Saracene - Aug 8, 2006 2:20 am (#2917 of 2969)
I think it all depends on what you mean by "good guy". When I mention Good!Snape I mean to say that I think Snape is on the good -side-, rather than that he is a good -person-. I'm in full agreement with JKR on her remarks about Snape being sadistic, deeply horrible, etc. I just don't think it automatically means that Snape can't possibly be on the good side.


Soul Search - Aug 8, 2006 6:05 am (#2918 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2006 7:10 am
We have discussed how the reader mostly sees Snape through Harry's eyes. Harry always looks for the worst in Snape, interpreting everything from a "Snape hates me" viewpoint. And, as soon as SS, this viewpoint developed into Harry also hating Snape. As cindysuewho45 pointed out a couple of posts ago, JKR reinforces the "Snape hates Harry" theme in most every interview where Snape is mentioned.

Recall, also, that Snape knew Harry's parents. In OotP we learn that James was "the best at whatever he did" and in HBP that Lily was a superior student, especially at potions. Snape also knows that Harry is supposed to defeat Voldemort. Snape expects Harry to be some sort of superstar, but Harry appears quite ordinary. Snape expresses this opinion in HBP, "Spinner's End."

While rereading recently I tried to get a glimpse of Snape without Harry's bias.

When I reread passages that Harry sees as Snape hating him, I can see that Snape is more disappointed with Harry than an object of his hate. Snape has very high expectations for Harry, and Harry does not live up to them.

Snape's expectations of Harry are a bit unreasonable, but disappointment is quite different from outright hate. Snape's view of Harry is also self-fulfilling: Snape expresses his disappointment by criticizing Harry, which causes Harry to do poorly, which reinforces Snape's disappointment.

I am not saying Snape is really fond of Harry; he most certainly isn't. Nor is Snape "good;" he is a nasty piece of work. But, Snape doesn't really "hate" Harry. Through Snape's eyes, Harry is a major disappointment.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 8, 2006 7:11 am (#2919 of 2969)
I never thought of Snape as a totally good guy. Or a totally bad one. He's not out for the order, or for Voldmeort as I see it. He's out for himself. Not everyone is totally good or totally evil. That simplifies things too much for me personally.

As we were discussing on the Dumbledore thread, Snape must have been the one who reported back that Voldemort was furious with Lucius about the diary being ruined. That's one thing that reinforces for me that he looks out for himself. That event probably improved his stock with both Dumbledore and Voldemort.


haymoni - Aug 8, 2006 7:45 am (#2920 of 2969)
Snape didn't have to hear the whole prophesy to figure out that Harry was The Chosen One.

Snape himself is a very accomplished wizard and may feel that he, himself, could take out The Dark Lord any time he wants.

But, no - see, there's this "prophesy" that says the Potter kid is the one that has to do it.

Now how is he going to take out The Dark Lord when he can't even make a potion correctly or use non-verbal spells?

I'm sure Snape is very frustrated with our young Mr. Potter.


Soul Search - Aug 8, 2006 8:32 am (#2921 of 2969)
I don't think Snape is "out for himself," exactly.

We saw at the end of PoA that Snape was quite pleased when Fudge was suggesting the "Order of Merlin" for his role in capturing Sirius Black and saving Harry, Hermione, and Ron. Snape seeks recognition by the wizarding world, but his double spy role absolutely prevents it.

My view of Snape is that, like Harry, he is "Dumbledore's man, through and through." He has dedicated himself to Voldemort's extinction.

With the wizarding world thinking he cruelly murdered Dumbledore, any kind of positive recognition for his efforts is going to be even more difficult, but I think it will come.


Potter Ace - Aug 8, 2006 8:38 am (#2922 of 2969)
Haymoni,

I like you thoughts in the last post, that combined with his reaction to being called a coward by Harry leads me to believe that he thinks that Harry is rather sub-standard and not worthy of of the glory that would come with defeating LV. There is a lot of jealousy in his actions and words towards Harry. I think Die has the right approach, he is out for himself and he alone should be considered the greatest wizard of all time, even more so than DD because of all that he had done.


Choices - Aug 8, 2006 9:47 am (#2923 of 2969)
Yes, Snape is a marvelous character, but he is not a nice person. I think Snape probably does good things because those good things just happen to also be what is best for Snape. I doubt he would do good if it did not further Snape's own agenda. I tend to think Dumbledore has him somewhat "over a barrel" and his seemingly "good works" are being forced on him. He does them because it is what he has to do to get what he wants.


haymoni - Aug 8, 2006 10:29 am (#2924 of 2969)
And those house elves at Hogwarts make the best chicken legs...


Magic Words - Aug 8, 2006 3:25 pm (#2925 of 2969)
I place him in the murky area between "out for himself" and "Dumbledore's man." He's a Slytherin, put simply, but I believe at some point he decided that his goals would be best served by allying himself with Dumbledore. By this I mean deafeating Voldemort became one of his greatest goals--therefore he's unable to cast off Dumbledore in favor of a better opportunity, because no better opportunity will ever come along.

Another way of putting it would be that Snape is loyal to Dumbledore, but not for loyalty's sake or the sake of Dumbledore himself (the way Harry is loyal for Dumbledore's sake or Hufflepuffs are loyal because it's in their nature). Snape is loyal to Dumbledore because he and Dumbledore share a common goal, the defeat of Voldemort, and Dumbledore is better equipped to achieve that goal, so Snape's best course of action is to let Dumbledore work and help the best he can.


Soul Search - Aug 8, 2006 5:00 pm (#2926 of 2969)
Magic Words,

I like the way you have characterized the Dumbledore/Snape relationship. In a previous post I said Snape was "Dumbledore's man, through and through." That may be overstated, at least compared to the same description of Harry and Dumbledore.

Dumbledore could, indeed, trust Snape. Snape remains dedicated to Voldmeort's defeat, and therefore helping Harry when the time comes. But his initial reasons and current motivations may be more in line with your description.

Could Harry be that "better opportunity?" And Snape resents it, or is skeptical of Harry's chances? At some point Snape will have to put his life in Harry's hands. He could be fearful of Harry's ability to defeat Voldemort.


TheSaint - Aug 8, 2006 6:21 pm (#2927 of 2969)
Edited Aug 8, 2006 7:22 pm
I think DD has made a deal with the lesser of two evils.

Snape resentment of Harry may stem from jealousy and disgust. Snape has spent his life learning to control himself, to perfect his craft and has become quite a master. However, he gets no recognition, he gets no respect, then along comes Harry...a complete mess as far as Snape is concerned. Complete lack of control, emotional, forgetful, unskilled, yet he is the one destined to defeat 'the infamous dark wizard of thier time.' Why? Because Harry can do the one thing Snape can't. He loves. Seems to me Snape found no use for this emotion as a child and has since trained himself right out of the ability.

Would be enough to make any emotionless man nuts!


Saracene - Aug 9, 2006 4:09 am (#2928 of 2969)
I'm a bit puzzled by the distinction made between evil!Snape and out-for-himself!Snape. Isn't it possible to be evil -and- be out for yourself? I mean, IMO many Death Eaters would fit that category quite well in that they aligned with Voldemort out of pure self-interest and never had the sort of burning devotion that someone like Bellatrix or Crouch Jnr do.

I wouldn't describe Snape as "out-for-himself", but I would say that IMO Snape is someone who's motivated first and most by personal reasons, as opposed to wider things like, say, social conscience. I also believe that Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore does have a touch of personal about it and is not just loyalty out of convenience.


haymoni - Aug 9, 2006 5:03 am (#2929 of 2969)
"Selfish Snape"????


wynnleaf - Aug 9, 2006 6:01 am (#2930 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2006 7:02 am
Magic Words said:

Snape is loyal to Dumbledore because he and Dumbledore share a common goal, the defeat of Voldemort, and Dumbledore is better equipped to achieve that goal, so Snape's best course of action is to let Dumbledore work and help the best he can.

In some ways, this kind of loyalty is a more sure thing, because it isn't dependent on personal feelings toward one individual. However, I tend to think Snape's loyalty does take on a personal aspect.

Saracene said:

I wouldn't describe Snape as "out-for-himself", but I would say that IMO Snape is someone who's motivated first and most by personal reasons, as opposed to wider things like, say, social conscience. I also believe that Snape's loyalty to Dumbledore does have a touch of personal about it and is not just loyalty out of convenience.

Although I think that the cases of Snape dramatically loosing is temper have certain circumstantial explanations, I do think Snape is a person of very deep and strong emotions. Because of that, I don't think his loyalty is solely a goal-driven loyalty, but a loyalty with a deeply emotional aspect.

Assuming that Snape AK'd DD on DD's orders, I think the willingness to do that shows a remarkable degree of trust in Dumbledore and a huge commitment to not just work for the "cause," or a common goal, but to do it Dumbledore's way. If the forest conversation was really Snape arguing that he didn't want to follow Dumbledore's plan, which culminated (at least in HBP) with the tower events, then Snape has shown a willingness to put aside strong objections, become basically a pariah to the side he is loyal to, sink himself deeply into LV's side, leave his home and job of 16 years, and generally take on an incredibly stressful and nasty future.

The fact that he apparently disagreed with this direction and didn't want to do it, yet went ahead with it on the strength of Dumbledore's insistence, is not really indicative of someone "out for himself," at least in the typical usage of that phrase.

I don't really consider following a leader because you agree with the same goals as "out for yourself." I tend to think an "out for himself" Snape would not really care which side won, so long as he came out ahead in the end. Since I think Snape has motivations that can only be met with the ultimate demise of LV, I don't consider Snape a pure "out for himself," type.

Plus, although Snape may have originally come to DD in an effort to stop LV from killing the Potters, and may want revenge on LV for the death of Lily and/or James (depending on motivations of love, friendship, life-debt, etc.), I think that Snape's motivations have grown to include a willingness and desire to commit to Dumbledore on a personal basis. I say that primarily because of Snape's willingness to do something that Dumbledore apparently wanted (the AK on the tower) regardless of how personally difficult it was for Snape, and regardless of the extremely bad position the act placed Snape in.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 2931 to 2969

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 5:37 am

Ann - Aug 9, 2006 7:25 am (#2931 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2006 8:46 am
I don't think Snape is a nice man. Nice people don't become Death Eaters, and there's also the fact that JKR modeled him on an abusive teacher she had herself--that assures me that he's not going to turn out to have been pleasant under his nasty exterior far more than her remarks about him being "deeply horrible." Being nasty and unfair to students, just because being a teacher gives you that power, is inexcusable and anyone who has been the victim of such abuse, and was a teacher herself, will not forgive it.

On the other hand (you knew this was coming, didn't you?), I think it is possible that Snape will turn out to be a Good Person. Not nice, but Good,in the sense of loyal, brave, capable of great and abiding love, committed to the defeat of evil, and committed to the safety and education to his students. I think there is good evidence for much of this in canon, and little or nothing to contradict it.

The first bit of evidence is Dumbledore's abiding trust in him. Dumbledore clearly knows him better than anyone else in the series, and he trusts Snape, and Snape's loyalty and dedication, enough to demand things of him that he knows very well that Snape very strongly does not want to do (acceptance of Lupin as a colleague, making Lupin's Wolfsbane Potion, shaking hands with Sirius). He demands that Snape do these things, and Snape complies. I believe the murder of Dumbledore himself is yet another one of these things, but that is not (yet) canon.

Dumbledore tells Harry that the one thing that Voldemort does not understand is love, and it is the strength of Harry's love for his parents and his godfather that ensures Harry's loyalty to the right side--and causes Dumbledore to trust him so deeply. (This is never explicitly stated, since Harry wouldn't think to question it, but Dumbledore does trust Harry to quite an amazing degree.) I think it is only a similarly deep love that would make him trust Snape so implicitly. An Unbreakable Vow seems very un-Dumbledore-like; and if Snape was under the sway of a Vow to Dumbledore, it would be madness to contemplate making one to Narcissa. And, in literary terms, it would be a cop-out as an explanation of Snape's loyalty. There are deep parallels between Harry and Snape, and these will, I suspect, become both more obvious to us and to Snape and Harry over the course of Book 7.

The moment when Snape's knuckles whiten on the back of the chair at hearing that Ginny has been taken to the Chamber of Secrets is the moment he ceased to be a caricature of a nasty teacher to me, and became a complex, human character. Snape's concern for his students and his attempts to protect them from major, though not minor, hurt can be seen in his rage at the risks they take (fighting the troll, flying a car to school, chasing after Sirius, Harry putting himself--as Snape believes--in the Triwizard Tournament, refusing to learn Occlumency, trying to rescue Sirius, etc.). He goes after the students--"charging" and "running," Harry observes--despite the fact that he is taking a path that led him to the most frightening experience of his life, and this time he knows that there's a werewolf at the end of the tunnel. His protection of Draco and the last lesson he gives Harry are indications that he protects his students even in the dire circumstances at the end of HBP.

Snape's nastiness, like most bullying, comes from insecurity. Clearly his classroom manner grows out of a need to distinguish himself from students who were, initially, only three years younger than he was and remembered him as a fellow student. And it probably comes from the nasty desire to frighten and intimidate that led him to become a Death Eater. Although he shares a background of verbal, if not physical, abuse with Harry, there must have been some essential difference in their backgrounds that resulted in Snape's friendless, anti-social personality. He was clearly poor throughout his school years (whereas Harry, once Hagrid takes him to his vault, is wealthy, and I think his ability to buy Ron treats helps cement their friendship initially); but I think it more probably has to do with whomever taught him all that Dark Magic he's so famous for. As for the assumption that, because he's a Slytherin, he must by definition always be out for himself, I think that's one of the assumptions that will be overturned by the end of Book 7. He was clearly ambitious, and given the Dark Magic background, it would be reasonable for the Hat to put him in Slytherin, but people grow out of their house affiliations (look at Wormtail). And Snape's clearly as clever as any Ravenclaw, as loyal and hardworking as any Hufflepuff, and as brave and high-minded as any Gryffindor. (If you look at the Hat's comments at Harry's Sorting, you'll see that he also has characteristics of all four Houses.) The uniting of the Houses has less to do with Harry falling for Pansy, I've always thought, and more with the realization by Harry that people aren't their Houses, but individuals.

Snape's made some bad choices in his life, clearly; but unlike his Dark master, he's also made some good ones.


Soul Search - Aug 9, 2006 9:44 am (#2932 of 2969)
Good posts, wynnleaf and Ann. Snape comes off as a very different character when we try to see him without Harry's eyes clouding our view.

I think I am willing to dismiss any "out for himself" attribute for Snape. There might have been some of that when he was younger and a Death Eater, but the consequences of the tower scene have to be as far from Snape's benefit as any action he could take. I also agree that the tower scene validates Dumbledore's trust in Snape.

However, I am not quite ready to buy into "capable of great and abiding love." I can not recall anything that would even hint at Snape loving anyone. (Snape's possible Lily interest is total speculation.) His great skill at Occlumency seems to depend on the absense of strong emotions, like love. Harry's difficulty with Occlumency was likely because he is capable of love.


Maud Merryweather - Aug 9, 2006 10:05 am (#2933 of 2969)
Ann, interesting post, just one question: what do you mean by the uniting of the Houses has less to do with Harry falling for Pansy ? Harry falling in love with Pansy Parkinson ?

Sorry, didn't get that. Could you please explain ?


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 9, 2006 10:54 am (#2934 of 2969)
Saying nice people don't become Death Eaters is too simplistic. Remember Sirius saying plenty of people thought that Voldemort had the right idea at first? I hate to start this kind of thing again, since it always gets misunderstood, but it's like saying no nice person ever joined the Nazi party. When Hitler wanted to improve the status of Germany and create jobs, and all that, lots of people think he had the right idea, too. And then you had the kids whose parents put them, willingly or not, into the Hitler Youth. They grew up on that philosophy, before they were old enought to really understand the implications of it. I think that's likely what Jo modeled the Death Eaters on.


haymoni - Aug 9, 2006 11:30 am (#2935 of 2969)
Maud - there is a thread about Uniting the Houses. Your questions about Harry & Pansy will be answered there.


Solitaire - Aug 9, 2006 11:35 am (#2936 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2006 12:36 pm
Being nasty and unfair to students, just because being a teacher gives you that power, is inexcusable and anyone who has been the victim of such abuse, and was a teacher herself, will not forgive it.

Ann, I think this is why Snape bugs me so much. I'm a teacher, and I know the damage that teachers can do to kids with the remarks they make. I've seen the carnage left by a couple of really mean colleagues with whom I used to work.

Saying nice people don't become Death Eaters ... it's like saying no nice person ever joined the Nazi party

Quite frankly, I believe that any person who knowingly joins a political party that touts racial purity and the superiority of one group of people over others isn't a nice person, Nazi or DE. Maybe there are people in the two groups who don't advocate killing those who are not "pure," but big deal! If they advocate discrimination and withholding benefits to someone based on his heritage or skin color, then no ... they are not nice.

Solitaire


Maud Merryweather - Aug 9, 2006 11:50 am (#2937 of 2969)
Thanks, Haymoni. I'll check out that thread.


wynnleaf - Aug 9, 2006 12:00 pm (#2938 of 2969)
I imagine the "nice" difference is mainly one of defintions.

"nice adj. , nicer , nicest . Pleasing and agreeable in nature: had a nice time. Having a pleasant or attractive appearance"

A person can come across as pleasing and agreeable, or pleasant -- often a definition of "nice," and still be pretty nasty underneath.

"One may smile and smile and be a villian." Shakespeare


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 9, 2006 3:11 pm (#2939 of 2969)
Well, if the keyword is knowingly, Solitaire, we don't know how much of Voldemort's agenda Snape knew about when he first signed on. He could have joined because all the kids his age in his social circle were joining, joined because he wanted to belong to a group, joined because he had relatives that pushed it, or for any number of other reasons. And once you're in, the only way out is in a body bag, if Regulus was any indication. You can't judge Snape's whole personality, nice or prickly, on being a Death Eater, which is what I meant when I compared it to Europeans who supported Hitler for Chancellor of Germany.

It's canon that many wizards thought Voldemort had the right idea at first, and they couldn't have all been evil monsters, or they wouldn't have been taken seriously.

There was a concentration camp survivor, Helen Waterford, who used to go around lecturing with a former member of the Hitler Youth, Alfons Heck, about tolerance. They both talked about what they did as young people at the beginning of the war. They wrote a fabulous book called "Parallel Journeys" with the help of an author named Eleanor Ayer, that I would recommend to anyone trying to understand what happened in Europe in the late 30's and early 40's.

Many people used to rage at Helen for even appearing with Alfons, and ask her how she could possibly be friends with him. Her answers on the subject could just as esily be paraphrased by someone trying to explain whey they think Snape could have a good side to him, and still have been a Death Eater.


TheSaint - Aug 9, 2006 6:03 pm (#2940 of 2969)
"Quite frankly, I believe that any person who knowingly joins a political party that touts racial purity and the superiority of one group of people over others isn't a nice person, Nazi or DE."

Well...there goes a couple of modern day major countries.


Solitaire - Aug 9, 2006 7:37 pm (#2941 of 2969)
Edited Aug 9, 2006 8:41 pm
we don't know how much of Voldemort's agenda Snape knew about when he first signed on.

Here is the exchange between Harry and Sirius from OotP: "Were - were your parents Death Eaters as well?"
"No, no, but believe me, they thought Voldemort had the right idea, they were all for the purification of the wizarding race, getting rid of Muggle-borns and having pure-bloods in charge. They weren't alone, either, there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things ... they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first."

This sounds to me as though the original "platform" behind Voldemort's rise to power was the Pure-blood issue. I can't help believing anyone as smart as Snape was not fully aware of this aim of the DEs. His use of the term Mudblood to Lily makes me think he heard plenty of this sort of talk in the Slytherin common room ... probably from those like Bella and Lucius, who were already supporting Voldemort. Perhaps, too, he wanted to distance himself from his Muggle heritage and thought that joining the mostly pure-blood DEs was a good way to accomplish this.

And for the record, TheSaint, I do have problems with those who believe in the idea of racial superiority. Perhaps that attitude comes from having grown up hearing racist talk from many of my relatives in my youth. I grew weary and sick of hearing various racial and ethnic groups trashed.

Solitaire


cindysuewho45 - Aug 9, 2006 10:14 pm (#2942 of 2969)
Hi all, I would hope that more people would feel that way Solitaire, I am happy that JKR has put this plot in her books. Maybe it will make more kids, people, think about how they think, and or feel about all people. If just one person becomes nicer on better because of it I will love it. As for Snape, I feel that he is more DE than for the Order. But like he has said, I think, being a DE is for life. So if he did learn anything from DD, he may want out of being a DE, and knows that LV will have to die for that to happen.


Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 9, 2006 10:26 pm (#2943 of 2969)
In light if Severus Snape's actions at the end of Half-Blodd Prince. I believe it likely that Severus and Draco either apparated to Spinners End or that Severus and Draco fled the United Kingdom altogether and sought refuge at Drunstrang.


Saracene - Aug 9, 2006 11:36 pm (#2944 of 2969)
Regarding comparisons between Nazis and Death Eaters: I think that the more suitable comparison would not be with some regular citizen who's joined the Nazi Party to keep up or someone who spent their childhood in Hitler's Youth. IMO a far better comparison would be between Death Eaters and the Nazis in Hitler's inner circle - henchmen who take orders directly from Voldemort and put his plans into action. And personally I'm quite happy to think of those people as BAD people. I'd also put them apart from the more "passive" supporters of Voldemort who had agreed with his aims in principle but haven't actually done anything for him and his cause. Spouting blood prejudice at your dinner table is one thing. Joining an inner tattooed circle of someone like Voldemort and carrying out his direct orders is another.

With Snape, we don't know what he's actually done while in Voldemort's service and personally I don't think that he's killed anyone. But JKR's comments in the interview about how we must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater and that he's seen some terrible things suggests to me that he wasn't unaware of the atrocities that went on around him. He only switched sides a short time before Voldemort's fall and by that time I'm pretty sure Voldemort has already shown his true colours. If Snape had any qualms about what he was doing prior to the Prophecy affair, we know nothing about them.


kage - Aug 9, 2006 11:57 pm (#2945 of 2969)
While I'm still having to catch up with a few hundred posts...one quick thought:

there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things ... they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first." Uhm, Regulus was younger than Siruis and Severus, so this would mean mean that Voldemort "showed his true colors" after Severus joined the DEs...

PS: I pretty much enjoyed and agree with Ann's and wynnleaf's (not only) recent post...


TheSaint - Aug 10, 2006 2:59 am (#2946 of 2969)
'And for the record, TheSaint, I do have problems with those who believe in the idea of racial superiority. Perhaps that attitude comes from having grown up hearing racist talk from many of my relatives in my youth. I grew weary and sick of hearing various racial and ethnic groups trashed. '

yes, that was the point...it is alive and well.


wynnleaf - Aug 10, 2006 5:40 am (#2947 of 2969)
Edited Aug 10, 2006 6:46 am
Hi kage, haven't seen you in awhile! Good to see you here.

kage quoted Sirius:

there were quite a few people, before Voldemort showed his true colours, who thought he had the right idea about things ... they got cold feet when they saw what he was prepared to do to get power, though. But I bet my parents thought Regulus was a right little hero for joining up at first."

and then kage said: Uhm, Regulus was younger than Siruis and Severus, so this would mean mean that Voldemort "showed his true colors" after Severus joined the DEs...

I never thought about that quote in relation to when LV showed his true colors. But you're right. The way Sirius was talking, LV hadn't shown his true colors when Regulas joined up. But Snape is older than Regulas and would already have been a DE.

Hm, for the sake of argument, lets say Regulas is just one year younger than Snape. Let's say Snape joins up just after Hogwarts, at age 18 -- no, lets put it at 17.

We know that James and Lily died when they were about 21. Harry was 15 months old. Snape had been a spy at that point for perhaps a year. We know he "returned" to DD after knowing that LV was targeting the Potters. We know that the Potters had Harry christened in secret, presumably because they knew LV was after them. That would mean that Snape had "returned" by the time Harry was christened -- shortly after his birth, I assume. So subtract 15 months from James (and Snape's) age of about 21, and we get Snape either just turned 20 or still 19 when he returned to DD.

Now let's say Regulas joined up at age 17, when Snape (for argument's sake) was 18. Snape would have been a DE for a year.

After Regulas joined, LV started showing his true colors. If Snape, as well as the Marauders, were 18, this would mean LV was showing his true colors right about the time they got out of Hogwarts.

James and Lily got married. Either just before or just after Lily got pregnant, Trelawney made her prophecy, which Snape partially heard and took the first half to LV. But by the time Harry was born, Snape had turned back to DD, told him LV was targeting the Potters, and Harry's christening was held at a point they knew LV was after them.

Supposing that Snape really joined at age 17, but LV didn't show his true colors until Snape was 18 at least (after Regulas joined), then Snape stayed on with LV for probably another year until the prophecy was given and he took the partial prophecy to LV.

So that means that Snape would have spent about 2 and a half years as a DE prior to going to DD. LV would have shown his true colors about half-way through that time.

BUT, it could have been even less time. We don't know. If Snape was 18 when he joined LV (that is, right out of Hogwarts), and if Regulas was also 18 when he joined, then Snape would have been 19 when LV started doing overtly terrible things. That would have been very close to the same time Snape heard the prophecy, took part of it to LV, learned LV was targeting the Potters, and turned back to DD.

In other words, it could be that Regulas and Snape turned away from LV at about the same time. Their reasons could have been the same, with the added higher priority for Snape of trying to rectify the danger into which he'd put the Potters.

I realize that when LV showed his true colours is sort of iffy. Aren't there some other pieces of text, besides Sirius' comment, that makes it sound like LV was doing publicly terrible things prior to that? I'm not sure. DD knew that LV was terrible, but I'm not sure that everyone did.

On the other hand, the earlier war with LV was longer.

I'm not sure. Perhaps JKR has made some "maths" errors again. When she does that, it's hard to tell what time line she really is using as her "reality," and what's just a glitch in her timing.


Soul Search - Aug 10, 2006 8:12 am (#2948 of 2969)
There has been mention on other topics of death eater wizarding families. In GoF, the cave scene, Sirius is describing Snape's friends when he was at Hogwarts:

"...he was part of a gang that nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters ... Rosier and Wilkes ... The Lestranges - they're a married couple - they're in Azkaban. Avery - from what I've heard he wormed his way out of trouble by saying he's been acting under the Imperius curse - he's still at large."
There are also a Lestrange, Avery, Nott, and Rosier mentioned (mostly from Riddle's visit to Dumbledore in HBP) that were part of Voldemort's school crowd who became the first death eaters.

The point is that some of Snape's Hogwart's crowd had fathers that were death eaters. They also became death eaters. Becoming a death eater would have been an accepted practice among Snape's peers.

It looks to me that Snape could very well have become a death eater because "everyone" was doing it. If Voldemort hadn't shown his "true colors" by then, we can't really fault an eighteen-year-old Snape that much. He did correct the situation, in the only way he could, by becoming a spy for Dumbledore.

I wonder how that came about. My first guess would be that Snape, disillusioned with Voldemort, went to Dumbledore with his problem: he wanted to leave the death eater ranks, but didn't know how avoid being killed. Dumbledore came up with the spying idea. Snape accepted it because the alternativbe was worse. Spying is too risky an activity to be welcomed by a Slytherin. Snape had no choice.


Solitaire - Aug 10, 2006 10:20 am (#2949 of 2969)
Regulus was younger than Siruis and Severus, so this would mean mean that Voldemort "showed his true colors" after Severus joined the DEs..

It could mean that. It could also mean that Voldemort only showed his true colors to those outside the DE once he had amassed a fairly large group of followers. While I will admit it is possible that Snape didn't have a clue what was really involved in being a DE, I am not sure I really believe that. I have difficulty believing Snape would join anything until he knew precisely what was in it for him and what would be required of him. After all, he is a Slytherin, and they take care of their own necks first. But that is only my take on him ...

Solitaire


The Artful Dodger - Aug 10, 2006 12:08 pm (#2950 of 2969)
In PS, right at the beginning, Dumbledore says: "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." Sounds as if Voldemort had shown his true colours quite some time before Snape joined.


wynnleaf - Aug 10, 2006 12:45 pm (#2951 of 2969)
In PS, right at the beginning, Dumbledore says: "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." Sounds as if Voldemort had shown his true colours quite some time before Snape joined.

Yes, that's the quote I was thinking of! But if that's the case, then Sirius' comments make little sense at all. That's why I wonder if this is just a glitch on JKR's part. Of course, if it is, we don't know which one is the mistake.

I am not sure I really believe that. I have difficulty believing Snape would join anything until he knew precisely what was in it for him and what would be required of him. After all, he is a Slytherin, and they take care of their own necks first. But that is only my take on him ...

Well, Regulas was a Slytherin, too, and for that matter, so were his parents. Yet Sirius seems to be saying that Regulas didn't know the full extent of what LV was capable of until after he joined up.

I don't know Solitaire. You might be right. I don't generally think of Snape as naive. The way he completed that OWL exam, he looked like a Hermione-style student, and we can bet Hermione would find out everything possible about an organization she'd join. Still, it all depends on just how well-known LV's worst activities were prior -- at least -- to the point where Regulas joined.


The Artful Dodger - Aug 10, 2006 1:04 pm (#2952 of 2969)
But if that's the case, then Sirius' comments make little sense at all.

Well, a Snape-Fan shouldn't be too surprised by this. ;-) Actually, it does make sense to me, because before that comment, Harry asks a question about Sirius's parents, so I guess he isn't talking about his brother.

As for Dumbledore's statement, it might be a glitch, but I wouldn't expect one on page 13 of the first book. At that time Rowling had only a slight chance to get entangled in inconsistencies.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 10, 2006 7:40 pm (#2953 of 2969)
What screws all of this up is the fact that we don't know many details about what was going on for those eleven years that they had little to celebrate.

We do not have enough information on Snape to decide, really, if he is good or bad, or out for himself or whatever. You can base all kinds of theories on snippets of information, but it really comes down to gut feeling, because Jo has given us very little concrete information to go on about this character who looms so large in the plot.

As for him being a Death Eater, I still will argue that someone who had been a very active Death eater would not consider his worst memory to be of some petty childhood slight. He would have seen much more horrific things than that. We've hashed that out before, and no one's going to change their minds, but Snape may have been accepted in the Death Eaters in the first plan for his usefulness at dark arts, or potions, or some other reason.

Maybe they even wanted somone with his kind of talents and wooed him to it, and he was flattered to have powerful people interested in him, after being humiliated so many times by people like James and Sirius.


Saracene - Aug 10, 2006 11:22 pm (#2954 of 2969)
"As for him being a Death Eater, I still will argue that someone who had been a very active Death eater would not consider his worst memory to be of some petty childhood slight. He would have seen much more horrific things than that."

But that's exactly what JKR was talking about in her interview - that Snape -has- seen some horrible things in his time as a Death Eater. Therefore, he -would- have seen much more horrific stuff than a petty childhood slight.


The Artful Dodger - Aug 11, 2006 4:04 am (#2955 of 2969)
That statement of hers is most interesting, concerning Snape's loyalties. It is part of the answer to the question whether Snape can see Thestrals. Rowling says, yes he can, but that is not too special, as most of the older people at Hogwarts naturally have lost someone in their lifes. But she adds that we must not forget that Snape was a Death Eater.

This, to me, implies two things:

Snape as a former Death Eater being able to see Thestrals is extraordinary, so it seems other Death Eaters can't see them, even though they must have seen horrible things, too.

And she talks about loss. So apparently the nameless Death Eater victims are not the reason for Snape's ability. Rather, he must have lost someone close to him.

When you think about it, someone who has suffered from the death of a friend, or beloved one, and someone who can see Thestrals while the other Death Eaters can't, wouldn't appreciate their company, would he?

To me, that's the strongest hint for Snapes goodness.


Ann - Aug 11, 2006 5:46 am (#2956 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2006 6:55 am
Artful Dodger, I don't quite understand what you are arguing. Seeing death is something that obviously has a greater chance of happening, the older you get, and when you remember that these people have lived through a war, it isn't too surprising that most of the Hogwarts adults can see them. To say "remember that Snape was a Death Eater" doesn't at all imply that other Death Eaters can't see Thestrals--quite the contrary: most adults (in this small wizarding community that has just survived a terrorist war) can see Thestrals, and Snape, as a sometime member of this terrorist group, can of course see them. I think you've misinterpreted something.

Soul Search, the Lestrange, Avery, and Rosier seen in the Pensieve in HBP were fellow students with Riddle in the 1940s, and can't have been classmates of Snape in the 1970s. They're probably their fathers. (The Nott shown there may be Theodore's father, though. There's no Nott mentioned during Snape's school years, and the DE Nott is quite an old man.)

kage, I've always wondered about that remark that you point out--that as late as 1978, when Regulus must have joined the DEs, Sirius says his parents didn't realize how far Voldemort was willing to go. And yet, Dumbledore implies in the very first chapter of the series, that the war has been making people's lives miserable since 1970.

You could argue for a huge escalation in the violence between the graduation of the Marauders and Godric's Hollow. In the Woes of Mrs. Weasley chapter of OotP, Moody shows Harry a photo that he says shows the original Order of the Phoenix--it shows 21 witches and wizards, including the Marauders, 11 of whom had died/gone missing/been driven crazy/turned traitor before Godric's hollow. While the picture doesn't show everyone (Mrs. Figg and Fabian Prewett are missing, and I suspect Minerva McGonagall was an original member as well), the death rate is ridiculously high--Molly has reason to be worried. Lupin says later in the chapter that the odds against them were 20 to 1, which must be a huge exaggeration (it implies at least 420 Death Eaters, and there are clearly spaces for only about 40 (including the dead) at the Little Hangleton cemetery scene. It sounds like 2 to 1 would be closer.

It may be, of course, that the 11 years of terror (which she repeats) was something that was to be important originally and has since been abandoned. It's ridiculous enough to think that Voldemort waited from 1956 (when he returns and tries to get a job from the newly appointed Dumbledore) until 1970 to begin his reign of terror. That's a generous 14 years to gain followers and quietly build up his organization. To think that he didn't really "show his true colors" until 1978 seems even more implausible. Perhaps the Black family was just isolated and refused to believe how bad things were until very far along in the terror--perhaps until Regulus had actually been forced to participate in the violence. They seem rather isolated in a lot of ways, and would of course only listen to purebloods.

I'm sure Snape knew what he was getting into, at least to some extent. His redemption would be much less effective and moving if he'd been a good guy all along. His remark to Harry in OotP about how easily Voldemort can manipulate those who wear their hearts on their sleeves certainly suggests that this was how he was recruited. It seems logical to me that it was his frustrated love for Lily (yes, I know it's not canon... yet) that, after she'd married his worst enemy, Voldemort manipulated into sufficient rage to entice him to join the Death Eaters. (That's why I think the Pensieve scene is his worst memory--it's when he took the first step along the path to Voldemort.) And it would also explain, if Voldemort knew of Snape's love for her, why Voldemort told her to stand away from Harry, rather than simply killing her too, giving her the choice that proved so important. (Interesting... I hadn't thought of that before. If I'm correct, then it's also because of Snape that Harry was saved!)


Solitaire - Aug 11, 2006 7:46 am (#2957 of 2969)
Snape as a former Death Eater being able to see Thestrals is extraordinary, so it seems other Death Eaters can't see them, even though they must have seen horrible things, too.

I'm with Ann on this point. I think what Jo meant was that DEs have killed people, so it is not unusual that he would see Thestrals ... meaning that other DEs would see them, as well.

Lupin says later in the chapter that the odds against them were 20 to 1, which must be a huge exaggeration (it implies at least 420 Death Eaters

Is it possible that not all of Voldemort's followers had the Dark Mark and were called DEs? Could there have been Wizards who subscribed to his theories but acted sort of "on their own"? What about Inferi? Could Remus have been including them in his numbers?

To think that he didn't really "show his true colors" until 1978 seems even more implausible. Perhaps the Black family was just isolated and refused to believe how bad things were

This makes sense to me. I suspect it is exactly what happened.

If I'm correct, then it's also because of Snape that Harry was saved!

Explain, please? As far as I can see, it was Lily who loved Harry and took his death sentence. That is why Harry was saved.

Solitaire


Fawkes Egg - Aug 11, 2006 9:13 am (#2958 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2006 10:16 am
Solitaire - no need to apologize, I enjoy debating with you a lot!

Anyway, I've missed a fair old bit of the continuing discussion in my week offline (don't get me started on my ISP's ineptitude!), but I guess I see no redemptive pattern to Snape because I believe he is truly out for one cause: Saving Snape's Skin. That's why he's stayed close to Dumbledore all these years; he even says as much to Bella and Draco, although he dresses it up as remaining at the post assigned to him by LV.

Now he could stay true to this by (1) working for LV or (2) helping Harry defeat LV.

Option 1: well he'd always be on his toes, wouldn't he, always wondering when he was going to fall out of favour. Plus, LV could be defeated by Harry without any help from Snape, intentional or otherwise, and then where would Snape be?

Option 2: Now if Harry is the Chosen One, and succeeds, Snape would have to do something pretty spectacular to earn Harry's forgiveness. Plus, LV could catch him helping Harry in the meantime. As Sirius pointed out when showing Harry his family tree, and as Snape must surely know, it's a lifetime of service or death to be a Death Eater. Snape has got to appear to support LV now in order to come out ahead later, even though he's got entirely his own agenda.

I don't think Snape will go for Option 2, because although it's potentially the best route to saving his own skin right now, he can't get over the fact that Harry is James Potter's son (I personally don't buy the Snape-loves-Lily thing). Snape's hatred of James has coloured his actions in the past: in the Shrieking Shack, his actions were fuelled by hatred of the Marauders, and led to Pettigrew escaping to join LV. Then there's Occlumency - again, as Dumbledore himself pointed out to Harry at the end of OotP, Snape just could not get over his old hatred.

So I don't think Snape will ever intentionally help Harry, and it'll be very interesting to see where his old schoolboy hatred next takes him. That doesn't preclude him doing a Gollum and unwittingly doing something to help defeat LV.


journeymom - Aug 11, 2006 11:52 am (#2959 of 2969)
Just an aside about seeing thestrals. If I understand correctly, you don't see them simply when someone close to you dies, but if you actually witness a death. One could say that Harry wasn't particularly close to Cedric Diggory, but he witnessed his death immediately and there after could see thestrals. This implies that Snape hasn't just lost somebody close to him but witnessed a death. Maybe he participated, maybe he simply saw it happen.

It might not be relevant to the story, but I am curious to know if Snape killed anybody during his DE days.


Maud Merryweather - Aug 11, 2006 12:41 pm (#2960 of 2969)
It might not be relevant to the story, but I am curious to know if Snape killed anybody during his DE days.

I am very curious too! Had he committed the supreme act of evil before or did he split his soul for the first time when killing Dumbledore ?

I hope we'll find out, because IMO it's interesting to know as much as possible about Snape.


Ann - Aug 11, 2006 1:03 pm (#2961 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2006 2:07 pm
Solitude, sorry if I wasn't clear about what I meant about Snape (also) saving Harry at Godric's Hollow:

If I'm right and Snape was in love with Lily, Voldemort undoubtedly knew it. Snape was, in those days, wearing his heart upon his sleeve, as he accuses Harry of doing in OotP. Voldemort might have spared Lily for Snape's sake, thinking to make her his reward for turning over the Prophecy, or just to avoid alienating one of his more promising young adherents. Since he didn't just AK her to get to Harry, as he might have done otherwise, she was given the choice that she used to save her son and transform Voldemort into Vapor-mort. That's what I mean that Snape's love for Lily may have played a role in saving Harry. Of course, he played an even larger role in endangering the Potters--although given the fact that they'd defied him three times, they must have been well up on his hit list already, even before the Prophecy.

Voldemort, of course, has no understanding of either the depth or the quality of love. I can't imagine that Snape would have wanted Lily as a "present," if that was his aim. Nor does Voldemort really understand what a permanent enemy he has made by killing her. Giving her a choice would have been just a trivial thing in his mind, and when she refused to take it, I'm sure he killed her without further thought.

All supposition, of course, at least until Book Seven comes out (at which time, I firmly expect it to become canon.)


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 11, 2006 3:45 pm (#2962 of 2969)
Harry could not immediately see thestrals after Cedric's death. He didn't see them on the ride home. That always bugged the heck out of me. I know Jo just didn't want to explain them until OotP, but I think it was a cop out to say the death had to sink in. He had talked to Dumbledore about it, talked to Cedric's parents, and gone to his memorial service. If it hadn't sunk in yet, Harry's an idiot.

Just like I think it's dumb to say Snape's worst memory was the hazing he got from James, but we have to put up with sloppy stuff sometimes in these books.

I think Snape and Lily gained more respect for each other and became friends in NEWT potions, but I'll be very shocked if Snape loved her. She was probably falling in love with James by that time, and Snape was probably still getting used to the idea that a "filthy mudblood" could have talent. The timing just does not work for me with the imformation I have now.


haymoni - Aug 11, 2006 3:57 pm (#2963 of 2969)
It is infuriating, but I guess we'll just have to wait it out until Book 7.


The Artful Dodger - Aug 11, 2006 4:14 pm (#2964 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2006 5:15 pm
The reason why I think Snape is the only (ex)Death Eater seeing Thestrals is this part of JKR's original answer:

as you go through life you do lose people and understand what death is.

And I just don't see any loyal Death Eater understanding it.


Choices - Aug 11, 2006 6:02 pm (#2965 of 2969)
If the theory about Madam Pince being Eileen Prince is correct, perhaps it was a member of his family that Snape saw murdered - his father perhaps or grandparents. Maybe that is why his mother is hidden at Hogwarts - to keep her safe - and maybe that is why Dumbledore trusted Snape, because Snape has lost family members to Voldemort.


haymoni - Aug 11, 2006 6:10 pm (#2966 of 2969)
If Snape was a Death Eater that bought the philosophy then I don't see any of those DE memories being his worst. If you buy in to the pureblood philosophy, then anything you did was justifiable.

You might have a change of heart and end up regretting what you did.

Possibly as Snape looked back over his life, he saw this 1 opportunity when he could have banded with Lily against James and regrets that he blew it.


Solitaire - Aug 11, 2006 10:58 pm (#2967 of 2969)
Edited Aug 11, 2006 11:59 pm
Solitude, sorry if I wasn't clear about what I meant about Snape

I think you are talking to me! LOL Actually, I still don't make the Snape connection as you make it, but that's okay.

Solitaire


Laura W - Aug 11, 2006 11:31 pm (#2968 of 2969)
Edited Aug 12, 2006 12:37 am

"In PS, right at the beginning, Dumbledore says: "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." Sounds as if Voldemort had shown his true colours quite some time before Snape joined." (Artful Dodger)

This 11 years thing seems to have some of us confused so I decided to see if there were any other references to it besides that PS one. Based on what I found in GoF, I tend to agree with you, Artful.

"Harry had been a year old the night that Voldemort - the most powerful dark wizard for a century, a wizard who had been gaining power steadily for eleven years - arrived at his house and killed his mother and father. Voldemort had then turned his wand on Harry; he had performed the curse that had disposed of many full-grown witches and wizards in his steady rise to power - ... Voldemort had fled; the terror in which the secret community of witches and wizards had lived for so long had lifted ..." (p.23, Raincoast).

I absolutely agree that people and other creatures (ie - werewolves, giants, etc.) joined V for their own individual reasons. Including Snape, of course. But it still sounds like Voldemort showed his true colours from the beginning or very early on in those 11 years of "his steady rise to power."

I can't decide if I have just made the potion a bit clearer or muddied it further. (smile)

Laura


Kip Carter - Aug 12, 2006 1:19 am (#2969 of 2969)
I have closed down this thread even though it has not reached the maximum number of messages (short four). Due to some deletions, the number is less than the three thousand posts that a thread may contain.

Clicking on this Severus Snape link should transfer your browser to the new thread.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Severus Snape, Volume 5 (posts from Aug 12, 2006 to Aug 2, 2007)

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 8:21 am

# Severus Snape (posts from Aug 12, 2006 to Aug 2, 2007)
Kip Carter - Aug 12, 2006 12:19 am Reply
Edited Aug 30, 2007 5:55 am

This is the fifth thread for Severus Snape, who is one of the most controversial characters in the Harry Potter series, and because of this controversy, the messages in his thread grow at a huge rate.

Please review the preceding thread for the on-going discussion. *** Do Not Post unless you are adding to the discussion! ***

The first thread Severus Snape (posts from Aug 29, 2003 to Nov 6, 2003) accumulated 644 messages in the 74 days since our return to the World Crossing (WX) system. The original thread had 620 messages on November 10, 2003 with the last message that day being Post #620 by Ovate. In an effort to consolidate some similar messages on another thread, The vacancy Snape wished to fill... was moved to the end of the original thread and the 24 messages of that thread start at Post #621 and continue to the end where I have stopped any further posts.

The second thread started on November 11, 2003 and continued to October 22, 2004 when it was closed out with 2957 messages. The second thread was renamed Severus Snape (posts from Nov 11, 2003 to Oct 22, 2004).

The third thread started on October 22, 2004 and continued to September 19, 2005 when it was closed with 2980 messages. The third thread was renamed Severus Snape (posts from Oct 22, 2004 to Sep 19, 2005).

The fourth thread started on September 19, 2005 and continued to August 12, 2006 when it was closed with 2969 messages. The fourth thread was renamed Severus Snape (posts from Sep 19, 2005 to Aug 12, 2006).

Note: I strongly suggest that everyone read my Jan 18, 2007 Edited Jan 23, 2007 post before adding your next message.

I added a temporary "- Contains SPOILERS" to allow posts after the release of Book Seven.

INDEX VOLUME 5

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
16[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]
 


Last edited by Mona on Mon Jul 11, 2011 6:12 am; edited 7 times in total
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 1 to 40

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 8:45 am

Saracene - Aug 12, 2006 1:31 am (#1 of 2959)

Yay! First post! Smile

About Snape and Lily: if Snape loved her, and Voldemort knew about it, I very much doubt that he'd be impressed one bit by one of his Death Eaters having feelings for a muggleborn. Voldemort, to me, seems like he really, fervently believes in the whole pureblood mantra he's spouting - for him it's not just a front to attract followers. A person like that IMO would not go, oh I might as well humour Severus to keep him on my side cause he's such a promising little Death Eater. I actually think that it wouldn't occur to him in million years that someone in his circle could care for someone like Lily (and if Snape really did have feelings for Lily I'd sooooo love for Voldemort to find out. That would totally blow his mind, Smile


Ann - Aug 12, 2006 2:41 am (#2 of 2959)

Saracene, I don't think Voldemort really believes all the pure-blood nonsense at all. After all, he's a half-blood himself, and he presumably knows that Snape is, too. I can't believe that on some level, he doesn't think half-bloods are better than pure-bloods.

I don't think he'd want it to come out that he spared a Muggle-born witch, since so much of his support is drawn from the pure-blood supremicists, and I think it's fairly likely that his own blood status is not well known. But for any sort of decent strategic reason (rewarding a loyal follower), I can't imagine that it would bother him that much.


wynnleaf - Aug 12, 2006 11:26 am (#3 of 2959)

Tom Riddle was sorted into Slytherin, a house that seems to have a majority of purebloods. And the purebloods in Slytherin tend to be highly into blood purity.

I would not be surprised to learn that Tom Riddle has no personal belief in pureblood superiority, but instead decided to capitalize on the blood purity issue as a way to garner support and followers.

Bella didn't seem to know that he was a half-blood. I think we can assume that even early on, in school, Riddle kept that a secret.

If Riddle has no personal belief that purebloods are better, it makes sense that he'd be quite willing to include half-bloods (isn't Pettigrew a half-blood?) among his followers. But you still wouldn't see very many half-bloods joining LV, because few would believe in blood purity.

It is even possible that in that regard, Snape's thinking on blood purity, at the time he joined the DE's, was the same as LV's. That is, that being a pureblood really isn't anything special. But the blood purity position was a good one to use to gather friends and supporters, especially if you're in Slytherin.


Solitaire - Aug 12, 2006 11:34 am (#4 of 2959)

I suspect that the only ancestry to which Riddle admitted was his Slytherin connection ... which is probably why he was sorted into Slytherin House. I agree that he probably kept his Muggle heritage a secret.

Solitaire


Chemyst - Aug 12, 2006 12:08 pm (#5 of 2959)

I think we can assume that even early on, in school, Riddle kept that a secret.
I agree, but to nit-pick– very early on, he did not know himself, and when he guessed, he guessed wrong by reasoning that surely his mum was not the witch or she would not have died. Once he knew the truth, he obviously did not broadcast it. ...but isn't this the Snape thread?

Snape, on the other hand, didn't seem to be perturbed by calling himself the Half-blood Prince.


journeymom - Aug 12, 2006 2:53 pm (#6 of 2959)

"MA: Oh, here’s one [from our forums] that I’ve really got to ask you. Has Snape ever been loved by anyone?

JKR: Yes, he has, which in some ways makes him more culpable even than Voldemort, who never has. "

Okay, I really am going somewhere with this, but I spent so much time reading the whole interview I forgot what I was originally responding to. Now I've got to go back to the old Snape thread and re-read what I was responding to.

ETA, [5 minutes later] oh for pity's sake I still can't remember why I thought this quote was important. We were talking about Snape possibly loving Lily, which isn't the same as Snape being loved. Oh well.


Mattew Bates - Aug 12, 2006 7:06 pm (#7 of 2959)

While Snape may have loved Lily, I don't think that's why Voldemort wanted to spare her. So far, for almost every murder that we know or suspect Voldey used to create a horcrux, he framed someone for the murder. I think his plan was to "spare" her to that fate (which would implicate her as the spy in the Order, and take heat off of Wormtail).


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 12, 2006 8:04 pm (#8 of 2959)

I have always wondered if Snapes's mother is the one loved him, and Jo was showing us that scene of Snape cowering in the corner as a small boy to emphasise that.


Laura W - Aug 12, 2006 10:38 pm (#9 of 2959)

Yeah, I always assumed Jo was referring to Snape's mother with the someone-loved-him remark. I know everybody jumped to the conclusion that it was Lily, but I always thought it was his mother. I suppose it is possible - farthest reaches of the imagination here - that more than one person truly loved Severus in his lifetime, but I still think it's his mother Jo was talking about.


Solitaire - Aug 12, 2006 10:40 pm (#10 of 2959)

I didn't jump, Laura. I think it was his mom.


Chemyst - Aug 13, 2006 2:51 am (#11 of 2959)

I had an entirely different interpretation of that scene, and I've thought it was a red herring from the first time I read it. I always thought the man generally assumed to be Severus's father was angry at the woman (assumed to be his mother) because he caught her teaching a child dark arts. The subsequent confirmation that Severus's father was a muggle and his mother was a witch still fits that theory. The 'cowering' can be equally explained by little Snape's fear of being reprimanded for practicing dark arts behind his dad's back.

Even if that proves wrong, Snape still learned those curses from somebody prior to his attending Hogwarts, and his mother is the most likely source. So, would a truly loving mother teach her young son dark arts? Isn't that one of the things that makes him such a tortured (if he is good) or nasty (if he is evil) character today? Where is the love in screwing up your kid's psyche?

The child Snape probably liked learning curses because he was very good at it, but love isn't always letting a child do whatever he wants.


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 4:38 am (#12 of 2959)

Even if that proves wrong, Snape still learned those curses from somebody prior to his attending Hogwarts, and his mother is the most likely source. So, would a truly loving mother teach her young son dark arts?

It's easy to mix up two sets of quotes. It is not Dark Arts that Snape is accused of having known so well when he entered Hogwarts -- it's hexes and jinxes. They are not the same thing. Separate quotes speak of Snape's being very interested in the Dark Arts after he got to Hogwarts.

As far as knowing more hexes and jinxes than most 7th years (that's what the quote says), it would be possible that a very bright child could glean that kind of knowledge from reading on his own. Since Snape seems to have had his mom's old potions book, he could also have easily had other textbooks belonging to her.

Further, we have evidence from the HBP potions book that Snape invented his own spells. If he had been inventing spells very early, prior to Hogwarts, that would also explain knowing hexes and jinxes that 7th years didn't know. They couldn't possibly know spells that he'd invented.

In fact, this is probably the simplest answer to the observation that was made of his knowing hexes and jinxes that 7th years didn't know. A combination of reading his mom's books and perhaps old textbooks (a very common thing for a gifted kid to do, by the way), and also some early experimenting with his own spells, is an explanation that already fits what we know about Snape, without having to resort to theorizing about possible family background for which we don't yet have information.

As regards someone having loved Snape. JKR compared Snape to LV on this one, saying Snape was more culpable because he'd known love. It's the culpability aspect that most interests me in JKR's comment. I think with LV, because he never knew love even as a baby, he has no ability to really empathize with others, therefore has no ability to love or care for others. If Snape was loved by his mother, then he grew up with the lessons of empathy and caring (even if she was a weak mom and didn't protect him from an abusive father - speculation, of course). So Snape should have the ability to empathize with others, but apparently rarely uses it. In that sense, he is more culpable than LV, because LV can't care, but Snape can.

Another way I see Snape as more culpable is in a direction that I do not think JKR will go, however I do think it's there in canon.

It depends on how you define love. I tend to define it as far more than feelings, but more in actions and attitudes. If you see love as more the way we act toward others and react or respond toward others, then I see Dumbledore's actions and responses to Snape as important examples of love being extended toward Snape. That is, Dumbledore not only forgave Snape. He was willing to place trust in Snape; he was willing to expect good things from Snape; he hoped for good things from Snape even when Snape didn't fulfill that hope (for instance, that he could put aside his wounds and teach Harry occlumency). And DD also raised Snape into an honorary position from the dishonorable depths he had sunk into (DE to teacher and head of house). I see these kinds of actions as a type of love -- not necessarily needing warm fuzzy feelings.

Yet despite the amount of forgiveness, trust and restoration that has been given to him from others, Snape is unwilling or unable to extend forgiveness to those who have hurt him. That, therefore, is another example of love being given to Snape which makes him more culpable for his own later actions toward others.


Vulture - Aug 13, 2006 6:18 am (#13 of 2959)
Edited Aug 13, 2006 7:59 am

Saracene, I don't think Voldemort really believes all the pure-blood nonsense at all. After all, he's a half-blood himself, and he presumably knows that Snape is, too. I can't believe that on some level, he doesn't think half-bloods are better than pure-bloods. (Ann - Aug 12, 2006 3:41 am (#2))

Hi, Ann: If logic was the only thing that drove us, I would agree with the above 100%, but it isn't. Hitler was Austrian, not German, and his own 'racial origins' wouldn't have got him into the SS !! Hendrik Verwoerd, the prophet of extreme Afrikaner racial nationalism, who became known as "architect of apartheid" when he was South African Prime Minister during white minority rule, wasn't an Afrikaner or even South African _ he was from Holland.

Dumbledore said in Book 5 that Voldemort regarded pure-blood wizards as the only sort worth knowing. Like Hitler and Verwoerd, it is the very flimsiness of his entitlement to membership in the "in-group" which makes him cling to it so passionately. I don't think we're left in any doubt about the contempt Voldemort has for his Muggle origins _ he wipes out all his living Muggle relatives, after all. I think that Voldemort deals with the "shame" of Muggle blood by focussing as intensely as possible on his descent from Salazar Slytherin. The first time we ever hear Voldemort refer to his family is when he proudly proclaims himself Heir Of Slytherin in Book 2, and _ as far as I recall _ Salazar Slytherin is the only relative of his (if you can call an ancestor of a thousand years ago a 'relative') whom he actually refers to by name.

In Book 6, we discover that Snape refers to himself as "Half-Blood Prince" and Harry speculates that he "was proud of being half a Prince". But nothing in Books 1 to 6 indicates that Voldemort liked drawing attention to his Muggle origins or referring to himself as "Half-Blood" in the way Snape does _ even if Snape was focussing on his wizard side. When Voldemort (originally) thinks that his father was a wizard and his mother a Muggle, he puts her out of his mind (in Book 6, see Dumbledore's first meeting with him, and later, Dumbledore's account of Tom Riddle's search for his family origins). Harry says bitterly that "he (Snape) is just like Voldemort" _ but on this particular point, they're in fact slightly different in their behaviour.

I think that Voldemort is violently pro-pureblood and wants a pure-blood wizard ideology for the regime he hopes to set up, but the practical realities of building an army mean that he wouldn't have enough followers if he excluded all except purebloods. It's more likely that the pure-blood thing is constantly promoted as a goal _ and it's a very useful way to enforce loyalty: those of 'less than 100% pure' blood would feel the most need to constantly prove themselves. Actually, this is roughly what happened with the Nazis _ to us (I hope !!) it sounds monstrous, insane and futile, but they actually had the most intricate discussions on how much or little Jewish ancestry someone could have and still qualify as a citizen.

(isn't Pettigrew a half-blood?) (wynnleaf - Aug 12, 2006 12:26 pm (#3))

I don't recall any information being given about Pettigrew's origins. I've always assumed that his mother was a witch, because the Ministry gave her Pettigrew's Order Of Merlin after his presumed death. While they might say all the right words to Muggle parents in such a situation, I think handing out wizard medals to Muggles would go against their rules about concealing the existence of wizards and witches.

(Sorry, editor, about irrelevance to this thread !!)


Fawkes Egg - Aug 13, 2006 6:44 am (#14 of 2959)

Wynnleaf, which quotes precisely are you referring to?

I have, from a single quote (my italics):

Page 460, GoF, Canadian paperback edition, from Padfoot Returns: "Snape's always been fascinated by the Dark Arts, he was famous for it at school...Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh year and he was part of a gang of Slytherins who nearly all turned out to be Death Eaters."

And from OotP, when Harry's telling Lupin and Sirius what he saw in the Pensieve (page 590, Canadian hardback edition: "Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts..." There's absolutely nothing there to suggest that this occurred only after he started at Hogwarts.

I really think it's splitting hairs to suggest that Snape only became interested in the Dark Arts after he got to Hogwarts. If he learned a load of curses before starting school, he was clearly interested in hurting other people even then.

I agree, however, that just because his mother may (or may not) have taught him a lot of curses before he got to Hogwarts, that does not mean she did not love him, weak though she may have been. I think Narcissa Malfoy loves her son, but she's not exactly Miss Goody Two Shoes, is she?


Ludicrous Patents Office- Aug 13, 2006 8:32 am (#15 of 2959)

Wynnleaf I also think that Snape was shown love by Dumbledore.

It is interesting that Voldemort and Snape both hold purebloods in such high regard. It makes me think Snape's father was a negative influence on him. He chose to identify himself with his mother. Both men want to wipe out the stain of any Muggle association.

Humans aren't just obsessed with pure blood humans (Nazis). We highly value purebred animals(golden retrievers, Persian cats, Thoroughbred horses). LPO


legolas returns - Aug 13, 2006 8:36 am (#16 of 2959)

I dont see how he can have practiced curses and hexes before school without getting into trouble with the ministry of magic. Admittedly he could have learnt to control his magic as a child and been a bit of a bully like riddle-learning to hurt people etc.


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 8:38 am (#17 of 2959)

Fawkes Egg,

Thanks for looking up the quotes for me. I did make a mistake in saying hexes and jinxes rather than curses. Nevertheless, curses do not equate to Dark Arts. A list of curses is as follows: Babbling Curse, Blasting Curse, Body-Bind Curse, Cruciatus Curse, Curse of the Bogies, Entrail-Expelling Curse, Impediment Curse, Imperius Curse, Jelly-Fingers curse, Killing Curse, Leg-Locker Curse, Reductor Curse, the Sponge-Knees Curse, and the Thief's Curse. You'll note that only three of those are Dark Arts curses and unforgiveables. To say Snape knew more curses than 7th years does not mean that the curses he knew were Dark Arts curses. Except for a few Dark Arts curses, we have no indication in the HP books that the other curses are any more "dark" than any hex or jinx. In fact, I don't think we even know the difference.

Yes, Sirius and Lupin both say that Snape was into the Dark Arts during school (and afterwards of course). But Sirius' allegation that Snape knew more curses as a first year is not the same as saying that Snape knew the Dark Arts as a first year. Besides, would we really be expecting Sirius to mean, "Snape knew more Dark Arts curses as a first year than most 7th years?" That would imply that 7th year students typically learned Dark Arts curses, which they almost certainly don't.

So although I got the quote wrong, I think what I said is still basically true.

legolas

I can't remember where I read/heard this, but isn't there a quote from the books or JKR that the MOM can only detect the magic, but not exactly who performed it? Therefore with children living with magical parents, the MOM expects to know that magic is being performed in the home and simply trusts the parents that it is not being performed by underage wizards and witches. That's not fair to the muggle-borns, but that's how it works.

I may not be correct about that, but I think I remember that explanation from some canon source.

Edit: I found it. A Sluggish Memory in HBP

DD tells Harry,

"You are quite right -- they [the MOM] can detect magic, but not the perpetrator: You will remember that you were blamed by the Ministry for the Hover Charm that was, in fact, cast by --" "Dobby," growled Harry; this injustice still rankled. "So if you're underage and you do magic inside an adult witch or wizard's house the Ministry won't know?" "They will certainly be unable to tell who performed the magic." Said Dumbledore, smiling slightly at the look of great indignation on Harry's face. "They rely on witch and wizard parents to enforce their offspring's obedience while within their walls."


Chemyst - Aug 13, 2006 8:56 am (#18 of 2959)

Besides, would we really be expecting Sirius to mean, "Snape knew more Dark Arts curses as a first year than most 7th years?"

I would. The more generic meaning of curse is
# obscenity, or blasphemous oath
# a malevolent appeal to a supernatural being for harm to come to somebody or something,
# the harm that is thought to result from this
# source of harm: a cause of unhappiness or harm
They all sound pretty dark and nasty to me.

definitions from msn Encarta dictionary
_________________

It makes me think Snape's father was a negative influence on him –LPO

How so? Since his father was a muggle, it's unlikely he was negative in the sense of wanting him to value purebloods or teaching him curses. If Snape chose to identify with his mother, it could have been because she offered him more power, not more hugs– unless she hugged him for torturing flies and such.
_________________

Edit applies to a following post by wynnleaf:
Frankly, I don't think JKR is anywhere near consistent enough in separating curse/hex/jinx terms to extract a working differentiation. It is just as likely that she chooses one word over another because they "sound good together." Jinxes seem to be a bit more lighthearted foolery, but even that is not always so. Sirius was using "curse" in the broad general sense that it was something bad.


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 9:01 am (#19 of 2959)

Chemyst,

In the HP books, what's more important is the definition that JKR is working with. Since many of the curses I listed are in common use in the books, and are clearly not considered Dark Magic, I don't think the definition you mention -- while perfectly valid in the real world -- works in the HP series. The characteristics of a curse that you mention work quite well for the hexes and jinxes as well, after all. Except that most do not seem to be considered "Dark Arts."


legolas returns - Aug 13, 2006 9:08 am (#20 of 2959)

Wynnleaf-You are correct the quote is in "A Sluggish Memory". I forgot about that. He could have learnt a whole lot of curses and stuff but did he have anyone to practice on unless he learned to repair any damage and make them forget what had happend.


Fawkes Egg - Aug 13, 2006 9:32 am (#21 of 2959)

I think Body-Bind, Leg-locker, Reducto, etc., could do people damage. Why else is Hermione so apologetic when she's compelled to Body-Bind Neville in PS?

Just because a curse isn't Unforgivable or considered Dark Magic doesn't mean the curser has no malevolent intent. And I think JKR is trying to make her world as real as possible, so the definitions Chemyst supplies are valid. Did Harry et al. seriously mean no harm to their enemies in the DoM battle or the Hogwarts battle when they may very well have used those sorts of curses? Or Harry's Furnunculus Curse on Malfoy, Crabbe and Goyle, used several times throughout the books?

If Snape was genuinely just a bright kid picking up stuff from his mother's books, why not learn Cheering Charms, or Transfiguration spells? Surely Eileen Prince had old Charms and Tansfiguration textbooks as well.

Dumbledore's assessment of the young Tom Riddle, where he noticed that Tom was already using his powers to 'frighten, to punish and control' others, is also a useful insight here. At that stage Tom didn't actually know any curses, but he clearly was full of malevolent intent. Dumbledore points out to the young Riddle that this is not considered an acceptable use of magic powers. Snape, learning things from Eileen's spellbooks, follows a similar pattern I think. In this sense, both Riddle and Snape are interested in the Dark side of magic even before they get to school.

JM2K!


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 10:21 am (#22 of 2959)

Snape, learning things from Eileen's spellbooks, follows a similar pattern I think. In this sense, both Riddle and Snape are interested in the Dark side of magic even before they get to school.

But let's be clear about what we really know.

First, we don't really know whether we can trust Sirius' or Lupin's comments. After all, if anyone had a stake in believing that Snape as an 11 year old was "bad" and that the Marauder's actions toward him were justified, they did. Of course, we don't know who started their enmity, but it did tend to be 2, 3, or 4 against 1; Lupin and Sirius did make some efforts to downplay their more aggressive actions toward Snape; and some of the excuses they gave to Harry for the enmity don't sound like the real reasons (jealously over Quidditch?). Sirius and Lupin may have been speaking nothing, but the unvarnished truth -- but they did have reason to "varnish" the truth, after all.

Completely aside from that --- including Sirius and Lupin's comments as "what we really know" -- here's the list.

1. Snape knew more curses as a 1st year than 7th years.

2. We only know 3 curses that are Dark Arts and 7th years weren't taught them. We can reasonably assume that Snape wasn't using unforgiveables. Therefore, Sirius was speaking of Snape knowing curses that were not Dark Arts.

3. Snape was very interested in Dark Arts during school and afterwards.

4. Snape had access to used textbooks.

5. Snape was pretty bright and began at some point to create his own spells and modify potions. The potions he modified were not necessarily harmful at all, and there were definitely spells he created that were not harmful (muffliato comes to mind).

We cannot therefore assume that Snape was only interested in creating harmful curses, since he created benign spells and improved unharmful potions. Nor can we assume that Snape had only focused on learning curses while at home. He could just as easily have also been creating nicer spells and/or potions just as he did at school. But Sirius and Lupin -- thinking of Snape as primarily a Dark Arts guy -- would only have noticed the curses.

If Snape was genuinely just a bright kid picking up stuff from his mother's books, why not learn Cheering Charms, or Transfiguration spells? Surely Eileen Prince had old Charms and Tansfiguration textbooks as well.

As I mentioned above, we don't know that he wasn't creating those kinds of spells. Sirius and Lupin noticed the curses and the Dark Arts. I don't think they were particularly interested in learning about Snape's other interests.

Just because a curse isn't Unforgivable or considered Dark Magic doesn't mean the curser has no malevolent intent. And I think JKR is trying to make her world as real as possible, so the definitions Chemyst supplies are valid.

But you have to then apply those intentions across the board. We have no idea what Snape's intentions were as an 11 year old, using curses. We don't know if he was using them defensively or aggressively. Harry, Ron, Hermione, and Ginny use plenty of curses, jinxes and hexes. We don't say that their use of those spells amounted to Dark Magic or Dark Arts. Therefore, without knowing Snape's intent, we can't say that for him either. Remember, I'm speaking primarily of an 11 year old Snape, not about his use of spells in, for instance, the Snape's Worst Memory scene.

Edit: Let me add an example. In COS, Hermione makes a potion that is well beyond the abilities of young students, generally only learned in the upper levels. She does not make it for nice purposes. She, Harry and Ron are planning to drug fellow students, steal their identities for some hours and impersonate them in order to spy on another student. While their goal is to solve the mystery of who is opening the Chamber, they concoct this plan solely on their personal suspicion of another student -- not even the one they plan to drug and impersonate. Hermione was using potions for harmful use (drugging students and impersonation), and they were potions that were well above her level. Does this make Hermione a user of Dark Magic? No, I don't think it does in JKR's world.


Solitaire - Aug 13, 2006 10:48 am (#23 of 2959)

We only know 3 curses that are Dark Arts

We know three curses that are considered Unforgiveables, to be sure. They certainly fall under the umbrella of Dark Arts, but I seriously doubt they are the only three curses, potions, etc., that are so classified. Sectumsempra! is definitely Dark Arts, wouldn't you say? Didn't Snape also invent the Levicorpus spell? I realize that one isn't necessarily Dark, but it isn't very nice. And he must have used it on someone else at least once, before it was used on him. Otherwise, how would James have learned about it? It does seem a popular spell among DEs, too, doesn't it?

I would not be surprised to learn that Snape worked mainly on dark curses and spells ... the kind "to be used on enemies," or however he put it.

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 10:55 am (#24 of 2959)
Edited Aug 13, 2006 12:29 pm

I'm posting too much on this thread!! LOL I'll stop for awhile after this one.

Yes, Sectumsempra is Dark Magic, according to Snape himself. But since it's in his 6th year potions book, it doesn't sound like one he invented as a little kid.

Further, a point I was making was that there are lots of curses that aren't Dark Arts (the majority listed in the Lexicon aren't), and that it's very unlikely that Sirius meant, "Snape knew Dark Magic curses that even 7th years didn't know," because that implies that 7th years commonly knew Dark Magic.

I would not be surprised to learn that Snape worked mainly on dark curses and spells ... the kind "to be used on enemies," or however he put it.

I'm sure Sirius and Lupin would have thought that, since that's what they think Snape's primary interest is. They seem to have had no knowledge of his inventions of spells, or his creativity improving and changing potions. Since he seemed to put a lot of time into that (think of where Harry sees lots of changes and modifications on potions), it's clear that curses and spells weren't his only interest. Further, even of the hexes, jinxes, etc. listed in the 6th year potions book -- we only learn of one that is clearly Dark Magic. The rest, which Harry seems to try out frequently, are pretty mild -- growing long toenails, muffliato, levicorpus, etc. Lupin didn't seem to think levicorpus was a dark curse.

So out of a potions book chock full of Snape's notes, we only see one piece of dark magic (that we're told is dark, that is). That means that all that time Snape spent on modifying potions and creating those particular spells, only a small percentage of that time was spent on dark magic.

Edit for Legolas below I meant of the time spent on the things noted in the potions book, only a tiny portion seems to have been spent on Dark Magic. We don't know if that was indicative of all Snape's activities, of course. I'm only saying this as an indicator that he wasn't just focused on Dark Magic.


legolas returns - Aug 13, 2006 11:08 am (#25 of 2959)

I am not sure that we can say that he only spent a tiny part of his time on dark magic. I would have thought that it would not be a good idea to write anything particularly dark down. Someone else could find his book. I cant remember where the line is about spells getting nastier and nastier as the book went on but I am sure that its near the end of HBP. I think it was talking about how Harry was taken in and did not expect the writer to be a murder. I am sure a person could not go from the good side to bad side in a single year.


Solitaire - Aug 13, 2006 11:16 am (#26 of 2959)

I know Remus said that Levicorpus! was "in vogue" when they were in school. But I was referring to how the DEs had used it. And the fact that Remus and Sirius thought that Snape was up to his eyeballs in the Dark Arts--whether or not he was--suggests to me a couple of things: First, Snape was probably far more interested in the Dark Arts than most of his peers (the ones they knew, anyway); and second, the jinxes and hexes he used on his fellow students were sufficently unkind that they were perceived as "Dark." JM2K ...

Solitaire


legolas returns - Aug 13, 2006 11:23 am (#27 of 2959)

In the pensive memory Snape slashes James face with a spell similar to sectumsempra. James washed his mouth out with soap and hung him upside down displaying his pants. The slashing the face spell was meant to cause damage whereas the responce was meant to humiliate.


Fawkes Egg - Aug 13, 2006 11:37 am (#28 of 2959)

wynnleaf - we all post a lot on this thread, don't worry about that!

I agree with Solitaire - it's about your intent with these spells, and I don't necessarily agree with what HRH did with Polyjuice Potion, even though they were trying to find out who was attacking Muggle-borns (it didn't get them anywhere in the end). JKR may have subtly been giving Hermione a lesson there with the cat hair, perhaps???

I think perhaps the message in all of this is that you can't necessarily draw a clear line between what spells are Dark and what's not, except for Unforgivables: clearly AK has no other purpose than the taking of a life, whereas Levicorpus can be a source of amusement (e.g. Harry hitting Ron with it) or a means of hurting someone (DEs at the World Cup). Given Snape's reputation, however unreliably perceived by the Marauders, I'd say his intentions were pretty malign, i.e., Dark.


wynnleaf - Aug 13, 2006 11:53 am (#29 of 2959)

I am not sure that we can say that he only spent a tiny part of his time on dark magic. I would have thought that it would not be a good idea to write anything particularly dark down.

I only meant the time spent on the work that went into that particular book -- not that it is necessarily indicative of all his activities. See below.

First, Snape was probably far more interested in the Dark Arts than most of his peers (the ones they knew, anyway); and second, the jinxes and hexes he used on his fellow students were sufficently unkind that they were perceived as "Dark."

Solitaire, I definitely agree with the first part of your comment. The second part I would modify to say that the Marauders perceived them as dark. But clearly, Snape was into the Dark Arts while at Hogwarts. I wasn't trying to say that he was not.

Actually, I started my part of this discussion not trying to downplay Snape's interest in Dark Arts while at Hogwarts, but trying to say that we don't really have any evidence that he knew any Dark Arts prior to coming to Hogwarts. I don't consider knowing advanced curses as the same as knowing Dark Magic -- because JKR doesn't seem to define Dark Magic as all curses, or all curses as Dark Magic. I'm just going by what she seems to be indicating as Dark Magic, which I think is not clear.

My original intent was to address what we can be reasonably sure Snape would have learned at home, and what we don't really know. We don't know that he learned Dark Magic prior to coming to Hogwarts. We do know that he had used textbooks; was a pretty bright kid who would likely read those textbooks; created spells when he was older and could have created them prior to Hogwarts; and lived in a half-magical home where he could do magic without attracting MOM attention. We don't know, or have true indication, that his mother was into the Dark Arts, or that any other family member was involved in them.

Consider that we're told that most purebloods are related. Yet there are no Princes on the Black tapestry (as far as we know). That means they were likely either not pureblood, or had been zapped off the tapestry for not being committed enough to blood purity, or they'd mostly died out and there weren't any on the tapestry. Of course, it could be that they were just not related. But my point is that we have no indication that he was related to people interested in Dark Magic who could have taught him.

And we have no real evidence that he came to Hogwarts knowing Dark Magic -- only curses. We might presume to consider any spell that has a malevolent intent to be Dark, but JKR has so far not defined it that way. Like I've said quite a bit now, I really don't think Sirius meant to say how amazing it was that Snape knew Dark Magic that even most 7th years didn't know, because that implies that 7th years commonly knew Dark Magic. It's much more likely that Sirius was saying that Snape knew lots of curses on a similar order of leg locker, the babbling curse, etc. which even most 7th years didn't know.

Now I've GOT to stop!! Smile I've got too much time on my hands this nice lazy Sunday afternoon....


Ann - Aug 13, 2006 12:40 pm (#30 of 2959)

On this question of Snape and the Dark Arts: Both Remus and Sirius say he was very interested in them. I was reminded of their remarks in the first DADA class in HBP. There, when Snape gives a semi-poetic speech about the nature of the Dark Arts (how they twist and mutate and how one must be equally flexible to fight them), Harry goes off on one of his wild rants about how horrible it is that Snape loves the Dark Arts as much as he does, how you can tell that he is evil by the way he talks about them. Hermione, however, disagrees; she says she thought he sounded like Harry did when he talked about the Dark Arts in DA. It seems clear that JKR wants us to realize that she is right. I wondered when I read that whether Sirius and Remus (who as wynnleaf points out, have good reason to want Snape to look evil, too, to justify their own behavior) didn't make the same mistake Harry did.

I've also wondered a lot about the comments that Snape knew a lot of curses when he arrived at Hogwarts. Supposing it's not a gross exaggeration (not impossible, given that Sirius isn't exactly unprejudiced), it's interesting to wonder who taught them to him. It could be that they were self-taught, if he was a horrible, nasty child; but I suspect the nasty man we see today is more a creation of the Marauders than of his own family. It seems unlikely that his mother was into the Dark Arts, since this seems to go hand in hand with an ideology of pure-blood supremacy (see the Black family home) and she married a Muggle. I wonder if he might have had cousins or an uncle on his Prince side that decided to take him in hand. I don't think he'd use the "Half-Blood Prince" title of himself if his mother's family had thrown his mother off completely. I suspect they disapproved, but not to the extent that Sirius's parents would.


Solitaire - Aug 13, 2006 1:21 pm (#31 of 2959)

The second part I would modify to say that the Marauders perceived them as dark.

Wynnleaf, that is actually who I meant. I was referring to the Marauders' perception of those things. It truly does bother me that James would use Levicorpus! and possibly Sectumsempra! on Snape. As I said, however, he had to have learned about them somewhere. Since Snape invented these spells, then James either saw Snape use them on someone, he heard Snape talking about them (perhaps the reason the Muffliato! spell was created) to someone, he managed to read them in Snape's book, or someone told him about them ... but who? Lily?

Solitaire


journeymom - Aug 13, 2006 2:56 pm (#32 of 2959)

Can you imagine just how much back-story Book 7 will have in order to answer all our questions about Snape and the Marauders? If Jo manages to answer even half of the questions it will be HEAVENLY!


Deb Zawacki - Aug 13, 2006 7:30 pm (#33 of 2959)

Maybe I'm too much of a teacher and into ed psych but looking beynd the whole HP/James deal-Snape kind of reminds me of the kids you hear about whose parents really don't know what they are into....he got really good at some things while his parents were busy ignoring him--or at least his father)

But also his holding of a grudge against James and directed at Harry seems like a bit of immaturity---in spite of Dumbledore's faith or second or third or twentieth chances. Snape, as I have said elsewhere is a grownup who chooses his actions and his attitudes.

He seems petulant and cruel and bratty--as though something happened to arrest his development and this does not allow him to act like a "real" adult but more like an angry teen--who is hell bent on making those around him feel stupid and useless and inadequate.

This is the personality by which we have known him for 6 books. Seems like he could manipulate Harry by appearing to care about him and stabbing him in the back if he were truly twisted but he makes no bones about his disdain for Harry. It's open and hostile.


Ice Princess - Aug 13, 2006 9:16 pm (#34 of 2959)

I agree with Chemyst in post #11. It would be hard to say that Snape's mother loved him, all while she was teaching him such dark magic and messing him up so much. But then agian, who really knows if it was Severus's mother that taught the magic to him. It will be interesting to see who it is that actually loves/d Snape in book 7. If Snape was loved it seems as though he might have more power than we know. It seems unlikely that it's just a coincidence that the Half-Blood Prince and Lord Voldemort have had so much in common since, well..birth. It's kind of scary to think about.


Saracene - Aug 14, 2006 3:40 am (#35 of 2959)

On Snape and Dark Arts: I tend to think that, since Sirius was talking about Snape's fascination with Dark Arts in that particular paragraph, the curses he was referring to were Dark curses. But I also think that by saying that Snape "knew" these curses Sirius may not have necessarily meant that Snape was using them left, right and centre - it could have been purely theoretical knowledge gained from books rather than regular practice.

And though Sirius is definitely biased when it comes to Snape, I look at it this way: a) there's only that much space JKR is going to devote to the older characters' backgrounds; b) when she thinks it important to indicate that the information we've learnt earlier is not correct or does not represent the full picture she does so. After all, we're not going to learn about these characters' backgrounds from any other source than what's in the books and, occasionally, JKR's interviews.


wynnleaf - Aug 14, 2006 8:33 am (#36 of 2959)


wynnleaf - Aug 14, 2006 8:34 am (#37 of 2959)

Saracene said:

And though Sirius is definitely biased when it comes to Snape, I look at it this way: a) there's only that much space JKR is going to devote to the older characters' backgrounds; b) when she thinks it important to indicate that the information we've learnt earlier is not correct or does not represent the full picture she does so. After all, we're not going to learn about these characters' backgrounds from any other source than what's in the books and, occasionally, JKR's interviews.

The problem is that, although we're given limited information on the histories of the Marauders and Snape, a fair amount of that information is contradictory. So although we might hope that, with such limited comments on their history, JKR would give us trustworthy info coming out of the various characters, it doesn't seem to be the case.

I don't have my books here, so I'm just going to say Sirius and Lupin together, since I can't always recall which said what.

For instance, from Sirius and Lupin we're told that in Snape/Marauder altercations, Snape always "gave as good as he got," and that he never lost an opportunity to hex James. Yet Snape says, I think in the Flight of the Prince, that their altercations were always several against one. While one could perhaps produce some convoluted theory where all three comments are correct, they sound as though they are contradictory.

Through Sirius or Lupin we're told that James hated Snape because of his interest in the Dark Arts. But James says in Snape's Worst Memory that he attacked Snape simply because "he exists."

Lupin characterized Snape's hatred of James as jealousy over Quidditch and James being the best at everything. But Dumbledore characterized Snape's hatred of James as over "wounds too deep for healing." That doesn't sound like petty jealousy to me or a schoolboy grudge.

Further, although Lupin said that James was the best at everything, Slughorn apparently didn't think so, since he never even mentions James having any particular noteworthy ability in potions. In fact, Slughorn never mentions James at all -- which is interesting when you think of how Slughorn seems to make use of every connection he ever had. Wouldn't he be telling Harry how wonderful his father was?

We're told by Lupin and Sirius that Snape gave as good as he got and never lost the opportunity to hex James, but when Harry goes through the detention files he finds many files on the Marauders, but apparently none on Snape. Why not?

Sirius said that Snape ran with a gang of Slytherins in school that all became Death Eaters. But then he proceeds to mention some characters that we know were several years older than Snape and it would have been highly unlikely that Snape was close to them while in school -- although they would have all been DE's together later on.

Personally, I think JKR has intentionally set up different pictures of the past from different characters and other revealing sources.

On the one hand, the characters of Sirius and Lupin present us with a picture of the Marauders hating Dark Arts, Snape being the object of their dislike because he was up to his ears in the Dark Arts, and a rivalry that included mostly equal hexing, Snape hating them because they were the best at everything and he was just jealous, Snape never missing the opportunity to hex them, Snape following them around trying to get them expelled, Snape running around in a gang of bad Slytherins who all became DE's. And as an adult, Snape holding a school boy grudge over a prank Sirius pulled, which James bravely rescued Snape from.

Snape's point of view presents us with a picture of a very arrogant James who thinks that he can do anything he wants, who typically ganged up on Snape with Sirius, Lupin and Pettigrew. This James attacks for no reason at all other than boredom and to show off for others, and attacks from the cowardly position of 2, 3, or 4 against one, and who is willing to hex a completely defenseless Snape (for instance, while he's already magically bound). This James is aware that his best friend Sirius tried to kill Snape and only stepped in to "rescue" Snape because he basically got cold feet.

Completely outside of the five involved, we get some collaboration on both sides. Hagrid liked James a lot. McGonagall seemed to think James was an excellent student. And the Marauder's Map obviously took a lot of skill to make. But on the other hand, James was definitely not the best at everything (potions being a notible flaw in this supposed "fact").

Evidence outside of the 5 seems to agree with Snape a bit more than Sirius and Lupin, in that it appears that the Marauders got far more detentions than Snape and they appear to have done a lot in a group or at least James and Sirius together, making it highly likely that Snape was right in saying that they typically ganged up on him. Dumbledore's comment about deep wounds makes it unlikely that Snape's hatred of James had much to do with petty jealousies.

All of these differences in the information that JKR is giving us through the various characters makes it seem to me that she wants to keep the real history more obscured by these differing points of view. Because of that, I don't think we can simply trust the reports of Lupin and Sirius, because they are the most likely to be biased in their reports. Nor can we trust the reports of Snape, except where there is collaborating evidence from other characters or sources.


Soul Search - Aug 14, 2006 8:41 am (#38 of 2959)

I don't think Snape hates Harry, exactly; something else is going on.

Canon's portrayal of Snape is of an extreme loner. The only time we see him with other teachers is at meals. The only time he is talking with another teacher is Quirell in SS. I can recall no other references where Snape is "chatting" with another teacher at the table. He has no friends among Hogwarts staff. We have seen a few interactions, Lockhart in CoS, Filch in GoF, etc., and all are far from friendly. We have never seen Snape in Hogsmeade or either of the pubs; Snape does not socialize. Snape doesn't need, nor want, any friends. The one time we saw Snape in the teacher's lounge, he was alone and left when Lupin and the class came in, giving a nasty dig to Neville. Snape's persona is acerbic, bordering on nasty, with everyone, and especially with students.

Magic came easily to Snape. He did well at Hogwarts. He can't comprehend that some students may have difficulty with lessons. If a student is less than perfect it is because they are lazy and not even trying. Snape isn't really a "teacher;" he plain doesn't know how to teach. At most, he places potion instructions on the board, and then goes around critizing everyone's work. The best a student can get is a walk by without criticism. Malfoy, who seems to be his only favored student, is lucky to get even a nod. (But, Malfoy is generally good with potions lessons.) Snape views all students as lazy and not worthy of his instruction.

We see Snape's true feelings toward Harry in the first potions lesson when he says:

"Ah, yes," ... "Harry Potter. Our new -- celebrity."

He then goes on to clearly demonstrate that Harry is nothing special, and, if fact, Harry is even less that average. Snape resents Harry's celebrity status.

Throughout SS, CoS, and culminating in PoA, Snape derides James and says Harry is "just like his father." We are given the impression that Snape hates Harry because he is James' son, but, this is a bit of misdirection on JKR's part. (Okay, maybe it is a little bit true, but it is not Snape's driving force.)

We learn in GoF that Snape was, and continues, to be a spy for Dumbledore. A high risk activity, to say the least. This is confirmed in OotP and HBP.

Snape expresses his true feelings (he wasn't just trying to downplay Harry) to Bellatrix in HBP, "Spinner's End:" Harry is a mediocre wizard who has been lucky and has received help from friends. SNAPE REALLY BELIEVES THIS OF HARRY!

We learn in HBP that it is Snape who heard part of the prophecy. Snape knows Harry is the one destined to face Voldemort. Snape has undertaken a risky double agent role and his efforts, ultimately, have been to help Harry. Snape's whole life has been dedicated to helping a mediocre wizard kid who can't possibly succeed! Snape's life will be forfeit, all because his enemy's kid will lose his battle with Voldemort.

This is why Snape seems to hate Harry. He is very disappointed with him, more than other students, because Snape knows the role Harry is destined for, and is convinced Harry must fail.

This is confirmed towards the end of the chase scene out of Hogwarts in HBP. Snape is desperately trying to give Harry some last minute instruction, hoping to help Harry with what is coming.


Vulture - Aug 14, 2006 8:56 am (#39 of 2959)

(While I was writing this, the thread seems to have moved a bit beyond discussing how much (and how early) Snape was into the Dark Arts. Just to be clear, my post is replying to the last few posts up to #35/#36: I didn't see the rest until I'd finished.)

My own opinion is that most, if not all, Slytherins have at least the inclination to dabble in the Dark Arts _ maybe not much, but a bit. Draco's father is known for doing so _ we see that as early as Book 2. Draco himself wishes he had been sent to Durmstrang, which teaches the Dark Arts "properly", and is contemptuous of the concept of Defence Against The Dark Arts as a subject. When he expresses these opinions, he does not do so in a whisper, but openly, to an audience of Slytherins who express no objection. JKR doesn't beat us over the head with this point, but I think she expects us to use our common sense and understand: it's consistent with what we see of the Slytherins. So Snape is not special simply from having contact with the Dark Arts.

When Sirius and Lupin, in Book 5, recall Snape as "this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts", we can take it that they're accusing him of a bit more than they would accuse the average Slytherin. OK, they're not unbiased (though I think Lupin tries to be), and they're speaking in a context of trying to make excuses for James, when being questioned by Harry about Snape being bullied, so perhaps they exaggerate a bit (Harry brushes aside the excuse ("James _ however he may have seemed _ always hated the Dark Arts") anyway). But, given that Sirius brought up the same allegation against Snape in Book 4, it seems that Snape was a bit more into the Dark Arts than other Slytherins. Of course, the Marauders are hardly neutral on the subject of Snape, but why would they lie to make one Slytherin seem worse than the rest ? _ presumably they dislike the lot.

When Harry sees Snape being tormented, he notices that "Snape was clearly unpopular" with other students, not just the four Marauders. (I think it's safe to assume that these others didn't include Slytherins, though we're given no information on this.)

At different times (principally in Books 3 and 5), Lupin and Sirius allege that Snape was jealous of James's successes at school, both academically and at Quidditch. The tone of Snape's own comments about James, in Book 3, seems to confirm this. It's alleged that James "was everything Snape wanted to be" _ and wasn't. Snape would not be the first or last person to feel jealousy, even hatred, towards someone who was a constant reminder of all that he wanted and could never have. Nor is it surprising that, as a loner with talents in one particular direction, he would develop that for all it was worth, to compensate for what he doesn't have.

There may be other reasons than just these school issues for Snape's relationship with the Dark Arts, but I think that the school dimension is worth keeping in mind.


Potter Ace - Aug 14, 2006 9:12 am (#40 of 2959)

All,

I think that we are all overlooking a major item regarding Snape and his abilities when he arrives at Hogwarts. His motivation. I feel that JKR showed us the cowering little boy in the corner and mentions the other "dark arts" items as background. Never having experience an abusive relationship I can only guess as to his motivations but I would think that he would want to stop it. Eileen Prince has the knowledge to end the abuse but can't due to her love of her husband. Whereas Snape (assuming he did not love his father) did not have this particular barrier so he studied all that he could in order to protect his mother from his father. His mother may have or may not have known the reason behind Snape's determination to learn all that he could but assisted in his learning as much as she could, in order to better her child and to prepare him for life as a wizard. I ten to think that she overlooked he learning of those curse as a way to protect herself ( I'm sure there is a Freudien (sp?) term here, just can't recall it).
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 41 to 80

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 8:54 am

Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 14, 2006 9:13 am (#41 of 2959)

Soul Search, I an inclined to agree to the extent that I believe that Severus is disappointed in two ways.

First, Harry is unlike Lily in his studies and Severus believes that this lack of diligent study and training will result in his failure.

Second, Severus Snape's mind Harry possesses the arrogance of his father James, but, he has yet to demonstrate the talent at nonverbal spells that James demonstrated.

Third, I believe Severus is disappointed in Harry much in the same way Augusta Longbottom is disappointed is Neville for not being the reincarnation of his parents.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 14, 2006 9:56 am (#42 of 2959)

The idea of practicing curses before you go to Hogwarts has been blurred. Supposedly you can't practice magic outside of school, but the kids use magic on the train going to and from the school all the time. Hermione fixes Harry's glasses before she's ever set foot in the school, before having had any formal training at all. Snape knew more dark arts spells when he got to Hogwarts than anyone else in his year, supposedly. And Ginny must have used her bat bogey hex at home, because we never saw it taught or practiced at the school before her brothers warn Harry about how proficient she is at it. I've never understood the whole thing about kids not being able to do magic outside of school. If you either can or can't, that's messed up. I don't know what Snape could have been taught at home anymore.

I agree with the assessment of Snape's disappointment in Harry. Of course Snape doesn't know that Harry did accidental magic often at a young age, which is similiar to using nonverbal spells. The kids don't get wands until they go to school, but they still do magic.


haymoni - Aug 14, 2006 10:00 am (#43 of 2959)

I think children born in wizarding families can pretty much do as they please. Dumbledore says they can track the magic to a location but they can't really tell who did it.

Hermione fixed Harry's glasses in the movies, so we can't really count that.

I always thought the magic on the Hogwarts Express was OK because there were no Muggles on board to view it.

I think Snape is disappointed in Harry because he was supposed to be great and nothing much has happened yet.


Catherine - Aug 14, 2006 11:38 am (#44 of 2959)

We're told by Lupin and Sirius that Snape gave as good as he got and never lost the opportunity to hex James, but when Harry goes through the detention files he finds many files on the Marauders, but apparently none on Snape. Why not?

Maybe because Snape designated the files that way? Would you really expect Snape to show Harry his own youthful transgressions? I wouldn't mind knowing what they were, come to think about it. It could even be possible that Snape did things that were worse than what James and Sirius did.

Through Sirius or Lupin we're told that James hated Snape because of his interest in the Dark Arts. But James says in Snape's Worst Memory that he attacked Snape simply because "he exists."

Perhaps because that is how James viewed Snape? Also, James's analysis of his actions and Lupin's recollection and interpretation of James's actions years later might not match.

But on the other hand, James was definitely not the best at everything (potions being a notible flaw in this supposed "fact").

Perhaps James had no interest in Potions, and chose not to continue that subject after his O.W.L.s. I don't see that JKR meant for us to take that statement completely literally.

For instance, from Sirius and Lupin we're told that in Snape/Marauder altercations, Snape always "gave as good as he got," and that he never lost an opportunity to hex James. Yet Snape says, I think in the Flight of the Prince, that their altercations were always several against one. While one could perhaps produce some convoluted theory where all three comments are correct, they sound as though they are contradictory.

I didn't see Lupin or Pettigrew casting spells at Snape in the Pensieve scene. I don't believe Snape when he says that, mostly because we know from Lily's statement that James liked to hex people. I tend to think that James was the primary offender. While I see Lupin as guilty for allowing his friends to bother Snape, he didn't actually gang up on Snape. I think that Snape is exaggerating here.


wynnleaf - Aug 14, 2006 12:27 pm (#45 of 2959)

Catherine,

My point in bringing those examples up wasn't so much to say that "look, Lupin and Sirius are wrong and Snape is right" or that the Marauders were more at fault than Snape.

My point was to show that we cannot assume that JKR has given us correct information through the comments that Sirius and Lupin make, any more than we can assume that she gave us correct info through the comments that Snape makes. We (you or I or anyone) can come up with all sorts of explanations for why this or that comment could or could not have been true. But the fact is, many of their comments are contradictory. They can't all be true. There's got to be gross exaggerations, faulty memory, biased reports etc.

Originally, I got onto this because of the discussion about Snape's background and whether or not he really came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than a 7th year. I feel that we can't really trust Lupin and Sirius' comments about that to necessarily be the facts. Someone else suggested that JKR wouldn't give us incorrect information in that manner. I'm simply trying to show that much of the info that JKR provides via the characters regarding their history is contradictory and can't be accepted at face value.

On the detention files -- I think Snape is far too picky about people following rules to tamper with Filch's files and remove his own records of detentions, and although Harry was told to start with files that had a lot of Marauder detentions in them, he seemed to be given a great many files to work through yet still didn't mention running across any of Snapes (and this was every Saturday, by the way, for at least several weeks).

We only can evaluate what we're actually shown in canon. I can point to contradictory claims by the characters about how things were with the Marauders and Snape. We can see outside collaborative evidence for much of what Snape says. We can see collaborative evidence for some of what Lupin and Sirius say (primarily that Snape was interested in the Dark Arts and became a Death Eater -- not much more).


Chemyst - Aug 14, 2006 3:50 pm (#46 of 2959)

...when Harry goes through the detention files he finds many files on the Marauders, but apparently none on Snape. Why not? — wynnleaf

Ohh! Excellent, excellent! Another clue for the Madam Pince is Snape's mum theory! (Filch wouldn't give Snape detention or keep incriminating records because he is in love with his mum.)
...but I agree with Catherine for the real answer. Snape was giving the detention, for Merlins's sake! He won't implicate himself. Even if I give you an allowance that "Snape is far too picky about people following rules to tamper with Filch's files," Snape has the skill to temporarily remove/alter/make them invisible to Harry.

Eileen Prince has the knowledge to end the abuse but can't due to her love of her husband. [...] I ten(d) to think that she overlooked he learning of those curse as a way to protect herself ( I'm sure there is a Freudian term here, just can't recall it). - Potter Ace
Reverting back to post #11 this is another reason I think the cowering boy scene might be a red herring. A good mother would be on top of her son's development and would not overlook nasty behavior— unless she was supporting it, which makes her a poor mother. And she could have easily controlled an abusive muggle with a simple blocking or shield charm. I think she was teaching little Severus malicious charms/hexes/curses/jinxes/whatever, and that is what the man was angry about. It does not make sense that a muggle could terrorize a witch, especially if she is a slytherin-istic witch.

Supposedly you can't practice magic outside of school...
True, that is the rule; but as haymoni pointed out, the ministry cannot effectively detect when underage children perform magic in a wizarding household. The rule will not stop a determined wizard, especially if a parent is willing to cover for him.


haymoni - Aug 14, 2006 4:21 pm (#47 of 2959)

I just don't see Snape doing anything that would merit detention.

I know he attacked James first, but if a teacher came upon Snape dangling upside down with his drawers showing, do you really think Snape would be the one who got detention???

He seems to slide just under the radar.


wynnleaf - Aug 14, 2006 5:59 pm (#48 of 2959)

Ohh! Excellent, excellent! Another clue for the Madam Pince is Snape's mum theory! (Filch wouldn't give Snape detention or keep incriminating records because he is in love with his mum.) ...but I agree with Catherine for the real answer. Snape was giving the detention, for Merlins's sake! He won't implicate himself. Even if I give you an allowance that "Snape is far too picky about people following rules to tamper with Filch's files," Snape has the skill to temporarily remove/alter/make them invisible to Harry.

Okay, here's the pertinent quotes...

Ominously, there were many cob-webbed boxes piled on a table where Harry was clearly supposed to sit,.....

"They are the records of other Hogwarts wrongdoers and their punishments. Where the ink has grown faint, or the cards have suffered damage from mice, we would like you to copy out the crimes and punishments afresh and, making sure that they are in alphabetical order, replace them in the boxes...."

"I thought you could start," said Snape, a malicious smile on his lips, "with boxes one thousand and twelve to one thousand and fifty-six. You will find some familiar names in there, which should add interest to the task. Here, you see...."

Now, we're told that there are 44 boxes that Harry is to start with, with the cards in alphabetical order. He finds cards for Sirius and James, meaning as he goes through the boxes, Harry apparently makes it through the entire alphabet. He does this for several hours each Saturday for about a month.

We have absolutely no canon evidence to show us that Snape is the kind of person to falsify records, or to remove evidence of his own wrongdoing. Any conjecture that he did so is pure guessing based on a sort of circular notion that Snape must have got many detentions, therefore he must have hidden the fact from Harry. We know this how??? We have no evidence that Snape got detentions. That's my point. Not even Sirius and Lupin said, "Snape was always getting detentions." They said he gave as good as he got and that he never missed an opportunity to hex James, but no one has said he got lots of detentions.

In fact, all the evidence we do have is that James and Sirius worked primarily together in a pair, sometimes accompanied (according to the detention files) by Lupin and/or Pettigrew. Therefore it is highly unlikely that there were very many one-on-one confrontations with Snape, enabling him to "give as good as he got," nor would one expect there to be many examples of Snape taking "every opportunity to hex" James, when James seems to hang out with his group a great deal. In any case, if and when Snape ever did attack James and hex him, he didn't seem to ever get caught.

The simple fact is, there's no evidence in the detention files of Snape's supposed misdeeds, nor do we have any evidence that he's the type of person to falsify the records, nor do we have any evidence other than Sirius and Lupin's comments that he ever did much in order to earn a detention.


Mrs Brisbee - Aug 14, 2006 6:29 pm (#49 of 2959)

In any case, if and when Snape ever did attack James and hex him, he didn't seem to ever get caught.

Now that you mention it, it is also odd that there is no detention record of Snape being James's and Sirius's victim. The feud seems to have left no impression whatsoever in the detention record boxes.


Choices - Aug 14, 2006 6:30 pm (#50 of 2959)

wynnleaf - "Harry apparently makes it through the entire alphabet."

If these are records of mischief, detentions, punishments, etc. for heaven only knows how many years back (Hogwarts is a 1000 years old after all), alphabetically "B" to "P" could possibly take up 44 boxes. We have no proof that Harry went through the entire alphabet. We do not know how big these boxes or files are and it is entirely possible that Harry never got to the "S's". It is also entirely possible that Snape was not caught in his rule breaking or that he simply didn't break many rules. The whole thing is a bit of a mystery.

Ludicrous Patents Office- Aug 14, 2006 6:37 pm (#51 of 2959)

Snape is a Slytherin. I doubt he got caught very much. James and Sirius loved attention. They probably did a lot of very mischievous things in front of audiences. Sneaky kids are the hardest to catch. It is the show offs that get nailed.

Snape seems to be very intent on proving to Harry his father was not as wonderful as everyone says. James and Sirius moved on. Severus did not LPO


Mediwitch - Aug 14, 2006 7:00 pm (#52 of 2959)

I agree with Choices and LPO; if Snape can fool either Dumbledore and/or Voldemort with his double-triple-agent act, I am sure he could have been successful at flying under the radar. No, we don't have canon for his supposed misdeeds at school, but we do have canon (double-agent role) that he is no fool and apparently can get away with a lot without getting caught.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 14, 2006 7:56 pm (#53 of 2959)

We don't know how those boxes were arranged. It could have been by house. It could have been by the teacher who issued the detentions. It could have been alphabetical. We don't know. If each teacher kept a box, which was simply filed away at the end of the term, it would be possible for Snape to have not ever gotten detention from the potions teacher, but to have gotten several from the Transfiguration teacher for example. He could have only given Harry the boxes from the teachers he knew had not filed cards on him.


Deb Zawacki - Aug 14, 2006 8:00 pm (#54 of 2959)

A little perspective here, as someone who used to get picked on and beaten up regularly by gangs of kids at school or at the bus stop. (not crying victim here--I'm over it, but...)

when someone feels rejected or persecuted by the so-called poplular people or even by people they want to like them (as kids) and it never ends, the wounds can be very deep.

Do I think Severus was a weak little taget--probably not--but what I AM saying is that people can be driven to defensiveness and anger and hatred-at parents at classmates, heck, at the world....

I used to be jealous of the kids who hammered on me--they never had to suffer any real punishments no matter what, they had great closthes--they were skinny and attractive--their parents stood up for them and most of all I didn't understand why they got to be lucky and popular without having to do much at all, and how they got pleasure at my expense.

But alas, I was passive aggressive and I didn't own a wand or know how to curse people....


Laura W - Aug 15, 2006 1:57 am (#55 of 2959)

"It is also entirely possible that Snape was not caught in his rule breaking or that he simply didn't break many rules. The whole thing is a bit of a mystery."

So true, Choices. Like so much else about Severus Snape. Which is exactly how Jo planned it. (wicked grin)

But sticking strictly to canon here, folks - as opposed to what we think *might* have happened -, it is actually written that James and Sirius got a lot of detentions while in school. Harry saw this with his own eyes when he went through the detention boxes. And in PoA, McGonagall says, "Black and Potter. ... Both very bright, of course ... but I don't think we've ever had such a pair of troublemakers - " (p.152, Raincoast). So we have it in black and white about James and Sirius getting into trouble - which means detention at Hogwarts - on a regular basis.

If what we are debating is whether Snape also got in trouble/caused trouble and received detentions or other discipline during his seven years at school (*is* this what we are debating?), the only way we - who take our information from canon written in the books - can say this is the case is if it has been written down somewhere. Right? And has it been? Have *any* of the characters, regardless of their reliability, ever said that Severus caused trouble in school (beyond hexing James at every opportunity, which may or may not have taken place but was still unquestionably stated by one of the former Marauders)? Has it been said in the narration at any point in the series?

Oh gosh, with so many posts on this thread, I now forget why we are so concerned about whether Snape got detentions at school. Is it because we want to know whether Snape was the bully here or whether James and Sirius (with Remus' silent acceptance) were? I'll just keep reading and I'm sure I'll get back on track ...


Saracene - Aug 15, 2006 3:17 am (#56 of 2959)

wynnleaf:

---For instance, from Sirius and Lupin we're told that in Snape/Marauder altercations, Snape always "gave as good as he got," and that he never lost an opportunity to hex James. Yet Snape says, I think in the Flight of the Prince, that their altercations were always several against one.---

I'm not sure why these are contradictory since IMO they're talking about completely different things. Lupin's point here is that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James - not that James was completely alone when Snape tried to hex him. Snape doesn't talk about their altercations in general or points that it was always James who initiated them - he simply tells Harry that his father never attacked him unless it was four against one. Which doesn't exclude the occasions on which the hexing would have been started by Snape. And personally I find it near-impossible to imagine that Snape was willing to just meekly bear the attacks and humiliation like a little victim without hexing James and the rest in return at other times.

Regarding the detention records: what I've noticed is that, in the very first record Harry reads about Sirius and James, the offence is described in detail - as well as the name of the victim. Yet there's no mention of Snape's name being listed as one of the victims - and I'm sure Harry would have noticed if it was. So while the records that Harry sees clearly show that James and Sirius were frequently in detention, there's no indication that any of them were in relation to Snape and what they did to him.

Also, it would make sense for James and Sirius to feature so frequently in the records because they clearly didn't limit their hexing to Snape; they were by all admissions troublemakers so the chances of them getting caught would be much higher. And clearly the students don't have the all-seeing eye of the teachers on them all the time and not all of their misdeeds would get punished.

--- Through Sirius or Lupin we're told that James hated Snape because of his interest in the Dark Arts. But James says in Snape's Worst Memory that he attacked Snape simply because "he exists." ---

Well, just before saying that Sirius also tells Harry that James and Snape hated each other from the moment they set eyes on each other and that it was "one of those things". I presume that James couldn't know that Snape was into Dark Arts just by looking at him; so to me it looks like what Sirius is saying is that Snape and James simply instinctively loathed each other from the start.

--- Lupin characterized Snape's hatred of James as jealousy over Quidditch and James being the best at everything. But Dumbledore characterized Snape's hatred of James as over "wounds too deep for healing."---

While I definitely agree that what Lupin told Harry is not exactly the full truth, I think it's an example of what I've mentioned earlier about JKR showing us that the information we've been given previously is either incorrect or does not constitute the full truth. I don't think anyone even needed Dumbledore's comment about "wounds" to get an idea that Snape's hatred wasn't just a petty jealousy.

--- Further, although Lupin said that James was the best at everything, Slughorn apparently didn't think so, since he never even mentions James having any particular noteworthy ability in potions.---

Lupin' full comment is, "Look, Harry, what you've got to understand is that your father and Sirius were the best in the school at whatever they did - everyone thought they were the height of cool".

Seeing that he talks about "the height of cool", personally I doubt that he's talking about academic achievements since those rarely ever make anyone "cool", Smile If anything, it would have an opposite effect.

--- Sirius said that Snape ran with a gang of Slytherins in school that all became Death Eaters. But then he proceeds to mention some characters that we know were several years older than Snape and it would have been highly unlikely that Snape was close to them while in school ---

Personally, I'm inclined to think that this is one of JKR's math goof-ups rather than anything else. If she really meant the readers to spot the inconsistency, she'd made the task near-impossible for the majority who wouldn't read the interviews or visit web sites or try to piece characters' ages from canon. Just from reading the books, I don't think I'd have any clue whether Bellatrix was younger or older than Snape. Or how old Snape actually is.


wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 5:31 am (#57 of 2959)

Laura W. said:

Oh gosh, with so many posts on this thread, I now forget why we are so concerned about whether Snape got detentions at school. Is it because we want to know whether Snape was the bully here or whether James and Sirius (with Remus' silent acceptance) were? I'll just keep reading and I'm sure I'll get back on track .

Just to clarify.. We were originally discussing Snape's background including whether or not he really learned Dark Arts at home, and whether or not he really came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than 7th years, and the degree to which we can trust the remarks of Lupin and Sirius on those topics. What I was trying to show, through a comparison of various comments made by the characters, is that we cannot necessarily trust the comments of Lupin, Sirius, or Snape about that history, because their opinions about the past are sometimes contradictory, or are contradicted by other outside sources, such as other characters. The evidence of the detention files is one such outside source, but my mentioning it brought up a lot of discussion about that particular thing.

On the detention files -- It is interesting that we're not shown files where the Marauders attacked Snape. It is also interesting that the files only give us evidence of James and Sirius or other Marauders working together in pairs or a group, not individually. This supports (not proves) Snape's allegation that James wouldn't attack him one-on-one. His comment that they always attacked 4-1 is disproved by the Snape's Worst Memory scene. That is prove positive that Snape isn't giving the unvarnished facts when he speaks about James and the Marauders actions toward him. His comments are, in the Flight of the Prince, exaggerated to some extent.

On the other hand, we also have evidence that Lupin and Sirius' comments about Snape are sometimes incorrect or exaggerations.

Saracene,

While I am perfectly willing to accept other reasons for some of the comments that the characters made, or other explanations for some of what we learn about their history with each other, my primary point has been to show that we cannot trust Lupin and Sirius to give us correct information about Snape.

Therefore comments about Snape knowing more curses than 7th years when he first came to Hogwarts have to be taken with a grain of salt. These are characters who can be shown to exaggerate or give us less than credible information about Snape. Unless we have other outside evidence, I don't think we should consider their reports conclusive.

We do, for instance, have outside evidence that Snape was really into the Dark Arts while in school. He did, after all, create Sectumsempra, and he did join Voldemort later. We have no outside evidence about knowing all those curses as a 1st year, therefore we shouldn't expect that info to necessarily be correct.

I hope it's clear now what my argument was all about, and why I used all of the examples I did. I'm not trying to prove some point about detention files, or that Snape never hexed James or never attacked any of the Marauders. We have no canon definite proof that he did, but it certainly would fit the character for him to try and get back at them. But that's not the point. The point is that without other collaboration in the text, we can't just automatically trust Lupin and Sirius' comments about Snape, or Snape's comments about the Marauders.

However, with Snape, most of his comments have outside collaborative evidence, even though we can see that at least one of his statements was an exaggeration (James always attacking 4-1). With Sirius and Lupin, many of their assertions about Snape have no collaborative evidence at all, and several of the statements have at least some evidence of being either completely false or at least gross exaggerations.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 15, 2006 8:08 am (#58 of 2959)

We can't trust Lupin or Sirius to give us correct information about Snape, any more than we can trust Harry to always be right and never be wrong about his impressions of Snape. They are colored by the character's personal prejudices against Snape, and are not impartial bits of information being imparted.

One of the key mistakes I see made about the Potterverse, and this is, I concede, solely my own opinion, is when someone takes every single word that's said literally, without considering the motivations of the characters who said it, or trying to decide how Harry is interpreting it, based on his own beliefs.


Mattew Bates - Aug 15, 2006 9:49 am (#59 of 2959)

We don't see Harry comment on Snape being either a transgressor or a victim of misdeeds in the detention files, but that does not mean that he is not in there. There are several possibilities that explain away the lack of mention of Snape. If these are just Filch's files, maybe Filch never caught the Marauders tormenting Snape. Snape clearly arranged the first session to be Marauder-Heavy, he could have picked boxes that he was not mentioned in. It is also possible that there were simply no detentions concerning Snape during the one session that we were "with" Harry. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - it is just evidence that JKR did not feel that mentioning Snape's involvement (or lack thereof) was important to the narrative (at least, not yet).


Steve Newton - Aug 15, 2006 10:07 am (#60 of 2959)

JKR chose not to show us any Snape misdeeds. I didn't pick up a hint of any. To me that suggests that we will not cover any productive ground.


Ice Princess - Aug 15, 2006 11:01 am (#61 of 2959)

I just wanted to get back to about if Snape had ever been or is loved. Somebody (I forgot who wrote and what post it was) mentioned that it was Snape's mother who had been teaching him the Dark Arts before he even entered Hogwarts, which ammounted to making Snape an evil, dark wizard at a young age. Considering how much Snape's mother messed him up, assuming that it was his mother that taught him all the dark magic, you can pretty much say that it wasn't Snape's mother who was the loved him. Or maybe it was. Who knows. But it also seems unlikely that all the things that The Half-Blood Prince and Lord Voldemort have in common are just a coincidence. Considering this, I think Severus Snape may be more powerful than we might suspect. Kind of scary thought if you think about it for a while. It should be interesting how these things play out in book 7.


haymoni - Aug 15, 2006 12:31 pm (#62 of 2959)

We don't know that Eileen was teaching him Dark Arts. We just know from Sirius that Snape arrived at school already knowing them.

He could have found out a lot on his own.


wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 12:57 pm (#63 of 2959)

We don't know that Eileen was teaching him Dark Arts. We just know from Sirius that Snape arrived at school already knowing them.

Haymoni and Ice Princess,

Sorry, but that's been the entire point of the examples I brought up and the past several posts I made. Sirius said that Snape arrived knowing more curses than 7th years. We don't know that those curses were Dark Arts, and we have plenty of evidence to say that neither Sirius nor Lupin's comments about Snape during the Hogwarts years can be taken as definitely true.

So the idea that Snape came to Hogwarts knowing the Dark Arts is not supported in canon other than Sirius questionable remark. Given that, there is no reason to suspect that Snape's mother was teaching him Dark Arts.

We can speculate on whether or not he really knew more curses than most 7th years, and if so, where or how he learned them. But we don't even know for sure that Sirius was revealing a fact or exaggerating through his own bias.


Ice Princess - Aug 15, 2006 1:05 pm (#64 of 2959)

Very true....I'm quite sure I mentioned that it might not have Snape's mother that taught him the curses. My point was just that Snape has been loved and most likely knows how to love, which could potentially make him more dangerous than some of us might have suspected....especially if Snape turns out to be a death eater.


Chemyst - Aug 15, 2006 4:14 pm (#65 of 2959)

Given that, there is no reason to suspect that Snape's mother was teaching him Dark Arts.

...to which I respectfully agree to disagree. Snape had a de facto knowledge of "unpleasant" magic when he arrived at Hogwarts. We do have canon for Sirius's report; and even if you believe that "more curses than most 7th years" is grossly exaggerated, it was not Sirius's intent to lie to Harry and therefore the statement probably contains a kernel of truth. Additionally we have an abundance of canon testimony that Snape is both clever and nasty, so it is quite reasonable to conclude that these are traits he was born with and that he was developing them during his childhood.

We also have canon evidence that his father was a muggle. A muggle, by definition, is non-magical. Simple deduction supposes that he did not learn magic from his father.

We do know that as best as Harry's occlumency glimpse and Hermione's research can tell us, Snape did grow up with a witch mother. There is reason to suspect that his mother taught him a foundational magic and that this magic was not all sugar and rainbows.

"Dark Arts" is only a degree of meaning, and I do not wish to go there or nit-pick over how bad something has to be before it is evil. I maintain here is reason to suspect that Snape's mother was teaching him "shadowy" magic prior to his coming to Hogwarts.


Choices - Aug 15, 2006 4:39 pm (#66 of 2959)

I agree with most of what you say Chemyst. Obviously, between his mother and his father, it had to come from his mother because she was a witch. But, it also could have been someone else in her family who taught him or he could have learned from someone he hung out with. I think the only thing that is definite here, is that it wasn't his father that taught him the dark magic.


Deb Zawacki - Aug 15, 2006 4:55 pm (#67 of 2959)

I'm still kind of leaning towards Snape as auto-didactic, She may have taught him a few things but I'm thinking he probably did a little more reading up on his own. I'm not saying his mother was good or bad I'm just wondering what the point is to learning a zillion curses and hexes UNLESS she was preparing him to use them defensively because Voldemort was already in power and she wanted him to be able to protect himself.

For all we know his magical kin-folk might have had some red-neck equivalent of aunts and uncles who sat around stunning and hexing each other for fun....

AVAAADDA KUHDAVRAH Y'ALL---GET 'R DONE!!!!!


wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 6:04 pm (#68 of 2959)

Hmm, let's see, where to start.

Did Sirius intend to lie about Snape knowing more curses as a first year than most 7th years? He needn't have meant to lie, he might only have been speaking from personal bias, a bias that had been in place -- by the time he said that -- for over 20 years. I doubt if Lupin was intending to lie when he told Harry that the source of Snape's hatred of James was jealousy over quidditch, or when Lupin and Sirius claimed Snape always "gave as good as he got." Yet we can be fairly confident that those things either weren't true, or had minimal truth to them. Well, we know, as did Harry, that the "gave as good as he got," comment wasn't true. Yet I don't think they were intending to lie. I think they were speaking from their personal biases which they'd had to shore up for years in order to justify their treatment of Snape during school.

In any case, I don't think we can place much trust in Sirius' comment about 1st year Snape knowing more curses than 7th years, when we have absolutely no other evidence that was true.

Chemyst said Snape had a de facto knowledge of "unpleasant" magic when he arrived at Hogwarts. We do have canon for Sirius's report; and even if you believe that "more curses than most 7th years" is grossly exaggerated, it was not Sirius's intent to lie to Harry and therefore the statement probably contains a kernel of truth.

I'm uncertain what your reasoning is. You seem to be saying that we know he knew more curses, because he knew "unpleasant" magic when he arrived. But the only way we hear that he knew any "unpleasant" magic is through Sirius' comment. Basically, the only actual canon evidence we have that he knew any magic whatsoever when coming to Hogwarts is that one comment by Sirius. I'm not trying to say that he didn't know any magic. I'm just saying that there's nothing to back up Sirius' statement about knowing all those curses. You suggest that because you think Sirius didn't intend to lie (about someone he hated and bullied and tried to get attacked by a werewolf) there must be a kernel of truth to what he said. I suppose this is where we'd have to disagree. I just don't think we can accept as truth the opinion of Sirius about someone he hated, bullied and tried to get killed -- and still thought had deserved the werewolf prank. To me, Sirius just isn't a reliable source about Snape. And anyway, I don't think we can take unsubstantiated reports from one rival against another.

Additionally we have an abundance of canon testimony that Snape is both clever and nasty, so it is quite reasonable to conclude that these are traits he was born with and that he was developing them during his childhood.

It's an acknowledged fact that a person's intelligence is in large part determined by genetics -- so a clever adult was almost certain a clever 11 year old. But I really don't think people are born nasty. I don't think it a valid assertion that Snape's being nasty in his thirties is evidence that he was nasty as an eleven year old, and therefore evidence that he was learning curses even prior to that.

I will agree that if Snape was learning magic from an adult prior to coming to Hogwarts, it was almost certainly his mother. But to leap from that to the notion that she was therefore teaching him "shadowy" magic, solely because a guy that hated, bullied, and tried once to kill Snape said that Snape knew a great many curses when he came to school -- well, personally, I wouldn't consider that valid reasoning.

I'm not saying his mother was good or bad I'm just wondering what the point is to learning a zillion curses and hexes UNLESS she was preparing him to use them defensively because Voldemort was already in power and she wanted him to be able to protect himself.

Not sure where we learn that Snape knew zillions of curses and hexes.

You know, all of this is based on one statement from Sirius' -- a man who not only hated and bullied Snape and took part in a 7 year rivalry with him, but was also completely willing as a student to hold Snape in magical bonds while James hexed him, who set Snape up to be attacked by a werewolf, and who said even as an adult that Snape deserved it. Because of this one persons statement, we're supposed to believe Snape was learning Dark Magic, or shadowy magic, or whatever, prior to coming to Hogwarts.

Oh well.

Ice Princess said My point was just that Snape has been loved and most likely knows how to love, which could potentially make him more dangerous than some of us might have suspected.

Sorry, I don't understand this one at all. I would think a person who has no empathy or care for anyone else (like Voldemort) is much more dangerous. In fact, in real life this has often been the case.


Ice Princess - Aug 15, 2006 6:51 pm (#69 of 2959)

Wynnleaf, I will admit, that probablly wasn't one of my most intelligent comments. My reasoning behind that one was see, L.V's weakness is that he cannot love. Seeing that Snape is just about as dark of a wizard as L.V, it may also be to Snape's advantage that he can love. It's just another power he has, that L.V does not possess. Maybe I am completely off.....and I welcome corrections!! It was just a thought I had.


Laura W - Aug 15, 2006 6:52 pm (#70 of 2959)

wynnleaf, say what you will about Sirius' credibility and character (or lack thereof, depending upon how one views him), at some point earlier in your posts I believe you equated what Black told Harry about Snape with what Lupin said to Harry about Snape. If I misunderstood you about this, then I'm sorry; but if I got that right, my reaction is the following --

I do not think it is fair to put Sirius and Remus in the same caldron regarding this.

Sirius and Snape obviously hated each other with a passion. This comes out more during their encounters at 12GP in OoP than anywhere else. Facing each other with wands drawn, Black calling Snape "Lucius' lap dog", Severus making cutting comments about Sirius conveniently staying safe and out of harm in his house, etc. And Sirius definitely had nothing good or even neutral to say about Snape to Harry during their two conversations (ie - the one in the cave and the one in the fire). Absolutely!

*For the most part*, however, I feel that Lupin has been more than fair and even-handed in his comments to Harry about Snape. I go to HBP, Chapter 16, for this:

"It comes down to whether or not you trust Dumbledore's judgement. I do; therefore, I trust Severus Snape." and " 'I neither like nor dislike Severus,' said Lupin." and, most important, " 'You are determined to hate him, Harry,' said Lupin with a faint smile. 'And I understand; with James as your father, with Sirius as your godfather, you have inherited an old prejudice."

Laura


wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 7:51 pm (#71 of 2959)

Laura,

While Lupin appears not to hate Snape, and even to give him the benefit of the doubt as an adult, that doesn't mean he has a good record in making accurate comments about Snape. When I said that Lupin's statements about Snape aren't necessarily trustworthy, it is because they are often unsubstantiated and many are contradicted by other evidence.

Examples of unreliable Lupin statements:

His comment that Snape's hatred of James stemmed from jealousy over quidditch. While Snape may have been jealous of James -- which could have included quidditch -- it's pretty clear that Lupin's characterization of that as a primary causal factor is wrong. Dumbledore seems to consider Snape's hatred of James as some sort of deep wound -- doesn't sound like anything like petty jealousy.

His comment that James and Sirius were the "best in the school at whatever they did" (we have no evidence that Lupin meant just quidditch and other hobbies), yet we know that others were the best in some areas. Of course, maybe James and Sirius just didn't do potions....

Lupin characterized Sirius and James as "sometimes got a bit carried away..." when Harry brought up the pensieve scene. A bit carried away??

Lupin said that Snape "never lost an opportunity to curse James, so you couldn't really expect James to take that lying down, could you?" That makes it sound like James' actions toward Snape were because he had to retaliate for Snape's treatment of him.

Lupin suggested to Harry that he "go back to Snape and tell him that on no account is he to stop giving you lessons -- when Dumbledore hears --" In other words, go back and demand Snape give him lessons. No mention of, "go back and apologize." Interesting attitude.

Lupin told Harry in POA that Snape revealed that Lupin was a werewolf because, "the loss of the Order of Merlin hit him hard." Huh? Does anyone really think that was what Snape was angry about? I thought it was because he thought his hated enemy, Sirius - who he also thought an evil murderer -- had been allowed to escape due in part to Lupin protecting Sirius' secrets. Did Lupin really think Snape was angry over the Order of Merlin instead of Lupin's part in Sirius' escape?

And in the Shrieking Shack, Lupin in talking directly to Snape, saying that Snape wanted Sirius back in Azkaban because of a schoolboy grudge -- thereby characterizing Sirius' actions toward Snape on a schoolboy level, and assuming that Snape has no concern over Sirius' supposed betrayal of the Potters or the deaths of 13 or 14 other people.

I think there's enough evidence to say that Lupin's notions about Snape are highly likely to be incorrect.

Ice Princess, I do think Snape is a darkish wizard -- more gray. However, I also think he's Dumbledore's man, so I don't think he is anything at all as dark as LV. After all, besides DD (who may have wanted Snape to AK him), who else has Snape killed? Who has he cruciod? Whose life has LV saved? No, I think LV is completely evil. Snape is just gray.


Saracene - Aug 16, 2006 12:07 am (#72 of 2959)

---Just to clarify.. We were originally discussing Snape's background including whether or not he really learned Dark Arts at home, and whether or not he really came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than 7th years, and the degree to which we can trust the remarks of Lupin and Sirius on those topics.---

Actually, to take it back to the original topic, I don't think that -Lupin- said anything about Snape coming to Hogwarts knowing advanced Dark Arts. So maybe it's more appropriate to focus solely on Sirius and whether his comments about Snape's background have been reliable. And I confess that I'm looking at it from completely different angle to wynnleaf: unless JKR gives us a clear indication that Snape -didn't- know Dark Arts before coming to school, then I'm perfectly willing to believe that what Sirius said was true and that JKR was giving us background information on Snape through another character. Especially since I don't think that this information contradicts with the overall picture of Snape and his interest in Dark Arts. In the same way that although we haven't actually been shown Snape hexing James, I see it an entirely plausible scenario and see no reason to disbelieve Lupin on it.


Laura W - Aug 16, 2006 1:52 am (#73 of 2959)

"although we haven't actually been shown Snape hexing James,"

Check out the exact wording of what happened in Snape's Worst Memory. (I think Jo is very deliberate in her wording at all times). Before any wands are drawn, let alone hexes performed, James says, "All right, Snivellus?" The very next line is "Snape reacted so fast it was as though he had been expecting an attack; dropping his bag, he plunged his hand inside his robes and his wand was halfway into the air when James shouted, 'Expelliarmus!' " *Then* James hexed Severus with "Impedimenta!"

The way I read this timeline, as it was written, 1. Potter called Snape a disgusting name, 2. Snape retaliated by reaching into his robe to get his wand (and what would he do with that wand but hex or jinx his verbal tormentor?), 3. James saw this and was quicker on the draw. Of course, there is no doubt that being able to best Severus - who he has never liked - gave the 15-year-old Potter satisfaction. (Well, Sirius and Lupin did confirm to Harry that his father and Sirius were jerks at that age.)

Laura


wynnleaf - Aug 16, 2006 4:13 am (#74 of 2959)
Edited Aug 16, 2006 6:24 am

Saracene said

And I confess that I'm looking at it from completely different angle to wynnleaf: unless JKR gives us a clear indication that Snape -didn't- know Dark Arts before coming to school, then I'm perfectly willing to believe that what Sirius said was true and that JKR was giving us background information on Snape through another character.

And this is precisely where we differ. I was trying to show examples of why I don't think we should believe that JKR uses Marauder characters to give us clear background info on Snape, or Snape to give us clear background info on Marauder characters. I don't think we should believe their reports without collaborating evidence from other sources. Edit: While your comment seems more like Sirius' comments are correct until proven wrong, I tend to consider his background info on Snape highly questionable until we get more evidence. Since JKR has shown Lupin as providing questionable background info, I see no reason to consider Sirius' comments less questionable.

Laura,

You quoted my comment "although we haven't actually been shown Snape hexing James," I should have clarified. I was referring to the allegation by Lupin that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. I assumed that Lupin was not speaking of when Snape hexed in self defence, but when Snape hexed in offense. I don't consider the Snape's Worst Memory scene as an example of Snape being on the offensive.

The way I read this timeline, as it was written, 1. Potter called Snape a disgusting name, 2. Snape retaliated by reaching into his robe to get his wand (and what would he do with that wand but hex or jinx his verbal tormentor?), 3. James saw this and was quicker on the draw.

Within the scene itself, it is never mentioned whether James already had his wand drawn, or whether he drew it in response to Snape going for his wand first. However, remember that Harry was an eyewitness to the memory.

When Harry considers it later, this is what he thinks:

Harry tried to make a case for Snape having deserved what he had suffered at James' hands - but hadn't Lily asked, "What's he done to you?" And hadn't James replied, "It's more the fact that he exists, if you know what I mean?" Hadn't James started it all simply because Sirius said he was bored?

When Harry spoke to Sirius and Lupin about it later this is what he said: "Yeah," said Harry, "but he just attacked Snape for no good reason, just because - well, just because you said you were bored.

I think it's pretty clear that Snape didn't draw first, because Harry can't think of any reason for James to have attacked Snape. He even refers to it as James attacking Snape, not the other way around.


Ice Princess - Aug 16, 2006 7:11 am (#75 of 2959)

Wynnleaf, thank you for the insight in post #71. I wasn't thinking about it from that piont of veiw, but your's makes more sense than mine. I geuss I just have a thing for Snape.....


haymoni - Aug 16, 2006 11:19 am (#76 of 2959)

Perhaps that incident made Snape want to learn how to do nonverbal spells and wandless magic.

Hermione came to school already knowing a lot about Hogwarts and the subjects that she was going to take.

Perhaps Snape did the same. Especially if he had his mother's old textbooks to read beforehand.

He may not have learned the spells directly from his mother, but BECAUSE of his mother.


Saracene - Aug 16, 2006 2:42 pm (#77 of 2959)

...just to elaborate more on my previous post since I didn't have time yesterday: I don't think that JKR -always- uses the Marauders and Snape to relay credible background information on each other - especially when the matters concern their school feud.

However, I do tend to look somewhat differently on Sirius' *specific* comments about Snape coming to Hogwarts knowing Dark Arts. Partly because for once Sirius and Harry weren't discussing Snape in terms of Snape/James, Snape/Sirius, Snape/Marauders, the Prank, the Pensieve incident, who hexed who, who was more to blame, etc. That particular discussion involved a matter more grave than a conflict between teenagers, namely whether or not Snape was really (once) a Death Eater. And to me, it looks like Sirius really did try to look at it fairly, admitting that both Hermione and Ron had a point, without immediately jumping to the conclusion that because Snape knew Dark Arts and hung around the wrong crowd then surely he must have been a Death Eater. I don't get an impression that Sirius said those things about Snape because, consciously or not, he wanted to make Snape look bad and spoke out of personal bias. I do think that he was weighing different bits of evidence and trying to see how it all fit.

wynnleaf:

---Since JKR has shown Lupin as providing questionable background info, I see no reason to consider Sirius' comments less questionable.---

Is that really fair though? Lupin and Sirius are not the one and same person. Sure, they are "the Marauders", but shouldn't they be judged as individuals, and judged on their respective quotes rather than collectively?


Choices - Aug 16, 2006 5:31 pm (#78 of 2959)

I would tend to question Sirius before Lupin. After all, Sirius was the reckless, rebellious one, whereas Lupin was more of a rule follower. He was a prefect and tried to be a good influence on James and Sirius.


Saracene - Aug 17, 2006 1:19 am (#79 of 2959)

Yeah, but Lupin is also a sort of person who often tries to put a "softening" spin on his statements and make things sound milder than they are. Compare his statement that James and Sirius "got carried away sometimes" to Sirius' "you mean, we were arrogant little berks at times".


Laura W - Aug 17, 2006 2:43 am (#80 of 2959)

wynnleaf wrote,

"You quoted my comment "although we haven't actually been shown Snape hexing James," I should have clarified. I was referring to the allegation by Lupin that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. I assumed that Lupin was not speaking of when Snape hexed in self defence, but when Snape hexed in offense. I don't consider the Snape's Worst Memory scene as an example of Snape being on the offensive."

First of all, I actually took that quote from the last line of Saracene 's post #72. I certainly should have made that clear. One point from my House.

Ok, so are you saying you do not believe that Snape "never lost an opportunity to curse James" throughout their school years, and that you do not believe it because Remus Lupin said it and you have come to the conclusion that Remus Lupin - wittingly or unwittingly - does not tell the truth?

If you are using that argument, then I put something else to you. Lupin also told Harry during that talk in the fire that Lily started going with James Potter in seventh year after James had "stopped hexing people just for the fun of it." In other words, Remus was not trying to paint his friend with a rose-coloured brush either. (Sorry about the mixed metaphor.) Again, he was being even-handed and trying to be fair.

So ... if you do not believe our friend with the furry little problem about Severus hexing James (yes, offensively, as you say), logically you would also not believe this so unreliable source (Lupin) - as you seem to think he is - about James going around hexing people, including/especially Snape just for the fun of it. Either both boys did what Lupin says they did or neither did any offensive hexing, cursing or jinxing of the other: depending upon whether Lupin has told it as it was or has gotten it completely wrong. *My* take is that what Lupin says about both boys are basically correct.

In an odd way, this actually makes James look worse than it makes Severus look. Undoubtedly because the reader - not to mention Harry - had such an elevated opinion of James until that chapter in OoP. Regardless of my entirely-negative feelings about Snape - which have altered to some degree with the passage of time and additional readings of the books - the first time I read OoP I was thoroughly disgusted with how James acted in that whole chapter; including his obvious conceit and his deliberately baiting Snape with that initial insult, talking about his hygiene, etc.

Still, Lupin tells Harry that James misbehaved at 15, but "grew out of it," and "he was a good person." I think what he meant was that James Potter *became* a good person - something we will learn about in a lot of detail in Book Seven.

There is, of course, no way Jo could have shown us every incidence of Snape and James hexing each other throughout their years at Hogwarts. We would need another seven books. (Hint, hint) I guess each of us - with an unfinished series as our reference -either believes Lupin's comment that it did take place, or we don't. Just like each of us has to decide how much to believe Sirius. And Snape, for that matter. I guess.

Laura
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 81 to 110

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 9:13 am

wynnleaf - Aug 17, 2006 3:29 am (#81 of 2959)
Laura,

You are misunderstanding the intent of my comments. I'm not going to reread my posts and see if I used the phrase "I don't believe Lupin," but that was not what I meant to say. I meant to convey that Lupin is not a trustworthy witness. That does not mean that everything he says about Snape is wrong, or completely incorrect, but it means that we cannot count on it being correct. What I personally believe about it, one way or the other, has no bearing on whether or not his statements are trustworthy.

For instance, I personally believe that Snape probably hexed James sometimes in an offensive, not defensive, manner. However, that doesn't add the slightest bit of credence to Lupin's comment that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. Lupin's comment still remains without any collaborative evidence, and he still has a record of clearly incorrect or less-than-correct reports about Snape, which should lead us to consider this one doubtful as well. My beliefs about Snape hexing James, one way or the other, do not make Lupin any more reliable a witness.

Saracene said: I don't think that JKR -always- uses the Marauders and Snape to relay credible background information on each other - especially when the matters concern their school feud. However, I do tend to look somewhat differently on Sirius' *specific* comments about Snape coming to Hogwarts knowing Dark Arts. Insert by wynnleaf: He didn't say Dark Arts, he said curses -- we only know of 3 Dark Arts curses at the time Snape was 11. Partly because for once Sirius and Harry weren't discussing Snape in terms of Snape/James, Snape/Sirius, Snape/Marauders, the Prank, the Pensieve incident, who hexed who, who was more to blame, etc.

I've heard this argument before. Basically, what you're saying is that even though Sirius intensely hated Snape, tried to send him into the jaws of a werewolf in their teens, continued to think Snape deserved this action even as an adult, and continued to called him "Snivellus" as an adult, we should believe what he said about Snape in GOF, because Sirius was being objective at that point. How do we know? Look, I'm not trying to say Sirius was intentionally lying. But I think it's utterly obvious that Sirius is strongly biased against Snape. I don't think we should assume that his bias and hatred can be so entirely set aside that we can believe what he says about Snape without question, solely because he's not talking to Harry in the context of a Marauder topic.

A somewhat different argument was this:

me: Since JKR has shown Lupin as providing questionable background info, I see no reason to consider Sirius' comments less questionable.

What I was addressing here, and in much of my earlier discussion about Lupin and Sirius' unreliability, was your earlier theory that JKR wouldn't give us incorrect information about Snape's history from Sirius for this reason:

Post 35 by Saracene And though Sirius is definitely biased when it comes to Snape, I look at it this way: a) there's only that much space JKR is going to devote to the older characters' backgrounds; b) when she thinks it important to indicate that the information we've learnt earlier is not correct or does not represent the full picture she does so. After all, we're not going to learn about these characters' backgrounds from any other source than what's in the books and, occasionally, JKR's interviews.

The theory above is a different reason for trusting Sirius' comments than the one you give below.

Saracene Is that really fair though? Lupin and Sirius are not the one and same person. Sure, they are "the Marauders", but shouldn't they be judged as individuals, and judged on their respective quotes rather than collectively?

In wanting to address your Post 35 theory for why to believe Sirius, I was trying to show that overall, JKR has shown us that the reports the Marauders and Snape make about each other are often exaggerated or not correct. Because of that, we can't use the Post 35 theory as a reason to believe Sirius.

As regards believing Sirius because you feels he is speaking more objectively of Snape in his GOF statements, I feel Sirius' hatred of Snape is too deep to ever assume he is not speaking from bias. But that's just my opinion.

In either case, we still have no collaborative evidence that Snape came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than most 7th years. This doesn't mean it's not true. It simply means that I don't think we should rely on that info, and especially not build theories that he had a lot of Dark Arts training in childhood around that one statement.


Catherine - Aug 17, 2006 3:59 am (#82 of 2959)
His comment that Snape's hatred of James stemmed from jealousy over quidditch. While Snape may have been jealous of James -- which could have included quidditch -- it's pretty clear that Lupin's characterization of that as a primary causal factor is wrong. Dumbledore seems to consider Snape's hatred of James as some sort of deep wound -- doesn't sound like anything like petty jealousy.

I don't see Lupin's statement as a "primary causal factor." He provided an explanation, just perhaps not the most complete information. Rather like Dumbledore has done to Harry.

For instance, I personally believe that Snape probably hexed James sometimes in an offensive, not defensive, manner. However, that doesn't add the slightest bit of credence to Lupin's comment that Snape never missed an opportunity to hex James. Lupin's comment still remains without any collaborative evidence, and he still has a record of clearly incorrect or less-than-correct reports about Snape, which should lead us to consider this one doubtful as well. My beliefs about Snape hexing James, one way or the other, do not make Lupin any more reliable a witness.

You can choose to believe this, but Forum members are free to believe that JKR may be using Lupin's comment to provide relevant background information.

In either case, we still have no collaborative evidence that Snape came to Hogwarts knowing more curses than most 7th years. This doesn't mean it's not true. It simply means that I don't think we should rely on that info, and especially not build theories that he had a lot of Dark Arts training in childhood around that one statement.

It is not necessary to have collaberative evidence, although I do think that Forum members are not mistaken to "build theories" about Snape's background in the Dark Arts with the textual evidence provided.

My personal take is that while JKR is not just writing a "children's book," she has not forsaken her younger readers. She writes in such a way that certain characters can "speak" and provide relevant background and plot information. But that's just my opinion.


Saracene - Aug 17, 2006 5:22 am (#83 of 2959)
wynnleaf:

---Insert by wynnleaf: He didn't say Dark Arts, he said curses -- we only know of 3 Dark Arts curses at the time Snape was 11.---

I'm not sure what you mean here. Unless you mean to say that at the time Snape was 11 there were only 3 Dark Arts curses in existence, which I find incredibly unlikely considering how long the Dark Arts have been around for. And since Sirius was talking about Snape's fascination with Dark Arts in that paragraph, I doubt that he meant typical hexes teens amuse themselves with.

---What I was addressing here, and in much of my earlier discussion about Lupin and Sirius' unreliability, was your earlier theory that JKR wouldn't give us incorrect information about Snape's history from Sirius for this reason---

But a part of my theory is,

--b) when she thinks it important to indicate that the information we've learnt earlier is not correct or does not represent the full picture she does so.--

Your examples list occurences when information/statements given by Marauders about Snape was contradicted/shown to be incorrect by information/statements from other sources. What I'm saying is that, IMO, so far JKR has given us no contradictory information to Sirius' GoF statement. As in, she didn't show us, or have any other person tell us, that no, actually Snape didn't know any Dark curses before coming to school. And by "information" I mean specific information about Snape's past rather than the general "Marauders gave untrustworthy statements in the past". Granted, we still have a book to go and JKR may address that point, but if she doesn't, then I'm willing to think that, with that comment, she was giving us background info on Snape.

I guess that, again, it just comes down to us looking at it differently.

---In wanting to address your Post 35 theory for why to believe Sirius, I was trying to show that overall, JKR has shown us that the reports the Marauders and Snape make about each other are often exaggerated or not correct.---

I understand that. I just feel that, in assessing *Sirius'* dependability, we should look solely at *Sirius'* comments and not put Sirius under the broad "Marauders" category and mix in Lupin and whatever questionable comments he'd made, or bring in Snape and his statements. I have trouble with the idea that, when looking at the comments made by character A and trying to assess their reliability, it's fair to bring in what the character B said and say, well since that character has proven to be untrustworthy then there's no reason why character A should be considered less questionable.


wynnleaf - Aug 17, 2006 6:01 am (#84 of 2959)
What I'm saying is that, IMO, so far JKR has given us no contradictory information to Sirius' GoF statement.

Let's take a look at what Sirius said in GOF. The questions for us are: 1. is JKR trying to give us correct info in this discussion? and 2. is Sirius being really objective in his comments about Snape?

1. Two of the crucial pieces of information that Sirius gives to HRH in this conversation are, unbeknownst to Sirius, quite false. He says that Snape was never accused of being a DE, but we find later that Karkarov accused Snape in the Wizengamot. Of course, Sirius couldn't have known this. And Sirius said that he didn't think Dumbledore would ever hire someone who had worked for Voldemort. This is also incorrect as we discover later that DD was well aware that Snape had been a DE. Therefore we cannot say that JKR was trying to give HRH, or the reader, purely correct information about Snape in this discussion -- not when we have 2 crucial pieces of false info included. Some info she gives us here is correct, and some is not.

2. Was Sirius being objective in his comments on Snape in this particular discussion? He says, "Snape's always been fascinated by the Dark Arts, he was famous for it at school. Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was," Sirius added, and Harry and Ron grinned at each other. "Snape knew more curses when he arrived at school than half the kids in seventh, year..." Okay, maybe if Sirius had stuck to objective comments, we could suppose that despite his hatred of Snape, he was being objective here. But he didn't. As soon as he started in on "slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid," we know that Sirius is still in "I hate Snape 'cause he's disgusting" mode. No, I don't think we can say he was being completely objective and unbiased at that point.

So we have the clear case of JKR using this discussion to give HRH some true info and some false info, as well as some that we're not sure of.

And we have biased comments by Sirius regarding Snape -- immediately prior to his comment on 11 year old Snape's curse knowledge.

Now as regards my comment on only 3 known Dark Arts curses when Snape was 11 --- I could only find 3 curses listed in the Lexicon list of curses that we know to be Dark Arts. Those are the three unforgiveables. We also know, from Snape, that Sectumsempra is Dark Magic, but he probably hadn't invented it at 11 years old. So as far as we actually know we can only name 3 curses that were Dark Arts when Snape was 11. Sure there were probably more. But given that the list in the Lexicon is rather longish, but with only 3 Dark curses on it, it could be entirely possible to know lots of curses, none of which were technically Dark. We don't, after all, have any sort of working definition from JKR as to how to define Dark Arts in the HP world.


darien - Aug 17, 2006 7:55 am (#85 of 2959)
One thing- do time lines allow Snape's mother be at Hogwarts at the same times as Voldemort? because something may have happened there. She was a half-blood and Tom Riddle has already been known to bully people without teachers knowing.

Snape could find later on than Voldemort is Tom Riddle and turn against him, or have been against him all time long. Dumbledore may have told him who Voldemort was and therefore that is why Dumbledore knows snape is good.

Is it possible?


Chemyst - Aug 17, 2006 8:46 am (#86 of 2959)
we only know of 3 Dark Arts curses at the time Snape was 11.—wynnleaf
...I'm not sure what you mean here. Unless you mean to say that at the time Snape was 11 there were only 3 Dark Arts curses in existence, which I find incredibly unlikely considering how long the Dark Arts have been around for. –Saracene

My interpretation was that Wynnleaf accepts as "dark" only curses which have been specifically labeled as dark by a reliable character with corroboration from an additional source and that Sirius and Remus are not reliable characters. Since Septumsempra had not yet been invented when Snape was 11, it did not count in that debate. (Apparently, Snape's word that "Septumsempra" is "dark" is reliable without additional authentication.)

As for me, I believe the most accurate picture of those relationships will be shown by the big picture and not by dissection of every sentence. It seems plain that James and Severus were near equals in their enmity by the end of their 5th year, the difference being that James had a support system and Severus was a loner. (I must believe Severus was a loner because the character who said he ran with a gang of Slytherins is unreliable and I have no corroborating confirmation. )

Bottom line; if Sirius always gave fully objective information, the reader would not know the intensity of the emotions evoked. Sirius has an even more intimate reason to hate Snape than James did because it would have appeared to Sirius that Snape was trying to become a type of the person Sirius was trying to shed and for that, Sirius was being rejected my his family.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

darien, from the Lexicon's Pensieve:

As the textbook seems intended for 6th-year potions and the copyright date was “nearly fifty years” ago (pg 337, US hardcover) in HBP, one could deduce that Eileen was a sixth year in the 1946-47 school year, and therefore, started at Hogwarts in 1940. At least, until we are told otherwise.

The Lexicon timeline has Tom Riddle leaving school in 1945. Eileen would have been in school but a couple years behind.


haymoni - Aug 17, 2006 8:50 am (#87 of 2959)
Dark Arts curses, I believe, are not the same as Unforgiveable Curses.

Otherwise students wouldn't spend years studying Defense Against the Dark Arts.

There has to be something more to it. Lupin taught about all those animals or beings or whatever they are. They certainly weren't spells, but they were entities that would cause you harm.

I think any spell could be Dark Arts simply if it causes harm.


Magic Words - Aug 17, 2006 9:55 am (#88 of 2959)
My interpretation was that Wynnleaf accepts as "dark" only curses which have been specifically labeled as dark by a reliable character with corroboration from an additional source and that Sirius and Remus are not reliable characters. --Chemyst

Have Sirius and Remus ever labeled curses Snape knew as "dark?" I thought that was the whole debate--whether we should read "Dark Arts" when Sirius only said "curses."


wynnleaf - Aug 17, 2006 10:31 am (#89 of 2959)
Okay guys, I think several of you are maybe thinking I'm saying things I don't mean.

1. I don't mean that everything Sirius or Lupin or Snape say about each other is untrue, simply that you can't take it as a fact without some sort of other evidence. If there's no other evidence, I'd just take it with a grain of salt.

2. I don't mean that there's no truth at all to Sirius' comment about Snape knowing more curses at age 11. I'm trying to say that Sirius' comment can't be taken as the literal truth. I don't mean that he was fabricating something, but that given his bias you have to assume that he might exaggerate, especially when the comment comes directly after how Snape is a slimy, oily, greasy whatever... So it's probably fair to say that Snape came to Hogwarts knowing a bunch of spells -- curses, hexes, jinxes or other spells. But not fair to assume that Sirius is completely technically correct and Snape knew more curses than half of the seventh years. And it's even more of a stretch to assume that the curses Snape supposedly knew were Dark Magic.

3. Does this mean I'm saying we trust nothing that Snape, Sirius, or Lupin say without collaboration? No. I mean that when it comes to their comments about each other, they should be expected to be exaggerating (Snape saying the Marauders always attacked 4-1), or otherwise prone to trying to make themselves look generally less bad, and the other guy(s)look worse, more petty, or at least just as bad.

4. Dark Magic is certainly not just unforgiveables. But we've also been given no information that the leg locker curse, or the body bind, or the babbling curse, for instance, are Dark Magic. Therefore we have no evidence that all curses are Dark, or even that most curses are Dark.

If Sirius' comment was taken as hyperbole, born of his personal bias, rather than a strict objective statement, Sirius could just as easily have been exaggerating a reality where Snape came to Hogwarts knowing more defensive spells than any of the other kids that the Maruader's associated with -- that is, kid's nearer their age.

I'm not saying that's definitely what Sirius meant or what the truth was. I'm just saying that given Sirius' bias, plus the fact that JKR was clearly willing to have that discussion include false information, we can't just assume that Sirius' comment was correct.


Saracene - Aug 17, 2006 7:25 pm (#90 of 2959)
wynnleaf:

---1. Two of the crucial pieces of information that Sirius gives to HRH in this conversation are, unbeknownst to Sirius, quite false. He says that Snape was never accused of being a DE, but we find later that Karkarov accused Snape in the Wizengamot. Of course, Sirius couldn't have known this. And Sirius said that he didn't think Dumbledore would ever hire someone who had worked for Voldemort.---

I'm not sure if I'd put these two statements above in the same league with Sirius' comment about Snape and Dark Arts. When Sirius says that Snape arrived at Hogwarts knowing curses, he states this as an objective fact. When Sirius says that he didn't think Dumbledore would ever hire someone who'd worked for Voldemort, he simply states his opinion - not giving us background information. And when he says that Snape was never accused of being a Death Eater, he precedes this with "as far as I'm aware" (or its equivalent) - thus indicating that his knowledge may be incomplete. So, IMO of the three statements listed, the only on instance of a character giving definite background info on another character is Sirius' remark about Snape coming to school knowing curses.

And even so, the point about those two other statements is that JKR *showed* them to be incorrect. She, so, far, has not shown Sirius' statement about Snape and curses to be incorrect.

---And it's even more of a stretch to assume that the curses Snape supposedly knew were Dark Magic---

I don't see why not. Snape's interest in Dark Arts is something I feel quite certain about; I don't see why it couldn't be something he started at an early age.


wynnleaf - Aug 17, 2006 8:32 pm (#91 of 2959)
Saracene,

I said: And it's even more of a stretch to assume that the curses Snape supposedly knew were Dark Magic

you said: I don't see why not. Snape's interest in Dark Arts is something I feel quite certain about; I don't see why it couldn't be something he started at an early age.

Sure, it could have been something he started at an early age. But that doesn't mean that we have solid canon evidence that he did. Snape could have invented Sectumsempra at age 5 for all we know. But we don't have any real evidence of it. My point is, do we really know that Sirius' statement was an objective, clear-cut fact? As opposed to hyperbole? No, we don't. And the immediate sentence prior, Sirius was clearly not making an objective comment.

Saracene, I hope you know that I agree with almost all of your posts and generally see eye-to-eye with you on most topics. I just don't agree on this particular point. I'm not saying Sirius was wrong, only that we cannot trust his statement to be objective fact.

By the way, why does having an interest in one's teens mean that Snape had the same interest when he was a little kid? Plenty of people develop interests in their teens that they never even thought of as little children. Snape's being "into" the Dark Arts at Hogwarts doesn't make him necessarily an ideal candidate for a little kid doing Dark Arts -- especially with a muggle dad and a mom willing to marry a muggle. After all, Harry's really "into" quidditch. He was so good at flying on his first try that anyone might have mistaken him for having flown for years. But he never even knew there were flying brooms until just days or weeks prior.


Chemyst - Aug 18, 2006 6:39 am (#92 of 2959)
By the way, why does having an interest in one's teens mean that Snape had the same interest when he was a little kid?

No one has been making claims of conclusive proof — only for general trends and propensities. Small children often do have natural tendencies or a 'bent' which is developed as they mature. It is the "leopard doesn't change its spots" axiom.

Frankly, I see the 'born that way' and 'from childhood' explanations far easier to accept than some "Oops! He got to Hogwarts and turned to the dark side." The literature of psychological research shows that a child's personality it fairly well determined by the time he is seven.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 18, 2006 10:03 am (#93 of 2959)
Personality, yes, but you don't always discover talents until an older age. And his mother couldn't have been totally dark or she wouldn't have married a muggle.

If we accept that he was dark from childhood with no proof, we're getting AWAY from the idea that it is our choices that make us who we are.


Chemyst - Aug 18, 2006 1:25 pm (#94 of 2959)
Why would recognizing a predilection be getting away from the idea that it is our choices that make us who we are? I have a penchant for chocolate; that does not prohibit me from ever choosing vanilla.

I don't see the connection between "totally dark" = "would not marry a muggle" either. A pureblood bigot may not marry a muggle, but an unprejudiced dark wizard might even have some nefarious reason for preferring a muggle, (less power to oppose him, perhaps?) Do we have canon that all dark wizards are prejudiced towards purebloods and against muggles, or is it merely a common association?


wynnleaf - Aug 18, 2006 4:48 pm (#95 of 2959)
Do we have canon that all dark wizards are prejudiced towards purebloods and against muggles, or is it merely a common association?

I think you're probably right about that. I don't think it's a prerequisite to being Dark, to also be into blood purity.

But as far as how early a person would likely exhibit dark tendencies -- well, I think it's likely that the seeds for whatever propelled Snape toward Dark Magic were sown in his early childhood. But that could simply mean that through his early years he was developing attitudes that would make Dark Magic a tempting option someday. But that's still a far cry from learning loads of Dark curses.


cindysuewho45 - Aug 18, 2006 9:31 pm (#96 of 2959)
Hi all, I do not believe that there is any canon about all dark wizards not liking muggles. There is some canon about DE's though, not liking them. I would think it is like JKR says about Slytherin House, they do not all turn out to do dark arts and be DE's, something like that. So I feel that there are some wizards that do dark arts, that do not have a problem with muggles.


MichaelmasGal - Aug 18, 2006 10:33 pm (#97 of 2959)
Is Snape on Voldemort's side or the good side?


Honour- Aug 19, 2006 3:12 am (#98 of 2959)
Wouldn't Regulus be the proof against your argument Chemist? By all accounts he was a typical Slytherin and a Black to boot? He even became a Death Eater, predilections aside, in the end he made the right choice, a choice which cost him his life none the less, but still the right choice?


Chemyst - Aug 19, 2006 6:11 am (#99 of 2959)
Wouldn't Regulus be the proof against your argument Chemist?

No, he would actually be proof FOR my argument; which is — someone can be born with a predisposition to make certain choices; we can rightfully use a character's innate temperament in our speculation of what is probable, even if we don't (yet) have specific canon for it; but having a predisposition to make a certain choice does not prohibit the character from making a choice to the contrary.

It is, in point of fact, characters such as Regulus who do make the unexpected choice that keep the suspense going book after book.


Ann - Aug 19, 2006 6:23 am (#100 of 2959)
Catherine said "My personal take is that while JKR is not just writing a "children's book," she has not forsaken her younger readers. She writes in such a way that certain characters can "speak" and provide relevant background and plot information. But that's just my opinion."

I think one of the things JKR will be showing children who read these books is that you shouldn't always take things you hear at face value, particularly when they are said by a person who has strong feelings about the person he's talking about. (It's also a heck of a literary device.)

Chemyst, I think your point about our automatic equation of Dark Arts and pure-blood prejudice (and I might add, Slytherin affiliation) is dead on. That assumption is quite probably wrong. Those things are clearly united in Voldemort and in Sirius's parents and the Malfoys (Draco throws an Unforgivable at Harry in HBP, after all), but they are not necessarily always linked.

But the question of Snape vs. James and Sirius and Lupin (lets ignore Pettigrew for the moment--as they all seem to have done) is a really interesting one. With James we have a pureblood background with no Dark Arts or prejudice, since he is so besotted with Lily. If Charlus Potter and Dorea Black are his parents, they may, like Sirius, have been in rebellion against the Black penchant for Dark arts and pure-blood prejudice.) This may have been one of the reasons Sirius liked him, since he was in full rebellion against his family, which is all of those things. And Remus seems to have been from a half-blood, unprejudiced household (they were pleased that he could go to Hogwarts and apparently fond of Dumbledore), but with the twist of being himself a Dark creature, which has proably kept him away from anything else Dark. (People would tend to assume it, and the slightest interest in that direction could ruin him.)

We know much less about Snape: only that his mother was a witch and his father a Muggle. I think Snape did know curses, and probably Dark curses, when he came to Hogwarts. Maybe not more than the 7th years, but some. One indication of that is that, when James attacks him with embarrassing curses (dangling him upside down and washing his mouth out with soap), Snape retaliates with something that draws blood. I suspect this is a standard pattern, and was one of the things that made the Mauraders feel superior--never mind that the gash in James' face can be repaired instantly, while the effects of being dangled upside down in front of one's fellow students (many of them girls) and then having one's underpants removed is not something Madam Pomfrey can cure. Given how sensitive an unpopular adolescent boy would be about such things, one can almost forgiven him for going to Voldemort.

I think Snape's resorting to violent curses like the one in the Pensieve is probably a pointer to his background--and probably something he couldn't help. I wouldn't think his mother taught him them; he probably learned them from playmates--perhaps his Prince cousins or the "gang of Slytherins" that Sirius refers to (most of whom seem to be older). Anyway, the curse he uses seems markedly different from the cute little jinxes that most kids seem to use (Jelly-legs, Furnunculus, even Densaugeo). The Marauders despise him for using them, overlooking the fact that they are used mostly in self-defense (and after a while, probably, for revenge). The fact that he goes for his wand when James shouts a greeting is sadly telling. And James' reason, "because he exists" is unbelievably cruel.

I think a contrast may also be drawn between James & Sirius here--James uses the cutsey jinxes; Sirius sends Snape into a werewolf's den as a "prank," something that would have destroyed Remus as well, if it had resulted in Snape's Lycanthropy or death. It may be a realization of this that causes James' transformation into someone Lily can love.

JKR has further drawn the contrast of a popular clique versus a solitary outcast. You'll notice that Snape has no nasty nicknames for the Marauders--except eventually Wormtail, and who can blame him? Nasty nicknames are merely pathetic if only one person uses them. You need a gang of sycophantic friends to laugh and use them back for them to be really hurtful. The Marauders think their "hexes" are trivial--they don't think that they're doing him real harm, since they don't draw blood. But they're making him into the hateful person who joins Voldemort.

So, yes, Wynnleaf; I think there is corroborating **swotty pedantic note: not "collaborating"** evidence for Sirius's "curses" statement--and I think he does mean to imply Dark curses. But if the Pensieve scene was at all typical, and I think it is, I think Snape was more sinned against than sinning.


Vulture - Aug 19, 2006 9:44 am (#101 of 2959)
Soul Search, I an inclined to agree to the extent that I believe that Severus is disappointed ....

First, Harry is unlike Lily in his studies and Severus believes that this lack of diligent study and training will result in his failure. ...

... I believe Severus is disappointed in Harry much in the same way Augusta Longbottom is disappointed is Neville for not being the reincarnation of his parents. (Nathan Zimmermann - Aug 14, 2006 10:13 am (#41))

I agree with the assessment of Snape's disappointment in Harry. (Die Zimtzicke - Aug 14, 2006 10:56 am (#42))

I think Snape is disappointed in Harry because he was supposed to be great and nothing much has happened yet. (haymoni - Aug 14, 2006 11:00 am (#43))

Hi, Folks: I'm afraid I disagree with the idea that Snape is "disappointed" in Harry _ assuming he's not on Voldemort's side (I'll come back to that.) I certainly cannot agree that he is motivated by disappointment, and would be different to Harry if he weren't disappointed.

Firstly, I have the impression that many of those who believe that Dumbledore was right to trust Snape not only believe he trusted him, but that he valued and confided in him more than most. (Correct me if I'm wrong.) Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Snape would have had plenty of chances, over six years, to hear something of Dumbledore's judgement of Harry's abilities and performance. He may choose (due to past grudges or otherwise) to ignore this information, but ignoring something is not the same as being unaware of it.

Secondly, if anyone feels that Harry has done nothing (yet) to earn respect for his powers, I refer them to the scene in Book 5 where Hermione and Ron first try to talk him into teaching Defence Against The Dark Arts to what becomes "Dumbledore's Army". Interestingly, Harry's efforts to argue against them are not a million miles from what we could imagine Snape saying _ that his deeds have all been a lot of luck. Personally, I agreed with Ron and Hermione.

In my opinion, to say that Snape is "disappointed" in Harry, from his first moment in school, is to imply that if Harry had acted differently in some way _ perhaps performed better on some level _ Snape would have respected him, or at least not shown the hostility we've seen. But I don't feel that this is backed up in the books, because I don't feel that they depict Snape as genuinely believing that Harry is thick, or lazy, or mediocre.

For example _ in Book 3, straight after Sirius's escape, Snape knows that Harry and Hermione have something to do with it _ despite not having a clue how , and despite it seeming impossible to the eyes and ears of all but Dumbledore. No suggestion there of any doubt about Harry's ability.

The reason I said "assuming he's not on Voldemort's side", above, is because, if Snape is on Voldemort's side, we can pretty much take what he says to Bellatrix in "Spinner's End" at face value (allowing for the odd bit of boasting or amusing himself at her expense), and in that chapter he claims that he (and other Death Eaters) had hoped that Harry Potter would turn out to be an amazing Dark Wizard around whom the Dark Side could re-group. If Snape means this, then certainly he would have been disappointed in Harry. But I don't think we would sympathise !!

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

We don't know that Eileen was teaching him Dark Arts. We just know from Sirius that Snape arrived at school already knowing them.

He could have found out a lot on his own. (haymoni - Aug 15, 2006 1:31 pm (#62))

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Haymoni and Ice Princess,

Sorry, but that's been the entire point of the examples I brought up and the past several posts I made. Sirius said that Snape arrived knowing more curses than 7th years. We don't know that those curses were Dark Arts, and we have plenty of evidence to say that neither Sirius nor Lupin's comments about Snape during the Hogwarts years can be taken as definitely true. (wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 1:57 pm (#63))

Haymoni, Ice Princess and wynnleaf: Perhaps both arguments are correct. I think that, with JKR, we always have to bear in mind the personality of the character in any given case. My impression of Sirius is that, in addition to being loyal, clever, and brave, he's also impetuous and, from time to time, hot-tempered. In conversation _ particularly among friends _ I can imagine him, now and again, exaggerating to emphasise a point, particularly if he's referring to someone who makes him hot under the collar. I think his friends would understand his style and know what he means.

So, in this specific case, I don't think his comment is intended to literally mean that Snape arrived at Hogwarts knowing more Dark magic than most 7th Years (though it could well be the case that a bright but warped first-year brain like Snape's knew more than the 7th-year Crabbes and Goyles of his day). I think that what Sirius meant to get across was that Snape, in 1st Year, showed more ability and interest in the Dark Arts than other Slytherins, who, as I've said in another post, could be assumed to take more interest in the Dark Arts than non-Slytherins. I think Sirius also meant to emphasise that Snape was not only ahead of other 1st Years in this, but knew more than many in years above him. The "7th" is just a typical flourish _ if Sirius wasn't so into style in every second thing he does, he'd be alive now !!

So yes, it's true that Sirius exaggerates, but it's also true that he had a point to make _ and his point is consistent with Snape's character (a crucial factor with JKR): the very first thing we're ever told about Snape (Book 1, the first Hogwarts feast) is that he "knows a lot about the Dark Arts".


Vulture - Aug 19, 2006 9:54 am (#102 of 2959)
Edited Aug 19, 2006 11:45 am
Did Sirius intend to lie about Snape knowing more curses as a first year than most 7th years? He needn't have meant to lie, he might only have been speaking from personal bias, a bias that had been in place -- by the time he said that -- for over 20 years. I doubt if Lupin was intending to lie when he told Harry that the source of Snape's hatred of James was jealousy over quidditch, or when Lupin and Sirius claimed Snape always "gave as good as he got." Yet we can be fairly confident that those things either weren't true, or had minimal truth to them. Well, we know, as did Harry, that the "gave as good as he got," comment wasn't true. Yet I don't think they were intending to lie. I think they were speaking from their personal biases which they'd had to shore up for years in order to justify their treatment of Snape during school. (wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 7:04 pm (#68))

Well, see post #101 for my take on Sirius's comment. As for Lupin's "Quidditch" comment, that was made in Book 3 _ with hindsight, it seems that what (good-side) adults say to Harry about anything involving his parents gets simpler, less detailed, and perhaps more sugar-coated the farther back we go. I think that that's less about bias (especially in Lupin's case) and more about shielding Harry.

At the same time, I don't think there's nothing to the Quidditch comment _ Snape himself, in Book 3, brings up Quidditch when labelling James as arrogant. We know that Quidditch is a big deal at Hogwarts and that James is good at it, and that this is part of why he was popular. Though it's not in canon, I think we can assume that James did as well as Harry the first time he got on a broom. Poor Snape, on the other hand, did not _ Harry, in Occlumency class, saw Snape's memory of a girl laughing at his efforts. It would be most surprising if this played no part in Snape's enmity with James _ but, as with Harry and Malfoy, the enmity would be there even without Quidditch.

I just don't think we can accept as truth the opinion of Sirius about someone he hated, bullied and tried to get killed (wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 7:04 pm (#68))

I don't think it's as simple as that. Sirius would hand out no compliments to Snape, but he would not lie to his friends about points of information they needed to know for the struggle against evil. Remember, it's Sirius who, despite everything he feels about Snape, nevertheless says in Book 4: "There's still the fact that Dumbledore trusts Snape ..."

As for trying to get Snape killed _ Snape himself made a comment about this, in Book 3. Do you remember how Dumbledore reacted ? He was giving Snape his X-ray look at that point _ and said "My memory is as good as it ever was, Severus". I've always felt that that was a very powerful scene, and that there was more than a hint of reproof, if not coldness, there. Was Dumbledore suggesting that he remembered more than Snape would find convenient ? Certainly, it was on hearing that comment that Snape stormed out. Equally certainly, he had earlier tried to get Sirius made worse than dead without following wizard law (i.e. by giving him up to Fudge and Dumbledore).

Sirius ... who set Snape up to be attacked by a werewolf, and who said even as an adult that Snape deserved it. (wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 7:04 pm (#68))

I've seen this said before. I think it's unfair to judge this comment of Sirius's without judging the context and his state of mind at the time. May I refer anyone who's interested to my post #2970 (Sep 19, 2005) on the "Severus Snape (posts from Oct 22, 2004 to Sep 19, 2005)" thread, or a repeat of the same on post #1267 (Sep 19, 2005) on the Sirius Black thread.

And in the Shrieking Shack, Lupin in talking directly to Snape, saying that Snape wanted Sirius back in Azkaban because of a schoolboy grudge -- thereby characterizing Sirius' actions toward Snape on a schoolboy level, and assuming that Snape has no concern over Sirius' supposed betrayal of the Potters or the deaths of 13 or 14 other people. (wynnleaf - Aug 15, 2006 8:51 pm (#71))

But Lupin is , if not 100% correct, on the right track about this. If Snape was motivated by rage against the supposed betrayer of the Potters and mass-murderer (an attitude we would applaud), we could expect him to have changed his attitude to Sirius by Book 5, when he's in the Order, knows Sirius is innocent, and, by the way, knows that he (Snape) nearly got an innocent man given a Dementor's Kiss without first following due process of law. I'm not saying I'd expect to see Snape and Sirius slapping each other on the back over Butterbeers and raucously singing "Fifteen men on the werewolf's chest/Yo-ho-ho and a bottle of rum" _ but I'd expect something. But Snape doesn't change.

Also, look at his reaction in Book 3 when Sirius offers to "come quietly" if Ron brings the rat to the castle _ he abandons any pretence of staying within the law and wants to rush Sirius straight to the Dementors before Dumbledore or Fudge can interfere. Am I the only one who suspects that at that moment he knows damn well that there's a doubt about Sirius's guilt ? Even allowing for their enmity, am I the only one who finds his relish at Sirius's fear unacceptable, and distasteful ? Later, when speaking to Fudge, he can hardly contain himself, wanting Fudge's reassurance that "the Kiss will be performed immediately". I think Snape's attitude could have a lot to do with the way Dumbledore looks at him (see above) just before he gets Harry and Hermione to go back in time.

Apart from all this, bear in mind when quoting Lupin's Book 3 comments that JKR does not, at that point, want to get into huge detail about Snape's past.

He says that Snape was never accused of being a DE, but we find later that Karkarov accused Snape in the Wizengamot. (wynnleaf - Aug 17, 2006 7:01 am (#84))

I think what Sirius meant was formally accused _ i.e. put on trial by the Wizengamot, or at least hauled in by Aurors for questioning. Incidentally, doesn't this comment of his show that Sirius can be objective about Snape ?

As for me, I believe the most accurate picture of those relationships will be shown by the big picture and not by dissection of every sentence. (Chemyst - Aug 17, 2006 9:46 am (#86)) Well said !! (despite my own dissections !!)


wynnleaf - Aug 19, 2006 12:47 pm (#103 of 2959)
Vulture,

I think I can basically agree with the second half of your post 101. Basically. Assuming there are other Dark curses other than the three unforgiveables and Sectumsempra, it may be that Snape knew some when he came to Hogwarts -- though I truly doubt that he knew more curses than 7th years.

I was never trying to say that Sirius and Lupin were intentionally lying, but that their own bias is too strong, and we have too many examples of their inaccuracies, to take what they about Snape as word-for-word truth.

Ann said:

I think Snape's resorting to violent curses like the one in the Pensieve is probably a pointer to his background--and probably something he couldn't help.

It may be that Snape resorted to violence more quickly. It's hard to tell. James and Sirius had first used a curse to magically bind him, so there's physical restraint involved already, although this doesn't cause physical harm. Also, dropping someone from being held upside down is somewhat physical, too. Still Snape's default response to stressful situations seems to be anger. It may be that at one time it was also violence -- but we don't know that.

So, yes, Wynnleaf; I think there is corroborating **swotty pedantic note: not "collaborating"** evidence for Sirius's "curses" statement--and I think he does mean to imply Dark curses.
I suppose it depends on what we allow as corroborating (thanks for correction) evidence. What I meant, was specific mention of information in the text. However, if one takes a certain "read" on Snape's character combined with the pensieve scene, one could use that to guess at what he might have been like at age 11. I personally wouldn't call that real evidence, but theorizing using evidence from events after the fact (so to speak). But I do see how you get there.

Complicating this is that we simply don't know many examples of dark magic, in particular dark curses, and the only ones we know of are either unforgiveables or sectumsempra which he almost certainly invented later. I tend to doubt that Snape was using unforgiveables as a first year.


Soul Search - Aug 19, 2006 1:57 pm (#104 of 2959)
Since Hogwarts doesn't teach the Dark Arts, any dark curses that 7th years know would have been learned informally. I wouldn't be surprised if "half the seventh years" didn't know any truely dark curses. So, Sirius' statement that Snape "knew more ..." wouldn't be saying much.

We also have to keep in mind that Sirius and James were also eleven when they all started Hogwarts. An eleven-year old Sirius would have been impressed by even the most incidental dark curse that Snape might have demonstrated.

My read is that the eleven-year old Snape showed an interest in the Dark Arts. Any such interest would condemn public opinion forever against him, except by Snape's fellow Slytherins, of course, where dark curses very well might have been an idle pastime.


Chemyst - Aug 19, 2006 3:54 pm (#105 of 2959)
I wouldn't think his mother taught him them (the curses); he probably learned them from playmates— Ann

For the average wizard boy, playmates could easily be the most likely explanation for picking up mean & nasty spells or curses. I'm not so convinced in the case of Severus. Suppose he did have playmates with whom he interacted and fooled around with well enough to learn some curses; then why isn't he better at social skills; and why would his mother let him play with kids who are such a bad influence? Or did the playmates bully him even at that young age, and if so, then did he learn the curses as the result of being the victim? And again, where was his mother to allow this?

I just find it easier to believe that his mother doted on her only child, but kept him isolated because they had to hide a lot of their magic from his dad; and that she realized she had a very bright and talented child and taught him quite a bit secretly. The secrecy and the isolation go hand-in-hand —and also make the adult Snape a very capable spy.


Solitaire - Aug 19, 2006 6:53 pm (#106 of 2959)
Hermione came to school already knowing a lot about Hogwarts and the subjects that she was going to take.
Perhaps Snape did the same. Especially if he had his mother's old textbooks to read beforehand.
He may not have learned the spells directly from his mother, but BECAUSE of his mother.

I think this is very likely. I think it is also likely that Snape was called a know-it-all by some of his teachers, which is why he turns that particular epithet on Hermione so often--he is "giving as good as he got," so to speak.

I think any spell could be Dark Arts simply if it causes harm.
I agree with this, haymoni. There are only three Unforgivables that we know about. However, I believe any hex or jinx used with the intent to cause harm--or put someone into a position where others can come along and harm him--must be considered Dark. Another reason to suppose that there are more things than those three curses to be considered Dark is the fact that an entire school--Durmstrang--seems to have been founded on the study of the Dark Arts.

why does having an interest in one's teens mean that Snape had the same interest when he was a little kid?

Hm ... it was certainly true of Voldemort, wasn't it? He seems to have been a rather cruel and dangerous child, even from a very young age. I would say he serves as a rather powerful example.

Is Snape on Voldemort's side or the good side?

Ah, MichaelmasGal ... the sixty-four million dollar question, isn't it?

Whew! It is not a good idea to be absent from this thread for more than 24 hours. It's one thing to read 50-60 posts ... it is another to read that many when over half of them are a whole screen long! I'm tired.

Solitaire


Saracene - Aug 19, 2006 8:30 pm (#107 of 2959)
Regarding Dark curses: I tend to believe that Dark Arts are quite differrent to the curses or jinxes that -can- cause harm if used with a malicious intent. I think that Dark curses are Dark because of their very nature, rather than the intention of the caster.

BTW, I think we do have other examples of Dark magic (though the curses remain unnamed): 1) the curse on the opal necklace that nearly killed Katie Bell 2) the curse Voldemort used to protect the Slytherin ring Horcrux. They're different in that they're meant to be cast on objects rather than people, but they're definitely Dark IMO.

wynnleaf:

---Saracene, I hope you know that I agree with almost all of your posts and generally see eye-to-eye with you on most topics.---

Same here, wynnleaf. I guess it's just that we can't agree ALL the time, Smile

Vulture:

---But Lupin is , if not 100% correct, on the right track about this. If Snape was motivated by rage against the supposed betrayer of the Potters and mass-murderer (an attitude we would applaud), we could expect him to have changed his attitude to Sirius by Book 5, when he's in the Order, knows Sirius is innocent, and, by the way, knows that he (Snape) nearly got an innocent man given a Dementor's Kiss without first following due process of law.---

Actually, I did get an impression that Snape's attitude to Sirius changed - even when reading the scene in GoF where Dumbledore forces them to shake hands. He obviously still loathes Sirius to the nth degree - but I didn't feel that his hatred in GoF and OotP had this extra incandescent "mad glint in the eyes" edge to it that it had in PoA.

As for whether Snape got an inkling, in the Shack, that there was doubt to Sirius' guilt, I guess that's a matter of personal opinion but I personally didn't think so. If the creaking door that everyone had heard signified Snape coming onto the scene, then he would have heard nothing about the Secret Keeper switch or Pettigrew being alive - Lupin didn't even say *what* sort of animal Pettigrew transformed into. Sirius' "look at the rat" would therefore make little sense to him. Do I think that the Shack scene doesn't paint Snape in a very good light and that he should have given Lupin and Sirius a chance to say their word, yes, certainly. Do I think that Snape realised that Sirius may not be guilty and tried to get him Dementor-kissed regardless, no.

I wonder if anyone in the Shack was aware that Snape knew about the Secret Keeper business and the attempt to hide the Potters. It's possible that they didn't think Snape knew anything at all about it, since it was a story that only very few people knew and, at that point, no one apart from DD had any idea about the connection between Snape and what happened to Harry's parents.


Honour- Aug 20, 2006 1:13 am (#108 of 2959)
Just a quick note, Chemyst your post #99 -

..."Someone can be born with a predisposition to make certain choices, we can rightfully use a character's innate temperament in our speculation of what is probable ..."

Even though our wee discussion isn't strictly to do with this thread, If Regulus is proof of your argument, then surely Sirius and Harry are the arguments against? You can't have it both ways?

How does one look at a new born and say your have the predilection to be a serial killer and you have the predilection to be the greatest leader ever?

Returning back to this Severus Snape thread, Eileen Prince married Snape Snr, this is cannon, but is there any cannon to say whether Snape Snr is actually Severus' father?


wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 3:55 am (#109 of 2959)
I looked back in GOF and OOTP at what Severus' attitude toward Sirius was and if it had changed from the "You're a murderer who deserves to die," mentality Snape had in POA.

In GOF there's only one confrontation -- in the hospital wing at the end. Snape is rather appalled to see Sirius there after he transforms, but is willing at DD's insistence to shake hands. That's about it for that book -- certainly better attitude toward Sirius than in POA.

Then in OOTP, Snape came to 12 GP to give reports, didn't stay for meals (we don't know that he was asked and refused, or not asked). It's hard to imagine Sirius asking him to stay for dinner.

Later, they meet when Snape comes to tell Harry about studying occlumency.

Snape is going to only talk to Harry. He tells Harry to sit down. This is not such a terrible thing to do, obviously. Snape is going to be explaining about Dumbledore's instructions for him to teach Harry, answer questions, etc.

It is Sirius that treated Snape's "Sit down, Potter," as an opening for an attack.

"You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

Everything about that comment is intended to be insulting -- interrupting Snape starting his conversation with Harry, loud, leaning back starring at the ceiling instead of who he's speaking to, basically saying "I'm in charge here, not you," over a situation that doesn't even call for it. Sirius basically threw down a challenge in that insulting way of speaking.

Snape does not immediately rise to this challenge/insult, at first simply trying to get Sirius to leave the room by saying that Dumbledore had told him to talk to Harry alone (this was probably true, given the nature of the discussion).

Sirius comment that he's Harry's godfather is okay, but he'd already set the challenging tone of the scene. Snape's comment to him about wanting to feel "involved," is just as insulting of course.

They go on to have various other insulting things to say to each other, Snape on Sirius' having to stay in the house, Sirius challenging why Snape has to be the one to teach occlumency to Harry -- a bit surprising since earlier and later conversations make it seem like (on a re-read) Dumbledore had told the Order why Harry needed occlumency lessons, and they all know it's a specialty of Snape's.

Both characters are at fault in their comments toward each other, but Snape did not initiate the challenging manner of their comments -- that was Sirius. Oh, yes, and Sirius pulled his wand first.

So I do think that Snape's attitude toward Sirius is a bit improved. Yes, he'll insult him in terms of making insinuating or later even direct comments about Sirius having to stay at the house, but that's a far cry from his attitude toward Sirius in POA.


Soul Search - Aug 20, 2006 5:31 am (#110 of 2959)
I think we have to realize that there is more going on between Snape and Sirius than the school-boy grudge.

Snape told Voldemort of the prophecy and became Dumbledore's spy because of it (maybe something more too.) Snape told Dumbledore that one of James' close friends was a traitor, but James ignored the warning. Sirius suggested using Wormtail for secret keeper, thereby leading to the Potter's deaths.

Snape is now blamed for the Potter's deaths, because of the prophecy, but it was really Sirius' or James' fault. Snape, however, blames Sirius, since he is the only one left. If Snape's warning had been taken, the Potters wouldn't have died and Snape would not be suffering the guilt over the prophecy. Its all Sirius' fault (in Snape's eyes, anyway.)

Sirius, of course, blamed Snape for telling Voldemort the prophecy in the first place.

Interestingly, it was really Wormtail's fault, since he betrayed the Potters. Wormtail doesn't know that Snape passed a warning to Dumbledore/the Potters. No doubt, Snape also blames Wormtail for his guilt about the Potters. Now Snape and Wormtail are living at Spinner's End. How long can that go on?

And now Snape is being blamed for Dumbledore's death. Sort of the Potters all over again.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 111 to 130

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 9:26 am

Solitaire - Aug 20, 2006 9:35 am (#111 of 2959)
I think it must be admitted that there were "off camera" interactions between Snape and Sirius at 12GP that we have not seen. Remember that the Weasleys and Hermione had been working at the house--and the Order had been meeting there--long before Harry arrived following the Dementor episode.

I suspect there were a lot of little snipe fights between Snape and Sirius. After all, 12GP was the one place where Sirius could assert a bit of authority, as it was his house. I can also see Snape taking pot-shots at Sirius for sitting in the house all safe while the others were out risking their lives. It just seems very Snape-like, to me. Such jabs would also be a very effective way to bug Sirius, knowing his penchant for a bit of danger and adventure.

If Snape's warning had been taken, the Potters wouldn't have died and Snape would not be suffering the guilt over the prophecy.

You must mean the Potters probably wouldn't have died, since no one can know for certain what would or would not have happened, had circumstances been different. The truth is that if Sirius had remained as the SK, the Potters probably would have been okay. But we still cannot know for certain ...

Solitaire


Vulture - Aug 20, 2006 9:57 am (#112 of 2959)
Ann said: "I think Snape's resorting to violent curses like the one in the Pensieve is probably a pointer to his background--and probably something he couldn't help."

It may be that Snape resorted to violence more quickly. It's hard to tell. James and Sirius had first used a curse to magically bind him, so there's physical restraint involved already, although this doesn't cause physical harm. Also, dropping someone from being held upside down is somewhat physical, too. Still Snape's default response to stressful situations seems to be anger. It may be that at one time it was also violence -- but we don't know that. (wynnleaf - Aug 19, 2006 1:47 pm (#103))

On this point about how, in the Pensieve scene, when James or Sirius (can't remember which) first shouted at him, Snape went for his wand like an OK Corral gunfighter on the draw, I seem to be in the unusual position of being more on Snape's side than most of ye, here !!

When I first read that, and every time I've read that since, I simply took it that (a) Snape was so used to fights with the Marauders that going for his wand was a reflex, and that (b) he and the Marauders were not only both accustomed to the level of Gryffindor-Slytherin hostility that we've always seen between Harry's and Draco Malfoy's Houses, but very probably to a far more intense hostility, given that the first Voldemort war was going on at the time. In the circumstances, Snape would be mad not to protect himself.

Also in the circumstances, with the Dark Arts murdering (among others) parents of Gryffindors right, left and centre outside the walls of Hogwarts, it is understandable (but be clear _ NOT justifiable) that a kid like Snape, who had a reputation (whether true or false) for being more into Dark Arts than most, would become a particular hate figure for Gryffindors.

Sirius would be particularly bitter, because of his own family background, and because of how what his family was loyal to was affecting his friends. Also because of his family background, Sirius had, as far as I'm aware, no parental figure whom he respected to keep him in check. Again, I emphasise that I'm not justifying how Sirius behaved to Snape. But, given the context I've described, I can see how it came about.

Finally, may I point out that when Harry quizzes them, neither Sirius nor Lupin refer to Snape going for his wand or to his drawing James's blood with his retaliation. Given that they spend the first part of that conversation trying to offer justifications (all of which Harry refuses), this is significant.

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

Snape is going to only talk to Harry. He tells Harry to sit down. This is not such a terrible thing to do, obviously. Snape is going to be explaining about Dumbledore's instructions for him to teach Harry, answer questions, etc.

It is Sirius that treated Snape's "Sit down, Potter," as an opening for an attack.

"You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

Everything about that comment is intended to be insulting -- interrupting Snape starting his conversation with Harry, loud, leaning back starring at the ceiling instead of who he's speaking to, basically saying "I'm in charge here, not you," over a situation that doesn't even call for it. Sirius basically threw down a challenge in that insulting way of speaking. (wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 4:55 am (#109))

No, no, no. I don't agree with this at all. (But thanks for getting me back to normal after my defence of Snape above !!)

Snape says "Sit down, Potter". You're right that it seems not such a terrible thing at first glance. But it's a challenge _ one of those little social put-downs we see around us every day. Sirius is Harry's guardian and it's his house _ it's for him to tell Harry to come in and sit down, etc. If you were a teacher visiting some kid's house about some special tuition, would you treat the place as your own by speaking before the kid's parent and adopting a tone of being "in charge" without reference to the parent ? Would it matter if you disliked both kid and parent ? Indeed, if you did dislike them, wouldn't you be even more, not less, on best behaviour ? (Even as it was, if Snape had prefaced his first words with a "Please", the atmosphere would have been different.)

The beauty of it as a tactic is that Sirius and Harry can't win. If Sirius doesn't challenge the remark, it means that Snape has taken charge and put both the child and child's guardian in their place. If he does challenge it, it's all his fault if there's a quarrel. Of course, there are all sorts of lovely correct assertiveness-training ways of dealing with this, but _ given Sirius' and Snape's mutual hostility _ that's a bit much to expect.

Snape does not immediately rise to this challenge/insult, at first simply trying to get Sirius to leave the room by saying that Dumbledore had told him to talk to Harry alone (this was probably true, given the nature of the discussion). (wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 4:55 am (#109))

If I remember correctly, Snape couples his statement about wanting to see Harry alone with the remark "... but by all means stay, Black; I know you like to feel _ involved". Sirius interrupts him with his "I'm his godfather" comment, but anyway, I don't think Snape's words can be taken as 'not immediately rising to the challenge' _ it's just that his tactics are far more waspishly subtle than Sirius's !!

But I think the main thing to remember about this incident is that, by the time it happened, Sirius and Snape had built up a habit of exchanging insults at 12 Grimmauld Place. At least, Sirius complained earlier in Book 5 about Snape's gibes at him _ we don't know how he replied (but I don't think we need consult Einstein to guess). When Harry enters the room the atmosphere is already full of hostility between Snape and Sirius, before a word has been spoken. Given how Sirius feels about James and James's son _ and also given how Snape feels about them _ almost anything could start a quarrel. (Notice, by the way, that Harry reacts to the quarrel by taking Dumbledore's attitude to it _ not Sirius's.)

Oh, yes, and Sirius pulled his wand first. (wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 4:55 am (#109))

Which is what I'd expect if I called Sirius a coward _ especially after he's been trapped in that house for ages and had to listen to versions of that same insult at every Order meeting.

Snape told Dumbledore that one of James' close friends was a traitor, but James ignored the warning. (Soul Search - Aug 20, 2006 6:31 am (#110))

Unless JKR has said something in an interview I don't know about, we don't know for certain that it was Snape who told Dumbledore. In Book 3, Fudge says that Dumbledore had "spieS" _ plural _ in Voldemort's camp. Having more than one wouldn't be that surprising, if the Order could manage it.


Chemyst - Aug 20, 2006 11:59 am (#113 of 2959)
Honour - post #108 — If Regulus is proof of your argument, then surely Sirius and Harry are the arguments against? You can't have it both ways?

Of course you can have it both ways! The whole point is that a FREE choice is entirely INDEPENDENT. Bad can choose bad; Bad can choose good; Good can choose good; Good can choose bad; or any portion thereof.

How does one look at a new born and say your have the predilection to be a serial killer and you have the predilection to be the greatest leader ever?
Nope. I did not say that. It is their choices that will make them serial killers or great leaders.
One of the things that both ardent evolutionists and supporters of intelligent design believe in is that human beings have a hard-wired nature. This is a rather over-simplified example but let's say two children have a hard-wired fascination with guns and a desire to get rich. One becomes the chief financial officer of a company that has a government contract to supply rifles to the army. The other becomes an armed robber.


wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 1:15 pm (#114 of 2959)
But I think the main thing to remember about this incident is that, by the time it happened, Sirius and Snape had built up a habit of exchanging insults at 12 Grimmauld Place.

Vulture and Solitaire both pointed out something similar. I think that's correct -- they were probably sniping at each other every time they saw each other (with the possible exception of when DD was around).

My point, Vulture, in going over the scene in OOTP is that it's the only real example of Severus/Sirius interaction in that book and both are fairly equal in their sniping. I would guess that it was similar to some other of their off-the-page interactions, with the probable difference of the drawn wands. I doubt if their sniping came to drawn wands every time they were together.

Even if you see it as Snape being the more agressive at sniping, the scene in OOTP doesn't come anywhere close to the level of hatred and overall animosity that he showed to Sirius in POA. My point is that he did get better in his actions toward Sirius. Of course, they still hated each other and acted badly, but Snape wasn't behaving nearly like in POA.


Ann - Aug 20, 2006 4:08 pm (#115 of 2959)
Two little points (I'll try not to go a full screen this time, Solitaire!):

About Snape's attack in the Pensieve scene being more "violent" than James': All I meant was that he drew blood. Blood-letting tends to be associated with Dark magic (though none of the Unforgivables use it). Hexing someone so that they bleed cannot be construed as a joke; turning them upside down, filling their mouth with foaming pink bubbles, making their legs wobbly, etc., can be dismissed as "pranks" or "entertainment," however harmful it is physically or psychologically to the victim. (From what I've read, British boarding schools in general are not too fussed about psychologically--at least not in the "good old days.") I'm actually completely on Snape's side here; I'm just saying that the way he reacts (trying to hurt James rather than humiliate him) may be why he is seen as favoring the Dark Arts. The intentional drawing of blood, however minor, is, I suspect, seen as Dark. There's no funny side. (And yes, I do think he learned these curses from older/bigger kids of Dark magic backgrounds who bullied him.)

About the scene where Sirius and Snape discuss (to put it mildly) Harry's Occlumency lessons: I think it was probably something of an exception to the rule. The Weasley parents who walk in on it look completely surprised, which wouldn't be the case if they were known to be enemies and if they were always sniping. I think Snape and Sirius manage to stay out of each other's faces normally. The fact that Harry is present is the catalyst for the confrontation. Sirius is showing off for Harry; remember, these two bonded over the journey from the Shrieking Shack where Sirius was bashing Snape's head against the ceiling and Harry approved. Harry has made it quite clear that he loves to hear Sirius insult Snape. And Snape is always a bit bonkers around Harry, anyway, and here's Harry's godfather encouraging him to be even more disrespectful than usual. Snape is uncomfortable and takes refuge in his professorial persona, and then leaves without giving Harry the basic information he'd been instructed to. By the way, does anyone else think it's significant that Snape explicitly calls Sirius a coward in this scene--a term he himself objects to when Harry uses it at the end of HBP?


Solitaire - Aug 20, 2006 7:27 pm (#116 of 2959)
LOL Ann! I wasn't referring to one particular person. Snape seems to cause us all to become rather prolific, whether we are defending or accusing him!

Harry has made it quite clear that he loves to hear Sirius insult Snape
I think this may be due to the fact that most of the adults in Harry's world insist that he use the title Professor Snape and tend to gloss over or excuse Snape's nasty behavior. Sirius joined in with Harry and helped insult Snape. I think Harry felt he had a soulmate in this area.

Solitaire


Ann - Aug 20, 2006 7:57 pm (#117 of 2959)
Not only the adults--Hermione corrects him, too.

But my point here (made less clearly than I thought it was when I posted) is that I think this contributes to the unreliability in the impression we get of Snape. Sirius, and to a lesser extent, Remus, are being childish about Snape because it's a point of contact with Harry. For example, Remus tells Harry seriously that both he and Sirius want Harry to learn Occlumeny from Snape and respect his abilities in this area. Doesn't tie in too well with the "Lucius Malfoy's lapdog" remark, which Harry takes much more seriously. (And so do we.)


Solitaire - Aug 20, 2006 9:17 pm (#118 of 2959)
I do not believe that Remus is childish about Snape, although I do believe Snape is childish about Remus. I think Remus is trying to be honest. He is trying to be supportive of Sirius, as his friend, but Remus generally gives Snape his due when he is pressed.

In HBP, he is even more supportive of Snape, as we see in "A Very Frosty Christmas." It is clear that he has faith in Dumbledore's judgement ... therefore, he trusts Snape. He sticks up for Snape right down the line. Since I do not believe Remus has suddenly transformed, I must believe he is as now as he has always been with regard to Snape, since he learned that Snape was on the side of the Order.

Solitaire


Laura W - Aug 21, 2006 1:31 am (#119 of 2959)
"I do not believe that Remus is childish about Snape, although I do believe Snape is childish about Remus. I think Remus is trying to be honest. He is trying to be supportive of Sirius, as his friend, but Remus generally gives Snape his due when he is pressed." Solitaire

Exactly the point I've been trying to make in my posts. And I would go further to say "generally give Snape his due" even when not pressed. There might have been a few inaccuracies in his comments over the years but overall, in his discussions with Harry regarding Snape (the one at Christmas in HBP and the one in the fire in OoP), Lupin makes the best effort to be as objective as he can to all sides (while acknowledging - again another example of his attempt to be even-handed and fair - that James and Sirius were/are his friends while Severus and he never were nor ever could be).

When Snape got so angry at Sirius' escape and how things did not work out for him (Snape) in PoA, he saw it as yet another victory for those blankity-blank Mauraders. James was dead and Sirius had escaped and Peter was hardly worth mentioning so the only person Severus could take out his understandable-frustration (DD said he had experienced "a terrible disappointment") on was Lupin. Despite that the Potions Master did this by getting the DADA teacher fired from the only job he could ever get, thanks to anti-werewolf legislation making it illegal to employ werewolves, Remus did not blame Snape, telling Harry his secret identity probably would have come out anyway. That is being mature almost to a fault. (If somebody got *me* fired from a job I loved and caused me to be permanently unemployable, *I* would have hunted them down and bit them!! Well, maybe not quite but you get my drift.)

Addressing another point that was mentioned, he does *not* make comments to make Snape look bad in order to make himself look good. The last thing Remus ever does is say *anything* to make himself look good. Even when Harry asks him to teach him the spell to repel the Dementors, Lupin first says he is no expert but he will try.

As I said, this does not mean that every single tiny detail of everything Lupin has said about Snape is correct, but his willingness to not see the young or adult Mauraders as all good and the young or adult Severus Snape as all bad gives him credibility above the others we have been discussing, in my eyes.

I feel that way about people in so-called Real Life as well. While allowing that no human being is completely and totally objective, the ability to at least really try to be what is known in my country as an honest broker - most often used regarding how one looks at and analyzes political situations or international issues (as we use the term) - is paramount to maintaining a reputation for credibility. The situation may change in Book Seven but all I've got to go on is what I've read in the first six books and, despite his faults and mistakes, I see Remus Lupin playing this role to an extent at least. ... Until that final scene in the hospital ward of Hogwarts when he learns that Snape - whom he has bent over backwards to defend and be fair to - has killed the greatest, kindest, wisest wizard Lupin has ever known. And his reaction at that moment is perfectly understandable, borne of overwhelming grief and pain.

Laura


Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 3:20 am (#120 of 2959)
Vulture:

---Also in the circumstances, with the Dark Arts murdering (among others) parents of Gryffindors right, left and centre outside the walls of Hogwarts, it is understandable (but be clear _ NOT justifiable) that a kid like Snape, who had a reputation (whether true or false) for being more into Dark Arts than most, would become a particular hate figure for Gryffindors.---

It's something that a few readers bring up, but I do find it strange that, when trying to explain to Harry the circumstances of Snape/Marauders feud, neither Sirius nor Lupin ever put it in the context of what was happening outside of Hogwarts with Voldemort killing students' parents. Even when he mentions James hating Dark Arts, Sirius doesn't really link it with Voldemort's cause. To me, overall, the loathing Snape and James felt for each other feels more like a purely personal thing, almost on a gut level, rather than something stemming from righteous indignation over Snape's hobbies. That at least is the impression I got from the Pensieve scene.

Soul Search:

---Snape told Dumbledore that one of James' close friends was a traitor, but James ignored the warning.---

That's only a speculation though. PoA mentions that Dumbledore suspected that someone kept LV informed about Potters' movements, and that he had suspected for some time that an Order member turned traitor. We have no canon information though that it was Snape who told him that. Or that he got that information from a spy.

---Sirius, of course, blamed Snape for telling Voldemort the prophecy in the first place.---

Well that can't be correct since Sirius -died- a whole book before Harry and everyone else learned that Snape had passed the prophecy to Voldemort.

If Sirius learned that while he was alive, he'd probably go and tear Snape's head right off.

Ann - Aug 21, 2006 4:47 am (#121 of 2959)
Saracene, we know that Harry only learned of Snape's passing along the prophecy in HBP, but that's no evidence that others didn't know before that. It's not as if people would tell him. The entire Order knows about the prophecy (though not what it says), since they're guarding it throughout OotP; they also know that Voldemort is after it, so he knows about it, but hasn't heard all of it. Depending upon the circumstances, however, Sirius and Remus or even the entire Order may have known that Snape revealed it to Voldemort.

I think, incidentally, that Snape was almost certainly the Order's only spy in Voldemort's camp. Fudge says "spies," but he was clearly not an order member--he was a flunkey working for Magical Catastrophes at the time, I believe, and would have no reason to need accurate information. Regulus is the only other possibility, but he doesn't seem the spy type to me, and if he had been, he would have told Dumbledore about the locket Horcrux. Also, he probably wouldn't have been killed. I doubt that Sirius et al. knew that Snape was the spy during the first war, but they certainly did during the second, and can undoubtedly work backwards. But to ask someone to take the Dark Mark for the sake of spying is something that I don't believe even Dumbledore would do.


Soul Search - Aug 21, 2006 6:56 am (#122 of 2959)
Saracene,

Good point about Sirius NOT knowing that Snape told Voldemort the prophecy.

The point in the post you referenced was that Snape did know that he had told Voldemort the prophecy. It is his guilt over it that is most important.


Vulture - Aug 21, 2006 1:11 pm (#123 of 2959)
Edited Aug 21, 2006 3:06 pm
This is a rather over-simplified example but let's say two children have a hard-wired fascination with guns and a desire to get rich. One becomes the chief financial officer of a company that has a government contract to supply rifles to the army. The other becomes an armed robber. (Chemyst - Aug 20, 2006 12:59 pm (#113))

Which is the bad guy ? :-)

Even if you see it as Snape being the more agressive at sniping, the scene in OOTP doesn't come anywhere close to the level of hatred and overall animosity that he showed to Sirius in POA. My point is that he did get better in his actions toward Sirius. Of course, they still hated each other and acted badly, but Snape wasn't behaving nearly like in POA. (wynnleaf - Aug 20, 2006 2:15 pm (#114))

No, I couldn't say for certain that Snape was more aggressive in that particular scene. I guess you've got a point, too, about his behaviour to Sirius in Book 5 as compared to Book 3.

However, just as I'm writing this, it occurs to me _ maybe the key word there is "behaviour". I wonder if his true attitude to Sirius is any different ? We may never know, I suppose (unless JKR includes it in the many things readers want explained in Book 7). But I can't help wondering if what we saw in Book 3, where he had Sirius at his mercy , and could literally get away with (worse than) murder, was a flash of the real Snape, whereas in Book 5 he's hedged in with all sorts of constraints by the Order.

My main reason for feeling this is that (1) in Book 3, much of his involvement with Sirius took place when he had no authorities to answer to (unless you include Lupin, whose position was compromised); and (2) Dumbledore's demeanour, when he came face to face with Snape after Sirius's capture, gave me just that tiniest hint of disapproval of how Snape was going on.

But I suppose this can be just dismissed as my interpretation.

About the scene where Sirius and Snape discuss (to put it mildly) Harry's Occlumency lessons: I think it was probably something of an exception to the rule. The Weasley parents who walk in on it look completely surprised, which wouldn't be the case if they were known to be enemies and if they were always sniping. I think Snape and Sirius manage to stay out of each other's faces normally. The fact that Harry is present is the catalyst for the confrontation. ... (Ann - Aug 20, 2006 5:08 pm (#115))

I don't think you can draw too many conclusions from the Weasleys' looks of amazement _ partly, it's the suddenness of what they walk in on, and, probably, they haven't seen Sirius and Snape with wands out before. (After all, they only saw Snape at Order meetings.) Besides, Sirius and Mrs. Weasley have had arguments, both over Harry and over Dumbledore's orders to Sirius, and even though they're on more friendly terms by this scene, I doubt if Sirius would relax around her and make gibes about Snape as he would, say, with Lupin.

I don't agree that Harry is the catalyst _ they would have found a catalyst anyway: the atmosphere Harry walks in on makes that clear.

Sirius is showing off for Harry; remember, these two bonded over the journey from the Shrieking Shack where Sirius was bashing Snape's head against the ceiling and Harry approved. (Ann - Aug 20, 2006 5:08 pm (#115))

No offence, but I think this is a bit more emphatic than JKR's words: all she said was that, as Snape floated along, his head bumped against the ceiling and "Harry had the impression that Sirius was making no effort to prevent this". This is a far cry from "bashing Snape's head against the ceiling", and it doesn't say much about Harry's attitude. OK, I don't suppose Harry minded Snape getting a few bumps _ but I think that if Sirius started bashing him, Harry would react much as he did to the Pensieve scene _ or indeed, to the quarrel at Grimmauld Place.

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

Vulture: "Also in the circumstances, with the Dark Arts murdering (among others) parents of Gryffindors right, left and centre outside the walls of Hogwarts, it is understandable (but be clear _ NOT justifiable) that a kid like Snape, who had a reputation (whether true or false) for being more into Dark Arts than most, would become a particular hate figure for Gryffindors."

It's something that a few readers bring up, but I do find it strange that, when trying to explain to Harry the circumstances of Snape/Marauders feud, neither Sirius nor Lupin ever put it in the context of what was happening outside of Hogwarts with Voldemort killing students' parents. Even when he mentions James hating Dark Arts, Sirius doesn't really link it with Voldemort's cause. To me, overall, the loathing Snape and James felt for each other feels more like a purely personal thing, almost on a gut level, rather than something stemming from righteous indignation over Snape's hobbies. That at least is the impression I got from the Pensieve scene. (Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 4:20 am (#120))

Ah, yes _ but (1) I'm not suggesting that, during the first Voldemort war, the kids went around consciously thinking about the war all the time _ life isn't like that, especially as they weren't on the front-line; and (2) Sirius and Lupin are reluctant to talk about the first Voldemort war in general, anyway _ in this they're like other adults on the good side: Sirius, in Book 4, is only persuaded to talk about it because of Ron's exasperated "Try us, why don't you ?" (in answer to the "you're too young" comment that he's heard a million times). I sometimes get the feeling that the first Voldemort war left such scars and division that not talking about it has become something of a general wizard etiquette. The only exception to that general silence is the celebrity status given to "The Boy Who Lived" _ and bear in mind that a lot of that is about him also being The Boy Who Ended The War. (Contrast that with the initial public reaction in Book 5 to The Boy Who Wants To Start Another War !!)

I'm not saying that the Marauders consciously thought about the war whenever they got into fights with Snape at school. What I'm saying is that the war created a context _ the children inside the walls would to some extent copy the patterns of enmity of their parents outside: even perhaps before they were old enough to know the full reasons. Bear in mind that Snape's "Mudblood" comment, with its taste of the war, makes James explode from cruel "fun" into open anger: hypocritical, yes, but real anger all the same.

Given all the analogies to the Nazi period in JKR, imagine if, during World War 2, there had been a school, magically protected against the ravages of war outside, where the kids of both sides were educated _ and suppose they were separated into Houses so that one House was from Nazi families and the other three weren't, and all of them were in constant contact with news from their parents. I don't think it's hard to guess what would happen: but you can bet your life that, once playground feuds had started, the kids would find lots of their own, non-war, reasons to keep them going.

I think, incidentally, that Snape was almost certainly the Order's only spy in Voldemort's camp. ... Regulus is the only other possibility, but he doesn't seem the spy type to me, and if he had been, he would have told Dumbledore about the locket Horcrux. (Ann - Aug 21, 2006 5:47 am (#121))

I'm only going on the books,not JKR's interviews,but there's no reason why Snape had to be the Order's only spy _ we just don't know. Why is Regulus the only other possibility ? Why should he know anything about the Locket Horcrux ? I know there are lots of theories that have grown from speculation that "R.A.B." is Regulus, but JKR hasn't backed any of this up _ or is there something I don't know ?


Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 5:50 pm (#124 of 2959)
Vulture:

- First off, as far as I can tell we don't really have information on *when* exactly Voldemort and his cronies started to actually kill people right, left and centre, or that the conflict started when Harry's parents were still at school. Therefore, it's not a certainty that the Marauders spent their school years, or their fifth year we see in the Pensieve, in the shadow of war. To take it back to the Nazi Germany example, Hitler didn't declare war the minute he became Germany's leader.

- It's true that Sirius and Lupin and adults in general don't talk much about the First War. But their conversation with Harry in OotP wasn't a random chat about their school times - Harry left Hogwarts and risked Umbridge's wrath because he desperately wanted to hear about *any* mitigating circumstances that could help him live with what he's seen his dad do in the Pensieve. And if the conflict with Voldemort contributed to the Marauders' treatment of Snape, who if not Harry can relate to what it s like to live with the threat of Voldemort and DEs? So my question is why wouldn't Sirius or Lupin appeal to Harry's understanding and try to put James' actions in the context of war when it would have been such an obvious point to make? Even if they weren't totally conscious of it as kids, surely as the adults Lupin at least could look at their actions at school from a more removed, "grown-up" perspective?


Ann - Aug 22, 2006 2:28 am (#125 of 2959)
Saracene, we do have two specific references, by Dumbledore in at least the first case (I forget who mentions it later), that tell us that the first war lasted eleven years. Since it ended in 1981, that implies it started in 1970, possibly quite abruptly, after more than a decade of quietly gathering his forces. That's what Voldemort wanted to do this second time as well, but Harry thwarts his intentions, first by insisting that he's been resurrected, and then by proving it at the DoM. The second war also begins at a distinct, pin-point-able time. So the war was being waged openly throughout the Marauders' school days.

But I agree with you that it is extremely weird that Sirius and Lupin, although they mention the Dark Arts as a mitigating factor in James's war against Snape, never bring up the war, or the fact that Snape became a Death Eater soon after. Somehow, I suspect this is yet another example of JKR downplaying or hiding things. There may in fact have been reasons for Snape's connection with Voldemort that she doesn't want to show us yet.


Saracene - Aug 22, 2006 4:04 am (#126 of 2959)
Thanks for that, Ann. I guess that does make Vulture's view more likely. I still find it very strange though that neither Sirius nor Lupin refer to the war in their conversation with Harry.


Magic Words - Aug 22, 2006 6:46 am (#127 of 2959)
There may still be a little leeway, even considering Dumbledore's quote that "we've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years." When Voldemort applied for the DADA job at Hogwarts, he seemed surprised that Dumbledore knew as much about his activities as he did. The eleven years Dumbledore refers to may be how long he and the Order of the Phoenix have been concerned about Voldemort's growing power, and not necessarily how long Voldemort has been terrorizing the general populace. It somehow took Regulus until (presumably) after his graduation to learn what being a Death Eater was really about. I think the best explanation may be that Order of the Phoenix members (Dumbledore, McGonagall, Hagrid, etc.) have been working hard against Voldemort for eleven years, but Voldemort didn't really come out into the open until much later. Keep in mind also that parents would want to protect their children from such disturbing politics, especially in the younger years. First- and second-year Marauders and Snape may have heard fragments and whispers of trouble, but if the mutual loathing between them was as immediate and instinctive as we've been led to believe, Voldemort probably had very little to do with it.


Ann - Aug 22, 2006 8:41 am (#128 of 2959)
Found both quotes:

PS/SS, Chapter 1: "We've had precious little to celebrate for eleven years."

GoF, Chapter 2: "Harry had been a year old the night that Voldemort -- the most powerful dark wizard for a century, a wizard who had been gaining power steadily for eleven years -- arrived at his house and killed his father and mother."

Voldemort's reign of terror clearly got worse as time went on, but it had a clear starting point eleven years before 1981, that is, in 1970. I think Regulus and his parents must have led very sheltered lives if they didn't realize what Death Eaters did. But Sirius seems to be exaggerating a bit here anyway. Regulus probably had a good idea of what he was signing on for, theoretically. Rowling's quotes in interviews make it seem likely that it was only when faced with the reality that he realized he was in too deep.

Actually, it's not surprising that the terrorization of the wizarding world has been going on for eleven years; it's more surprising that Voldemort didn't come out into the open earlier. It's pretty clear that Voldemort applied for the DADA job in December 1956 or early 1957. (McGonagall began teaching Transfiguration in December 1956, and Dumbledore had just become headmaster when Voldemort visited him. The two presumably moved up at the same time.) At that point he has a guard of thugs who stay with him at the Hog's Head, the kernel of the Death Eaters, no doubt.

What did he do during the 13 years from 1957 to 1970? It's rather a long time just to be laying the groundwork--inventing the Dark Mark and hiding his Horcruxes. And yet, Rowling clearly has made a point of that period of time, marking the beginning of his reign of terror as 13 years later, in 1970, on two different occasions.

And it's a little odd, isn't it, that 1970 is exactly the moment that the Marauders and Snape head off to Hogwarts. Coincidence? I don't think so.

Edit: We seem to have cross posted, saying exactly opposite things, Erin. Do you have a citation for that quote about the war being 'half as long but twice as bloody'? I haven't seen that.


els - Aug 22, 2006 8:47 am (#129 of 2959)
Just a note about the Marauders talking about the war and what was going on outside of Hogwarts:

Dumbledore notes that Voldemort had been rising to power publicly for 11 years - when the Marauders and Snape first entered Hogwarts. It is unclear when the all out war began. But JKR has a quote where she says the current war will be half a long as the first one but twice as bloody. This implies that the "official" war did not start until the Marauder's and Snape's 7th year or after they were done. This war would be 4 years long since the current war is slated to end with the 7th book (or 2 years).

That is not to say that there were no deaths and missing people as Dumbledore noted in GoF. The larger public was not aware and not putting the pieces together as he had been doing for years. So the climate at Hogwarts was probably more like pre-OotP.

So to say the Marauders would hate anyone associated with the Dark Arts like Snape because of the war may or may not be true.

~Erin


Vulture - Aug 22, 2006 2:47 pm (#130 of 2959)
First off, as far as I can tell we don't really have information on *when* exactly Voldemort and his cronies started to actually kill people right, left and centre, or that the conflict started when Harry's parents were still at school. Therefore, it's not a certainty that the Marauders spent their school years, or their fifth year we see in the Pensieve, in the shadow of war. (Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 6:50 pm (#124))

I'm going on the basis that Sirius was 36 when he died (I might be wrong about the exact age _ it's based on something I can't recall just now), so 34 when he escaped Azkaban. 12 years there takes him back to 22, and he was caught not long after Dumbledore (in Book 1) said to McGonagall that "we've had precious little to celebrate for 11 years" _ that takes him back to age 11. Even if I'm a little out in my calculations, Sirius (and therefore James, Lily and Snape) must have spent some of their schooldays during the first war.

So that's when I think the war started. For the events in it, I'm going mainly on Sirius's account in Book 4.

Harry left Hogwarts and risked Umbridge's wrath because he desperately wanted to hear about *any* mitigating circumstances that could help him live with what he's seen his dad do in the Pensieve. (Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 6:50 pm (#124))

Did he leave Hogwarts ? I thought he talked to Sirius and Lupin from the fire in Umbridge's office ?

It's true that Sirius and Lupin and adults in general don't talk much about the First War. But their conversation with Harry in OotP wasn't a random chat about their school times - Harry left Hogwarts and risked Umbridge's wrath because he desperately wanted to hear about *any* mitigating circumstances that could help him live with what he's seen his dad do in the Pensieve. And if the conflict with Voldemort contributed to the Marauders' treatment of Snape, who if not Harry can relate to what it s like to live with the threat of Voldemort and DEs? So my question is why wouldn't Sirius or Lupin appeal to Harry's understanding and try to put James' actions in the context of war when it would have been such an obvious point to make? Even if they weren't totally conscious of it as kids, surely as the adults Lupin at least could look at their actions at school from a more removed, "grown-up" perspective? (Saracene - Aug 21, 2006 6:50 pm (#124))

I know it's not a totally satisfactory answer, but Harry was pressed for time (with the threat of Umbridge's return) and focussing on the issue of James and Snape, and secondarily on Lily. As for Lupin and Sirius _ well, I know that many won't agree, but I feel that it's just not in their characters to cop out and make excuses for themselves. Sirius's reaction is "I'm not proud of it", for example.

It's true that, up to a point, they try to shield James (not themselves) from Harry's criticism. But even then, they don't try and disguise what he did. They talk about James and Snape hating each other from day one ("it was just one of those things ...", etc.), and when that doesn't satisfy Harry, they conclude that "a lot of people are idiots at the age of fifteen". What they don't do, as you correctly point out, is bring up the war _ I feel that they don't do so because that would sound as if they were making an excuse or trying to imply that Snape deserved what he got, and I think they're not trying to do that.

(Also, of course, I think JKR is trying to achieve a very precise effect with the Snape Pensive issue, and dragging the war in would muddy the water. But it's there all the same.)

This implies that the "official" war did not start until the Marauder's and Snape's 7th year or after they were done. (els - Aug 22, 2006 9:47 am (#129))

Sorry, Erin, but I don't understand how you reach this conclusion from the rest of what you say in your post. Maybe I'm being thick, but I don't see.

From the way I calculated above, I would say that by James's and Sirius's fifteenth year, or fifth Hogwarts year, the first Voldemort war had been definitely going on for a while. We can speculate about whether it was of equal intensity all through, or started out quietly. But the only hard information I know about it is Sirius's description in Book 4, which conveyed to me that the Death Eaters' murders, of Muggles as well as wizards, brought the wizard world to the brink of defeat before Voldemort fell.

I think Sirius, at school, was more conscious of the issues than most because of his family pressures, and I don't doubt that he transmitted his anger to his friends about all the Slytherin rhetoric at home _ we've seen what his mother was like. But I don't think the Marauders were unique in this _ I think these issues and divisions arose all over the place.

Hagrid, in Book 1, tells us that "some who were on his (Voldemort's) side came back to ours", saying that they had been under Imperius curses, and later, we learn that many (like Lucius) who were saying that were lying. I think (this just my own hunch) that after Voldemort fell, the general mood was like any country after a civil war _ nobody was too keen to bring up questions that would cause division. Look at how readily the likes of Lucius and Macnair were re-admitted into general wizard society. That gives me a feeling of how bad things were when the war was on.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 131 to 150

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 9:42 am

Saracene - Aug 22, 2006 8:19 pm (#131 of 2959)
Vulture:

---Did he leave Hogwarts ? I thought he talked to Sirius and Lupin from the fire in Umbridge's office?---

Yes, you're right. I forgot about the fireplace.

---Also, of course, I think JKR is trying to achieve a very precise effect with the Snape Pensive issue, and dragging the war in would muddy the water. But it's there all the same.---

Well... how can it be "there" and "not there" at the same time? IMO you can't really go, yeah there was a big war outside, but let's not mention it for the sake of effect of one particular scene.

About that JKR comment Erin mentioned, I think it works like this:

---JKR has a quote where she says the current war will be half a long as the first one but twice as bloody.---

1) Since we can pretty much be sure that the second war will come to an end in the next book, this means that the second war will overall take up roughly two years - counting from the end of OotP (which even has a chapter named "Second War Begins") to the end of the seventh book.

2) If, according to JKR's quote, the second war will be half as long as the first one, then the length of the first war would be 2nd war x 2. Which would make the first war 2x2=4 years long.

3) The second year finished when Sirius was roughly 22 years old. If the war lasted for four years, then that would make Sirius 18 years of age when the war started. At 18 Sirius would either be in his last year at Hogwarts, or he left school already.

So, four years could have been the time when Voldemort really came into the open on a very public level and the atrocities really started - on the same level we see in HBP where we routinely hear about the deaths and disappearances.

Personally, I think we're simply dealing with an author who is not all that interested in dates and timelines to start with. At least not to the degree that we are, Smile


Ann - Aug 22, 2006 9:16 pm (#132 of 2959)
Saracene, actually we're dealing with an author who plans out her stories month by month in a grid. The fact that she has twice given the length of the first war as 11 years (in book one and book four) must mean something. And she's much more likely to mess up her numbering in an interview than in something that's been written and rewritten and edited, twice, three books apart.

And is the quote about the second war being "half as long and twice as bloody" definite? I just spent ten minutes doing many, many searches (of these words and all the variants I could think of) on Quick Quotes ,but I couldn't find anything of the sort. Where did you all find it? I don't mind changing my mind if there's evidence, but it might be useful to look at the context and the exact wording.


Vulture - Aug 23, 2006 8:49 am (#133 of 2959)
Well... how can it be "there" and "not there" at the same time? IMO you can't really go, yeah there was a big war outside, but let's not mention it for the sake of effect of one particular scene. (Saracene - Aug 22, 2006 9:19 pm (#131))

Well, just my interpretation, but I think you can. It's "not there", in the obvious sense that it's not mentioned, and (I grant you this much) it was probably not in the (conscious) minds of the Marauders when they tormented Snape. (If it did occur to one of them, my money would be on it being Sirius _ but no, I'm not saying it's probable.)

But it is "there" at the same time, in the sense that it's going on outside, and is the unconscious context in which those kids (including Snape, too, of course) are living at the time.

Look at it another way _ as part of Harry's appalled reaction, we learn that he can't imagine any of his Gryffindor schoolmates doing such a thing, not even the Weasley twins, whom up to this he has seen as his generation's trouble-making version of the Marauders. Forget for a moment whether we agree with Harry's opinion on this _ ask yourself, why is it so unthinkable to him ? Now, the answer has to work one of two ways _ either (a) the Marauders were, by nature, more cruel than other Gryffindors, so that the rest of their House were just like Gryffindor House in Harry's day, or (b) the times were different to Harry's day, and things went on (in Hogwarts generally, of course _ not just with Gryffindors) which a later generation would find distasteful.

I don't happen to believe that (a) is true. Be clear _ I'm not saying that the Marauders, in what they did to Snape, weren't inexcusable and cruel (in James, Sirius, and Pettigrew's case) and morally cowardly (in Lupin's). What I'm saying is that they weren't unusual for their time: they gave in to bad inclinations in a context that gave scope for them. After all, they didn't operate in isolation _ when they start tormenting Snape, they immediately have an appreciative audience, because "Snape was clearly unpopular". When Lily intervenes, she's the only one of the laughing girls by the lake to do so _ and as James has been showing off with an eye on that group, and Sirius (we're told) tends to get eyed up by girls, I find it noteworthy that none of her friends even tagged along behind Lily saying nothing (hanger-on, Marietta-style). I find it all the more noteworthy given that Slughorn later tells us how popular and kind she was. In short, no-one wants to get involved in rescuing Snape _ not even when a strong and popular person is already doing the hard work of leading the way.

So, given that I believe (b) is the true answer above, we then have the question: why were the times different to Harry's ? My feeling is that the most likely answer is the first Voldemort war.

Personally, I think we're simply dealing with an author who is not all that interested in dates and timelines to start with. At least not to the degree that we are, Smile (Saracene - Aug 22, 2006 9:19 pm (#131))

You're right on that one. No offence to her, but her interviews drive me up the wall !!

Mind you, it just occurs to me that maybe she is counting the second war from the moment of Voldemort's return. Yes, I know about that chapter called "The Second War Begins", with that Neville Chamberlain-type statement from Fudge straight after the tear running down Dumbledore's beard. It's terrific stuff and all that, but I feel that, after all, Cedric may be regarded as the second war's first casualty. For Fudge, the second war begins when he finally accepts that Voldemort is back. For Dumbledore, it began when Harry came out of the maze in Book 4.

Mind you, I guess that doesn't add that much. Roughly three and a half years _ that'd make the first war seven years, if we're going on this "half as long and twice as bloody" comment.


wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 1:29 pm (#134 of 2959)
Vulture, on your A and B options for how the rest of the school would have considered the Maruader's actions, you make a good argument for B. In fact, from a pure reasoning viewpoint, I'd say you're correct, except that I'm not sure that JKR necessarily wanted us to think that. In other words, I think she intended us to think as Harry does that the Marauders actions are well beyond anything the more rowdy boys of Gryffindor in Harry's time would do. I think she wants us to see them as more reckless and more cruel. Unless she's going to come back in Book 7 and explain how the whole climate at Hogwarts was quite different back then (as you describe) then I think we've got to assume that it was in fact more similar to Harry's time. Maybe she'll tell us that it was different, but I sort of doubt it.

By the way, while Lupin acted cowardly in doing nothing about the situation, James and Sirius were pretty cowardly too -- most of their hexing took place against an unarmed Snape, and some of it while Snape was under impedimenta which is described as like being bound with invisible ropes. Hexing a person who is disarmed and bound? That is very, very cowardly.

I don't think the climate of the war made James and Sirius' actions somehow as acceptable (using that loosely here), among the students of Hogwarts, as Fred and George's antics in Harry's day.


Ann - Aug 23, 2006 5:37 pm (#135 of 2959)
I agree that some of the stuff the Mauraders do to Snape is inexcusable, regardless of the circumstances. I think one of the differences is that there's really no one like Snape in Harry's class. (Oddly, Neville comes the closest, but given the protection of Harry's friendship, he's more like Pettigrew, although of course he's a far better person.) Snape is what Hermione would be if she was from a poorer background (and not well groomed) and if she had never become friends with Harry and Ron: awkward, isolated, defensive, with a horribly unpleasant combination of superiority and insecurities. Snape is, in a word, eminently bully-able, and Sirius and especially James do not seem to be able to resist. This certainly happened in my school to certain people who were not "normal" or "popular." Teenagers are, by definition, immature. I don't think what's going on in the outside world offers anything more than an excuse--which makes it odd that Sirius and Lupin didn't invoke it.

As for the war(s), I stand by my 11-year length of the first one. But I agree with Vulture that the second one can really be said to begin (or continue) with Voldemort's resurrection. If you look at the history of WWII (which influences anyone British of JKR's generation, even if only unconsciously) there was this long period, over a year, called "the Phony War," when it had been declared, but nothing much was happening. There's a really well done television dramatization of the British Air Force during this period called "Piece of Cake," which shows the pilots stationed in France, bored and goofing off, flying under bridges on dares and whatnot. Then, when the real war starts (after Dunkirk), things suddenly turn very, very serious indeed, and most of these light-hearted boys get killed. Not, in fact, a very cheery programme. But this is a possible model for what is going on in the second war.


Ydnam96- Aug 23, 2006 5:55 pm (#136 of 2959)
Ann, I agree with you. I don't think the way that James and Sirius treated Snape was in any way justifiable. But I would have to dissagree with you about your comparisson between Snape and Hermione.

Hermione grew up in a loving home. Snape, for all we know, most definietly did not. He came into school with a lot of issues and was, in my opinion, very pre-disposed (if not already) a defensive, snappy, unlike-able person on top of that he was smart and down right proud of it. He seems like he didn't mind watching people feel badly because it made him feel better.

Hermione was just a little bit of a know it all.

I can respect your opinion but it seems a little far fetched to me.


Saracene - Aug 24, 2006 2:25 am (#137 of 2959)
Edited Aug 24, 2006 3:58 am
Vulture:

---Look at it another way _ as part of Harry's appalled reaction, we learn that he can't imagine any of his Gryffindor schoolmates doing such a thing, not even the Weasley twins, whom up to this he has seen as his generation's trouble-making version of the Marauders.---

I'm not really sure where "any of his Gryffindor schoolmates" comes from. In that paragraph, Harry *only* mentions Fred and George - not making sweeping statements about his Gryffindor friends/schoolmates or "his" generation in general and whether he thinks they're capable of what James and Sirius did to Snape in the Pensieve.

And besides, he thinks that he cannot imagine Fred and George do what James and Sirius did, "not unless they really loathed them... perhaps Malfoy, or somebody who really deserved it..." So he doesn't say that Fred and James wouldn't do something like this to anyone, period.

---What I'm saying is that they weren't unusual for their time: they gave in to bad inclinations in a context that gave scope for them.---

Well, I think that James and Sirius weren't unusual for *teenagers*, period. Ditto for the people who laughed at Snape when he was tripped upside down. What we see in a Pensieve is a scenario that IMO could have happened (and happens) in just about any society and any generation, regardless of whether it's peaceful or goes through a war. Popular, handsome, charming, "cool" boys at the top of the school ladder who aren't big on maturity and empathy (I personally think it's empathy that's the biggest difference between Harry and his father) can act cruelly towards unpopular, unattractive, unpleasant loners that they personally dislike and easily get away with it. If you add to the mix that particular aspect of Hogwarts where Slytherins are the least popular House among the rest of the Houses, then there's really no wonder that no one joined Lily in defending Snape.

I personally think that the difference is not that of the "times" but more that we simply have a different mix of personalities and relationships in Harry's time as opposed to the Marauders'. For instance, Fred and George may be forerunners to the Marauders but they don't really have the sort of ultra-personal feud with any of the Slytherins that James and Sirius had with Snape.

Overall, while your point about the Hogwarts being a somewhat different place in the Marauders' time is valid, I just don't see JKR making that point in the *canon* or showing that the war played any part in Snape/Marauders feud. Especially when, IMO, the war doesn't really need to be there at all in order to explain the whys and therefores of the Snape/Marauder feud and the Pensieve scene.


Vulture - Aug 24, 2006 2:10 pm (#138 of 2959)
Edited Aug 24, 2006 3:43 pm
By the way, while Lupin acted cowardly in doing nothing about the situation, James and Sirius were pretty cowardly too -- most of their hexing took place against an unarmed Snape, and some of it while Snape was under impedimenta which is described as like being bound with invisible ropes. Hexing a person who is disarmed and bound? That is very, very cowardly. (wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 2:29 pm (#134)) _ Absolutely. No disagreement here. Just that I thought Lupin's cowardice a bit less obvious than the others when I was writing.

Unless she's going to come back in Book 7 and explain how the whole climate at Hogwarts was quite different back then (as you describe) then I think we've got to assume that it was in fact more similar to Harry's time. Maybe she'll tell us that it was different, but I sort of doubt it. (wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 2:29 pm (#134))

Oh, I don't think it was that different either. My basic point is a very hair-splitting one _ on the surface, things were much the same, but I think the war was there in the background, which it isn't for Harry's generation.

I think she intended us to think as Harry does that the Marauders actions are well beyond anything the more rowdy boys of Gryffindor in Harry's time would do. (wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 2:29 pm (#134)) _ Yes,I agree.

I think she wants us to see them as more reckless and more cruel. (wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 2:29 pm (#134))

They certainly are at that time, yes. But then, we're up against the key question _ is that what they're inherently like ? Well, I think it's obvious that it's not (except for Pettigrew, I guess): we've enough evidence from what Sirius and Lupin are like now, and from James dying to defend his wife and son. Also, we have the fact that Lily, who blazed with anger at what went on in the Pensive scene, eventually married James.

So if that's not what they're inherently like, how do we explain Snape's treatment ? Well, Sirius says "We were arrogant little berks", and I've seen posts here saying that this kind of bullying can happen anywhere and anytime. Up to a point I agree. But only up to a point. In Book 3, Dumbledore says "I knew your father well, Harry, both during and after Hogwarts" to support his view that James was a merciful person: note that he includes "during".

So, was Dumbledore unaware of, or oblivious to, the bad side of James at Hogwarts ? I don't believe so. In Book 1, Harry reflects at the end that Dumbledore knew a great deal more about what he, Ron and Hermione were doing than they realised. Yes, I know Dumbledore pays Harry particular attention, but I think he's quite perceptive about students in general _ in Book 4 we see from his memories that he understood Bertha Jorkins as well as schoolmates like Sirius did. No, there's no canon to back me up on this, but I'd be surprised if Dumbledore didn't know a great deal more about the James-Snape feud than either of its principals would like. There's that gently reproving "Not unlike yourself or Mr. Malfoy" in Book 1 _ how did he know about Harry and Malfoy? (There are only two clashes that teachers observed in Book 1 _ McGonagall the first time, Flitwick the second; neither enough to get reported as an ongoing feud. I don't count the clash Snape saw because that was Ron v. Malfoy, not Harry v. Malfoy.) Then again, in Book 3, we learn that Snape was ordered to keep quiet about Lupin and the Whomping Willow after Sirius's "joke" _ ultimately, that order came from Dumbledore.

So here we have someone whom Dumbledore regarded as merciful by nature, committing a merciless act and being regarded by his future wife as "an arrogant bullying toe-rag" (her words). Something must explain the discrepancies _ and I think the war played a part: a small part. I don't want to portray it, as a context, to be more than it is. All I'm saying is that it's there.

I don't think the climate of the war made James and Sirius' actions somehow as acceptable (using that loosely here), among the students of Hogwarts, as Fred and George's antics in Harry's day. (wynnleaf - Aug 23, 2006 2:29 pm (#134))

I don't either. What I suspect, though, is that there were more open clashes between Slytherin and the other Houses in James's day. I've no canon proof for that _ I simply feel that the war made it likely. In Harry's day, most of the serious clashes seemed to take place in connection with Quidditch before Voldemort rose again. In Book 1, I got the feeling that Dumbledore had brought about a regime where, by the time Harry arrived, Slytherin were treated as normally and as courteously as possible _ a former Death Eater was a House Head, another was on the Board Of Governors, and Slytherin were the most conspicuously successful House. Until Harry arrived, of course _ but that's another conversation !!

Snape is what Hermione would be if she was from a poorer background (Ann - Aug 23, 2006 6:37 pm (#135)) _ I'm more with Ydnam96 (#136) on the Hermione part, but _ is Snape from a poor background ? I don't remember seeing any information about this.

I personally think that the difference is not that of the "times" but more that we simply have a different mix of personalities and relationships in Harry's time as opposed to the Marauders'. For instance, Fred and George may be forerunners to the Marauders but they don't really have the sort of ultra-personal feud with any of the Slytherins that James and Sirius had with Snape. (Saracene - Aug 24, 2006 3:25 am (#137)) _ Ah, but why is it so ultra-personal ? Have we ever been given a reason ? Not that I'm saying that the war is the main one, but I think it's there.

I'm not really sure where "any of his Gryffindor schoolmates" comes from. In that paragraph, Harry *only* mentions Fred and George - not making sweeping statements about his Gryffindor friends/schoolmates or "his" generation in general and whether he thinks they're capable of what James and Sirius did to Snape in the Pensieve.

And besides, he thinks that he cannot imagine Fred and George do what James and Sirius did, "not unless they really loathed them... perhaps Malfoy, or somebody who really deserved it..." So he doesn't say that Fred and James wouldn't do something like this to anyone, period. (Saracene - Aug 24, 2006 3:25 am (#137))

I went back and had a look at that part in Book 5. Basically, Harry thinks of McGonagall (in Book 3) saying that Sirius and James were like the Weasley twins, and Harry feels that the twins wouldn't do etc. (pretty much as you quote). I always felt that the "perhaps Malfoy, or somebody who really deserved it" afterthought, coming where it did, was supposed to reflect Harry's anguished thought processes for us, trying to make a case for his dad _ but maybe that's just me. (Actually, despite the wording in Book 5, it wasn't McGonagall who made the point about the Weasley twins in Book 3 _ she said (about James and Sirius) "we've never had such a pair of troublemakers" and Hagrid answered, "I reckon the Weasley Twins could give them a run for their money".)

Anyway, my deduction about the rest of Harry's Gryffindor schoolmates comes from those remarks of McGonagall's and Hagrid's. It's accepted that the Weasley Twins break more rules than the rest, so if there's something they won't do, you can pretty much expect that the rest won't. So when Harry reflects on the Weasley Twins, what he thinks of his other Gryffindor schoolmates is there by default.

(One more point in next post ...)


Vulture - Aug 24, 2006 2:25 pm (#139 of 2959)
Something we were discussing a few posts back, folks: the fact that Lupin said that "Snape was a special case. I mean, he never lost an opportunity to hex James so you couldn't expect James to take that lying down, could you ?" in Book 5, whereas Snape, in Book 6, says that "Your father would never attack me unless it was four on one".

Now, leaving aside how much dead-on literal accuracy you think is in either or both of those statements, I just want to say that _ as they stand _ they're not as irreconcilable as we might think. That is to say, it's quite possible that James, whenever he attacked Snape, had the others with him (though I doubt that Lupin took an active part), but it's also quite possible that Snape would try to ambush James when he (James) was alone, and that James (being a very effective wizard) would strike back. For all we know, Snape may have had Slytherin cronies with him in such ambushes.

Such a scenario (which, by the way, has little or no direct canon proof) lends some support to my war context theory. Remember Book 3's description of the intense Gryffindor-Slytherin clashes in the weeks leading up to the Quidditch Final ? Well, my hunch is that, in James's day, Hogwarts was like that all the time. But yes, it's just my hunch.

JKR !!! Back me up !!!


painting sheila - Aug 24, 2006 7:28 pm (#140 of 2959)
Can some one help me with the Madame Pince being Snape's mother idea? I have read post alluding to that relationship - but can't find a source.

Thanks!


Chemyst - Aug 24, 2006 7:34 pm (#141 of 2959)
Shelia, Check out the Eileen Prince thread. You'll have to start at the beginning and the theory is slowly built up over the next several hundred posts. Happy reading!


painting Sheila - Aug 24, 2006 7:39 pm (#142 of 2959)
YEAH! Found it - Thanks!


Ann - Aug 25, 2006 4:31 am (#143 of 2959)
Okay, I stand corrected about Hermione and Snape being similar. When I said a "poor" background, I should have said a poor background both economically and emotionally. I think we have evidence that there was conflict in Snape's household (between his mother and his father or his mother and some other family member) and that it affected Snape strongly, since it shows up in the sort of traumatic memory that comes to the fore with a Legilimency Spell. And the old, gray underwear that is described in the Pensieve scene suggests a certain economic insecurity--the Snapes were clearly not as wealthy as the Malfoys.

But I stand by my suggestion that there are some similarities, and that if Hermione's circumstances (and gender) had been different, she might have been subject to the same sort of bullying. (Even as it is, Ron was pretty nasty at the beginning.) Both of them are described as having unattractive characteristics (although Snape's are more a matter of general grooming and Hermione's are both fixable, as she shows during the Yule Ball). Both seem to have cried at some time early in their school career (hence the Snivellus nickname). And both were most certainly Know-it-alls, with little patience for their more relaxed schoolmates. But putting effort into grooming and crying can tend to be perceived as more negative for boys than for girls, so even if Hermione had been less affluent and less loved, she might have made friends more easily than Snape did.


Vulture - Aug 25, 2006 6:49 am (#144 of 2959)
Hi, Ann: Re your last post (#143) _ I guess it just shows how reading the same thing can provoke different reactions in different people. It never occurred to me to read economic insecurity into Snape's grey underwear _ I thought it was just a sign of a loner who didn't take care of himself properly. It never occurred to me that "Snivellus" was about crying _ I thought it arose from taunts about his hooked nose. Not that I'm saying you're wrong _ these things just never occurred to me.

Apart from obvious differences (like gender, loving home, being part of the Muggle world, etc.), there is one difference between Hermione and the young Snape that stands out for me _ it centres on your mention of Ron being pretty nasty at the beginning. Hermione, before she became friends with Harry and Ron, was very active in making her presence felt, right from the beginning, and Ron's comments were largely a matter of wanting her to go away _ he wasn't seeking her out and targeting her. (If anything, it often seemed the other way around !!) On the other hand, we've little information about the young Snape's school beginnings, apart from Lupin's comment that he and James hated each other from the very beginning.

It's true that you could say that each era's 'Potter & Co.' group regarded both as snoopers who were trying to get them into trouble. But in the case of Sirius and James, they were quite sure (rightly or wrongly, I don't want to discuss here) that the priority for Snape was to get them expelled, whereas I think Harry and Ron, no matter how exasperated with her, always saw that the priority for Hermione was following the rules.


journeymom - Aug 25, 2006 9:55 am (#145 of 2959)
Edited by Catherine Sep 2, 2006 12:03 pm
"It never occurred to me that "Snivellus" was about crying _ I thought it arose from taunts about his hooked nose. "

Wow, I never even thought Snivellus could refer to anything other than crying! That's an interesting thought. I'll think I'll stick with crying though, since it sounds like 'snivelling', crying, sniffling, whining. Or I suppose it should be whinging.

You know how boys can call each other names without the intent of being accurate but simply to be cruel. Perhaps Severus never particularly cried in school. But I can imagine him whining to a teacher about what Potter and Black did, trying to get them in trouble. That could earn him the name 'Snivellus', as well.

ETA, Vulture, I like your analysis of the parallels between Snape and Hermione. Well thought out.

I edited out two sentences that contained language and implications that JKR has not used in her novels thus far. Please remember that this Forum is accessible to school children.--Catherine


haymoni - Aug 25, 2006 10:48 am (#146 of 2959)
I thought it was snivelling, whining - "But Professor, you didn't give me the extra credit points for the information on werewolves I provided."

I could see Snape being a lot like Hermione in this regard.


Ann - Aug 25, 2006 3:33 pm (#147 of 2959)
Vulture, you point out that Hermione was big on following the rules; if you look back, you'll see that that is probably the second biggest complaint Snape has about Harry--aside from being arrogant. He sees him as being someone who, like his father, believes the rules shouldn't apply to him. Yet another parallel with Hermione. And remember that James and Sirius were compared with Fred and George by Minerva McGonagall, who presumably knew both sets of troublemakers pretty well. It seems not unlikely that one of the first conflicts between Snape and the Marauders was over breaking rules. I can see that being extended to "getting them expelled." (Sirius does tend to exaggerate, remember.)

Again, the parallel is not exact by any means, and Hermione is changed by her friendship with Harry and Ron (she becomes a bit more relaxed about the rules for one thing), but I think the parallels are there.


Saracene - Aug 26, 2006 1:24 am (#148 of 2959)
Vulture:

---It never occurred to me that "Snivellus" was about crying _ I thought it arose from taunts about his hooked nose.---

Hmm... what's the connection between "Snivellus" and Snape's hooked nose though?

I agree BTW that it never occurred to me to think that "Snivellus" referred to Snape actually crying (for one thing IMO Snape would rather die than display such "weakness" in front of other people). I just thought it was a way to put a derogatory spin on his real name.


azi- Aug 26, 2006 4:16 am (#149 of 2959)
I thought Snivellus meant Snape had a runny nose and 'snooked' instead of blowing his nose, or wiped his nose on his robe sleeves or something. Is 'snooking' a slang term? I don't know another way to phrase it...

Definition from dictionary.com

sniv?el
1. to weep or cry with sniffling.
2. to affect a tearful state; whine.
3. to run at the nose; have a runny nose: She sniveled from the cold.
4. to draw up mucus audibly through the nose: Stop sniveling and use your handkerchief.
–verb (used with object)
5. to utter with sniveling or sniffling.
–noun
6. weak, whining, or pretended weeping.
7. a light sniffle, as in weeping.
8. a hypocritical show of feeling: a sentimental snivel.
9. mucus running from the nose.
10. snivels, a sniveling condition; a slight cold; sniffles (usually prec. by the).

According to this, snivelling is another term for snooking (number 4).

Edited to correct HTML


wynnleaf - Aug 26, 2006 7:54 am (#150 of 2959)
Snape parallels with Hermione?

Hmm.

If Spinner's End is Snape's family home, then he was from a lower economic level than Hermione, coming from a family of two dentists.

Hermione's home is assumed to be happy; Snape's memories make his appear to have a certain amount of anger affecting his homelife.

Both are highly intelligent. Hermione seems to go "by the book," Snape at school was inventing his own spells and improving the book's instructions. The difference is particularly clear in Hermione's negative reactions to the way the HBP deviates from the book's instructions.

Hermione's "know it all" reputation may or may not parallel Snape. We don't have any evidence that he was a "know it all" in school. That would imply, wouldn't it, that he was pretty vocal about his knowledge around other students? Perhaps. His adult dislike of Hermione being a "know it all" could be either from a history of always disliking that kind of person (disliking those who quote from the text, while he's out there questioning the text to make it better), or it could be from having a personal history of being a "know it all" and growing past that. I've known a number of gifted adults who really, really dislike know it all kids for both or either of those reasons.

Friendships versus loners. Hermione would likely have stayed a loner if it hadn't been for Ron and Harry befriending her. Other students in 1st year don't like her and don't mind saying so. As she gets older, I never get the impression she has close friends other than Ron and Harry.

We don't know about Snape's friends. Sirius speaks of a gang of Slytherins, but of the ones he mentions, those for whom we know their ages are several years older than Snape. Snape seems to have a longstanding friendship with the Malfoys, but they're older than he is (at least Lucius is). In the Snape's Worst Memory scene, no Slytherins appear to either want to help him, or even sympathize. Yet we know that a house takes classes all together, so all of the Slytherins of that year would have been in the class which seemed to mostly all wander down to the area where the attack took place.

A lot of people in fandom like to think of Snape and Hermione as very similar. I think it's rather superficial, based almost exclusively on the fact that both are supposed to be highly intelligent. My personal opinion, partly based on spending a lot of time around a lot of very talented students, as well as some personal biases, is a little different.

If I were to compare it to a typical school class that I'm familiar with, I'd see Hermione as the very academic, responsible girl, the girl the teacher's love, does community service, always chosen as the "leader" especially when the leadership position is chosen by teachers. Proud. Thinks her opinions are generally more relavant and knowledgeable than others. The "I know best. I even know what's best for you, even if you don't agree," kind of mentality. Has some friends, for whom she continues to play the "I know best" role and exerts that power by enabling the others through a large knowledge base, which they can only access (or think they can only access) through her. The sad thing about this sort of person is that if their huge knowledge base was suddenly gone, one wonders who would continue to want them around. Sorry, I guess that's cynical.

Snape, on the other hand, strikes me like a stereotypical gifted loner geek, with an emphasis on stereotype. (My house seems to attrack geeks!) Anyway, to follow the stereotype -- very smart and knowledgeable, often knows unusual ways to solve problems, knows a lot of stuff teachers don't know, not very athletic, never looks "cool," not attractive to either other kids or teachers, resentful of "cool" kids, insecure and arrogant at once, sort of reclusive (hangs out by himself with his techno interests, scientific interests or other geeky focus). May or may not care about formal academics. Certainly isn't the kid who gets chosen (by either teachers or students) for leadership roles.

Get the picture? I'd see the Snape-type as being a loner geeky nerd in school, maybe (if he had friends) leaning a bit toward goth if he had even the slightest interest in any kind of "style," whereas Hermione would be aspiring to be on the debate team and join the student government associations. Is it family upbringing which produces the difference? Maybe, maybe not. You see both types come from all sorts of family backgrounds.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 151 to 170

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 9:53 am

wynnleaf - Aug 26, 2006 7:57 am (#151 of 2959)
Snape parallels with Hermione?

Hmm.

If Spinner's End is Snape's family home, then he was from a lower economic level than Hermione, coming from a family of two dentists.

Hermione's home is assumed to be happy; Snape's memories make his appear to have a certain amount of anger affecting his homelife.

Both are highly intelligent. Hermione seems to go "by the book," Snape at school was inventing his own spells and improving the book's instructions. The difference is particularly clear in Hermione's negative reactions to the way the HBP deviates from the book's instructions.

Hermione's "know it all" reputation may or may not parallel Snape. We don't have any evidence that he was a "know it all" in school. That would imply, wouldn't it, that he was pretty vocal about his knowledge around other students? Perhaps. His adult dislike of Hermione being a "know it all" could be either from a history of always disliking that kind of person (disliking those who quote from the text, while he's out there questioning the text to make it better), or it could be from having a personal history of being a "know it all" and growing past that. I've known a number of gifted adults who really, really dislike know it all kids for both or either of those reasons.

Friendships versus loners. Hermione would likely have stayed a loner if it hadn't been for Ron and Harry befriending her. Other students in 1st year don't like her and don't mind saying so. As she gets older, I never get the impression she has close friends other than Ron and Harry.

We don't know about Snape's friends. Sirius speaks of a gang of Slytherins, but of the ones he mentions, those for whom we know their ages are several years older than Snape. Snape seems to have a longstanding friendship with the Malfoys, but they're older than he is (at least Lucius is). In the Snape's Worst Memory scene, no Slytherins appear to either want to help him, or even sympathize. Yet we know that a house takes classes all together, so all of the Slytherins of that year would have been in the class which seemed to mostly all wander down to the area where the attack took place.

A lot of people in fandom like to think of Snape and Hermione as very similar. I think it's rather superficial, based almost exclusively on the fact that both are supposed to be highly intelligent. My personal opinion, partly based on spending a lot of time around a lot of very talented students, as well as some personal biases, is a little different.

If I were to compare it to a typical school class that I'm familiar with, I'd see Hermione as the very academic, responsible girl, the girl the teacher's love, does community service, always chosen as the "leader" especially when the leadership position is chosen by teachers. Proud. Thinks her opinions are generally more relavant and knowledgeable than others. The "I know best. I even know what's best for you, even if you don't agree," kind of mentality. Has some friends, for whom she continues to play the "I know best" role and exerts that power by enabling the others through a large knowledge base, which they can only access (or think they can only access) through her. The sad thing about this sort of person is that if their huge knowledge base was suddenly gone, one wonders who would continue to want them around. Sorry, I guess that's cynical.

Snape, on the other hand, strikes me like a stereotypical gifted loner geek, with an emphasis on stereotype. (My house seems to attrack geeks!) Anyway, to follow the stereotype -- very smart and knowledgeable, often knows unusual ways to solve problems, knows a lot of stuff teachers don't know, not very athletic, never looks "cool," not attractive to either other kids or teachers, resentful of "cool" kids, insecure and arrogant at once, sort of reclusive (hangs out by himself with his techno interests, scientific interests or other geeky focus). May or may not care about formal academics. Certainly isn't the kid who gets chosen (by either teachers or students) for leadership roles.

Get the picture? I'd see the Snape-type as being a loner geeky nerd in school, maybe (if he had friends) leaning a bit toward goth if he had even the slightest interest in any kind of "style," whereas Hermione would be aspiring to be on the debate team and join the student government associations. Is it family upbringing which produces the difference? Maybe, maybe not. You see both types come from all sorts of family backgrounds.

One thing extra, though. The loner geek types seem to get picked on more than the do-everything-by-the-book academic over achievers who attrack the approval of the faculty.


Saracene - Aug 26, 2006 7:12 pm (#152 of 2959)
wynnleaf, I think that's a great analysis of two very different types. I also don't see much similarity between Snape and Hermione; the only thing they seem to have in common is intelligence and even then they possess different kinds of intelligence. I certainly don't get the sort of fan-fiction where Snape gets together with Hermione (when she's of legal age, naturally) supposedly because he's the only male character in the Potterverse who can fit Hermione's search for an intellectual equal, Smile


rambkowalczyk - Aug 27, 2006 6:02 pm (#153 of 2959)
I think the analogies between Snape and Hermione are valid. Both adhere to the rules, Snape may have been a know-it-all, both are difficult to get along with.

But there are differences. Hermione is kind even to her enemies. Snape is kind only to his friends not to people who hurt him. I can't see Hermione plotting to hurt Draco even though he was quite hurtful to her. Even though Snape hurt her with the insult about her teeth in book 4, she never sought to get back at him. If Snape were in the same position he wouldn't rest until he had his revenge. Just my 2 knuts.


Solitaire - Aug 27, 2006 7:39 pm (#154 of 2959)
I think it is also likely that Snape was called a know-it-all by some of his teachers, which is why he turns that particular epithet on Hermione so often--he is "giving as good as he got," so to speak.

This was the only comparison I made between Hermione and Snape. I do not see her sharing other qualities like his vindictive nature or his mean-spiritedness.

Solitaire


wynnleaf - Aug 27, 2006 9:09 pm (#155 of 2959)
But there are differences. Hermione is kind even to her enemies. Snape is kind only to his friends not to people who hurt him. I can't see Hermione plotting to hurt Draco even though he was quite hurtful to her. Even though Snape hurt her with the insult about her teeth in book 4, she never sought to get back at him. If Snape were in the same position he wouldn't rest until he had his revenge. Just my 2 knuts.

While I obviously believe Hermione and Snape are two very different types, I don't agree with these comments about Hermione.

In fact, Hermione is not at all kind to Marietta Edgecombe; she plots to drug two other mostly innocent students (Crabb and Goyle, innocent of any involvement in what she's investigating) solely so she can enable Harry and Ron to completely unnecessarily interrogate Draco; she plans and attempts to impersonate another innocent student (Millecent). She persists in attempting to literally force the house elves into a complete life-changing situation, solely because she thinks it's for their best interests. She confines Rita Skeeter to a jar for a long period of time and then blackmails her. She sabotaged another student's (am forgetting his name) attempt to join the Quidditch team solely to make sure Ron got a better chance. She was not particularly "kind" to Ron when he upset her during HBP.

That's some instances I can think of off the top of my head. Where was she "kind" to her enemies?

I agree that we haven't seen the stereotypical version of "kindness" from Snape except toward Narcissa and perhaps Draco when he was injured from the Sectumsempra. On the other hand, Snape does (if he is loyal) show a willingness to protect someone he clearly dislikes (Harry), spend a lot of time making wolfsbane potion for someone else he thoroughly dislikes (Lupin), save the life of Gryffindor Katie Bell (he presumably dislikes Gryffindors), and generally put his life on the line constantly to help a group of Order members who seem to all distrust him with the exception of Dumbledore.

We tend to think of "kindness" as gentle actions. Whether one considers it "kindness" or some other form of good, a willingness to do good and sacrifice for people you really don't like is an honorable thing. I'm trying to think of a time we've seen Hermione do this. If Snape is loyal to DD, he does this quite a bit, regardless of how "unkind" he is in the classroom as he says sarcastic and hurtful things to his students.

The only real example I can think of off-hand for Hermione is that, prior to Snape's AKing DD, she tended to defend him around Harry and Ron, regardless of how sarcastic and mean he'd been to her in class. Her basic defense was "DD trusts him," so you could argue that she is primarily defending DD. But if we grant this example to Hermione of being "kind" to her enemies, I can still not come up with other examples. But I am biased a bit against Hermione, so I may not be remembering appropriate examples.


rambkowalczyk - Aug 28, 2006 9:18 am (#156 of 2959)
Obviously my statement about Hermione's kindness doesn't apply to her entire life and perhaps that statement needs to be fine tuned.

1 Marietta. Hermione's actions towards Marietta were impersonal. What happened to Marietta would have happened to anyone who broke the magical contract. Hermione didn't seem to get any personal satisfaction out of hexing her nor did she question whether that particular hex might be to harsh.(in that it persisted for over a year).

2 Her actions regarding the making of Polyjuice potion indicates neither kindness nor cruelness. It shows her fear not only for herself but for other Muggleborns. She feels desperate measures are needed to find out who is behind the attacks. Draco has in subtle ways threatened her.

3 Forcing house elfs to accept freedom. This somewhat misguided action is a result of seeing Winky's distress at being unfairly dismissed from the Crouch household. Allowing people to accept their slavery is the easy thing to do. Encouraging them to take responsibility for their own lives is more difficult. Hermione is taking the more difficult option. Although what she is doing is not really the best thing it might be better than doing nothing.

4 Rita Skeeter. Best example of how Hermione isn't kind and shows that she does have a little bit of vindictiveness in her. Excellant point. I will point out that when she captured the beetle it was because the beetle was in the hospital wing not because Hermione went out of her way to find her.

5 Hexing McLaggin so Ron could get on the Quidditch team. good point. It almost shows a Slytherin side to her.

6 Vindictiveness to Ron when he was snogging/dating Lavender. No argument here.

Better examples of Hermione's kindness/concern for others

1 Neville, In book 1, Neville is clearly a loser, perhaps the Snape of his day--a chubby little kid with little magical talent who loses his toad alot. Whereas other students steered clear of him she took him under her wing and tried to help him even when a teacher tells her not to.

2 She is concerned about younger students being taken advantage of by Fred and George when they wanted to test their products.

3 She was concerned about Montague when he left school after being tossed in the Vanishing cabinet. She thought she should tell how he got there.

4 She was concerned for Draco after Moody turned him into a ferret.

5 She defended not only Snape but also Lockhart.

Snape's moments of kindness that we have seen so far have only been towards Narcissa, and Draco. It can be argued that Snape chooses not to show his kindness because it would destroy his image. For example in the fifth book he does intervene to make sure Neville doesn't get hurt by Crabbe when he is strangling him.

I wonder if the main difference between Snape and Hermione is their ability to forgive and let go of the past.


Die Zimtzicke - Aug 28, 2006 9:20 am (#157 of 2959)
The only time I think Hemrione was kind to an enemy is when she told Harry he couldn't hurt the babyheaded Death Eater, but I'm not sure he could have decided how to hurt him in a split second anyway.

She's not even that nice to allies, considering the way she treated the centaurs after harping about how the rest of the wizarding world treated other magical cratures.

She is extremely narrow minded at times, and vindictive. I know it's because she's trying so hard to prove herself in this new world of hers, but she's really annoying when she thinks he's always right and everyone else is always wrong, when she often doesn't really have any PRACTICAL knowledge of what she's talking about at all. Take the scene where she's arguing with Mr. Weasley about elf rights at a totally inappropriate time, for one example.


Vulture - Aug 28, 2006 10:33 am (#158 of 2959)
Thanks, journeymom (for what you said in #145). (What does ETA mean ?)

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

Vulture, you point out that Hermione was big on following the rules; if you look back, you'll see that that is probably the second biggest complaint Snape has about Harry--aside from being arrogant. He sees him as being someone who, like his father, believes the rules shouldn't apply to him. Yet another parallel with Hermione. (Ann - Aug 25, 2006 4:33 pm (#147))

I know that that's one of the things he says about Harry, but isn't he hypocritical in this ? He doesn't seem to have the same problem with Malfoy breaking rules (I can think of one clear example in Book 3), and by being selective like that about whom he enforces rules on, he is himself breaking them. One has only to look at McGonagall's strict enforcement _ applied completely even-handedly _ to see the contrast. Hermione, I think, would be much more on McGonagall's wavelength (in Book 5, incidentally, Hermione's changed attitude to rules (see reason 3, below) is echoed by McGonagall).

If I were to compare it to a typical school class that I'm familiar with, I'd see Hermione as the very academic, responsible girl, the girl the teacher's love, does community service, always chosen as the "leader" especially when the leadership position is chosen by teachers. Proud. Thinks her opinions are generally more relavant and knowledgeable than others. The "I know best. I even know what's best for you, even if you don't agree," kind of mentality. Has some friends, for whom she continues to play the "I know best" role and exerts that power by enabling the others through a large knowledge base, which they can only access (or think they can only access) through her. The sad thing about this sort of person is that if their huge knowledge base was suddenly gone, one wonders who would continue to want them around. Sorry, I guess that's cynical. (wynnleaf - Aug 26, 2006 8:54 am (#150))

I'd agree pretty much with the above, except for the second-last ("sad thing is ...") sentence _ at least if you're applying that sentence to Hermione. I've four reasons for saying that:

(1) Just before Harry faces Quirrell near the end of Book 1, Hermione shows a great deal of self-awareness (as well as humility and love) in putting "friendship and bravery" above "books and cleverness". I recognise the type you describe, above, but is humility a typical quality of theirs ?

(2) In Book 5, Hermione reveals that the Sorting Hat originally thought of putting her in Ravenclaw (for her brains), "...but it decided on Gryffindor in the end". Why did that happen, I wonder ? Did Hermione have something similar to Harry's "not Slytherin" moment, or did the Hat just change its mind all by itself ? We haven't been told so far. (If it was Hermione's doing, why might she want to be in Gryffindor ? Perhaps because of her earlier comment on the train that Dumbledore was ?) But in any case, my point is that the Hat did not end up placing her on the basis of her brain.

(3) Also in Book 5 (as I think I mentioned in the "Was Anyone Disappointed In Book 6" thread), Hermione grows and branches out a bit beyond her original image, to pull some very unorthodox stunts: a subversive deal in a pub with unusual characters, organising a secret society against the Headmistress, encouraging (to their stunned amazement !!) the school's biggest troublemakers in creating mayhem, and finally showing a flash of ruthlessness in deliberately and coldly leading Umbridge into a trap she knew could be lethal. Now, before you say so, I'm well aware (and said so before) that, in all this, Hermione is still, in a way, being loyal to the school _ it's just that true loyalty, during the Umbridge regime, demands something more than the mere rules-obeying conformity of a Marietta. Nevertheless, I think there's more going on here than just a walking human encyclopedia or teacher's pet.

(4) Having written them out, I can see that the above 3 reasons may not answer the point directly. But my fourth is simple: if Hermione's "huge knowledge base was suddenly gone", Harry and Ron would still want her around. Yes, their friendship was a matter of luck (the troll incident), but then, much true friendship is a matter of luck in the beginning.

Snape, on the other hand, strikes me like a stereotypical gifted loner geek, with an emphasis on stereotype. (My house seems to attrack geeks!) Anyway, to follow the stereotype -- very smart and knowledgeable, often knows unusual ways to solve problems, knows a lot of stuff teachers don't know, not very athletic, never looks "cool," not attractive to either other kids or teachers, resentful of "cool" kids, insecure and arrogant at once, sort of reclusive (hangs out by himself with his techno interests, scientific interests or other geeky focus). May or may not care about formal academics. Certainly isn't the kid who gets chosen (by either teachers or students) for leadership roles.

Get the picture? I'd see the Snape-type as being a loner geeky nerd in school, maybe (if he had friends) leaning a bit toward goth if he had even the slightest interest in any kind of "style," whereas Hermione would be aspiring to be on the debate team and join the student government associations. Is it family upbringing which produces the difference? Maybe, maybe not. You see both types come from all sorts of family backgrounds.

One thing extra, though. The loner geek types seem to get picked on more than the do-everything-by-the-book academic over achievers who attrack the approval of the faculty. (wynnleaf - Aug 26, 2006 8:54 am (#150))

I pretty much agree with this as well. I do have some reservations, though. For one thing, there's the fact that the adult Snape became, not just Head of House, but a popular Head Of Slytherin (look how they cheered him in Book 2) _ I don't have the impression that Slughorn was looked up to half as much (admittedly, he had young Voldemort to compete with), and Snape certainly doesn't show his former teacher and House Head much deference. Of course it can be objected that I'm talking all about the adult Snape, and that maybe his achievements as an adult didn't draw on any qualities he had while at school. I've my doubts, though.

I'm not, myself, sure what I'm getting at, but I've a feeling that Snape himself would be very impatient with our focus on him as a victim of bullying. He certainly is no passive, helpless victim _ he fights back all the time, even if not successfully. In the Pensive scene, he goes for his wand like a gunfighter, and later hits back at James, drawing blood. Whether his terms are based on the general Slytherin outlook or on something more personal (we don't know which), he won't compromise them even to save himself _ he contemptuously rejects "help from filthy little Mudbloods like her" (Lily). Imagine if Wormtail were in that situation _ he really would be a victim, and he certainly wouldn't reject help, no matter what he thought of the helper.


Vulture - Aug 28, 2006 10:40 am (#159 of 2959)
In fact, Hermione is not at all kind to Marietta Edgecombe; she plots to drug two other mostly innocent students (Crabb and Goyle, innocent of any involvement in what she's investigating) solely so she can enable Harry and Ron to completely unnecessarily interrogate Draco; she plans and attempts to impersonate another innocent student (Millecent). She persists in attempting to literally force the house elves into a complete life-changing situation, solely because she thinks it's for their best interests. She confines Rita Skeeter to a jar for a long period of time and then blackmails her. She sabotaged another student's (am forgetting his name) attempt to join the Quidditch team solely to make sure Ron got a better chance. She was not particularly "kind" to Ron when he upset her during HBP.

That's some instances I can think of off the top of my head. Where was she "kind" to her enemies?

I agree that we haven't seen the stereotypical version of "kindness" from Snape except toward Narcissa and perhaps Draco when he was injured from the Sectumsempra. On the other hand, Snape does (if he is loyal) show a willingness to protect someone he clearly dislikes (Harry), spend a lot of time making wolfsbane potion for someone else he thoroughly dislikes (Lupin), save the life of Gryffindor Katie Bell (he presumably dislikes Gryffindors), and generally put his life on the line constantly to help a group of Order members who seem to all distrust him with the exception of Dumbledore. (wynnleaf - Aug 27, 2006 10:09 pm (#155))

I would agree that perhaps "fair" would have been a more accurate word than "kind". (rambkowalczyk, it was your post originally _ what do you think ?) I think Hermione is, as far as possible, fair to all, even her enemies.

However, I disagree completely that there was anything wrong in Hermione's actions to the enemies listed above:

Marietta: She was a traitor _ end of story. She deserved what she got _ in fact, Hermione's punishment was quite lenient. With traitors, soft soap just does not work _ and worse, makes greater treachery likely. In Book 5, Voldemort has returned, the Ministry are trying to get rid of Dumbledore and ignoring Voldemort, and Umbridge is imposing the Ministry's will in a particularly brutal way. All this was known to the D.A. At its very beginning, Hermione warned the D.A. what signing up meant. Among other things, it meant keeping the D.A.'s secrets, accepting the fact that Voldemort was back, and thus accepting that they were at war. There was even a debate between members about their worries before they all signed _ and Marietta did not say a word. If she wanted out, that was the time to get out. People are not supposed to do the right thing because they've been told what the punishment is: they're supposed to do the right thing because it's the right thing.

Marietta sold out her friends. She sold out her best friend _ who stood by her afterwards in a way she certainly didn't deserve. Did Hermione kill her or injure her ? No: she hurt her pride _ which is exactly what Marietta needed. Indeed, her punishment, literally, forces her to look at herself (in more ways than one !!) and thus gives her a chance to change _ that's more than most traitors who are caught get. So in fact, Hermione wasn't just being fair, but also kind in the long run.

Crabbe and Goyle: As these aren't major characters, JKR can't be expected to cross all the T's and dot all the I's, but enough had been said in Book 1 to show that these two were, and are, bullies and thugs. "Mostly innocent" ? _ I don't agree: they were closely mixed up with Draco (see below).

Draco Malfoy: I disagree that the interrogation of Draco Malfoy was "unnecessary". The only reason we know it's "unnecessary" is that Harry and Ron found out that Malfoy was not the Heir Of Slytherin. But before that, Malfoy (without realising it himself, of course) had done everything to make himself Suspect No. 1 _ only failing because Harry was most people's Suspect No. 1. Unlike most students, Draco was openly gleeful when the Heir rose again. When students at last stopped suspecting Harry, the alternative suspect they immediately thought of was Malfoy _ and Harry shot that down straight away (despite his dislike of Malfoy): he wouldn't have had the data to do so without that interrogation. Bear in mind that Harry felt under pressure to clear his name, and no-one apart from Ron or Hermione were offering to do the investigative work.

Millicent Bulstrode: Given that Draco was likely to talk openly to her, I question the description of her as "innocent". Draco and his friends were openly celebrating the Heir Of Slytherin's return _ Draco wanted to help the Heir, and was disappointed that the "Mudblood Granger" didn't die.

Rita Skeeter: A particularly leech-like journalist feeding off the misery she can create in people's lives _ and one of JKR's most brilliantly (and accurately)-created characters. (I did a bit of reading about what was in JKR's mind in creating Rita, and feel quite sure about what I'm saying.) Anyway, I agree totally with everything Hermione did _ the moral is, if you're a beetle you shouldn't keep getting in people's hair !! Hermione forced her to act decently for a change _ what's so bad about that ?

House-Elves: Well, much of what's written about Hermione and house-elves is not intended to be other than comedy. There are some serious points hidden along the way, though, about slavery and particularly, slavery's mental aspect _ how slaves, with the passage of time, can be got to accept their condition as "normal". Yes, like many idealists, Hermione gets things comically wrong, because (again, like many idealists) dealing with people _ in other words, making new friends _ is not something she's very good at. But her intentions were quite fair _ and kind, too, in this case !!

McLaggen: Well, I didn't think much of Book 6's writing, so perhaps I shouldn't comment. Nevertheless _ yes, Hermione sabotaged his attempt to join the team, but I don't think she regarded him as an enemy. And what she said about his personality and how it would affect the team was proven right later on in the book.

As for her actions towards Ron after seeing him mouth-wrestling with Lavender _ OK, not very "kind", but probably fair !! After all, Ron did it partly to hurt her. Also, bear in mind that students hexing each other when they're annoyed is par for the course at Hogwarts.

As for Snape: We have only one definite recorded instance (i.e. Book 1) of "willingness to protect someone he clearly dislikes (Harry)" _ in all other cases, we get into endless debates according to which side we believe he's on. Even Snape himself (in "Spinner's End") was able to make a case for how protecting Harry in Book 1 was not truly from kind or good motives, but necessary to being an agent for the Dark Side.

The Wolfsbane for Lupin and whatever he did for Katie Bell were, essentially, done under Dumbledore's orders _ so how sincere you think he was about them depends, once again, on your bet as to his loyalties. (By the way, just struck me: are bookmakers offering odds about which side Snape will turn out to be on ?!)

The phrase about Snape generally putting his life on the line is one I don't agree with. Essentially, it's what Snape says about himself at Order meetings _ which doesn't give me faith in its accuracy, or modesty !! (Yes, I suppose that, technically, he's at risk every time he meets a Death Eater.)

Mind you, this does bring me to a key difference between Hermione and Snape _ we know far more facts about Hermione. Virtually everything I've just said about Snape can (and will !!) be shot to pieces simply because we don't know which side he's on (if any)


wynnleaf - Aug 28, 2006 11:15 am (#160 of 2959)
Vulture, on your first post, I will in general concede. I was sniping at Hermione a bit in implying that she might not have any friends if they weren't leaching on her intelligence. Actually, I said that I was being cynical, at the time.

I'll also agree with your comments on Snape in your first post. I don't think he was a weak victim either. Sometimes people assume that the stereotypical geeky loner nerd is also weak and this is often not the case.

As regards your second post... The instances I brought up about Hermione were to show that she was often not kind to her enemies. One might feel that her actions regarding Marietta, Crabb, Goyle, Rita Skeeter, Umbridge, etc. were justified. I'd argue some and not others. But certainly no one would ever consider those actions kind.

As for Snape's actions towards those who are his enemies, or people he apparently thoroughly dislikes... Once again, they probably wouldn't be considered kind, exactly. But on the other hand, he has shown a lot more willingness (saying he had to do things because DD wanted him to is just conjecture), to do good things for his enemies and people he dislikes than Hermione has.

As long as his cover isn't blown, how high is the level of threat ?

Karakarov tried to run and was killed thousands of miles away. And he didn't betray LV anything like Snape is doing (assuming he's loyal). LV is a superb legilimens. Every time Snape is around him he'd risk LV finding out about his loyalties. That means he risks immediate death every time he's around LV. If another DE gets proof that Snape is a spy, he'd be hunted down with even more speed than Karkarov. If one of Snape's students who's a DE's child should find out he's loyal to DD, then once again -- a death sentence.

Personally, I think that's about as high a "level of threat" as anyone in the Order has -- higher than the others in fact, since no one else has to see LV in person.


Vulture - Aug 31, 2006 7:45 am (#161 of 2959)
As regards your second post... The instances I brought up about Hermione were to show that she was often not kind to her enemies. One might feel that her actions regarding Marietta, Crabb, Goyle, Rita Skeeter, Umbridge, etc. were justified. I'd argue some and not others. But certainly no one would ever consider those actions kind. (wynnleaf - Aug 28, 2006 12:15 pm (#160))

I'd in general agree about the use of the word "kind" in that context _ I speculated that "fair" might have been what was originally meant, and I wanted to make a case for Hermione's actions being justified (except to McLaggen, and I think JKR meant that as comedy). Paradoxically, though (as I've just said on the Hermione thread), I think the Sneak Jinx might turn out to be true kindness to Marietta in the long run, stopping her from becoming a worse traitor, like Wormtail. Not that Hermione was agonising over how kind the spell was when she cast it.

saying he had to do things because DD wanted him to is just conjecture (wynnleaf - Aug 28, 2006 12:15 pm (#160))

I disagree. It's quite clear that Snape, like McGonagall or the other teachers, had certain duties and would have to answer for them to Dumbledore. Equally, like Sirius, McGonagall, or Lupin, he had duties as an Order member for which he also had to answer. I'm not saying anything about how enthusiastically or genuinely he did them because I don't know _ and neither does anyone else apart from JKR (and possibly Alan Rickman, if what I've heard about him knowing the secret of Snape is true).

LV is a superb legilimens. Every time Snape is around him he'd risk LV finding out about his loyalties. That means he risks immediate death every time he's around LV. If another DE gets proof that Snape is a spy, he'd be hunted down with even more speed than Karkarov. If one of Snape's students who's a DE's child should find out he's loyal to DD, then once again -- a death sentence.

Personally, I think that's about as high a "level of threat" as anyone in the Order has -- higher than the others in fact, since no one else has to see LV in person. (wynnleaf - Aug 28, 2006 12:15 pm (#160))

I think that perhaps we're talking at cross-purposes. I'm not disputing that, if Snape is Dumbledore's man, he's at great risk whenever he's near Voldemort. But, given that he has found a way to neutralise this risk, what we're then talking about is a routine risk. In other words, once Snape established at the beginning that Lord V trusted him and wouldn't kill him, the probablility of being killed was lower at any given individual moment afterwards than at that beginning.

I was contrasting that to the risk, for example, taken by Sirius (and others) in going to Harry's aid at the Ministry in Book 5. They know that it's highly likely that Death Eaters will be there, and that if there's a fight, there will be Dark curses flying around like confetti. In that situation, the probablility of death or injury is higher for them at any individual moment than it is for Snape at any individual moment.

Of course, Snape has a lot more individual moments to contend with, and the more of them there are, the higher the probability that one of them will be his last one !! But individually, none of them have as high a probability of death as what Sirius & Co. experience at the Ministry.

This, by the way, is all quite apart from the fact that Snape boasts at Order meetings about risking his life while Sirius sits at "home". (That Sirius has had to hear this quite often is indicated by his explosive reaction when Fred makes a similar taunt after Arthur Weasley's injury.) Now, I'm not any more concerned than Dumbledore (at the end of Book 5) about Sirius's and Snape's mutual taunting _ I quote this simply to point out that Snape has a lot to say about risking his life. It's probably just me, but my admiration for, and belief in the truth of, a person's good actions, tends to decrease in direct proportion to the amount they bang on about it. (I know it'll be said that I'm relying on what Sirius says about Snape, but (1) I don't think Sirius lies, even about his enemies, and _ more importantly _ (2) we have examples of Snape's boasting about saving Harry's life in Book 3.)

By the way, do we know for a fact that Snape has reported to Lord V directly since he began spying in Book 4 ? I can believe that he has done so since Lucius Malfoy's capture, given his boasts to Bellatrix in "Spinner's End". But his mention of Lucius Malfoy to Sirius in Book 5 leads me to think it possible that he may have reported to Lucius before that. Just my speculation, of course.


Ann - Aug 31, 2006 4:41 pm (#162 of 2959)
Vulture, you said, "The phrase about Snape generally putting his life on the line is one I don't agree with. Essentially, it's what Snape says about himself at Order meetings.... We have no idea what Snape says at Order meetings, since Harry (our viewpoint) is not allowed to attend. He may be extremely modest. I would bet he's also not present very often--there must be a fairly limited group of people who know his role.

As for his reporting directly to Voldemort, he stresses to Bellatrix (and she doesn't raise a 'you never talk to him directly' objection) that he has explained everything he has done to Voldemort and that Voldemort ordered him to stay at Hogwarts when the attack on Harry at the Ministry is taking place. Narcissa tells him that he is the Dark Lord's most favored Death Eater--she's flattering him, but you notice that Bella doesn't scoff. And when he claims to know Draco's mission, and the reason for it, Bella is surprised, but Narcissa isn't. I think he probably saw Voldemort fairly regularly, particularly during the summer.


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 1, 2006 5:34 am (#163 of 2959)
Great post Ann. You said what I wanted to say, but much better than I ever could have. We can speculate, but if we don't see something, we can't prove it's there. We never saw Snape say ANYTHING at an Order meeting.


Socius Dobbiae - Sep 1, 2006 9:38 am (#164 of 2959)
++1st post++ (please be lenient)

It seems to me that the character of Snape will be absolutely crucial in book 7 and the denouement of the entire series. Rowling has developed such a suspensfully taut and unresolved aura of mystery about the circumstances surrounding Snape's true nature. Personally, I am of the camp that believes Snape loved Lily in some deep capacity, and that this was, in some way, what compelled him to renounce his evil allegiance (which i believe he indeed did).

One point that I believe is vital is the painstakingly obvious way in which Rowling presents the case for Snape, allegedly, showing his 'true' evil colors at the end of HBP. I just get the strong intuitive sense that the climax in the Lightning-Struck Tower was designed, as have been many deceptive instances in the series, to convincingly mislead readers in the opposite direction. For many, it seems to reconcile Snape's murder of DD, and his flocking with the Death Eaters, with a portrait of an ultimately 'good Snape' is impossible. I believe, however, that the bounty of evidence Rowling presents for evil Snape at the end of HBP only points more strongly to the contrary being dramtically revealed as true in the final book.


rambkowalczyk - Sep 1, 2006 2:42 pm (#165 of 2959)
I too think that Harry facing Snape will be just as climatic if not more so than facing Voldemort.


Vulture - Sep 1, 2006 8:12 pm (#166 of 2959)
Vulture, you said, "The phrase about Snape generally putting his life on the line is one I don't agree with. Essentially, it's what Snape says about himself at Order meetings...". We have no idea what Snape says at Order meetings, since Harry (our viewpoint) is not allowed to attend. He may be extremely modest. I would bet he's also not present very often--there must be a fairly limited group of people who know his role. (Ann - Aug 31, 2006 5:41 pm (#162))

No, Harry isn't my source _ Sirius is. In Book 5, soon after Harry meets him, Sirius refers to Snape banging on about "risking his life" while Sirius sits safe in 12 Grimmauld Place. We know that Snape doesn't hang around 12 Grimmauld Place except for Order meetings. I know someone will say that Sirius is biased, but I don't have the impression that he lies.

My point was that Snape has talked about how he's risking his life, and that I personally tend to admire and believe someone less and less, the more they bang on about the great stuff they're doing.


wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 8:46 pm (#167 of 2959)
Vulture said: My point was that Snape has talked about how he's risking his life, and that I personally tend to admire and believe someone less and less, the more they bang on about the great stuff they're doing.

The only evidence of Snape talking about risking his life and going on and on about it is Sirius, who I assume you consider admirable and believe, else why believe what he's said about Snape?

But Sirius as an adult said that Snape deserved the trick that Sirius played that almost killed Snape.

This is the adult that still persists in calling another grown man "Snivellus" -- Snivellus, a name worthy of a 10 year old mind.

This is Sirius, who characterized the pensieve scene that Harry saw -- a scene, by the way, in which Sirius hexed a guy who was unarmed and magically bound -- as being "arrogant little berks." He first tried to more-or-less excuse the scene by saying that Snape had always been jealous of James and was a little odd-ball, up to his ears in Dark Arts. As though just belittling the victim and saying "hey, he deserved it," would be enough to excuse that scene.

When that didn't work, and Harry didn't buy the excuse, Sirius did say he wasn't "proud of it," which never sounded particularly repentant to me, especially when Sirius jumps right into fond reminiscing that the memory brought back -- James messing up his hair and playing with the snitch. The fact that James and Sirius bullied Snape in part to attract the attention of girls was once again the source of another fond memory of James enjoying the girl's attention ... Sorry, Sirius didn't sound particularly regretful at all. It sounded more like he was trying to placate Harry.

Hm, how about more from the admirable and believable Sirius?

Well, in GOF Sirius said that Snape ran with a gang of Slytherins in school that all became Death Eaters. But then he proceeds to mention some characters that we know were several years older than Snape and it would have been highly unlikely that Snape was close to them while in school -- although they would have all been DE's together later on.

Some readers say that because Sirius was supposed, in the GOF scene, to be talking to Harry seriously about what was going on at Hogwarts, he was being particularly serious and careful in his remarks about Snape at that point. Yet somehow, he managed to intersperse his supposedly careful remarks with comments on "Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was," which really shows how fair and careful he was being right? Hm.

My point is that Sirius says all sorts of things about Snape and practically all of them are in some way to make Snape look bad, or to excuse Sirius. Whether Sirius is correct or not is hard to tell, because he's amazingly biased.

Now, did Snape mention to Sirius that he was risking his life while Sirius wasn't?

We don't know how that came about. Sirius was feeling pretty useless at GP. And he probably was jealous of the other Order members having a lot to do, while he had to just take care of the house. It wouldn't take much -- maybe Snape reporting on a particularly dangerous assignment, for Sirius to decide that Snape was intentionally rubbing his (Sirius') nose in the fact that Snape was risking his life while Sirius was safe at home.

To assume that Sirius -- who is very biased against Snape; interjects very insulting remarks about Snape even when he's supposedly trying to be fair; still thinks Snape deserved the prank that almost killed him; still tries to excuse his own bullying of Snape; is feeling really bad about his seeming uselessness; is likely jealous over the other Order member's assignments -- you get the picture.

Are we supposed to not only completely believe Sirius' view of what Snape has said while at GP? Without question? And accept it to the point of considering Snape a less admirable person because of what Sirius said?

Personally, I don't find Sirius so admirable and believable that I'd give that much weight to what he said.


Vulture - Sep 2, 2006 8:37 am (#168 of 2959)
Edited Sep 2, 2006 10:57 am
Hi, Wynnleaf, I'll come back later with the numbers of my previous posts that answer your points. However, in my opinion (which of course you're free to reject), none of those points is relevant to the present issue.

The present issue is not whether Sirius is a saint, or what we think of his life, or how we feel about his daring to dislike Severus Snape, beloved of so many. It is not even about whether he ever lies _ though, as it happens, in neither the books nor in his Lexicon enemies' best efforts have I seen any convincing evidence of Sirius deliberately and cold-bloodedly saying anything he knows to be untrue. But let's not debate that, because it's not necessary for the present issue.

For the present issue (only), it doesn't bother me if you think Sirius should be hung from the Whomping Willow. My point is this: do you (I mean everyone, not just you, Wynnleaf) or do you not believe that when Sirius mentioned to Harry that Snape was in the habit of making remarks to the effect that he (Sirius) was staying safe in 12 Grimmauld Place while he (Snape) was out "risking his life", he (Sirius) was telling the truth ?

Now, I personally do. The reason I do has nothing to do with what I think of Sirius generally; it is simply that the context where the remark occurs, combined with the fact that it is never contradicted, leads my common sense to accept it as true. (This is quite apart from the fact that, in their later kitchen quarrel, Snape follows the same line of attack as in his earlier reported remarks.)

In the same way, what I might think of Snape generally has nothing to do with the fact that I believe him when, in Occlumency class, he is telling Harry about the details of Voldemort's role in Harry's visions. It's not that I give the same weight to everything Snape says _ it's that the context in this case clearly backs him up (even before his words are verified by Dumbledore or Harry's later experiences).

In neither case could I prove the speaker's words in a law court beyond reasonable doubt. I have to use my common sense and the most reasonable evidence of context. The fact is that Sirius's reference to Snape's taunts is backed up by several pointers in Book 5 _ there is Sirius's own reactions, for one thing, which worry Harry long before the Ministry battle. There is also Dumbledore's reference to Snape's "feeble taunts", which does not contradict their existence. (Before anyone brings up Sirius's confinement in Grimmauld Place, I'm fully aware that he would have brushed off Snape's taunts more easily if he hadn't been stuck there.)

Of course, anyone who has decided on something beforehand can always beat a distorted meaning out of the text. I do not do this _ I simply take the text, imagery, mood and language as it is (to the best of my ability).

Incidentally, because I do believe that Snape and Sirius had this history of mutual taunting in Book 5, I've always wondered (if we assume Snape to be on the good side) how on earth Snape approached that last communication with Sirius, assuming that he really did, as Dumbledore said, try to get Sirius to wait at Grimmauld Place for Dumbledore. On the one hand, after all the taunts of cowardice, Snape's sudden request to Sirius to stay out of battle would seem extremely suspicious to Sirius, and provoke him to the opposite. On the other hand, if Snape, anticipating this, kept his tone as usual (i.e. a few taunts here and there), he risked having Sirius charge out the door like a greyhound after a rabbit. If Snape is Dumbledore's man, he was in a no-win situation at that moment.


Fawkes Egg - Sep 2, 2006 11:41 am (#169 of 2959)
I think he was telling the truth Vulture, and your points on context and common sense are very well put.

Whilst Sirius was biased about Snape it's important to bear in mind that we're talking about someone who's basically spent his entire adult life in Azkaban. Hardly surprising that his responses and prejudices are often still those of a schoolboy. Compare that with Lupin, whose assesment of the Pensieve situation is more honest (which Sirius grudgingly admits with his 'arrogant little berks' comment).

I can find no such excuse for Snape, who seems to bear all of his schoolboy grudges still, despite being free all these years. His behaviour in the Shrieking Shack is particularly telling, if you consider that he was there for much of the conversation before throwing off the invisibility cloak (the point at which the door moves of its own accord in that scene = Snape's entry! I'm amazed that hasn't been discussed more).

I've said it before, but worth a mention here in all this discussion of Snape's loyalties and grudges is this: Snape is on Snape's side, no-one else's. He's convinced Dumbledore and Voldemort that he's on their side, or he apears to have done. He more or less admits this in HbP (to either Bella or Draco, I'm too lazy to get up and look in my book!): "Where do you think I would have been all these years, if I had not known how to act?"

As an aside, I don't think either Dumbledore or Voldemort are so daft as to COMPLETELY buy Snape's acting, despite our Harry-centric view of Dumbledore's trust of Snape. But they seem to be playing along with whatever game Snape is utlimately playing, and this of course suits Snape too.


wynnleaf - Sep 2, 2006 3:36 pm (#170 of 2959)
Vulture,

I may have gone a bit too far in my comments to say that Snape's possible comments could have amounted to little more than reports which made his risking his life obvious, but Sirius taking that as some sort of personal insult. First, I think that Sirius would probably have taken any reference Snape made to his own activities which included lots of risky actions, as a personal insult -- the comparison to Sirius would have made him feel like he looked like a coward in comparison and he wouldn't like that.

However, it is true that Snape makes comments in Harry's hearing implying that Sirius isn't involved or saying he isn't really useful. The main thing I was intending to object to is that we don't know if Snape did that during Order meetings, or in sniping back and forth with Sirius outside of meetings. In your post a couple back you were saying that Snape was making a point out of risking his own life while ridiculing Sirius.

In the Occlumency chapter, he doesn't actually mention his own risky missions, but focuses on Sirius. And he doesn't get around to actually calling him a coward until the argument reached a level apparently well past where they usually go (they were at the point of drawing wands by then).

So I don't think we can characterize Snape's Order reports as going on about how risky and courageous his work is. We don't know. And we don't really know if he was taunting Sirius during meetings.

Further, because of Sirius' bias, I don't think we really know the real picture of how his taunting went. Was he just doing what he did early in the Occlumency scene -- commenting on Sirius' usefulness? Or did he really go into comments about how risky his own work was?

I just don't think you take a character who is highly biased against another and start analyzing their exact wording about the hated character's actions or character as though they spoke in the most perfectly factual way.

By the way, I have occasionally pointed the same thing out about Snape's comments about the various Marauders. It's just that I almost never have the opportunity to do that, because most people think practically everything Snape said about them was false anyway, so there's no need to point out that Snape is biased against them. On the other hand, many readers seem to think that the Lupin and Sirius are so naturally honest and have such wonderfully admirable characters (have they lived up to this?) that their every word about Snape should be taken as "facts we know about Snape." I do not necessarily include you in this group, but I'm pointing out why I am constantly saying "don't take the word of Lupin or Sirius about Snape," but hardly ever saying the same about Snape's comments regarding the Marauders.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 171 to 190

Post  Mona Mon May 30, 2011 11:19 am

Saracene - Sep 2, 2006 7:18 pm (#171 of 2959)
Vulture:

---This, by the way, is all quite apart from the fact that Snape boasts at Order meetings about risking his life while Sirius sits at "home".---

I looked up Sirius' quote and what he says is:

"Oh yeah, listening to Snape's reports, having to take all his snide hints that he's out there risking his life while I'm sat on my backside here having a nice comfortable time... asking me how the cleaning's going."

To me it looks like Snape is making these comments about him risking his life with a very specific aim of wounding Sirius' pride. And IMO it's quite different to "boasting" - which is about glorifying yourself in speech before others to boost your own ego. So since these comments were meant for Sirius, I think it's safe to suggest that if Sirius wasn't present at the Order meetings, Snape wouldn't be making any such hints about the dangers he's facing.

Do those comments make Snape spiteful and childish, yes. But I think that saying "Snape is boasting about risking his life at the Order meetings" is quite different to "Snape is making snide hints about risking his life in order to get at Sirius". I agree with you that a person's good actions are lessened to a degree when they're banging on about them. But I tend to associate this less-than-admirable "banging on" with a desire for self-aggrandisement and to impress other people with your "goodness" - like, say, a rich man who shows off his charitable acts. Which IMO is not what Snape's intention was.


Ann - Sep 3, 2006 5:38 pm (#172 of 2959)
"Oh yeah, listening to Snape's reports, having to take all his snide hints that he's out there risking his life while I'm sat on my backside here having a nice comfortable time... asking me how the cleaning's going."

Saracene, thanks for the exact quote. Vulture is right--I'd forgotten that Sirius actually tells Harry that Snape gives reports to the entire Order. It seems risky to me, but I suppose since Voldemort knows he's working with the Order, he could always explain it as part of his cover.

I think the quote clarifies things considerably. Sirius is objecting to listening to the reports Snape gives (which you could hardly expect him not to give, just to make Sirius feel better) and to his "snide hints," which Sirius goes on to give an example of: Snape is merely "asking me how the cleaning is going." What this looks like to me is that Snape is implying that Sirius is useless and cowardly, by giving his report and then asking Sirius snidely about the cleaning. Yes it's nasty, but I wouldn't call it bragging.

And is the fact that he describes his experiences with Voldemort to the Order any reason not to believe he's risking his life? (What you said, Vulture, was "The phrase about Snape generally putting his life on the line is one I don't agree with. Essentially, it's what Snape says about himself at Order meetings.") I would think that going back to Voldemort, having told the Order things that Voldemort presumably does not want them to know is by definition risking his life. Even if he only reports what Voldemort knows he knows, he could be killed if Voldemort found this out; and if he actively investigates things he's not supposed to know (as Chapter 2 of HBP and his questioning of Draco suggest), things could get nasty even more quickly.

The only way that he would not be risking his life would be if he was completely on Voldemort's side, and told the Order only what Voldemort had instructed him to. I'm not overlooking this possibility, and I know that a lot of people believe that the killing of Dumbledore proves that this is indeed what he's doing. But I find far too many hints, even through the Harry-filter, that he is loyal to Dumbledore and to the Order to be so easily convinced.

So, yes; I believe he is risking at life, and I find no evidence, even in Sirius's actual statement, that he is bragging about it. He's taunting Sirius with his remarks about cleaning, but he's not bragging about the risks he takes--he's only reporting what he's learned. Frankly, this seems perfectly in character. He's a subtle sort of man, as Rowling has been at pains to point out. Bragging doesn't seem his style. The contrast is there, he is nastily alluding to it by mentioning what Sirius is doing, but it is Sirius who supplies the explicit contrast.


Vulture - Sep 3, 2006 7:10 pm (#173 of 2959)
Fawkes Egg, thanks very much for your back-up in #169. As regards your view that "Snape is on Snape's side, no-one else's", well, that's one of the possibilities I covered in my posts #2600 and #2649, in the 3rd Snape thread: the 5 possible affiliations of Snape. I said then, and still say now, that everything JKR has written can be used to support any of the 5 theories. (Admittedly, the "Snape works for the good side" theory depends on the Book 6 Tower scene not being as it seemed to Harry, whereas the other 4 don't.)

I feel, though, that she may have painted herself into a corner as a result of the Book 6 Tower scene: by having Snape kill Dumbledore, blast him off the Tower, and generally do everything short of dancing on his grave to make himself seem a villain, JKR has practically ensured that Snape will turn out a good guy. So many readers are (loudly) expecting this, that when it happens it'll be a complete anti-climax. Unfortunately, if she just goes with how Snape now looks, and makes him turn out evil, that'll be even more of an anti-climax. So if she's looking to surprise us, she's running out of options.

But I think that saying "Snape is boasting about risking his life at the Order meetings" is quite different to "Snape is making snide hints about risking his life in order to get at Sirius". (Saracene - Sep 2, 2006 8:18 pm (#171))

Hi, Saracene: No, I'm afraid I don't. But I agree with most of your post #171, and thanks for going to the trouble of getting the exact quote. On the above statement, though, I think that the first statement includes the second, as it were _ in other words, those snide hints are a form of boasting, or at least, of self-promotion. (I agree with you that there are other forms of boasting, like getting up and making a bragging self-praising speech to an audience.)

So, yes; I believe he is risking at life, and I find no evidence, even in Sirius's actual statement, that he is bragging about it. He's taunting Sirius with his remarks about cleaning, but he's not bragging about the risks he takes--he's only reporting what he's learned. Frankly, this seems perfectly in character. He's a subtle sort of man, as Rowling has been at pains to point out. Bragging doesn't seem his style. The contrast is there, he is nastily alluding to it by mentioning what Sirius is doing, but it is Sirius who supplies the explicit contrast. (Ann - Sep 3, 2006 6:38 pm (#172))

No, I'm sorry, I don't buy this. See above for my opinion on boasting. Nor do I feel that Sirius is reading things into Snape's remarks that aren't there (you might not have been saying he was _ I'm not too clear). My feeling is basically that they both are having to carry on their feud in asides, whispers and mutterings, because Dumbledore would come down upon them both like a ton of bricks if they did anything more public. (Remember his exasperation with them in Book 4, and his rebuke of (fake) Moody for having a go at Karkaroff.) Because Snape never eats at 12 Grimmauld Place, and turns up only for meetings, Dumbledore would normally always be present whenever Sirius and Snape both are.

Hi, Wynnleaf: Still trying to pull together those old posts to reply to your post #167 !! Quick question on your post #170: are you clear that what you refer to as "the Occlumency chapter" (meaning where Snape first mentions Occlumency classes to Harry, and quarrels with Sirius) is not what I refer to in #168 as "Occlumency class" ? My #168 Occlumency reference has nothing to do with Sirius _ it was just designed to show how context can make me believe a character 100% at a particular point, even if I disbelieve them elsewhere.


Saracene - Sep 4, 2006 2:38 am (#174 of 2959)
Vulture:

---On the above statement, though, I think that the first statement includes the second, as it were _ in other words, those snide hints are a form of boasting, or at least, of self-promotion.---

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree, because in the end I tend to judge Snape's hints on their *aim*, which I don't believe was self-promotion. Perhaps I'd agree that self-promotion was his *method* of achieving his aim which was getting at Sirius. As opposed to my example with the rich man where self-promotion would be the aim itself.

---I feel, though, that she may have painted herself into a corner as a result of the Book 6 Tower scene: by having Snape kill Dumbledore, blast him off the Tower, and generally do everything short of dancing on his grave to make himself seem a villain, JKR has practically ensured that Snape will turn out a good guy. So many readers are (loudly) expecting this, that when it happens it'll be a complete anti-climax.---

Hmm I wouldn't bet on it. I've been to other HP forums and while there are naturally many readers who believe that Snape is ultimately on the good side, there're just as many who are convinced that he's either plain evil, or working for himself like a good little self-centred Slytherin(TM).

I personally wouldn't be one bit surprised if JKR revealed Snape to be the on the good side, but I wouldn't really see it as anti-climatic. While there obviously wouldn't be any surprise for *me*, that revelation would certainly bowl over just about every character in the book and Harry especially. And I think it would be tremendously fun to see Harry get the rug pulled out from under him where Snape is concerned, Smile I mean, sure Snape is a fascinating character and all but this is ultimately Harry's story; and with the sixth book JKR had built up Harry's hatred to the point where he now hates Snape as much as he does Voldemort.

I believe also that no matter how many *theoretical* scenarios there may be concerning Snape's loyalties, there're really only two ways the final book will go with: 1) either Snape is everything Harry believes him to be at the end of HBP, or 2) what Harry believes about Snape will be reversed completely. Any other "in-between" version, such as that Snape is simply a weak person or that he was really loyal to DD at some point but then slipped back, is frankly unlikely to me. Because, well what would be the point of Harry finding out that there was some other reason why Snape betrayed and murdered DD than what Harry believes in HBP? There'd still be murder and betrayal to avenge; that new knowledge would change absolutely nothing.

Also, I think JKR said in one of her recent interviews that there are things in Book 7 that no one could have guessed so I dare say she's still got surprises up her sleeve, Smile


Ann - Sep 4, 2006 7:31 am (#175 of 2959)
Saracene, I don't think it's possible that JKR will come up with something no one has guessed--there are too many of us, and, like monkeys with typewriters (does that metaphor still work in the 21st century?) someone will have come up with what eventually happens. The surprise will be which guess turns out to be right, won't it? And I agree that watching Harry deal with Snape's being on the good side will be where the interest lies. (What sort of moral would it be if Harry is simply confirmed in his prejudices and hatred?)

And I think you are dead on about the aim of Snape's comments. He is subtly pointing out that he's risking more than Sirius is, but he's not trying to make everyone admire him--he's trying to annoy Sirius by implying that he's a coward, which he says explicitly during their argument in the kitchen. (And, yes, Vulture, I think he's doing it on purpose--of course.)

There's good reason to question the veracity of someone who constantly tells people how brave he is and how much he's contributing--such bragging implies self-doubt, and hearers quite rightly doubt, too. But that is not what Snape (or any intelligent person over the age of ten, I should think) is doing at the meeting. He knows that bragging about his bravery would be counterproductive. So he coolly reports what he has done, and then later, with his polite question about the cleaning, insinuates that Sirius has done less. Sniping at rivals like that (which Vulture regards as bragging and I regard as irresistible, given their history) does not imply self-doubt in the same way that (real?) bragging does. There is no reason to doubt that Snape has done what he says he has done. He is presumably giving the Order good information (or Dumbledore would cease to trust him), and if he is doing that, he is obviously risking his life. (Voldemort kills people, he would presumably kill a spy.)


wynnleaf - Sep 4, 2006 8:07 am (#176 of 2959)
Having read the actual quote (I just couldn't find it and was glad it got printed here), I really agree with both Saracene and Ann's comments. Snape is certainly making snide remarks about the cleaning that Sirius hates and feels (correctly probably) that Snape is doing that solely to point out what an easy and safe job Sirius has. But that is not the same as bragging. Sirius does not actually say that Snape is bragging, although Sirius clearly feels that Snape is trying to play the "you're cowardly" card, which he definitely does in the kitchen at Grimmauld Place.

But just as Sirius truly feels that Snape is making remarks in order to be snide and insinuate that Sirius is taking the easy road, it is later quite clear that Snape really does feel that Sirius and the rest of the Marauders are capable of cowardly behavior. It's pretty clear from other quotes that this is a true deep seated belief of Snape's about the Marauders. This doesn't make it true. But it does explain some of his attitude toward Sirius.

Sirius has a lot of the Gryffindor bravery, but Snape doesn't see it. He thinks all of the Marauders were either cowards (ganging up 4 -1, which is not actually always accurate), or weak (Lupin). So when Snape would make his reports -- which were not characterized by Sirius as bragging -- he apparently took the opportunity to also ask snide questions about Sirius' role, which obviously played up his view of Sirius as a coward.

This isn't the same thing as the insecurity of bragging, where a person is trying to make themselves look brave in the face of others who actually look the better. It is Snape who really is doing all sorts of risky things, probably knowing that practically no one in the Order but Dumbledore trusts him. And he's in a meeting with someone he hates -- who by the way trusts Snape least of all -- and who he considers a coward, and who is (in Snape's mind), living the safe and secure existence at Grimmauld Place with nothing more to worry about than cleaning.

That's not nice of Snape, but it's not the same as bragging.

Now as regards Vultures comment about the truth about Snape being an anticlimax in Book 7.

To an extent, I agree. No matter how Snape turns out, massive amounts of fan speculation will have gone on about it. We're all expecting one of a number of options to take place and probably none of them will truly shock anyone of the stronger fans.

But my personal feeling is that this is not where JKR is planning to surprise the readers. It appears that Book 7 is so planned out for us -- Harry goes to 4 Privet Dr., visits Godrics Hollow, goes to the wedding, does or doesn't go to Hogwarts, searches for Horcruxes, finally destroys all of the horcruxes except perhaps one, goes after LV discovering Snape's loyalties (anticlimax) along the way combined with "What Really Happened to DD." Destroys LV along with a few deaths of loyal characters. Epilogue.

Would JKR, mistress of surprise endings, really do this??? Come on!

But there's One Big Thing left out. Every other book had a surprise treachery at the end. Quirrell is the traitor; Tom Riddle is LV; Scabbers is a traitor; Moody is Barty, Jr.; Kreacher is a traitor; Snape AK's DD. There's no new characters planned for Book 7. She doesn't re-use traitors. So who will be the traitor for Book 7?

My expectation is that JKR is wanting all of our attention to be diverted to things like "who is RAB?" and "is Snape loyal?" and "what happened to DD?" or "will Harry die?" and "what and where are the horcruxes," all so that we will be completely surprised when she springs the real shocks of Book 7.


Mrs Brisbee - Sep 4, 2006 8:22 am (#177 of 2959)
Wynnleaf: My expectation is that JKR is wanting all of our attention to be diverted to things like "who is RAB?" and "is Snape loyal?" and "what happened to DD?" or "will Harry die?" and "what and where are the horcruxes," all so that we will be completely surprised when she springs the real shocks of Book 7.

I award your House 100 points, because ever since you pointed this out, my faith that I will enjoy Book 7 has been restored. Snape does make a spectacular literary distraction, if that is indeed the function he is fulfilling.


Magic Words - Sep 4, 2006 9:08 am (#178 of 2959)
---I feel, though, that she may have painted herself into a corner as a result of the Book 6 Tower scene: by having Snape kill Dumbledore, blast him off the Tower, and generally do everything short of dancing on his grave to make himself seem a villain, JKR has practically ensured that Snape will turn out a good guy. So many readers are (loudly) expecting this, that when it happens it'll be a complete anti-climax.--- -Vulture

I personally wouldn't be one bit surprised if JKR revealed Snape to be the on the good side, but I wouldn't really see it as anti-climatic. While there obviously wouldn't be any surprise for *me*, that revelation would certainly bowl over just about every character in the book and Harry especially. And I think it would be tremendously fun to see Harry get the rug pulled out from under him where Snape is concerned, Smile I mean, sure Snape is a fascinating character and all but this is ultimately Harry's story; and with the sixth book JKR had built up Harry's hatred to the point where he now hates Snape as much as he does Voldemort. -Saracene

I agree with Saracene here. I won't be at all surprised if Snape turns out to be good, but I definitely want to see it for myself. And I am dying to see Harry's reaction.

By the way, the pattern of book endings Wynnleaf pointed out seems to almost ensure that there will be a traitor in book 7. I haven't heard any theories on who it might be (other than Lupin, whom I sincerely hope it isn't). Is there a thread where this is being discussed?


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 4, 2006 3:03 pm (#179 of 2959)
Is Snbape making snide remarks, or is Sirius seeing them as snide. Snape always seems to talk fairly sardonically. How do we know Sirius was interpreting it the way it was intended to be interpreted? How can we prove that beyond a doubt?

If the two of them spent all of their meetings sniping at each other, I'd think at some point someone else there (I can really see McGonagall doing it!) would tell them to shut up and knock it off and get back to business.


Vulture - Sep 5, 2006 10:02 pm (#180 of 2959)
Hi, Wynnleaf: I'm still interested in getting back to you about issues in your post #167, but never realised the task involved in searching through my former posts !! So it'll be a while ....

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

"Oh yeah, listening to Snape's reports, having to take all his snide hints that he's out there risking his life while I'm sat on my backside here having a nice comfortable time... asking me how the cleaning's going." (Sirius, Book 5)

If the two of them spent all of their meetings sniping at each other, I'd think at some point someone else there (I can really see McGonagall doing it!) would tell them to shut up and knock it off and get back to business. (Die Zimtzicke - Sep 4, 2006 4:03 pm (#179))

McGonagall, yes, or Dumbledore himself _ he showed some slight exasperation with them in Book 4 before forcing the poor blokes to shake hands !! My feeling is that Snape and Sirius, in Book 5, are carrying on their quarrel for all they're worth, but can't do it openly due to Dumbledore and McGonagall (and _ probably _ Mrs. Weasley !!). They can't do (much of) it out of sight of those three, because Sirius can't leave the house and Snape only turns up for meetings. So _ this puts another complexion on those "snide hints": in short, they're snarling at each other like mad _ but in whispers and quick one-liners.

More generally _ I think I differ with some people over the exact meaning of "boasting": I probably use the term more loosely. My basic point is that Snape keeps bringing up the risks he's taking. I don't share the impression of some of ye, that Snape simply reads his reports and, apart from that, just winds up Sirius with cracks about "cleaning". I certainly don't think that Sirius is perceiving meanings which weren't really intended. The meaning I take from Sirius's remark (see above) is that Snape reads out these reports at meetings, but intersperses them with "snide hints" that cover his risks and Sirius's inactivity. Their later quarrel in the kitchen, among other things, gives a flavour of The Lip-Curling One's style _ I grinned all the way through that, especially that little pause and the word "involved". Mind you, I'm sure that _ as in the kitchen _ Sirius always gives as good as he gets.


Vulture - Sep 6, 2006 11:11 am (#181 of 2959)
Edited Sep 6, 2006 12:51 pm
Hi, Wynnleaf: This is to answer your points from #167. This is longer than planned _ it's ended up as three posts, but I've tried to break them up into distinct subjects. I refer to some former posts on specific points, but if possible, for general stuff please refer to:

#2743 by T Brightwater on the 3rd Snape thread;

#2975 by RoseMorninStar on the third Snape thread;

My post #2600 on the 3rd Snape thread (which covers the 5 possible affiliations of Snape (repeated in #2649)).

(By the way, I don't necessarily agree with everything T Brightwater and RoseMorninStar say, but their posts are a good read.)

Vulture said: "My point was that Snape has talked about how he's risking his life, and that I personally tend to admire and believe someone less and less, the more they bang on about the great stuff they're doing".

The only evidence of Snape talking about risking his life and going on and on about it is Sirius, who I assume you consider admirable and believe, else why believe what he's said about Snape? (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

Well, it's not necessary, as I said in post #168, to consider Sirius as always admirable and believable in order to believe one comment about Snape which I feel is justified by general context. But in fact I do consider Sirius to be generally admirable and believable, especially given his life: brought up in a "home he hated" (Dumbledore's words) till about 5th year, 12 years in Azkaban for a crime he never committed, best friends murdered, on the run from his escape until his death. Sirius does have faults, but to my amusement (sorry, but it's true), Snape fans never bring up the correct ones !! I honestly don't know why, because there are enough of them !! _ and one of them got him killed, and has been warned against by Snape himself (though not in reference to Sirius).

----------------------------------------------------------------

But Sirius as an adult said that Snape deserved the trick that Sirius played that almost killed Snape. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

_ Taking this in isolation and without context, as with so much else, makes it sound worse than it is. I refuted this point in #2970 and #2972, in the 3rd Snape thread. See also "Firstly" paragraph in #2964, 3rd Snape thread.

------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the adult that still persists in calling another grown man "Snivellus" -- Snivellus, a name worthy of a 10 year old mind. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

My memory may be at fault, but I recall only two occasions when, as an adult, Sirius calls Snape "Snivellus" _ the first is when Snape is gloating about "revenge is very sweet" in Book 3, and Sirius snaps back defiance and says he'll come quietly if "the rat" is taken to the castle. See my 3rd thread posts referred to in the last point for stuff about context.

The second occasion is the kitchen quarrel scene in Book 5. Sirius warns Snape against "giving Harry a hard time" in Occlumency classes _ Snape answers by explicitly insulting both Harry and Harry's father as being arrogant. Even if this itself was not a red rag to a very impatient bull, the way Snape does it guarantees an explosion: he first makes the pseudo-innocent comment about how "Potter is very like his father", which Sirius can't help feeling good about (despite the situation), and then pulls the rug out with the "arrogant" gibe. It is only then that Sirius starts with the "Snivellus" stuff _ before that, he and Snape called each other by surname.

In short, on both occasions Sirius is in a fight situation _ the first time, he's fighting for his life and good name, the second he's fighting for Harry not to be picked on. I admit that, in the kitchen quarrel, Sirius's warning which started the whole thing was itself provocative. But it's no good trying to fix blame _ the only right way to view their quarrels is as Dumbledore does.

(Continued in next post ...)


Vulture - Sep 6, 2006 11:17 am (#182 of 2959)
Edited Sep 6, 2006 1:12 pm
........ Continued:

This is Sirius, who characterized the pensieve scene that Harry saw -- a scene, by the way, in which Sirius hexed a guy who was unarmed and magically bound -- as being "arrogant little berks." He first tried to more-or-less excuse the scene by saying that Snape had always been jealous of James and was a little odd-ball, up to his ears in Dark Arts. As though just belittling the victim and saying "hey, he deserved it," would be enough to excuse that scene.

When that didn't work, and Harry didn't buy the excuse, Sirius did say he wasn't "proud of it," which never sounded particularly repentant to me, especially when Sirius jumps right into fond reminiscing that the memory brought back -- James messing up his hair and playing with the snitch. The fact that James and Sirius bullied Snape in part to attract the attention of girls was once again the source of another fond memory of James enjoying the girl's attention ... Sorry, Sirius didn't sound particularly regretful at all. It sounded more like he was trying to placate Harry. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

I feel that this ignores the context; it also leaves out certain details and alters the details it includes from the way they occur in the text. The context is that Harry, Lupin and Sirius are all (for different reasons) hunted men, and that Harry has a very short time to get through everything that's on his mind _ he's also in extreme discomfort the whole time (he exasperatedly wonders why Sirius never mentioned how painful it is to kneel in a fireplace _ the answer, of course, is that Sirius is used to suffering as his daily bread).

Also, Harry has not come primarily to demand an apology on Snape's behalf _ he is primarily there because he's so appalled at his father, and is equally disturbed by what he believes was hatred for James that he saw on Lily's face. It is these things which come across most strongly to Lupin and Sirius, who care about him more than they do about themselves.

Of course Snape is a big part of this scene _ but there's nothing amazing in Lupin and Sirius focussing on Harry, whose torture in Book 4 left Sirius bowed with grief in the hospital. It is true that they initially try to play down ( not 'excuse' _ there's a difference) James's actions (not Sirius's _ Sirius doesn't care about his own image) _ this is for Harry's sake, not theirs. We've just had a whole chapter describing how cold and miserable Harry feels _ don't you think that's the first thing that Lupin and Sirius see ?

You quote Sirius's "arrogant little berks" out of context, in my opinion _ he doesn't say it as an excuse; on the contrary, he says it to interrupt Lupin, who's doing his usual Tom Hagen (the lawyer in "The Godfather") act of trying to smooth everything over. You claim that Sirius "first tried to more-or-less excuse the scene by saying that Snape had always been jealous of James" _ no, he didn't: what he said was that James and Snape hated each other from the first moment, "it was just one of those things". Then he says " I think (my emphasis) James was everything Snape wanted to be ...", followed by a list of James's advantages in school. It is in that context that he follows this with "And Snape was this little odd-ball who was up to his ears in the Dark Arts, and James _ however he may have appeared to you, Harry _ always hated the Dark Arts". I know this is going to sound really nit-picky, but the phrase "this little odd-ball" _ not "a little odd-ball" _ in that particular context, makes me feel that the speaker is re-creating for his listener how "we" felt " then". Besides, it's not a particularly inaccurate description of Snape !! _ he always has known a lot about the Dark Arts, and as for his "oddball" image _ it's still so pronounced as an adult that Quirrell, in Book 1, found Snape's presence useful in diverting suspicion.

You say that Sirius only said "I'm not proud of it" because Harry didn't buy his "excuse". That's not what happened _ he was focussing on James because Harry was: when Harry brings up Sirius's part, "I'm not proud of it" is his immediate spontanaeous reaction. There's no use expecting Sirius to kneel on the floor (well, in fact, he is doing so !!) and beat his breast because that's not his style.

You say that "Sirius jumps right into fond reminiscing" as if this is something awful, but I don't see it that way. I admit that Harry has a similar reaction to yours when Lupin and Sirius start beaming at each other (by the way, it's Lupin, not Sirius, who asks "Was he playing with the Snitch ?"). What I see is two blokes whose best friend was murdered, living in a ghastly house, on the run and marginalised by society, having a very edgy conversation with the best friend's son which may be cut off by Umbridge at any moment. When Harry, who found it embarrassing, mentions James "messing up his hair", he unwittingly makes the others laugh, suddenly relaxes the tension for them, and shines the sunlight of happier times into their depressing surroundings. (It's great writing _ that little hint of the generation gap in that moment.) Anyway, literally, they're talking to someone who has just seen a friend they haven't seen for years; they would not be human if they did not react as they did.

But they're not trying to avoid the point _ at the end, Sirius acknowledges their having been "idiots" _ but again, his priority is Harry's welfare, not Snape's. After all, Snape will never know of their conversation. Lupin openly admits that he was at fault in not reproving the others for how they treated Snape _ and Sirius says that Lupin did manage to make him and James ashamed of themselves sometimes, and that this was a good thing.

This clearly is not enough for you _ which is close enough, I guess, to Snape's own feelings. Let me just point out that a common human habit (a failing, perhaps ?) is to judge others' feelings by how we would react. So, in Sirius's case, how would he react, at 15, to being treated as Snape was ? My bet is that he would laugh it off and fight back. Same for James. Of course that's no excuse for what they did, but my point is that they've no concept of carrying deep wounds, etc., over such an incident. Their hand of cards in the school game is too strong for them to feel bad if they get hexed or Levicorpused _ and by the law of averages, the Slytherins must have got them sometimes. Now, Harry, on the other hand, does feel bad, because he has been in a situation so similar to Snape's _ without Snape's advantages (few as they are), by the way.

I hope I'm not going to get screamed at, but it occurs to me to wonder if there's a gender divide over views of all this. Are women more likely to react strongly to what happened to Snape, and are men more inclined, not to excuse it, but to categorise it as "rough and tumble" of school ? I'm just wondering.

(Please also read the paragraph beginning "Thirdly" in #2964, 3rd Snape thread.)

Continued in next post .........


Vulture - Sep 6, 2006 11:27 am (#183 of 2959)
.... Comtinued:

Well, in GOF Sirius said that Snape ran with a gang of Slytherins in school that all became Death Eaters. But then he proceeds to mention some characters that we know were several years older than Snape and it would have been highly unlikely that Snape was close to them while in school -- although they would have all been DE's together later on. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

_ This allegation has been repeated by so many people that I went and looked up the Time-lines on the Lexicon. Sirius lists Avery, the Lestranges, (Evan) Rosier and Wilkes. In all cases except the Lestranges, they are listed as " born late 1950s or early 1960s" and "attended Hogwarts with Severus Snape". (Snape is listed as born between 1958 and 1959 _ but 1958 is listed as most probable.)

Admittedly, the source used by the Lexicon for Avery, Rosier and Wilkes is this same quotation from Sirius in Ch. 27, Book 4, which you're disputing. But the Lexicon does not mention any other source in these cases, nor does it seem in doubt about its information. I'm not clear what your alternative source is for Avery, Rosier and Wilkes.

In the case of Bellatrix, she was born in 1951 (Black Family Tree), so would have attended Hogwarts from 1962 to 1968, whereas Snape, at earliest, would have been there from 1969 to 1975. But Rodolphus, her husband, is listed as being a Slytherin during the 1970s _ the source, again, is Sirius's quotation, and this information hasn't been changed. Also, by the way, Bellatrix's mother was a Rosier _ so there would have been contact between her family and the Rosiers, and Evan Rosier was close to Snape in age.

Besides, though Bellatrix wouldn't have been at school with Snape, Narcissa, who was born in 1955, certainly was: 1966 to 1972. Yes, she's 3 to 4 years older than Snape, but we know that Harry's interests lead him into contact with students 4 to 5 years older than him as early as 1st Year. Why should the same not be true for Snape ? Also, bear in mind that Slytherin House would feel more cut off from other Houses than Harry's friends, who interact with Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw _ in other words, Slytherin 1st Years would feel more in common with older Slytherins than with non-Slytherins of their own year. This would be even more true during the first Voldemort war.

Some readers say that because Sirius was supposed, in the GOF scene, to be talking to Harry seriously about what was going on at Hogwarts, he was being particularly serious and careful in his remarks about Snape at that point. Yet somehow, he managed to intersperse his supposedly careful remarks with comments on "Slimy, oily, greasy-haired kid, he was," which really shows how fair and careful he was being right? Hm. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

Well, I hope I've shown that there's nothing outlandishly inaccurate about Sirius's Book 4 information _ unless one is pre-disposed to take Snape's side. Please see also my post #2705, 3rd Snape thread, "Sirius dislikes Snape far more ..." paragraph. As for the "slimy ..." etc., comment, I don't see why Sirius's dislike of Snape should be regarded as some sort of mortal sin, especially as _ when he makes this comment _ his last conversation with Snape happened to be when looking down the wrong end of a wand, about to be handed illegally to Dementors without due process of law or reference to the proper authorities. But none of this matters _ if these guys dislike each other, that's their right. The point is whether context leads us to trust information, which I feel it does, in this case.

----------------------------------------------------------

My point is that Sirius says all sorts of things about Snape and practically all of them are in some way to make Snape look bad, or to excuse Sirius. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

I disagree. In fact, Sirius is very rarely concerned enough about himself to offer excuses of any sort _ he's much more likely to make excuses for James or Harry. In the Book 4 scene where Sirius fills Harry in about Snape: (a) I see no evidence, then or later, of Sirius lying to Harry. Indeed, I see no evidence that he ever deliberately says something he knows to be untrue; (b) Because of Sirius's attitude to Snape, the fact that he feels it necessary to say "There's still the fact that Dumbledore trusts Snape ..." carries a great deal of weight in the context _ I don't know why Snape fans have such a problem with this, because in this case the weight it carries favours Snape.

I've covered the Book 5 scene about Snape's "snide hints" in post #168 of this thread.

Whether Sirius is correct or not is hard to tell, because he's amazingly biased. (wynnleaf - Sep 1, 2006 9:46 pm (#167))

I disagree. The word "bias", to me, carries the connotation of being determined to believe the worst of one's enemy no matter what proof exists to the contrary. That is not Sirius's attitude. True, he dislikes Snape intensely _ but when hard information crops up that favours Snape (like the fact that Dumbledore trusts him), he takes it on board _ as shown by Book 4, Ch, 27. (I know he seems to disregard Dumbledore's opinion in the Book 5 kitchen quarrel scene, but that's when he's in a fight, not a careful discussion with friends.) The trouble, as always, is that there is very little hard evidence favouring Snape _ as I've said before, what we have is Dumbledore's word, the Book 1 broom incident, a lot of "maybe" incidents, and a lot of ingenious theories.

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

Finally, a general word about Snape's attitude to Sirius _ apart from all the things that usually get said about this, I feel that Sirius is one of those people (we all know them !!) who seems (to others) to be able to get liked, admired and considered brave by his peers, almost without having to lift a finger. Assuming that Snape is on the good side, he must find this infuriating _ no matter how much effort he puts in, Sirius will always be 'the brave one'.


haymoni - Sep 6, 2006 11:43 am (#184 of 2959)
Yes to your last paragraph - Lupin says as much - James & Sirius were the height of cool and I doubt that it took much effort on their parts.

Snape could have known more, could have been more accomplished, could have gotten better grades, but Sirius was "IT".

Sorry, Snivellus!


Vulture - Sep 6, 2006 12:20 pm (#185 of 2959)
Hi, Haymoni: Thanks for your approval. (Now that you've called him That Name, I'll get back in my air-raid shelter before anyone reads it !!) LOL


Vulture - Sep 7, 2006 7:46 pm (#186 of 2959)
Hi,Folks: I'm not sure if the two are linked, but as I was writing post #1367 on the Sirius Black thread, this occurred to me:

In Book 3, it's made clear to us that a Dementor's Kiss is such an appalling thing that Lupin, even while he still believes Sirius Black to be a traitor who helped Voldemort murder Lupin's best friends, refuses to agree with Harry that anyone can possibly deserve such a punishment. Yet not only does Snape later wish to consign Sirius to that fate, and revel in his fear (Sirius, who does not fear death, does fear the Kiss), he tries to rush it without going through proper legal procedure. Later, he wants Fudge to reassure him that "the Kiss will be performed immediately ?" I think that this shows an aspect of Snape's nature which those who defend him prefer to overlook _ at least, I haven't seen much discussion of it (apart from mine).

There is no getting away from it _ such an attitude is not just vengeful; it's sick.

(Sorry _ I'm falling asleep here !! .........)


Ann - Sep 8, 2006 5:27 am (#187 of 2959)
Vulture, Remus says when he's explaining the Kiss to Harry (when he's talking with him about dementors--sorry, but my book is not to hand) that the Ministry has already approved the administration of the Kiss to Sirius, presumably through proper legal channels. It's not surprising that Remus, who had been close friends with Sirius until the Potter's murder, was bothered by the idea of the administration of the Kiss even when he thought Sirius was guilty.

But Snape has always hated Sirius, and with some reason (the man manipulated him into following a werewolf, after all, and he would have died or contracted Lycanthropy if James hadn't saved him). If, as many of us believe, he loved Lily, that would make him doubly vengeful--the more so in that (in his view) Sirius circumvented the protection that he himself had advised to compensate for having inadvertently set Voldemort after the Potters in the first place. So it's not surprising that he is anxious to have him Kissed.

Harry shares Snape's opinion about this, incidentally, at least in that conversation with Remus. Are you saying he's sick, too?


wynnleaf - Sep 8, 2006 6:51 am (#188 of 2959)
Yet not only does Snape later wish to consign Sirius to that fate, and revel in his fear (Sirius, who does not fear death, does fear the Kiss), he tries to rush it without going through proper legal procedure. Later, he wants Fudge to reassure him that "the Kiss will be performed immediately ?" I think that this shows an aspect of Snape's nature which those who defend him prefer to overlook _ at least, I haven't seen much discussion of it (apart from mine).

First, I agree with Ann.

There are two aspects I'd like to address. 1. The kiss itself seems particularly cruel to some and Sirius does seem to fear it more than death. 2. Not going through proper legal procedure.

Snape thoroughly hates Sirius and I think we'll ultimately find that his hatred at that moment was not solely regarding the werewolf prank, but also for what he thought was Sirius' part in the Potter's deaths. I think Snape wanted to see Sirius get this particularly cruel punishment.

But we have to remember that the WW doesn't seem to have capital punishment, and Sirius had already shown an ability to escape prison. Of course, Snape just wants something horrific to happen to him, regardless. But actually, it does seem to be the next step for a person who is considered a mass murderer and can't be held in Azkaban. And Harry is perfectly willing for Sirius to be kissed as well.

Now as regards legal procedure... actually, in spite of his threats (Snape commonly uses threats that are over-the-top so it's not surprising he'd threaten Sirius and Lupin the same way), Snape actually does get the opportunity to take Sirius directly to the dementors, but he doesn't do it. He put him on a stretcher and took him to the castle instead.

However, as regards legal procedure, remember that Lupin and Sirius were both about to take the law into their own hands in the Shrieking Shack and kill Pettigrew right there and then. While one might excuse Sirius, who was sort of unbalanced anyway, Lupin had just been showing great clarity of thought in his long discussion and explanations. Lupin, at least, was making a calm and rational decision to kill Pettigrew without any legal process, and even without anyone else even knowing that he was the traitor.

So was Snape awful to want Sirius to get the kiss? Maybe. But he also had a lot of reason to hate him at the moment, and seemed to want him to get the worst that the WW had to offer in terms of punishment. Did he circumvent legal procedure? He threatened to, but having the opportunity, he did not.

Did Harry want Sirius kissed? Originally yes, but later, no. And he didn't want Pettigrew killed out of hand either.

Lupin? Lupin didn't seem to want Sirius kissed. But he was perfectly willing to circumvent legal procedure and kill Pettigrew.


Vulture - Sep 8, 2006 9:12 am (#189 of 2959)
Now as regards legal procedure... actually, in spite of his threats (Snape commonly uses threats that are over-the-top so it's not surprising he'd threaten Sirius and Lupin the same way), Snape actually does get the opportunity to take Sirius directly to the dementors, but he doesn't do it. He put him on a stretcher and took him to the castle instead. (wynnleaf - Sep 8, 2006 7:51 am (#188))

Actually, that's a good point, Wynnleaf _ I had forgotten that. Yes, it was chiefly the total illegality that bothered me _ I didn't expect Snape to shed any tears over what the Dementors had been already authorised to do, but it bothered me that he seemed to want to rush the victim to that fate without going through proper procedure. I know it seems uselessly nit-picky, but it raised all sorts of questions in my mind.

But you're right _ no matter what Snape's intentions were in the Shack (and unless that explainer-of-all, Book 7, says something, we'll never know), there is no disputing the fact that, when he woke up, he did put Sirius on a stretcher and did follow correct procedure _ and though it wasn't his intention, that choice did allow Sirius's life to be saved.


haymoni - Sep 8, 2006 9:18 am (#190 of 2959)
He also had a handful of kids to deal with also. He couldn't leave them while he took Sirius to the dementors and he wouldn't be able to take the kids inside without answering a bunch of questions, so he took them all in.

I'm sure his head hurt a bit also, so he may not have been up to delivering Sirius Black to the dementors.


Last edited by Mona on Fri Jun 03, 2011 2:45 am; edited 1 time in total
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 191 to 220

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 12:29 am

Ann - Sep 8, 2006 10:03 am (#191 of 2959)
Lupin drank a little more butterbeer, then said, "It's the fate that awaits Sirius Black. It was in the Daily Prophet this morning. The Ministry have given the dementors permission to perform [the Kiss] if they find him." PoA 12 (p 247 US edition).

Vulture: "I didn't expect Snape to shed any tears over what the Dementors had been already authorised to do, but it bothered me that he seemed to want to rush the victim to that fate without going through proper procedure."

There is no further procedure to go through. If the dementors find Sirius, they're authorized to Kiss him. Snape would have been quite justified within the law to take Sirius to the dementors, as he threatened. His suggestion that they might kiss Remus, too, was a bit over the top--but it would be the dementors who were in the wrong if they kissed Remus, since they haven't got clearance to do so.


Colette - Sep 8, 2006 11:22 am (#192 of 2959)
Seeing how the Dementors tried to kiss Harry and Hermione without authorization, if they were in the mood to kiss Remus, they would've. I imagine the horrors of his life would be quite attractive to them.


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 8, 2006 3:51 pm (#193 of 2959)
If the Dementors had kissed Remus, or Harry, or Hermione, it wouldn't have been Snape's fault. It would have been theirs. They only had clearance to kiss Sirius. Taking anyone to them is a moot point, since they had been allowed on the grounds by the Ministry in the first place.


Ann - Sep 8, 2006 7:57 pm (#194 of 2959)
That was basically my point--it can't really be argued that Snape is sick or immoral or ignoring proper Ministry procedures on the basis of his attitude towards Sirius receiving the kiss.


Solitaire - Sep 9, 2006 1:13 pm (#195 of 2959)
I hope I'm not going to get screamed at, but it occurs to me to wonder if there's a gender divide over views of all this

Not by me, Vulture. I don't have the problem with Lily and James--even after her comments and looks at him in the Pensieve scene--that some others (including Harry) tend to have. I chalk up her change in sentiment toward James to the maturing process. I assume James has grown up a bit and cleaned up his act considerably by the time he and Lily become a couple. People change.

If the Dementors had kissed Remus, or Harry, or Hermione, it wouldn't have been Snape's fault. It would have been theirs. They only had clearance to kiss Sirius.

Dumbledore talks to the kids about the Dementors that first night at the welcoming feast. "... I must make it plain that nobody is to leave school without permission. Dementors are not to be fooled by tricks or disguises -- or even Invisibility Cloaks ... It is not in the nature of a dementor to understand pleading or excuses. I therefore warn each and every one of you to give them no reason to harm you. I look to the prefects, and our new Head Boy and Girl, to make sure that no student runs afoul of the dementors," he said.

From this speech, I gather any victims of Dementors--other than Sirius, at this point--would have been considered by the Ministry as responsible for their own fates. After all, they had been warned.

I actually wonder about how much "control" even the Ministry ever had over the Dementors, even when they were supposedly under Ministry jurisdiction. After all, Umbridge sent them after Harry. I seriously doubt they were told to go after Dudley, a Muggle ... yet they did. Fudge says they are "completely out of control." I wonder if they ever really were in control.

Solitaire


Catherine - Sep 9, 2006 1:54 pm (#196 of 2959)
If the Dementors had kissed Remus, or Harry, or Hermione, it wouldn't have been Snape's fault. It would have been theirs. They only had clearance to kiss Sirius. Taking anyone to them is a moot point, since they had been allowed on the grounds by the Ministry in the first place.--Die Zimtzicke

Whose fault would it be? The dementors' fault, or Harry, Hermione, or Remus's fault?

I thought Dumbledore forbade the Dementors to be on the actual Hogwarts grounds. I believe they were supposed to stay at the entrances. Since when does Snape have the authority to deliver anyone to the dementors?


Vulture - Sep 9, 2006 2:18 pm (#197 of 2959)
Edited Sep 9, 2006 3:48 pm
'Lupin drank a little more butterbeer, then said, "It's the fate that awaits Sirius Black. It was in the Daily Prophet this morning. The Ministry have given the dementors permission to perform [the Kiss] if they find him." PoA 12 (p 247 US edition).'

Vulture: "I didn't expect Snape to shed any tears over what the Dementors had been already authorised to do, but it bothered me that he seemed to want to rush the victim to that fate without going through proper procedure."

There is no further procedure to go through. If the dementors find Sirius, they're authorized to Kiss him. Snape would have been quite justified within the law to take Sirius to the dementors, as he threatened. His suggestion that they might kiss Remus, too, was a bit over the top--but it would be the dementors who were in the wrong if they kissed Remus, since they haven't got clearance to do so. (Ann - Sep 8, 2006 11:03 am (#191))

Well, in my view, the correct procedure was that Sirius would be dealt with as authorised once he was in the hands of authorised representatives of the law. Snape wasn't one; the Dementors were, so was Fudge _ and Dumbledore appears to be accorded a role of political authority beyond his role as Headmaster, despite his own lack of desire for any formal role.

Now, it's important to remember that Sirius had surrendered _ he said he would "come quietly" if they went up to the castle. At the castle, Fudge would follow procedure and hand him to the Dementors, as far as Snape knew.

I know it's nit-picky, but I think that there was a small legal procedural point involved. I also think that even a personality like Snape's, even with all his grievances, and even believing in Sirius's guilt, should have mercy when it's a question of the Dementors. The only way I could see Snape's words being defensible is if Wynnleaf is right and it was simply an empty threat to scare Sirius. Various people's posts since my last one leave me unsure what Snape's true intentions were. What's new, eh ?! :-)

His suggestion that they might kiss Remus, too, was a bit over the top--but it would be the dementors who were in the wrong if they kissed Remus, since they haven't got clearance to do so. (Ann - Sep 8, 2006 11:03 am (#191))

I personally think that it's more than "over the top" _ it's completely unacceptable on grounds of both mercy (see what I said about mercy, above) and wizard law. Even werewolves have some rights under wizard law, as far as I know, and Lupin's only offence (in the law's eyes) was to have helped a wanted criminal on the run. I think that would get him time in Azkaban, not a Dementor's Kiss. In any case, that decision was for the Wizengamot, not Snape. Again, we can only hope it was an empty threat.

Incidentally, I don't think it would be good enough for Snape to say "it's the Dementors' fault" if they gave Lupin the Kiss. In Book 3, both Dumbledore and Hagrid make clear to us that nice questions of law, innocence or guilt are not part of a Dementor's make-up. Given Snape's knowledge of Dark Arts, this is something he would certainly know. If they had all gone to the Dementors as Snape seemed to be about to do, the Dementors would have tried to take all of them unless stopped _ presumably Snape intended to do the stopping, for himself and the three students.

I thought Dumbledore forbade the Dementors to be on the actual Hogwarts grounds. I believe they were supposed to stay at the entrances. Since when does Snape have the authority to deliver anyone to the dementors? (Catherine - Sep 9, 2006 2:54 pm (#196))

Exactly. Spot on.


Ann - Sep 9, 2006 4:28 pm (#198 of 2959)
In this case, we do know what's Snape's intentions were, since he didn't turn Sirius over to the dementors, even after the students Stunned him and moved him out of the Shack. Although I suppose it's possible that he changed his mind--he had Ron, Hermione, and Harry to take up to the school as well, by then, which he did.

And, incidentally, it was Snape's suggestion to Lupin that I said was over the top, not the Kiss itself. It was even more obviously an empty threat, although, again, if he'd been letting a dangerous escaped prisoner into a school, as Snape assumes, such a punishment might be legally administered after a proper trial. But of course the dementors would not have been justified in such an action.

Clearly the dementors are a bit out of control, which is why Dumbledore is uneasy about their presence. Dumbledore's warning to the students, however, isn't to avoid the dementors entirely--the students have to pass them when they go into Hogsmeade. He just says, don't give them a reason, don't run afoul of them. But the Dementors aren't supposed to Kiss anyone unless they are authorized to do so (Fudge is shocked that one tried to Kiss Harry, although no one seems surprised when one Kisses Crouch in GoF). There would be no point in ever granting them authorization to Kiss Sirius if they simply Kiss anyone with whom they come into contact. And if that were the case, having them patrol Hogsmeade, and even suggesting that they patrol inside Hogwarts, would have been pure insanity. The fact that the authorization is issued means that they normally are not authorized to do such a thing. We have several instances where the dementors do "go rogue," but obviously they must not do so all the time, or wizards wouldn't use them as guards. However undependable, they are, in fact, part of the wizarding Law Enforcement.

And Sirius is, by all the obvious evidence, a dangerous convicted murderer who has escaped from prison. It's true that we know he's innocent, and he didn't have a proper trial (although Dumbledore says he gave evidence against him, so there must have been some sort of hearing), but his legal status is that of a criminal. Particularly harsh measures are authorized in cases of escaped prisoners by most legal systems, and have clearly been authorized by the Ministry in this case. From that point of view, Snape is simply being a good citizen to turn them over to the branch of Magical Law Enforcement that is searching for him: the dementors. Holding him in the school themselves, while obviously a practical solution when there are injured students to take care of, is completely unnecessary. Calling in Fudge so he can do some political grandstanding was generous of Dumbledore, but not necessary.

My point here (and I feel like I'm beating it into the ground) is that Snape's actions are reasonable. He has clearly lost his emotional control in the Shrieking Shack--and who can blame him, given the history of the werewolf incident, the presence of the two people responsible for it (in his mind, anyway), and the fact that an escaped murderer is, he thinks, Confounding and threatening the lives of three students, including the Boy Who Lived (and Snape knows the first bit of the prophecy, remember). If he loved Lily and believes that Sirius's betrayal is the immediate cause of her death (making him an accessory), his feelings are even more understandable. But his actions are those of a responsible teacher. As always, you have to ignore what Snape says and watch what he does. Harry invariably does the opposite. My point is, since we know what Harry knows, we're seeing things through his eyes. Snape is wrong here, but his actions are not unjustified, much less immoral.


Saracene - Sep 9, 2006 9:43 pm (#199 of 2959)
Regarding Snape's behaviour in the Shack, I believe that the descriptions like "mad glint" and "seemed beyond reason" that were used to describe Snape in those passages indicate just that. Personally I tend to think that Snape was so riled up in that scene that he'd probably do exactly what he threatened to do. He's not a nice or gracious person in the best of circumstances, let alone when he's overcome with anger and thirst for revenge.

I think also that Snape's temper grew progressively worse through the scene with Lupin calling him "a fool", Sirius saying that the joke was on him, Harry calling him "pathetic" and such. And there wasn't one single person in the Shack who Snape trusted or liked or who made the sort of goodwill gesture that Lupin had done for Harry by handing in his wand.

In a way I find Lupin's willingness to execute Pettigrew more unsettling, since, unlike Snape or Sirius, he was one adult who seemed to have stayed calm and cool throughout the whole thing, and the one who was shown to be the nicest and the kindest. I mean, there's really nothing surprising about the way Snape behaved considering his overall personality.


wynnleaf - Sep 10, 2006 5:16 am (#200 of 2959)
Remember how DD looked at Fudge when he discovered that Fudge had Barty, Jr. kissed out of hand? With no due process and with no interrogation to get at the facts? As I recall, the book said that DD looked at Fudge was though seeing him for the first time (or something like that). I wonder what DD thought of Lupin's willingness to kill Pettigrew just as quickly? My point is that Lupin's willingness to kill Pettigrew is really the most questionable of all, because we can easily see how calm Lupin was throughout most of the scene -- discussing the ins and outs of the situation and the facts of everything so rationally.

Anyway, about Snape... I totally agree with Ann and Saracene's comments. In addition, we have to remember that from the first moment the narration mentions a creak in the door -- a signal of Snape's entry into the room -- to the point where Snape reveals himself, all of the comments he had heard were primarily regarding the fact that the Maruaders had all been animagi. Now considering that Snape (along with the whole WW), thought Sirius was a murderer and servant of LV (as a traitor and spy on the Order), Snape was now hearing what he'd consider proof positive that his concerns about Lupin were true. He was hearing Lupin tell about vital information that Snape would have known Lupin had not revealed to Dumbledore during the entire previous nine months he'd been at Hogwarts teaching. This would just confirm in Snape's mind that everything he'd feared about Lupin was true -- that he'd been helping Sirius all along.

By the time Snape revealed himself he would have been convinced that not only was Sirius guilty of everything he was accused of, that Lupin had been helping Sirius all along. Further, Snape would see the immediate evidence of a wounded student (Ron), who Snape could be fairly certain had been wounded in a confrontation with Sirius.

Further, Snape was the only one in the room that seemed to be thinking about the fact that Lupin was about to transform. The first thing he said was to Lupin, about Lupin having forgotten his potion. Is it any wonder that within just a few moments he would bind Lupin all over? He was expecting the guy to transform soon, after all.

Further, it could be that Snape thought Lupin was probably well aware that he was about to transform, especially since Snape had just reminded him. So that would make Lupin seem even more culpable, because he was standing there encouraging the kids to have a nice long chat while he was about to transform. Snape would, if he had time to think, know that Sirius and Lupin could escape after Lupin transformed as Lupin had just explained, while Snape was in the room, how Sirius in animagus form was safe from the werewolf.

Is it any wonder that with all that Snape would see before him, he should think that the kids had been confunded?

Snape definitely lost his temper in a big way, but I agree with Saracene that his fury seemed to grow with all of the things Sirius, Lupin and Harry said to him. In the face of what he thought was going on, those comments would be absolutely infuriating.

By the way, Snape always had more people to be concerned with than just Sirius, even if he'd been able to take Sirius and Lupin out when he originally wanted to. Ron was injured, and there were Harry and Hermione, and -- as Snape seems to recognize -- Lupin was about to transform.

Snape very regularly makes threats that he's highly unlikely to actually follow through on. In this case, I wouldn't call them "over-the-top" threats, because in his mind, Sirius should have been kissed, and Lupin was helping a mass murderer, had betrayed DD's trust all year, and was subjecting innocent people to his transformation into a werewolf. But while I think Snape thought they both deserved the dementors, it's unlikely that he'd have actually called the dementors. Particularly when he didn't do it later when he actually had the chance.

This is a very important distinction. Snape made a lot of threats while absolutely furious, but given the opportunity to have Sirius kissed, Snape took him to the castle. Lupin made his decision to kill Pettigrew in calm rationality and given the opportunity to kill Pettigrew without any legal proceedings or even telling anyone else, Lupin was going to do it.


Soul Search - Sep 10, 2006 7:02 am (#201 of 2959)
Well said, wynnleaf. I think it particularly important that Snape could have called the dementors, as he threatened, but didn't. In the shack, he was making threats for effect. He might have wanted to take Sirius and Lupin to the dementors, but reason prevailed when he had the chance.

We might keep this incident in mind when judging Snape in other situations. For example, he threatens Harry with expulsion on a few occasions, but would he have followed through? I judge that the threat was for effect, Snape knowing that expulsion from Hogwarts, his "home," was, in Harry's mind, the worst thing that could ever happen.


Ann - Sep 10, 2006 8:20 am (#202 of 2959)
Good points, wynnleaf. It hadn't occurred to me that the whole Animagus discussion not only prevented them getting to the murder of the Potters while Snape was listening, but also meant Snape heard that Sirius was an Animagus, which would have confirmed his opinion of Remus's guilt. And he did hold out on Dumbledore.

And I'd forgotten about Ron being already badly hurt before Snape was Stunned. I was trying to make the point that Snape could have changed his mind because of the injured students. I stand corrected. So we know he didn't intend to carry out his threats, since circumstances were essentially the same, later, and he didn't. Although I still think he would have been doing nothing illegal or immoral, given what he thought he knew (much of it from Dumbledore), if if he hadn't.

As for Remus. He talks calmly, but I think he must be seething. I wouldn't try to excuse his and Sirius's intention to kill Wormtail, but one can certainly understand it. Dumbledore suggests that Harry was right to stop it, because of the Life Debt thing and because it was what his father would have done. When Harry says, realizing that he's sent Voldemort's servant to him, that he should have let them kill Pettigrew, Dumbledore does not say, "How could you, Harry? That would be vigilante justice! That would be wrong!" It's my impression that the wizarding world was a little more like the Old West than modern America or (more) Britain. After all, everyone is essentially armed all the time.

On the other hand, I've always wondered what curse they were planning to use. The Avada Kedavra? And I'm even more curious what Harry thought he was going to do, holding his wand to Sirius's heart and intending to kill him when they first arrived. He didn't even know about the AK at that point.


rambkowalczyk - Sep 11, 2006 4:11 am (#203 of 2959)
It is interesting to note that there is a difference between what Snape says or threatens and what Snape does. The previous posters have given good examples. Perhaps if there is a twist to this story it will be that what we thought we saw in the astronomy tower(Snape killing Dumbledore) is not what really happened. In spite of this I still tend to believe that Snape did kill Dumbledore and Harry needs to forgive him.

There is also another incidence that might be reinterpreted. in book 7:Snape's worse memory.

There's a fan fiction story that make a very interesting point about Snape's worse memory as well as an offbeat hypothesis of what really happened. Her theory was that Snape was not as helpless as we were lead to believe. In fact the part that Harry didn't see, Snape was actually victorious against the 4. James' face was still bleeding from the sectumsempera curse, and he negotiated healing that cut with the promise that they would leave him alone in the future. This incident was what prompted Sirius to tempt Snape to follow Lupin. The point of this post is not her theory but her fact and that was that Snape for the most part had his wand with him.

It starts when James calls to Snape. Snape reaches for his wand. In fact it says "as though he had been expecting an attack:" James says expelliarmus and Snape loses his wand. James does the Impedimenta spell and then taunts and insults him. Snape swears and tries to hex him but since he is without his wand, he is ineffective.

James then uses the scourgify charm. Lily steps in, demands James to stop. James offers her a deal. She rejects him. Meanwhile Snape had retrieved his wand, gashes James' face. James flips Snape. (Note Snape has his wand)

Lily almost laughs, but tells James to let him down. Snape falls,"...he got quickly to his feet, wand up..." Sirius does the Locomotor mortis. Snape falls (presumably wand in hand). Lily shouts "leave him alone" James removes the curse and says lucky that Evans was here. Snape insults Lily who insults him back.

James demands an apology. Lily tells James off almost implying that what James did was worse than what Snape said. After Lily leaves, James tries to act nonchalant but after Sirius correctly notes that Lily thinks that James is conceited, James gets angry and flips Snape and threatened to take off Snape's underwear.

At the very end when Snape is upside down and they are threatening to remove Snapes underwear, Snape has to have had his wand. He is not completely helpless. I had to reread this to be sure.

Some people have wondered if Snape had intended Harry to actually see this scene as proof that his father was a bully. Although I think that theory is contrived, I think there is more to this memory that meets the eye.

There is the possibility that Snape was deliberately following James and the gang to look for evidence to get them in trouble. Did Snape hear the werewolf comments made after the OWLS? This might explain why he reacted so quickly when James originally called out to him.

Snape very quickly hexed James after the impedimentia hex wore off but he didn't hex anyone after James removed the locomotor curse. Actually this was when he called Lily a Mudblood. Did Snape call her a mudblood because James said he should be grateful Lily was here or because he noticed that she almost laughed when he was upside down? Could Snape have noticed that she had a momentary smirk when he was flipped? His robes covered his head. Did he just assumed she laughed with everyone else or was there 'something' in her tone of voice when she said "let him down"? 'something' that Harry didn't notice.

While James tells Snape to apologize to Lily and Lily tells James off, Snape had the opportunity to hex someone. Lily leaves, and James and Sirius still talk and again Snape has the opportunity to hex someone but doesn't, why??? Was Snape upset by what he said to Lily, or was this just the first time that his curse was used against him?


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 11, 2006 6:24 am (#204 of 2959)
I agree that there is often a difference between what Snape says and what he does. He says horrible things to Harry, but he has several times done things that protected Harry, as we all know.

Another idea about Snape and the dementors...I have always suspected, though I can't prove it, that the Dementors were never really loyal to the Ministry. I think they were out for themselves. They finally left Azkaban when it wa no longer the most advantageous place to be. Could this be true and could Snape have either known or suspected it?


haymoni - Sep 11, 2006 6:37 am (#205 of 2959)
Dumbledore certainly suspected it. He told Fudge as much at the end of GOF. Even if it wasn't Snape's original thought, I'm sure he knew of Dumbledore's feelings on the subject.


Ann - Sep 12, 2006 3:56 am (#206 of 2959)
And Voldemort suspects it--he calls them "our natural allies" at the end of GoF.


Vulture - Sep 17, 2006 4:33 pm (#207 of 2959)
I think it particularly important that Snape could have called the dementors, as he threatened, but didn't. In the shack, he was making threats for effect. He might have wanted to take Sirius and Lupin to the dementors, but reason prevailed when he had the chance.

We might keep this incident in mind when judging Snape in other situations. (Soul Search - Sep 10, 2006 8:02 am (#201))

It just occurs to me: how did Fudge know that the Dementors had tried to administer the Kiss to innocent people ? He wouldn't believe anything Sirius said, and the Trio were unconscious. Therefore, either Snape told him, or he or somebody else (Dumbledore ?) came out of the castle in time to see.

Now, we know (from Harry's observations after going back in time) that Snape only seemed to recover consciousness after he (Harry) had driven off the Dementors. Therefore, either Fudge and/or others were there to observe what the Dementors did, or Snape was conscious enough, early enough, to observe them himself.

In the first case, Snape would have had to go by the form-book and bring Sirius and the Trio to the castle. In the second, there is the question of why Snape, if conscious, did nothing to fight the Dementors. But OK, giving benefit of the doubt _ if he was conscious but a bit groggy, he would have seen enough to realise (if he didn't already know) that taking Sirius and the Trio to the Dementors carried the risk of being attacked himself, or at least, losing one or more of the Trio and having to face awkward questions afterwards. Besides, the Dementors had been driven a considerable distance away.

In either case, we have a situation which does not offer cast-iron proof about Snape's original intentions.

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

Here's what I think happened: when Snape first cornered Sirius and Lupin, I think he was so sure of Sirius's guilt that he probably would have been in favour of dragging them off to Fudge and have Sirius given the Kiss, Lupin arrested, and himself covered in glory. But Sirius's offer to "come quietly" if "the boy brings his rat up to the castle" did two things: firstly, it introduced a doubt _ why should this arch-criminal be confident enough to "come quietly" ? Secondly, the way Sirius phrased his answer ("the joke's on you again, Snivellus") upped the ante in the battle of wills _ it was a total mistake by Sirius, because I agree with Snape's defenders on this much: it did anger Snape more than he need have been. But I'm not convinced that this really makes a difference, because I believe Snape would still have reacted as he did to Sirius's "come quietly" offer.

How do we know that Snape knew the implications of the rat business ? _ because he knew enough to mention the "fairytale" of Pettigrew being a rat, etc., to Fudge before Harry or Hermione opened their mouths after regaining consciousness. How could he know this unless he had understood what Sirius and Lupin were claiming in the Shack ?

But, you may say, knowing the rat allegation doesn't mean he believed it. Ah, but I'm afraid ye all have done an excellent job of proving that Snape had heard all about the Marauders being Animagi. So he knew that Pettigrew had been able to transform into something. But, you may say, that doesn't mean he knew that Peter was still alive. Really ? _ Sirius, his arch-enemy, first ever jailbreaker from Azkaban, having eluded the Ministry for months and pulled various violent stunts around Hogwarts, suddenly makes a rat his reason for surrender, and I'm supposed to believe that one of the cleverest and most calculating wizards in JKR's books utterly fails to make any connection with what he's JUST HEARD about Animagi ?

His threat to go straight to the Dementors comes in direct response to Sirius's offer to "come quietly" to the castle. Let's ask ourselves _ what difference, in pure cold logic, is there between going straight to the Dementors and going to them (in effect) via the castle ? I can only think of one _ the direct route avoids that meddling old moralist, Dumbledore. Why should Snape fear Dumbledore, if he's sure that Sirius is guilty ? After all, Fudge can be relied on to keep Sirius in Azkaban if proof of innocence isn't cast-iron _ the wizarding public would have his head otherwise.

I remember, in some crime thriller, Humphrey Bogart saying that it's not any one of the little things in themselves _ "but look at the number of them". Snape has no logical answer to Sirius's agreement to surrender if the rat is taken to the castle. He has no logical answer to Harry's point (which is before his shouting "pathetic") that Lupin could have killed him many times. We know he knew about the "fairytale" of Pettigrew being a rat. He shuts Lupin up when Lupin protests Sirius's innocence. He tries to shut Harry up when Harry does the same. He cannot stand hearing what Hermione has to say, either in the Shack or at the castle, despite her being completely polite and logical _ why ? _ in both cases, what she was about to do was apply cool reason: why is this the last thing Snape _ that calculating Occlumens who values logic over emotion _ wants to hear ?

If his threats are empty bluster and he's just an old softy trying to frighten his enemies, why is he so desperate for reassurance from Fudge that "the Kiss will be performed immediately" ? _ no enemies are present when he asks that. "I only hope Dumbledore isn't going to make difficulties" he says _ why would he think Dumbledore could possibly make difficulties about a formal Ministry decision if he (Snape) has no doubt about Sirius's guilt ?

No, I don't buy it. Snape wanted Sirius "worse than dead", innocent or guilty.


wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 9:05 pm (#208 of 2959)
Sirius, his arch-enemy, first ever jailbreaker from Azkaban, having eluded the Ministry for months and pulled various violent stunts around Hogwarts, suddenly makes a rat his reason for surrender,

Vulture, you make it sound like Sirius' offer to come quietly was some sort of offer to "surrender" -- a bargain offer from Sirius. The man had no wand. Basically, he was already Snape's prisoner. He had no bargaining power and the "come quietly" offer was really useless and of no benefit to Snape. Snape could bind him just like he did Lupin. Snape didn't need an offer to come quietly (or at least, he wouldn't think he did, not knowing that the trio was about to zap him). From his standpoint, Sirius' offer to "come quietly" could just sound like a tactic to stay away from the dementors -- not a reasoned plea to check out a rat.

I think one of the biggest reasons why Snape would never have believed Sirius and Lupin is the sheer magnitude of how ridiculously unbelievable it must have seemed that Lupin was there innocently. Snape finds Lupin, who would have been taking wolfsbane for days, then neglected his last dose, there in the Shack supposedly forgetting all about becoming a werewolf, all the while discussing being a werewolf. Snape goes to the shack and finds 3 students, one with an obviously broken leg, almost certainly inflicted by one of the adults.

He gets to hear Lupin tell all about crucial information that he had kept secret from Dumbledore throughout the school year.

Then Snape takes off the cloak and looks right at Lupin and reminds him that he forgot to take his wolfsbane. But Lupin does nothing like "oh, my gosh, you're right!" He just keeps right on with wanting to talk. So naturally Snape ties him up (a good safety measure given that Snape seems to be the only person who realizes that Lupin's about to transform, other than Lupin -- oh yeah, he forgot again after Snape reminded him?)

Anyway, Snape is faced with 1) Sirius -- who even DD thought a mass murderer, who had also been seen brandishing a knife over Ron and slashing a painting 2) a student, Ron, almost certainly just injured by either Sirius or Lupin 3) a self-confessed betrayer of DD's trust, Lupin, who had clearly kept information secret that could have helped in the capture of Sirius and 4) Lupin is also an about-to-transform werewolf that is taking zero precautions for his upcoming transformation.

Snape has Lupin tied up and Sirius unarmed with Snape's wand trained on him. And now he's supposed to believe Lupin and Sirius' protestations about a rat? After only just learning of Lupin's betrayal of DD's trust all year?

But we know Snape did in fact carry Sirius to the castle later.

By the way, on Fudge's knowledge of what the dementors did:

"What amazes me most is the behavior of the dementors... you've really no idea what made them retreat, Snape?" "No, Minister... by the time I had come 'round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances..."

Fudge must have found out about the dementors trying to kiss Harry through DD. Fudge mentions it just as he's finally about to leave Hogwarts. Dumbledore had talked with Sirius before Harry and Hermione had even woken up. So Dumbledore would have to be the one to have told Fudge.

So that leaves Snape waking up next to the Whomping Willow with the dementors gone, never having seen how dangerous they acted with Sirius and Harry, and no pesky Fudge around to necessitate Snape's doing the right thing, but he still manages to do the right thing anyway and took Sirius (on a stretcher no less, much kinder than Sirius was to him), and the others to the castle.

However, just in case anyone should wonder if everyone would have done the right thing, just remember that Lupin -- decribed in the immediately preceeding pages as courteous, quiet, casual, pleasant, light and casual, cold, even; and then finally as he got ready to kill Peter, grim and quiet, was only seconds away from killing Peter in cold blood -- no castle, no Dumbledore, no Fudge, no dementors, no legal proceedings. Nothing. And he was going to do it. Sirius I can excuse, but not Lupin, not in such calm, cold blood.

Snape shouted, fumed, and said insulting things, but he didn't really do what he threatened, not even when given the opportunity. Lupin was casual, pleasant, calm, and finally grim -- and he was going to kill Peter.


Saracene - Sep 18, 2006 2:22 am (#209 of 2959)
Vulture:

---Now, we know (from Harry's observations after going back in time) that Snape only seemed to recover consciousness after he (Harry) had driven off the Dementors. Therefore, either Fudge and/or others were there to observe what the Dementors did, or Snape was conscious enough, early enough, to observe them himself.---

In the book, Snape told Fudge that by the time he had come round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances. So maybe Snape had recovered after Harry drove off the Dementors, but before they disappeared from the scene completely.

---How do we know that Snape knew the implications of the rat business ? _ because he knew enough to mention the "fairytale" of Pettigrew being a rat, etc., to Fudge before Harry or Hermione opened their mouths after regaining consciousness. How could he know this unless he had understood what Sirius and Lupin were claiming in the Shack ?---

I went and had a *very* careful look at the text and this is not in fact correct.

Snape tells Fudge that Harry and his friends's behaviour looked to him as if they "seemed to think there was a possibility he (Sirius) was innocent". But he makes *no* mention whatsoever of Pettigrew and the rat, in any context. Then Harry and Hermione gain consciousness and try to tell Fudge, in a rather breathless manner, that Sirius is innocent, that Pettigrew faked his death and that he's Ron's rat who's really an Animagus.

Snape's remark (to Dumbledore, not Fudge) about the "fairytale" of Pettigrew and the rat comes *after* he's heard Harry and Hermione's attempts to explain everything to the Minister.

---in both cases, what she was about to do was apply cool reason: why is this the last thing Snape _ that calculating Occlumens who values logic over emotion _ wants to hear ?---

Occlumency is more about control over emotions rather than logic, though. And Snape has displayed on number of occasions in these series that, despite being a superb Occlumens his emotions can take the better of him.

And I wouldn't expect cool logic from a person who, going by the description from the book, has a "mad glint in his eye"/eyes "gleaming fanatically", seems "beyond reason", looks "deranged" and repeatedly screams in All Caps. Nor it is surprising IMO that such person would not want to listen to calm logic.

I think that some time after the events of PoA DD took Snape aside quietly and told him the whole story about the switch of the Secret Keepers - which was BTW something that was never mentioned around Snape in the Shack or later at Hogwarts.


Vulture - Sep 18, 2006 5:39 am (#210 of 2959)
Vulture, you make it sound like Sirius' offer to come quietly was some sort of offer to "surrender" -- a bargain offer from Sirius. (wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 10:05 pm (#208))

No, look, please _ I don't "make it sound" like anything except the exact words I used. Maybe it's just me, but I'm very, very careful about what I put in posts: I weigh every line, every word, for possible counter-argument (not that that stops the rest of ye !!). So if I didn't use the words "bargain offer", I didn't mean them. I don't agree that "Snape didn't need an offer to come quietly" _ Sirius's reaction to the Trio's zapping is that they should have left Snape to him. Empty boasting, you may say _ well, we'll never know for certain, but if I was there, I certainly would feel a lot better about a prisoner like Sirius if he wanted to "come quietly".

But none of this is relevant to my point, which is that it was clear to Snape that Sirius was making a big issue of "the rat".

Fudge must have found out about the dementors trying to kiss Harry through DD. (wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 10:05 pm (#208))

How would Dumbledore know, any more than Fudge would, unless at least one of them was there to observe it ? If that's what you're saying, then the observer was near enough that Snape would not be in any position to cart Sirius off to the Dementors at the gate without so much as a backward look _ he would have to go by the form-book. As Catherine (I think it was) pointed out, Snape has no authority to deliver people to the Dementors (particularly with everything a Dark Arts expert would know about them).

If there was no observer, then the only way Fudge could know about the Dementors trying to Kiss Harry would be from Snape observing it _ in which case, why did he do nothing to defend Harry ? If you answer that he was conscious but a bit groggy, then _ as I said already _ he would have seen enough to realise that taking Sirius and the Trio to the Dementors carried the risk of being attacked himself, or at least, losing one or more of the Trio and having to face awkward questions afterwards.

In either case, in my opinion, we have a situation which does not offer cast-iron proof about Snape's original intentions.

Snape has Lupin tied up and Sirius unarmed with Snape's wand trained on him. And now he's supposed to believe Lupin and Sirius' protestations about a rat? After only just learning of Lupin's betrayal of DD's trust all year? (wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 10:05 pm (#208))

What had he got to lose ? If he's so sure that Sirius is guilty, even after the rat is mentioned, what has he to lose ? After all, his defenders claim that he always meant to take them to the castle and that any threats he made were just for effect. So why is he so desperate to close down all discussion of the rat or anything that sounds contrary to Sirius being guilty ? Couldn't he just tie up Lupin and Sirius, snap at the Trio something like "you can tell all that rubbish to Dumbledore and Fudge" and drag the whole crew up to the castle ? (In fact, I'm sure he was going to do that at first, because he says triumphantly to Lupin, "I shall be interested to see how Dumbledore takes this ...". But he changes tack the minute Sirius brings up the rat.)

Most of all _ why is Snape in such a hurry ?

No, I'm sorry _ but I don't buy it. All the speculation about Snape's emotions, and what he must have thought, is impossible to prove or disprove because it's not in the text. In my opinion, the one explanation that makes all of Snape's recorded actions and words clear, consistent and logical is the desire to avoid Dumbledore at all costs until Sirius is beyond help.

I think the thing we all have to keep in mind is what Lupin, in effect, said to Harry when both still believed Sirius to be guilty _ that no-one deserves the Dementors' Kiss. Nothing justifies it _ nothing excuses it, not Lily's eyes, being hung upside down, any other convoluted love-and-revenge theory _ nothing. If it turns out that in Book 6, Snape murdered Dumbledore for the worst reasons, that's as nothing compared to what he wanted to do here. Simply killing Sirius would be far easier to forgive.

However, just in case anyone should wonder if everyone would have done the right thing, just remember that Lupin .... (wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 10:05 pm (#208))

What Sirius and Lupin did or intended to do is not the point. Two wrongs don't make a right _ and at worst, Sirius and Lupin never tried to get Peter a Dementor's Kiss. My focus here is on Snape, not least because this is the Snape thread and I want to keep my posts from getting too long !! (But I might put a comment on Lupin's thread if I get time.)

In the book, Snape told Fudge that by the time he had come round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances. So maybe Snape had recovered after Harry drove off the Dementors, but before they disappeared from the scene completely. (Saracene - Sep 18, 2006 3:22 am (#209))

No problem _ but then who observed the Dementors trying to Kiss Harry ? Either Fudge did or somebody told him. The answer can be plugged in to my 2 paragraphs above beginning "How would Dumbledore know, any more than Fudge would ...".

Snape tells Fudge that Harry and his friends's behaviour looked to him as if they "seemed to think there was a possibility he (Sirius) was innocent". But he makes *no* mention whatsoever of Pettigrew and the rat, in any context. Then Harry and Hermione gain consciousness and try to tell Fudge, in a rather breathless manner, that Sirius is innocent, that Pettigrew faked his death and that he's Ron's rat who's really an Animagus. (Saracene - Sep 18, 2006 3:22 am (#209))

Well done _ you got me on that one !! Nevertheless, as I said in #207, various people "have done an excellent job of proving that Snape had heard all about the Marauders being Animagi. So he knew that Pettigrew had been able to transform into something. But, you may say, that doesn't mean he knew that Peter was still alive. Really ? _ Sirius, his arch-enemy, first ever jailbreaker from Azkaban, having eluded the Ministry for months and pulled various violent stunts around Hogwarts, suddenly makes a rat his reason for surrender, and I'm supposed to believe that one of the cleverest and most calculating wizards in JKR's books utterly fails to make any connection with what he's JUST HEARD about Animagi ?"

So yes, I was wrong in saying that Snape's "fairytale" remark came before Harry and/or Hermione spoke. But I still feel that Snape had heard enough to connect the Animagus information with Sirius's remarks about the rat. He might even have put the "Wormtail" he had read on the Map together with all that, too _ we're always hearing how good he is at putting two and two together.

And I wouldn't expect cool logic from a person who, going by the description from the book, has a "mad glint in his eye"/eyes "gleaming fanatically", seems "beyond reason", looks "deranged" and repeatedly screams in All Caps. Nor it is surprising IMO that such person would not want to listen to calm logic. (Saracene - Sep 18, 2006 3:22 am (#209))

Trouble is, I can see a consistent logic to what Snape does _ he may be angry, but if (as I believe) he wanted to get Sirius Kissed, he doesn't do anything stupid. (Mind you, I never felt that the mad-glint stuff was JKR's best writing, any more than at the end of Book 6.)


wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 8:08 am (#211 of 2959)
Vulture,

You said, But none of this is relevant to my point, which is that it was clear to Snape that Sirius was making a big issue of "the rat".

If you read further, after Snape is unconscious, to where Peter is human and begging and pleading that he's innocent, you'll notice how he comes across. We, the readers, know he's guilty by then. Sirius and Lupin know it. For all Peter's protestations and begging, he just sounds like a guilty coward trying to escape just punishment; sliding down the slope to doom and trying to find any purchase that will gain him some hope. Well, I think that's the way Snape probably thought of Sirius' comments about the rat -- an obvious clear murderer, with his clearly guilty accomplice, begging for anything that will gain him a little time to try and escape or otherwise get out of his just punishment. That's why I said that I didn't think Snape would see Sirius' words as a true "offer," as he hadn't really anything to offer that was of benefit to Snape (coming quietly didn't matter much when Snape could just bind him). Snape thought Sirius was simply trying to buy time -- which in a way he was, it's just that, unlike Peter, he had true cause.

Um, why exactly should Snape believe the offer of a mass murderer, escaped from prison, just injured a student, to go quietly???

Most of all _ why is Snape in such a hurry ?

You're calling it being in a hurry to take Sirius to the very next step in his legal journey - the dementors. While that would have been a grievous error, it was the next step for Sirius, and Snape would not have been acting hurriedly to move toward that step. To take Sirius to Dumbledore is to actually prolong and extend the steps of dealing with Sirius, beyond the legal requirements (I'll use that loosely, since the WW never followed good legal proceedings in the first place, but that's not Snape's problem). What Sirius was asking was for Snape to allow extra steps -- no dementors until he'd talked to Dumbledore. Given the situation Snape was in, I would not blame him for expecting Sirius to be asking this solely to gain time in order to somehow escape justice.

I think the thing we all have to keep in mind is what Lupin, in effect, said to Harry when both still believed Sirius to be guilty _ that no-one deserves the Dementors' Kiss.

I may be wrong. I don't have my book here. But I don't think Lupin said that. I believe he only questioned Harry as to whether Harry thought it was justified. I don't think he gave a direct opinion.

No problem _ but then who observed the Dementors trying to Kiss Harry ? Either Fudge did or somebody told him.

Dumbledore talked to Sirius before anyone else. Apparently Dumbledore told Fudge (probably not saying that he'd gotten the story from Black), since it's obvious that Snape didn't and Fudge didn't appear to have been there as he was asking about what happened.

But the primary point in the Fudge question, Vulture, is that Fudge wasn't there necessitating Snape to do the right thing. Nor was Snape awake to see how dangerous the dementors were, so he didn't avoid calling them because of that. Those were your two reasons for why you thought we couldn't assume that Snape took Sirius to the castle without feeling forced into it by the presence of Fudge or the danger of calling back dementors.

Without those two possibilities, we're left with Snape deciding on his own -- no pressures from Fudge present or fear of dementors -- to take Sirius to DD and the castle.

And THAT means that he wasn't trying to keep Sirius away from DD.

---------------

Now, the reason I compared Snape to Lupin in that scene isn't because I was trying to say Lupin was awful and Snape was good, or two wrongs make a right, or whatever -- that's another topic.

What I wanted to point out is that the reader (and the characters) see Snape's fury, nasty threats, and insults, and assume that he's so mean and nasty he must mean it. Therefore even if he took Sirius up to the castle later, he must have really meant to take him to the dementors because he's so mean and nasty about it, he must have meant all those threats. Because we, the readers (and the characters) know that Sirius is innocent, we see Snape's actions as terrible, possibly even heinous. We forget entirely that Snape had good reason to consider Sirius completely guilty, that Sirius was a convicted murderer, etc. etc. That makes no difference. We think Snape should have listened to his pleas, thought rationally and taken his time and not taken Sirius to the dementors.

We assume that he was serious about the dementors, because we assume the worst of Snape's intentions.

On the other hand, Lupin is cool, calm and collected. Therefore the reader (and the characters) don't see much at all wrong with Lupin's decision to kill Peter. The reader is convinced of Peter's guilt by the time Lupin and Sirius are ready to kill him, we generally aren't too concerned -- or even considering -- that this calm, quiet man is going to kill a pleading, begging coward in cold blood in front of 3 13 year olds, without the slightest benefit of legal proceedings.

My point is that we view Snape's threats a certain way because of his demeanor and what, at that point, we knew of his hatred of the Marauders (and recall, we don't know much at the end of POA).

We view Lupin differently because he's so much more rational and calm.

But in actuality, Lupin's decisions are far worse than Snape's. No one was stopping Snape's hand when he decided to not call the dementors and instead take Sirius to the castle. On the other hand, Lupin would have killed Peter without Harry's intervention.

So the point about Lupin and Snape is to show that the readers and the characters are simply assuming Snape's intent based on his demeanor, threats, etc. But we also assume Lupin's actions and motives are fine, because he seems so calm and collected about the whole thing and doesn't use nasty, mean sounding threats. His cold, quietly voiced intention to kill doesn't sound nearly so awful as Snape's, especially on the written page.

It took me many readings of this book and considering the whole scenario before I saw how wrong Lupin was -- not just in error about willingness to kill Peter, but really terribly wrong to so calmly be willing to kill without legal proceedings and in front of 3 kids. But on the very first reading, most readers feel Snape is horribly wrong in wanting to take Sirius to the dementors. The juxtaposition of these two responses, versus the true culpability of the characters is primarily a result of the way the two are described to the readers and our willingness to see Snape as having automatically awful intentions and our desire to see good in Lupin.


Vulture - Sep 18, 2006 8:31 am (#212 of 2959)
For all Peter's protestations and begging, he just sounds like a guilty coward trying to escape just punishment ...Well, I think that's the way Snape probably thought of Sirius' comments about the rat -- an obvious clear murderer, with his clearly guilty accomplice, begging for anything that will gain him a little time to try and escape or otherwise get out of his just punishment. (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:08 am (#211))

Sirius, begging ? Can Snape, his arch-enemy, really believe that ? A curious kind of begging, that snarls "The joke's on you, Snivellus" (which I've said before wasn't the greatest tactical idea Sirius ever had).

Um, why exactly should Snape believe the offer of a mass murderer, escaped from prison, just injured a student, to go quietly??? (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:08 am (#211))

Fair enough _ no reason to believe, as such. But still, Sirius did say it _ so there's nothing to lose by binding him and going to the castle. Nothing to lose, either, by showing up his rat hocus-pocus in front of Fudge, who'd then have Sirius given the Kiss. Unless (thinks Snape, in my opinion) .... unless just maybe things aren't as they seem, and the enemy will escape revenge.

Snape would not have been acting hurriedly to move toward that step. (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:08 am (#211))

It's not just that _ his whole demeanour in that scene seems to me to be frantic haste and anger close to panic at even a discussion which might get revenge off the rails.


wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 8:42 am (#213 of 2959)
Vulture,

I'd love to read your comments on the rest of my post. I'm assuming you'll get around to it. You usually do.

As regards Sirius begging. You're right -- wrong word. I just mean that I think Snape would see Sirius as trying to stall and buy time, etc. in order find a way to escape somehow. Not in the same way Peter stalled (begging and pleading), but for the same purpose.

Oh, this is an edit and you might miss it. But, Vulture, don't you think his frantic haste might also have to do with standing in a room with an about-to-transform werewolf? I don't necessarily think that those bindings would hold a werewolf -- the chains between Lupin and Peter later didn't cause him the slightest problem to get out of. And we know that Snape is very wary of Lupin-as-werewolf, from his whole demeanor when bringing Lupin the potion early in the book (never taking his eyes off of Lupin, wanting him to drink the potion right away, backing out of the room -- even though it was still a few days from his transformation). By the way, many people who have anger as their default emotion for any stressful situation, will get extremely angry when they're really actually more scared than anything.


The Artful Dodger - Sep 18, 2006 5:24 pm (#214 of 2959)
Many of those who defend Snape seem to think that in the Shrieking Shack scene, he was concerned about the children's safety. That a werewolf and a murderer were about to attack them, which partly is why Snape's actions were justified.

This is pure Snape-Fan Filter. Snape didn't fear that Sirius and Lupin would harm the children. Here's the proof:

"Miss Granger, you are already facing suspension from this school", spat Snape. "You, Potter and Weasley are out of bounds, in the company of a convicted murderer and a werewolf."

Sorry if that was a little off the current discussion, but I felt an urge to point it out.


Meoshimo - Sep 18, 2006 5:24 pm (#215 of 2959)
Brevity! My kingdom for brevity!


wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 6:25 pm (#216 of 2959)
The Artful Dodger, I'm not at all certain how you feel that quote was an example of your point. I don't think it proved it anyway.

Meoshimo, I agree. Brevity is the soul of wit, and I'm in trouble.


The Artful Dodger - Sep 18, 2006 6:39 pm (#217 of 2959)
Company is not a threat, that's why. I thought that was obvious. Plus, is there anything Snape does which suggests that he is worried? Does he check if Ron's injury is a werewolf bite, for example? No.


Saracene - Sep 19, 2006 1:43 am (#218 of 2959)
Vulture:

---Nevertheless, as I said in #207, various people "have done an excellent job of proving that Snape had heard all about the Marauders being Animagi. So he knew that Pettigrew had been able to transform into something.---

That's presuming Snape actually took Lupin's Animagus story seriously. But what if he thought that the whole Animagus story was complete hogwash, too?

---After all, his defenders claim that he always meant to take them to the castle and that any threats he made were just for effect.---

Actually, I tend to think that Snape's threat wasn't just for show. Of course, later on we see him deliver Sirius to Fudge, but what I belive that, *in that particular moment in the Shrieking Shack*, Snape would have acted on his threat.

But what I believe, also, is that Snape's actions were fuelled by emotions (not admirable emotions, granted) rather than a calculated attempt to make sure Sirius got Dementor-kissed regardless of whether he was really guilty or not. Unless it was an uber-brilliant piece of acting, Snape's angry tirade about how Harry would have died just like his father, who was too arrogant to believe he might be mistaken in Black, indicates to me that he genuinely believed Sirius to be the one who had betrayed the Potters. If, on the other hand, Snape put together the rat and Animagus story then he'd also put together the real Secret-Keeper story just as Lupin had done before. And personally I believe that when Snape *really* loses it there's no pretence - he really says what's on his mind.


wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 3:58 am (#219 of 2959)
Actually, I sort of agree with Saracene. I think Snape meant his threat, in that he really did want to call in the dementors right then. But Snape saying something in a rage doesn't mean he's actually going to do it in practice. So if everyone had gone right along with what Snape wanted; if he'd taken them all out of the Shack right then, taking the long walk out to the willow, and then standing out on the grounds, would he have still called the dementors? My guess is probably not. Because later that evening, Snape waking up from unconsciousness and no long furious didn't call the dementors and instead took Sirius to the castle. The biggest difference is Snape's fury in the Shack and the question is whether that fury would really have led him to calling in the dementors.

If no one had knocked Snape unconscious and he'd continued to have the upper hand of the situation, I'd think it would just all depend on circumstances -- if getting everyone out happened in such a way to continue to push his anger higher or not.

Snape was apparently scared of Lupin-as-werewolf. Earlier in the book when Snape first brought Lupin his potion, it was about a week from Lupin's transformation. Yet still, Snape never took his eyes off of Lupin, tried to insist he drink the potion right away, and backed out of the room with his eyes still on Lupin. That all speaks of fear, and a somewhat irrational fear as Lupin was a week from transformation.

So in the Shrieking Shack, only minutes from transformation, Snape was almost certainly scared of Lupin. But with Snape, it wouldn't come across as fear, but anger. His anger was probably a combination of hatred of Sirius, perhaps some stress of dealing with a supposed mass murderer, and the fear of a werewolf -- as well as anger at all the things they were saying to him.

I think if he'd gotten everyone out of the tunnel, whether or not he really called the dementors would probably depend on his continued level of anger, fear, and overall stress.

Company is not a threat, that's why. I thought that was obvious. Plus, is there anything Snape does which suggests that he is worried? Does he check if Ron's injury is a werewolf bite, for example?

The Artful Dodger, sorry, I still don't get it. What company isn't a threat? Snape considered both Sirius and Lupin a threat. Of course there's evidence Snape was worried -- he bound Lupin probably because he knew he was close to transformation and we already know we was scared of Lupin's werewolf form. Perhaps you expect that if he was worried he'd be showing an attitude of concern rather than anger? My guess is that Snape is the sort who gets angry in practically any kind of stress, including when he's anxious or concerned. And why in the world would he check Ron for a bite when Lupin hadn't transformed yet? Fenrir was considered quite unusual for biting people while still in human form -- Snape wouldn't think Lupin would do that.


The Artful Dodger - Sep 19, 2006 2:00 pm (#220 of 2959)
OK, let me try an explanation once more. You will certainly agree with me when I say that Snape regards Lupin in Sirius as companions. He clearly thought they were helping each other. Now, I believe Snape's use of the word company implies that he thinks Harry, Ron and Hermione are Lupin's and Sirius's companions, too. But he can't have thought at the same time that the three were in danger because they were facing a murderer and a werewolf. That's what I meant when I said "company is not a threat". Companions just don't threaten each other. I hope that makes it clear.

About Ron's injury, of course you're right, Snape had no reason to think it was a werewolf bite.

But I have to disagree with you about Snape binding Lupin. First, Snape doesn't do that immediately. Why, if he feared an attack? Instead, it happens when Lupin calls what Snape had to endure in his youth a "schoolboy grudge". So it is worth a debate whether Snape hexing Lupin is a reaction to feeling threatened, or feeling insulted.

Secondly while Snape may have felt threatened himself, I still don't think he was worried about the children, reason see above. The point is, binding Lupin does make perfect sense without any concern involved for the trio, which is why I personally do not count that as evidence.

Also, in addition to the company thing I already mentioned, the following quote is worth a look.

"You forgot to take your ption tonight, so I took a gobletful along. And very lucky I did ... lucky for me, I mean."

Doesn't sound like Snape was desperate to save anyone.

On the other hand, this one, "Vengeance is very sweet. How I hoped I would be the one to catch you.", clearly shows what made him come instead.

To sum it up, I see one questionable bit of evidence for Snape being worried about the children, and three not-so-questionable bits that he wasn't.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 221 to 240

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:09 am

wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 2:52 pm (#221 of 2959)
Now that I see what you mean, I don't agree. I think when Snape uses the word "company" he simply means that the Trio are in the company of dangerous people. Even though the words company and companions are related, that doesn't mean they are used in the same way. For instance, I may be in the "company of my enemies," but that use of the word doesn't mean they are suddenly my friendly "companions."

So, no, I don't think Snape's use of that word means that he considered the children at no risk. Rather odd to think that what with Ron having an obviously broken leg, which would have almost certainly occurred at the hands of one of the people there -- and it probably wasn't Harry or Hermione.


The Artful Dodger - Sep 19, 2006 4:22 pm (#222 of 2959)
For instance, I may be in the "company of my enemies," but that use of the word doesn't mean they are suddenly my friendly "companions."

Well, I wasn't aware that a phrase like that is commonly used, as English is not my native tongue. There is nothing similar -as far as I know- in the German language, which I speak, so that is how I got the idea.

But, regardless of that, don't you think it is odd that Snape combines the use of the word company with a threat to expel the three from Hogwarts? Would it be reasonable to punish them for being in mortal peril? So I remain convinced that my interpretation is correct.


Vulture - Sep 19, 2006 6:00 pm (#223 of 2959)
Edited Sep 19, 2006 8:07 pm
Anyway, about Snape... I totally agree with Ann and Saracene's comments. In addition, we have to remember that from the first moment the narration mentions a creak in the door -- a signal of Snape's entry into the room -- to the point where Snape reveals himself, all of the comments he had heard were primarily regarding the fact that the Maruaders had all been animagi. Now considering that Snape (along with the whole WW), thought Sirius was a murderer and servant of LV (as a traitor and spy on the Order), Snape was now hearing what he'd consider proof positive that his concerns about Lupin were true. He was hearing Lupin tell about vital information that Snape would have known Lupin had not revealed to Dumbledore during the entire previous nine months he'd been at Hogwarts teaching. This would just confirm in Snape's mind that everything he'd feared about Lupin was true -- that he'd been helping Sirius all along. wynnleaf - Sep 10, 2006 6:16 am (#200))

------------------------------------------------------

Vulture:

---Nevertheless, as I said in #207, various people "have done an excellent job of proving that Snape had heard all about the Marauders being Animagi. So he knew that Pettigrew had been able to transform into something.---

That's presuming Snape actually took Lupin's Animagus story seriously. But what if he thought that the whole Animagus story was complete hogwash, too? (Saracene - Sep 19, 2006 2:43 am (#218))

Well, in that case, the Snape defence team lose a big chunk of their case _ there were a lot of posts (such as Wynnleaf's #200, above) arguing (quite well, I thought) that because Snape knew they were Animagi, that fuelled (a) his concern for the kids, and (b) his belief that Lupin and Sirius were working together.

But, Vulture, don't you think his frantic haste might also have to do with standing in a room with an about-to-transform werewolf? (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:42 am (#213))

Aha !! So we're agreed that he was in a hurry !! (Snape prosecution team rub their hands in glee.) ;-)

But yes, the werewolf thing is a factor, I suppose _ I'll have to think some more about it. Mind you, I got the impression that Lupin would only transform if he could see the full moon. Or maybe if the full moon came out.

And yes, I know the one about anger arising from fear.

Unless it was an uber-brilliant piece of acting, Snape's angry tirade about how Harry would have died just like his father, who was too arrogant to believe he might be mistaken in Black, indicates to me that he genuinely believed Sirius to be the one who had betrayed the Potters. If, on the other hand, Snape put together the rat and Animagus story then he'd also put together the real Secret-Keeper story just as Lupin had done before. (Saracene - Sep 19, 2006 2:43 am (#218))

Hmmmm. You know, that does give me pause for thought. But in fact, that tirade of his is very oddly worded, no matter how you take it. For example, he says "You'd have been well served if he'd killed you !!" and starts banging on about how James died unable to believe he could be mistaken about Sirius, and that Harry is doing exactly the same. But even Snape can surely see this is nonsense: Harry has only known Sirius a half an hour, so there's no way anyone could think he'd have the same feeling about him as James did, or allow any loyalty to cloud his judgement.

So if everyone had gone right along with what Snape wanted; if he'd taken them all out of the Shack right then, taking the long walk out to the willow, and then standing out on the grounds, would he have still called the dementors? My guess is probably not. Because later that evening, Snape waking up from unconsciousness and no long furious didn't call the dementors and instead took Sirius to the castle. (wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 4:58 am (#219))

But I've already shown (see #207) that we can deduce that his actions after waking up don't prove anything about his earlier intentions. We can deduce it from the fact that Fudge knew about the Dementors trying to give Harry the Kiss _ so I thought (#207) that either Snape told him, or that he (Fudge) or someone else was an observer. In fact, thanks to someone else quoting from Book 3, I now know that Snape did not tell Fudge _ he said that when he woke up, the Dementors were heading back to the gates. Yet Fudge knew (1) about the attempted Kiss, and (2) about the "extraordinary behaviour" of the Dementors (i.e. their retreat from the Patronus). Therefore, either Fudge himself, or someone who told him, was close enough to observe. Therefore, with that observer present, Snape couldn't cart Sirius off to the Dementors even if he wanted to.

I think if he'd gotten everyone out of the tunnel, whether or not he really called the dementors would probably depend on his continued level of anger, fear, and overall stress. (wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 4:58 am (#219))

OK, so I think we're at least now agreed that Snape giving Sirius straight to the Dementors is something which could happen. I guess what we differ on is what exactly was his motivation _ whether he was being driven by uncontollable emotion, or was acting with deliberate intent. I think we also differ on whether the question of Sirius's innocence or guilt was important to Snape.

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

I think The Artful Dodger has a point with these two quotations from Snape:

(Spoken to Lupin) "You forgot to take your potion tonight, so I took a gobletful along. And very lucky I did ... lucky for me, I mean." _ That phrase "lucky for me, I mean" rejects what the previous "lucky" would seem to be about _ i.e. the werewolf situation. Snape goes on to say that he found the Marauders' Map and observed them on it.

(Spoken to Sirius) "Vengeance is very sweet. How I hoped I would be the one to catch you." _ What struck me about this, from the moment I read it, is that there is some intensely personal bitterness between Snape and Sirius which hasn't been explained.

But yes, even though I'm being generally tough on Snape, I have to agree somewhat with Wynnleaf that, when Snape says to Hermione that she is "in the company of a convicted murderer and werewolf" it mainly means that they're in the presence of Sirius and Lupin. On the other hand, he is trying to shut Hermione up, and implying that she is in dodgy "company" is part of that. But a nasty strict teacher trying to control students might say such a thing, while still believing that, in fact, they're in danger. The subtle wonders of the English language !!

But in fact, I, like The Artful Dodger, don't feel that Snape is that concerned about the Trio _ I think that his main focus is on the Marauders, and that the Trio, for him, are an irrelevant nuisance.

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

By the way, why didn't Snape bring any Wolfsbane with him to the Shrieking Shack ?


wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 7:20 pm (#224 of 2959)
But I've already shown (see #207) that we can deduce that his actions after waking up don't prove anything about his earlier intentions.

Yes, Vulture, but I already twice gave a complete answer to why I think your idea there doesn't work and you never answered me about that. Here it is again.

From post 208 By the way, on Fudge's knowledge of what the dementors did:

"What amazes me most is the behavior of the dementors... you've really no idea what made them retreat, Snape?" "No, Minister... by the time I had come 'round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances..."

Fudge must have found out about the dementors trying to kiss Harry through DD. Fudge mentions it just as he's finally about to leave Hogwarts. Dumbledore had talked with Sirius before Harry and Hermione had even woken up. So Dumbledore would have to be the one to have told Fudge.

So that leaves Snape waking up next to the Whomping Willow with the dementors gone, never having seen how dangerous they acted with Sirius and Harry, and no pesky Fudge around to necessitate Snape's doing the right thing, but he still manages to do the right thing anyway and took Sirius (on a stretcher no less, much kinder than Sirius was to him), and the others to the castle.

And I went over it again in Post 211

Dumbledore talked to Sirius before anyone else. Apparently Dumbledore told Fudge (probably not saying that he'd gotten the story from Black), since it's obvious that Snape didn't and Fudge didn't appear to have been there as he was asking about what happened.

But the primary point in the Fudge question, Vulture, is that Fudge wasn't there necessitating Snape to do the right thing. We know that from his comments and questions to Snape. Nor was Snape awake to see how dangerous the dementors were, so he didn't avoid calling them because of that. Those were your two reasons for why you thought we couldn't assume that Snape took Sirius to the castle without feeling forced into it by the presence of Fudge or the danger of calling back dementors.

Without those two possibilities, we're left with Snape deciding on his own -- no pressures from Fudge present or fear of dementors -- to take Sirius to DD and the castle.

So who told Dumbledore? Well, since Dumbledore knew Sirius was innocent by then, he'd have known he could probably trust Sirius to tell him what happened. However, Dumbledore might not have told Fudge exactly where he got his info. Everyone's pretty used to Dumbledore seeming omniscient, so maybe Fudge didn't question where he learned about the dementors.

I have never tried to say Snape was completely rational in the Shrieking Shack. What I've tried to say is that we can explain his actions based on what he thought was going on. Lupin looked quite culpable, he already thought Sirius was a killer, and Ron was injured. Yet the kids were supporting the adults, so it's natural he'd think them confunded.

Why didn't Snape take wolfsbane to Lupin? Consider that when he saw Lupin, Lupin had just entered the willow. From the point Harry and Hermione entered the tunnel following Ron and Sirius to the point Lupin arrives is, in my book, 9 pages. From the point Lupin arrives in the Shack to the point Snape enters is about another 9 pages. Basically what I think we can come close to concluding is that Lupin ran after Sirius and Pettigrew, and kids, and then Snape ran after Lupin. Neither had any time to spare. Snape wouldn't be carrying along a goblet of potion to balance. Think how much longer that would take. And he'd assumed that Sirius (evil murderer in Snape's mind) was there, too. If he thought Lupin was with Sirius, would he really expect to nicely hand Lupin (evil accomplice of a murderer) the wolfsbane potion for him to partake of, prior to anything else??? "Hi, Lupin and Sirius, you evil murderer and accomplice. I'm here to take you to the dementors. But first, drink this wolfsbane potion." No, I don't think so.


Meoshimo - Sep 19, 2006 9:49 pm (#225 of 2959)
like, seriously guys, brevity. i challange all to condense ideas.


Ann - Sep 20, 2006 4:26 am (#226 of 2959)
One point of Vulture's that hasn't been addressed (many posts back--I've been busy):

If his threats are empty bluster and he's just an old softy trying to frighten his enemies, why is he so desperate for reassurance from Fudge that "the Kiss will be performed immediately"?-- no enemies are present when he asks that. "I only hope Dumbledore isn't going to make difficulties" he says--why would he think Dumbledore could possibly make difficulties about a formal Ministry decision if he (Snape) has no doubt about Sirius's guilt?

Dumbledore notoriously resists having dementors in his school. He doesn't like them, and doesn't trust them, and I think he may share Lupin's (implied) view that soul-sucking is far too severe a punishment, no matter what crime has been committed.

Wynnleaf, I don't quite agree with you about Lupin. He seems rational and controlled (if you're a werewolf, you have to be, I think), but his cold rage at Peter for his betrayal is indeed rage, and he is clearly not thinking straight. This is also responsible for his completely forgetting the wolfsbane.

And Artful Dodger, as has been pointed out, "in the company of" is neutral; it simply means "with." However, it's also perhaps a reference to the fact that students can be expelled for endangering themselves, not just others. Keeping students safe is a school's responsibility, and students are punished mainly for refusing to cooperate with this--that's what Snape is referring to. They've repeatedly broken rules (being out on the grounds illegally) that were made for their own protection, and as a result, they've ended up in the company of a werewolf and a murderer. I'm sure he thinks he's saving them, and the threat of explusion is to make them realize that they shouldn't do this. (Though at least Harry must be protected by Snape whether he's in school or not--he's heard the first bit of the prophecy, remember.)

As for the Animagi discussion: I just re-read it, and it's quite clear that JKR is carefully preventing Sirius or Lupin from mentioning the forms that the Marauders took. I'm not sure Snape was actually listening anyway, after he realized that Lupin knew something so crucial about Sirius that he hadn't told Dumbledore. It is, after all, the only reason Sirius was able to escape and elude the Aurors. But JKR clearly doesn't want Snape to realize their forms during that conversation (he clearly learns about them later, at the end of GoF and before HBP). Sirius says only that he and James are large and Peter is small, when it would have been much simpler to name the animals they were. Presumably, this is so she can exonerate his actions here later--there's no other reason that Sirius wouldn't have said what the forms were. And even Harry thinks it odd that he doesn't.

Meoshimo, I don't think you'll manage to convince anyone to write more compactly. Most of us are doing the best we can. But it's a conversation, and there are lots of us, and we all want to respond to each others' comments.


Steve Newton - Sep 20, 2006 5:20 am (#227 of 2959)
First of all I have to confess that this was the first thread that I decided that I couldn't keep up with. (Alchemy was the second.) This may be repetitive. I have reread the 'Snape's Worst Memory' chapter many times trying to figure out why it is his worst memory. I, like most of you I guess, have several ideas. This weekend it occurred to me that JKR has a habit of interrupting things just before crucial information is to be imparted. Could the reason why this is his worst memory be something that we, the readers, are not shown but which we might be able to figure out since it was just about to occur?

I'm guessing that this is not a new conjecture. If it has already been beaten to death my apologies.


Choices - Sep 20, 2006 10:01 am (#228 of 2959)
"Meoshimo, I don't think you'll manage to convince anyone to write more compactly. Most of us are doing the best we can. But it's a conversation, and there are lots of us, and we all want to respond to each others' comments."

However much it may be ignored, Meoshimo has a great idea. If some of these posts were shorter and more to the point, I might bother to read them. As is, I skip over long posts completely. There are so many threads to keep up with and so many posts to read each day, if it isn't said concisely, I don't read it.


juliebug - Sep 20, 2006 10:18 am (#229 of 2959)
I'm often guilty of this too. I'll try to read the really long posts, but find my eyes glazing over. I do try my best to keep my posts from getting too long, but sometimes the thrill of a new idea just gets the best of me.


Vulture - Sep 20, 2006 11:29 am (#230 of 2959)
Hi, Wynnleaf: I did, in fact, quote and answer your comment of #208 on the Fudge-observer question, in post #210. But yes, I missed what you said in #211 _ sorry, but this thread grows like Medusa's heads and my Net-link isn't always the greatest. Anyway, to re-cap:

Fudge must have found out about the dementors trying to kiss Harry through DD. (wynnleaf - Sep 17, 2006 10:05 pm (#208))

--------------------------------------

How would Dumbledore know, any more than Fudge would, unless at least one of them was there to observe it ? If that's what you're saying, then the observer was near enough that Snape would not be in any position to cart Sirius off to the Dementors at the gate without so much as a backward look _ he would have to go by the form-book. As Catherine (I think it was) pointed out, Snape has no authority to deliver people to the Dementors (particularly with everything a Dark Arts expert would know about them).

If there was no observer, then the only way Fudge could know about the Dementors trying to Kiss Harry would be from Snape observing it _ in which case, why did he do nothing to defend Harry ? If you answer that he was conscious but a bit groggy, then _ as I said already _ he would have seen enough to realise that taking Sirius and the Trio to the Dementors carried the risk of being attacked himself, or at least, losing one or more of the Trio and having to face awkward questions afterwards.

In either case, in my opinion, we have a situation which does not offer cast-iron proof about Snape's original intentions. (Vulture - Sep 18, 2006 6:39 am (#210))

---------------------------------------

Dumbledore talked to Sirius before anyone else. Apparently Dumbledore told Fudge (probably not saying that he'd gotten the story from Black), since it's obvious that Snape didn't and Fudge didn't appear to have been there as he was asking about what happened.

But the primary point in the Fudge question, Vulture, is that Fudge wasn't there necessitating Snape to do the right thing. Nor was Snape awake to see how dangerous the dementors were, so he didn't avoid calling them because of that. Those were your two reasons for why you thought we couldn't assume that Snape took Sirius to the castle without feeling forced into it by the presence of Fudge or the danger of calling back dementors.

Without those two possibilities, we're left with Snape deciding on his own -- no pressures from Fudge present or fear of dementors -- to take Sirius to DD and the castle.

And THAT means that he wasn't trying to keep Sirius away from DD. (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:08 am (#211))

So, in answer to my question "Who observed the Dementors trying to Kiss Harry ? Either Fudge did or somebody told him.", you're essentially saying that Sirius was the observer, and (since Fudge wouldn't believe him) he told Dumbledore, who then told Fudge.

OK _ then why didn't Sirius try to help Harry when the Dementors attacked ? Why did no-one but Harry try to fight them with a Patronus ? OK, so Sirius was weak (and wandless, maybe, too ?) but I would imagine he'd do anything he could.

No, you see, my strong impression is that Sirius had collapsed, unconscious, with the onset of a hundred Dementors, by the time the Dementor went for Harry.

Also, though I can't be 100% sure on this, I feel that there's a time problem with assuming that Fudge heard from Dumbledore, after the latter talked to Sirius. When Dumbledore arrives in the hospital wing and wants to see Harry and Hermione alone, his words to Snape, and later to Harry and Hermione, give me the strong impression that he has just come from Sirius. (Indeed, is my memory at fault in thinking that he actually says so ?) My impression is that when Harry wakes up, Snape and Fudge are waiting for Dumbledore _ who is talking to Sirius. When Dumbledore arrives, he never mentions the attempt to soul-suck Harry. That would imply that Fudge has not heard about it from him when he mentions it after Sirius's escape. (I recently examined the events in Book 3 from Harry waking up to the end of their time-travelling.)

I admit that it's possible (though not as easy as it looks) to shoot holes in the above paragraph, but, in my opinion, it's a lot harder to see Fudge's much earlier comment about the Dementors' "extraordinary behaviour" (their retreat from the Patronus) as being based on Dumbledore's second-hand testimony; Fudge makes this comment very soon after Harry wakes up. Why would Dumbledore tell him such a thing, and then delay (long enough to allow the conversation between Fudge and Snape) before coming to the hospital wing (and announcing that he had been talking to Sirius) ? My impression is that Dumbledore came hell-for-leather to Hermione and her Time-Turner the minute he realised the truth from Sirius, and what was at stake: look at how he practically throws everyone out of the hospital wing and doesn't even bother explaining to Harry what he and Hermione are at. Where, in there, is the time to hang around chatting to Fudge ?

So, while I think that making Sirius the observer is a shrewd move for Snape's defence, I don't feel it's what happened. I think that whoever observed the Dementors' attempt on Harry was too far away to help, too far away to be affected by the Dementors, but close enough to observe and therefore to be observed by Snape. (Possibly the onset of a hundred Dementors caused a general alert and rush to the grounds.) My guess is that, if there was just one observer, it was Dumbledore or Fudge.

It just occurs to me also that the observer may have been at a castle window _ not on the steps. That would explain why they couldn't help.

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

Basically what I think we can come close to concluding is that Lupin ran after Sirius and Pettigrew, and kids, and then Snape ran after Lupin. Neither had any time to spare. Snape wouldn't be carrying along a goblet of potion to balance. (wynnleaf - Sep 19, 2006 8:20 pm (#224))

Hmm. Yes, I thought the answer would be something like that. But why didn't he magick up a pocket-flask (the way he did the stretchers), and bring some along ? I mean, Lupin's transformation, as many have pointed out, was an urgent matter.


haymoni - Sep 20, 2006 11:29 am (#231 of 2959)
I know the posting limit inhibits some of us - we need to get in as much as possible. I have a hard time with those that copy full paragraphs from other posts and then respond. It's nice to know what they are talking about, but it gets long.

Back to Snape...

JKR better redeem this guy or I will be very disappointed. I don't care how it happens - mystery memories of Dumbledore, jumping in front of an AK aimed at Harry, saving Neville from Bella or AK'ing Draco and dying on the spot.

Whatever it is, Gina cannot be wrong about her husband!!


Vulture - Sep 20, 2006 11:39 am (#232 of 2959)
Who's Gina ?

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

Hey _ look at that: nice short post !!


haymoni - Sep 20, 2006 11:41 am (#233 of 2959)
Search for "Gina Snape" and you will find Snape's greatest supporter on the Forum.


Vulture - Sep 20, 2006 11:52 am (#234 of 2959)
Yes, indeed; scary stuff, Snapecast and all. I didn't see anything about Gina wanting hubby to be on the good side, though. Admittedly, I didn't have a chance to read her posts yet.


journeymom - Sep 20, 2006 12:03 pm (#235 of 2959)
"...or AK'ing Draco and dying on the spot."

Nooo! I think I must be a Pollyanna. I want Draco to come around, too! He can still be an arrogant berk. I just want him to place his family and wizarding pride over wanting to be a Death Eater. And it seems clear that by the end of HBP he'd already done that.

I was about to say, "Besides, I don't think JKR will kill off Draco", but she did warn us that some of us will be disappointed with aspects of Book 7.

I'll be very surprised if Snape lives beyond Book 7. But I'm almost certain he'll redeem himself. I think he's been working for that since before Harry was born.


wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 12:35 pm (#236 of 2959)
I think any time we're trying to figure out something in a previous book we should first to first assume that the answer is right there in the book, and that things are as they seem, i.e. Snape didn't see anyone watching him, because the book didn't reveal anyone, and really didn't know what the dementors had done, just as the book said. Second, if we decide to postulate that something else occurred which gives a different twist to the text, but is not in the page, I think we should have to assume that this will be explained in a later book. If it's not going to be eventually revealed in a later book (for instance, Snape only took Sirius to the castle because other people were watching, or he really in spite of what he said, saw the dementors earlier and knew how dangerous they were), then we have to assume it didn't happen.

There is no purpose for a writer to have all sorts of secret and unrevealed things going on in a book, if she has no intention of ever revealing them.

So in working on theories where we postulate that things are occurring that haven't yet been revealed, I think we have to look at reasons for why the author will reveal these things later on.

For instance, when in the new invisibility cloak thread, people come up with theories about who might have been under the cloak, ways people might have known the Potters Secret without knowing who the Secret Keeper was, etc., the general idea is that not only have these things not been revealed to the reader, they will be revealed in Book 7. So the theories have to be important enough for JKR to need to reveal these things later. If we're not going to learn anything from the "revelation," JKR has no need to keep the info a secret in the first place, and no need to reveal it later.

So for Snape outside the Whomping Willow. Why would JKR need to keep from us that Snape only took Sirius to the castle because he had to? So we'd know how much he hated Sirius? -- we already know that. So we'd realize he wanted him to be kissed by dementors? we already knew that. What is the purpose in hiding this unknown observer from us? Or having Snape lie, unknowingly for the reader, about not seeing the dementors? Are we to expect some revelation later that will surprise the readers? "Oh, no, I had no idea Snape hated Sirius and wanted him kissed!!" I don't think so.

I don't think JKR is going to have some big revelation moment in Book 7 where we suddenly learn that Snape saw a heretofore unknown observer watching him, or that we suddenly learn Snape really did see the dementors attack Harry, and therefore he had to take Sirius up to the castle. I just don't think there's much impact in that kind of revelation. Besides, who would that surprise? Hardly any readers take any note of the fact that Snape might have been doing something right by carrying him to the castle in the first place, so it would only be this tiny group that would be "surprised."

No, Vulture, I don't think JKR is going to reveal the hidden observer, or that Snape lied about when he came to consciousness. So I think we have to take the text as it's written, even if JKR messed up some with exactly how much time was or was not available for Sirius to tell Dumbledore, or Dumbledore to tell Fudge, or whatever.


Vulture - Sep 20, 2006 1:34 pm (#237 of 2959)
So the point about Lupin and Snape is to show that the readers and the characters are simply assuming Snape's intent based on his demeanor, threats, etc. But we also assume Lupin's actions and motives are fine, because he seems so calm and collected about the whole thing and doesn't use nasty, mean sounding threats. His cold, quietly voiced intention to kill doesn't sound nearly so awful as Snape's, especially on the written page. (wynnleaf - Sep 18, 2006 9:08 am (#211))

No, no, no. That may very well be true of other readers _ I can't speak for them _ but I can assure you that it's not the way I view things. I don't want to get into a whole detailed treatment of Lupin in here, because I know it'll end up spreading Lupin all over this thread with about a million side-tracks. But I promise I will get around to it on his thread !! But, very briefly _ you could say that the way I viewed Lupin was essentially summed up in that one sentence when he spoke with "a steely note in his voice which Harry had never heard before" and said "Ron _ give me that rat." One other thing _ the worst, absolute worst, you can say of Lupin is that he was guilty of attempted murder _ he was not going to have Pettigrew's soul destroyed: a far worse punishment. I'm not going to say anymore about Lupin here, but you're wrong if you imagine that I think of him as a "nice" character.

Now, as regards Snape _ I happen to thoroughly enjoy Snape, and one of the things about him I enjoy most is his sarcastic comments to and about Harry. I enjoy his calculating cunning, his deviousness, and his lip-curling ability to wipe the floor with opponents in verbal exchanges. I am also fascinated by all those tantalising hints that, saddled with a wretchedly warped personality, he may, at certain moments, be trying to do good. But what I won't do is treat him as a misunderstood angel, or the strongest hero on the good side apart from Dumbledore. To do so actually diminishes him as a character. (This is all just my opinion, of course.)

I don't regard the case against Snape in Book 5 as strong _ and I often say so. I do regard the case in Book 3 as strong, and I will continue to say so. This does not make me biased or deceived.

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

I think any time we're trying to figure out something in a previous book we should first to first assume that the answer is right there in the book, and that things are as they seem, i.e. Snape didn't see anyone watching him, because the book didn't reveal anyone, and really didn't know what the dementors had done, just as the book said. Second, if we decide to postulate that something else occurred which gives a different twist to the text, but is not in the page, I think we should have to assume that this will be explained in a later book. If it's not going to be eventually revealed in a later book (for instance, Snape only took Sirius to the castle because other people were watching, or he really in spite of what he said, saw the dementors earlier and knew how dangerous they were), then we have to assume it didn't happen. (wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 1:35 pm (#236))

I'm afraid I don't agree. Many of the keenest and most sophisticated arguments and theories in defence of Severus Snape would totally collapse if the above were a rigid rule, in my opinion. Therefore, the prosecution should not have to obey different rules to the defence.

So for Snape outside the Whomping Willow. Why would JKR need to keep from us that Snape only took Sirius to the castle because he had to? So we'd know how much he hated Sirius? -- we already know that. So we'd realize he wanted him to be kissed by dementors? we already knew that. What is the purpose in hiding this unknown observer from us? (wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 1:35 pm (#236))

Well, I don't think she does, exactly. In my opinion, her text pretty much conveys the meanings I've taken from it. As far as I'm concerned, when Fudge talked about the Dementors' retreat and their attempt on "an innocent boy", he was talking matter-of-factly about something which had been observed by him, Dumbledore, or possibly a few people. Equally, as far as I'm concerned, Snape's whole set of words and actions that evening make clear to me that he intended Sirius to get soul-sucked, innocent or guilty. He at first intended to do this all nice and legally, then it clicked with him that there might be a spanner in the works (i.e. "the rat"), so wanted to avoid Dumbledore and rush Sirius to the Dementors, and finally, woke up in a situation where, on balance, it was in his best interests to go back to Plan A rather than risk awkward questions _ especially as there was a good chance that Sirius still mightn't be believed.

To me, all the above is self-evident from the text. No mystery, no muddle, no stuff to be explained in Book 7 (except possibly some more details on why Sirius and Snape loathed each other so much).

The thing is, though, there are LOADS of people, on this thread alone (and probably more elsewhere) who DON'T see things as I do. Many of these people make categorical statements which are based on things I feel able to disprove _ so I try to do so, which unfortunately means getting dead nit-picky. Of course, these people feel exactly the same about my opinions, and get nit-picky right back. In fact, this is all quite enjoyable and I learn a lot from it.

But for me, my reading of the text is the obvious truth. (No-one else need agree, of course.)


wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 5:52 pm (#238 of 2959)
Edited Sep 20, 2006 7:47 pm
Why would Fudge or anyone else have been there observing? Out for a stroll? Fudge wouldn't have been called in until after Snape got Sirius back to the castle and there was a reason to bring Fudge. Ditto anyone else from the Ministry. Why would they have come and viewed what went on? No one knew the kids were in the Shrieking Shack, or that Lupin hadn't taken his wolfsbane, or that Sirius was down there, too. No one.

Not even Dumbledore, unless he really is omniscient, could have known they were down there. What was going on? Dumbledore just happened by Lupin's office and just happened to be viewing the map when Lupin and Co. came out of the Whomping Willow? Conveniently noticing them on the map? So he rushes out there, just in time to see the dementors converging on Harry and Sirius -- and naturally does nothing, just watches to see what happened.

Come now, Vulture. If you're so sure someone else was there observing, please have a reason for why they were there?

Okay, so Dumbledore or somebody observed from some distance the convergence of dementors near the lake -- but had no idea that Sirius, Harry, or anyone else was down there. So on a hunch, Dumbledore (or somebody) goes down there to find Harry and Sirius collapsed.

Or did they go instead to the Whomping Willow and watch Snape waking up? Wait a minute! Why would DD, or anyone, go to the Whomping Willow? The dementors had been at the lake. Maybe it was another hunch.

Okay, so first Dumbledore goes to the Whomping Willow for no reason whatsoever except he's really omniscient. He watches Snape wake up (why help him out? DD want's to see what Snape will do.) So Snape wakes up and sees DD, but doesn't bother to tell him to go look for Harry and Sirius and Lupin. He just goes about his business putting people on stretchers and then goes to look for the others himself. Dumbledore tags along behind to see what Snape does about Sirius -- uh, did he know Sirius was at the lake with Harry? Hmm.

See what I mean?? Who was there? Why would they be over at the Whomping Willow? If they went to the lake because of the dementors, why didn't they help Harry and Sirius themselves, while Snape was dealing with other injured people?

Not even Harry and Hermione saw anyone else on their second run-through with the time-turner.

So Fudge wasn't there -- he'd have had to be alerted by someone (the dementors said "come see what we're up to?") and got to the lake in seconds to see it all happen -- but then there's be no reason to see Snape at the willow, or to not offer to help bring people to the castle, or even to not just have Sirius kissed then and there.

If it was DD, coming to see what the dementors were up to, why wouldn't he have chased off the dementors, or if he got there too late, why not help get everyone up to the castle?

And you're saying all this would have gone on and we shouldn't ever expect JKR to tell us outright, we're just supposed to glean it from the text?

Sorry, I think you're working very, very hard to come up with something that forced Snape to take Sirius up to the castle, so that it can be doubted that he did it of his own free will.

I think I'll drop this topic -- unless that is you can come up with some good reason for why someone would be there, only observe without helping, no one see them, and JKR doesn't tell us but we're supposed to accept that they are there.


Vulture - Sep 21, 2006 5:46 am (#239 of 2959)
Edited Sep 21, 2006 7:32 am
Why would Fudge or anyone else have been there observing? Out for a stroll? Fudge wouldn't have been called in until after Snape got Sirius back to the castle and there was a reason to bring Fudge. Ditto anyone else from the Ministry. Why would they have come and viewed what went on? No one knew the kids were in the Shrieking Shack, or that Lupin hadn't taken his wolfsbane, or that Sirius was down there, too. No one. (wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 6:52 pm (#238))

I'm not clear if you mean why was Fudge at Hogwarts in the first place, or why, even if he was at Hogwarts, would he have observed Snape.

If you mean the first, that's easily answered: we know that he was there for the execution of Buckbeak, and that after Buckbeak's escape, Dumbledore invited the visitors up to the castle for refreshments. That places Fudge at Hogwarts before Harry & Co. ever went near the Whomping Willow.

If you mean why would anyone have been around to observe Snape, well, let me turn the question around _ why wouldn't they ? We're talking about a castle with hundreds of windows. We're talking about a castle and grounds bristling with staff who are on constant red-alert about the notorius Sirius Black. We're talking about a Headmaster who hates the Dementors. Is it really so amazing that, when a hundred Dementors at once blatantly defy Dumbledore's express instructions to stay the hell out of Hogwarts's grounds, somebody sees it, and it causes uproar ? Our Time-Travellers don't stay to see that, but given that they're rushing around with Buckbeak to get to Sirius, why would they ?

But no matter how we might wrangle over probabilities and what's likely or not, we can't argue with what is in the text. How did Fudge know that the Dementors had tried to administer the Kiss to innocent people (which it's doubtful he knew from Dumbledore, if you go over the time factor) ? How did Fudge know that the Dementors retreated (which he said just after Harry woke up) ?

Fudge wouldn't believe anything Sirius said, and the Trio were unconscious. Therefore, either Snape told him, or he observed it himself, or he got the information from an observer (or someone who had talked to an observer). An earlier post (not mine) ruled out Snape as the source _ in fact, Snape's own words definitely rule him out as the source about the Kiss. You're saying there were no un-named observers. We know what the Trio said, and when.

That leaves Sirius _ and in order for that to be credible, we have to believe a whole lot of stuff we don't see: that Dumbledore talks to Sirius, believes him, realises he's going to get worse-than-death any minute, comes belting down, finds Fudge, fills him in on the Kiss-attempt and retreat without saying how he knows (or trying to talk Fudge out of giving Sirius the Kiss, or delay it), then disappears off to let Fudge and Snape have a chat for our benefit (during which Fudge says not a word about the chat with Dumbledore), waits till after Harry and Hermione wake up (which he doesn't know about), then _ and only then _ comes belting back down again in the raging hurry which we do see.

No _ personally, I feel that after Sirius is taken off and locked up, Dumbledore stays and talks to him, while Fudge and Snape come down to the hospital wing _ where we see them _ to wait for him. The whole impression I have when Dumbledore arrives is that he has just come from Sirius. If one accepts that, there is no moment (check it if you don't believe me) at which it's possible to insert time for a chat between Dumbledore and Fudge between the moment Dumbledore locks the kids into the ward, and the moment Fudge mentions the attempted soul-suck on Harry.

Let me also point out that, in order for Sirius to witness the Kiss-attempt and retreat, we're supposed to believe that Sirius made no sound or action to help his godson. With everything we know about Sirius, this is incredible. But let's pretend I buy that (that he's too groggy or something). Assuming he did observe all this, that means that he's conscious and recovering, when Snape wakes up. Yet we see no sign of a struggle, not even a squawk. In fact, the whole impression I get on the second run-through with the Time-Turner, is that Snape conjures stretchers for unconscious bodies.

OK, so while JKR didn't actually say so in neon lights, I think we have enough to indicate that Sirius was not the observer. Let's go through the other options _ did Fudge learn the info from Snape ? _ no, that's been proven by others than me. Did he learn it from Dumbledore ? _ unlikely, but if he did, where did Dumbledore get it ? _ I've already shown that the the timetable doesn't allow for Dumbledore learning from Sirius (a most unlikely witness, as I've also shown) AND telling Fudge. So, as Sherlock Holmes said, when you've eliminated everything else, what's left must be the truth. What's left is that Fudge either observed the Kiss-attempt and retreat himself, or was told by someone who did (who could be Dumbledore or anyone else).

Now, you created a very amusing scenario whereby someone comes along, watches nearby, and does nothing, just to cramp poor old Severus's style. I quite agree with you _ that would be ludicrous, and is not what I'm suggesting. What I already said (in a previous post) is that whoever observed was too far away to help, at the moment when Time-Turner Harry let loose the Patronus. There's nothing amazing about that.

Sorry, I think you're working very, very hard to come up with something that forced Snape to take Sirius up to the castle, so that it can be doubted that he did it of his own free will. (wynnleaf - Sep 20, 2006 6:52 pm (#238))

Well, it seems that I can't win. If I try and say things briefly and simply, the Snape defence shoot them to bits; if I go over everything with a toothcomb, I'm "working hard" to convict Snape. What I in fact am doing is taking the text exactly as it is.

You've admitted that Snape was in a hurry in the Shack. You admit that he wanted Sirius to be Dementor-Kissed. What I've done is add to those points on which you agree with me by using data which is right there in Book 3. Bear in mind _ all I've said is that Snape's actions after he comes round don't give us unshakeable evidence about his intentions in the Shack, because when he comes round he's aware of possible observers. If you want to prove me wrong on that, you have to come up with a better reason for Fudge's info than I have.

As for Snape's original intentions, there is enough there to indicate to me that he wanted Sirius fed to the Dementors, innocent or guilty. I'm not asking anyone to agree, but that's what the data says to me. This doesn't mean that I think Snape can't end up being a Dumbledore agent, on the good side, etc. _ it simply means that, even if he does turn out to be one, Book 3 wasn't his finest hour.

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

P.S. Another factor just occurred to me: when Snape wakes up and sees the unconscious bodies, there is a notable absentee: Lupin. And a lovely full moon. Enough said.


wynnleaf - Sep 21, 2006 7:02 am (#240 of 2959)
Vulture,

I'm starting to think JKR didn't write the progression of this to perfection.

No one should have been able to see the dementors attempting to kiss Harry. The narration describes the dementors as forming a "solid wall" around Harry, Hermione and Sirius. Sirius and Hermione lost consciousness, so even though Sirius could have told DD about most of it later (he woke up who knows how long before Harry did), he couldn't have told anyone that the dementors tried to directly attack Harry. Only Harry knew that.

No one could have seen it. It was a cloudy, though full-moon night. They were down at the lake. I don't think it's just in the film that there are trees at least partly around the lake. The dementors formed a solid wall around them. No one would have seen what the dementors did, other than converging on Sirius, Harry and Hermione, which could be taken -- from a distance -- as simply trying to get to Sirius.

So no one should have seen it.

Now, Snape didn't even get there until after the dementors were gone. So if anyone else had been anywhere close enough to see what was going on in the cloudy, partial moonlight, that person should have got to the fallen people before Snape did. Do you seriously think a person looking out the windows on a cloudy night would have seen all that -- enough to really understand what was happening?

And if Fudge or another ministry person was close enough to see what was going on, they'd have got to Sirius first. I would think they would have called the dementors back, because that was the next thing to happen to Sirius -- there was no need for more legal proceedings.

It would only be if Dumbledore had been close enough to see what was going on that would change things. And if he was there, why not drive away the dementors? Remember -- the "solid wall" -- no one saw the dementors attack Harry or try to kiss him.

As far as who told who. No one could have told about that part. Sirius could have told Dumbledore everything else. We have no idea how much time there was between Snape bringing them up to the castle and Harry's waking up, or who all had met and discussed things. DD could easily have talked with both Sirius and Fudge.

But I have to repeat. No one saw the dementors directly attack Harry -- the only thing possible to see was the dementors converging around them. Therefore, no one could have told Fudge about it. I suppose this is a glitch of JKR's.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 241 to 270

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:23 am

Vulture - Sep 21, 2006 7:28 am (#241 of 2959)
Edited Sep 21, 2006 9:01 am

Hmm. Well, the most definite reply I can make to #240 is that I can only go on the text. But doesn't Time-Turner Harry see what goes on, from a good distance across the lake ? Or have I got that wrong, and does he just know what goes on because he's been through it ?

But anyway, I think we're getting into the sort of territory where we'll be arguing about whether those trees are really there and how high the castle is, and what the view is like from the windows, and maybe even if the wizard world has telescopes. I have to admit that maps, etc., and descriptions of distances and angles in books, aren't a strong point of mine: JKR doesn't draw any for us, so those who do have worked from the text (which I couldn't do) but Tolkien does, and I still wasn't that great at putting detailed stuff in his books together with the maps.

All I can go on is the data that I've assembled, and I think it largely backs up what I've said about Snape. But as I mentioned in my last post, (a) this doesn't prevent Snape from doing good in other books, and (b) in addition to the observer question, there's the fact that Snape would have been conscious that Lupin was prowling around in werewolf-mode _ that would change his mind about any little side-trips to cart Sirius to the gates (the Dementors weren't going to come back).

I suppose, in fairness, it has to be said that hanging around to load the bodies onto stretchers, with the prickly sensation of possibly ending up as a werewolf's late supper, took a certain amount of bravery. Especially as the bodies can't all have been in one place _ hadn't (pre-Time-Turner) Harry and Hermione left Ron and Snape both unconscious in one place to run and help Sirius in another ?

So Snape deserves some credit for that. But I still say that what he did after he woke up tells us nothing about what he initially intended to do to Sirius when he had the chance.

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

We have no idea how much time there was between Snape bringing them up to the castle and Harry's waking up, or who all had met and discussed things. DD could easily have talked with both Sirius and Fudge. (wynnleaf - Sep 21, 2006 8:02 am (#240))

No, I think we do, because remember, we have the second run-through with the Time-Turner. Now, this is the sort of calculation I'm not the greatest at, but I have the impression that from the moment Snape loaded up the unconscious bodies, Our Time-Travellers were in a tearing hurry to match up with the events they knew were going on. So that doesn't allow for any great deviation from, for example, the Dumbledore timetable I sketched out in my last post. What you have, in JKR's writing of that evening, is a jigsaw where each little piece connects in just the correct way to the next.

While I think you may have a point about JKR and glitches in general, I also think we have to balance that with how jigsaw-like and logical the data for that evening in Book 3 is. I think that, because she was aware of possible issues around time travel, she was careful enough in making things fit.

I should also point out that, even accepting Fudge's comment about the attempted soul-suck as a glitch, there's still his other, earlier, comment about the Dementors' retreat. Was that a glitch too ? If not, then that plugs into all the data I assembled _ from the text, remember _ just as well. Once all that is accepted, it backs up what I've said about Snape's original intentions towards Sirius.


wynnleaf - Sep 21, 2006 8:45 am (#242 of 2959)
Vulture,

Don't you think we should drop this?

I don't think we'll agree.

Snape may have called in the dementors while in a furious rage, to kiss Sirius. This would have been legally justified since Sirius was already to be kissed if the MOM found him.

The point I wanted to make is that given a more calm point of view, Snape didn't call the dementors.

We don't actually know that he would ever have called the dementors (even though he certainly wanted Sirius to be kissed). All we have to go on is the already established fact that Snape makes over-the-top threats, and that when given the actual opportunity he did not call the dementors.

You tried to establish that Snape could have felt forced to do the right thing and take Sirius to the castle, because he knew people were watching. I think if JKR wanted us to think that, she'd have made it more clear that someone else was around and watching (who wouldn't want Sirius immediately kissed), and that Snape knew it.


Vulture - Sep 21, 2006 9:04 am (#243 of 2959)
Sure thing, but I quite enjoyed it. May I compliment you on your intricate case for the defence, m'learned friend !!

I should say that the Lupin-prowling-werewolf factor, which I only thought of towards the end of our debate, is probably at least as important as the possibility of observers in Snape's mind, if not more. So I would still say that we can't deduce his original intentions from his final actions. But he deserves a few points for Slytherin for stretcher-loading with a werewolf potentially prowling around.

By the way, I've posted a short comment about Lupin's part in all this on his thread, and may post more, in case you're interested. (This news will probably make you run screaming for the airport !!)


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 21, 2006 1:18 pm (#244 of 2959)
I agree that no one should have been able to see what happened down by the lake. I'm at a complete loss to say how everyone was able to talk about what the dementors did right after it happened, without someone haaving seen it, or Jo screwing up.

I'm more inclined to think she screwed up. These books are NOT as well planned out as we have been led to believe. I can think of five things without even trying that were just plain mistakes. If she didn't screw up, I think it certainly could have been Snape. But I lean more toward it being a mistake.


Magic Words - Sep 21, 2006 7:36 pm (#245 of 2959)
I feel slightly ashamed for asking this, since I don't have books to reference, but are we sure Fudge didn't have time to learn what happened after the whole time-turner situation? If he says anything about the dementors retreating (which I don't recall), he could have heard it from Snape. I seem to remember the comment he made about dementors trying to kiss an innocent boy as being very near the end. He's agreeing to remove the dementors from Hogwarts because they're no longer serving a purpose, since Sirius has already escaped. Right?


Vulture - Sep 22, 2006 5:28 am (#246 of 2959)
Hi, Magic Words: No, he doesn't really _ this is where the whole Time-Turner thing bamboozles us. His comment about the Dementors retreating comes just after Harry and Hermione wake up, and (yes, you're correct) his 2nd comment, about them trying to soul-suck an innocent person, comes at the end.

But of course, it's not as simple as that. While his 2nd comment does come near the end of the book, in time terms it comes just after Dumbledore locks them (pre-time-travel) in, then unlocks again to lock the post- time-travel Harry and Hermione in, and then after Snape comes down roaring about Sirius's escape. Now, Dumbledore's locking the pre-time-travel pair in comes just after he arrives on the scene where Snape and Fudge have been chatting, and orders everyone away so he can talk to Harry and Hermione alone.

So Fudge couldn't really have learned about the Kiss attempt after the Time-Turner, unless he already knew it, or unless someone other than Dumbledore told him. We've ruled out Snape telling him, and he wouldn't believe Sirius, so if he learned from someone else (in the brief time) after the Time-Turner, that makes that person an observer whom Snape would have seen.

I don't know if you've waded through the debate between me and Wynnleaf in the last few posts ? _ pretty much covers all details !! But as I said recently, I forgot to think about the fact that, when Snape was stretcher-loading, Lupin was off somewhere in werewolf mode. That, in itself, was an urgent reason to get into the castle quickly, and neither Wynnleaf nor I paid it much attention.


haymoni - Sep 22, 2006 6:18 am (#247 of 2959)
I still don't understand how Fudge is able to communicate with the dementors - how was he able to bring one into the castle without it affecting him???


wynnleaf - Sep 22, 2006 7:49 am (#248 of 2959)
While his 2nd comment does come near the end of the book, in time terms it comes just after Dumbledore locks them (pre-time-travel) in, then unlocks again to lock the post- time-travel Harry and Hermione in, and then after Snape comes down roaring about Sirius's escape.

Think about this. When Harry and Hermione say goodbye to Sirius, they comment that they have 10 minutes to get back to the Hospital. They get back just at the moment that their other selves are leaving. So it's a 10 minute fast paced journey between the tower to the hospital wing. But at the moment their other selves started the time-turner, Fudge, DD and Snape were heading out to get the dementors and get Sirius kissed. So even if they (DD, Fudge, Snape) only went up to the tower and back down (and the way up they wouldn't be rushing there and DD would take his time, I'd think), it would take a minimum of 10-15 minutes there, and 10 minutes back down. Yet (and I don't have my book here), I seem to recall Harry and Hermione getting back and within moments hearing everyone storming back to the hospital wing.

So I think the timing is off. However, DD could have filled Fudge in on more facts on the way to supposedly get Sirius kissed.

Now earlier between Harry and Hermione seeing Snape taking the people back to the castle and when they say they have to be back in the hospital wing is 45 minutes. Take off the 10 minutes that they spent after saying bye to Sirius, and that's 35 minutes between seeing Snape with the stretchers and saying goodbye to Sirius. Somewhere in 35 minutes, Snape got Sirius and others to the castle, Sirius woke up, had some discussion with DD, got locked in the tower, was met by Hermione and Harry, and escaped on Buckbeak.

I suppose if Sirius woke up as soon as he got to the castle, there'd be enough time to have some discussion with DD (centered presumably on Peter, but perhaps including the dementor attack), and then DD could have spoken briefly to Fudge. But only briefly.

By the way, on Fudge communicating with dementors... Remember on the train that Lupin was able to talk to the dementors and told them in no uncertain terms to leave. Don't have my book, but didn't he tell them Sirius wasn't there? Whatever. Anyway, he was able to communicate with them.


haymoni - Sep 22, 2006 8:42 am (#249 of 2959)
But how do they communicate back?

i.e. could a dementor have told Fudge what happened that night?


Choices - Sep 22, 2006 8:49 am (#250 of 2959)
We are told that dementors can't see, but they definitely have a mouth. Even so, I think their communication must be more mental than verbal. Fudge communicates with them, as does Dumbledore while they guard the gates of Hogwarts, and if they side with Voldemort, he must also be able to communicate with them.


haymoni - Sep 22, 2006 8:55 am (#251 of 2959)
If the dementors could communicate with Fudge and they told them they attacked a boy - I'm sure Fudge would have assumed that a boy would be innocent - a boy isn't Sirius Black. Once he found out the boy was Harry Potter, I'm sure THAT didn't look good.

Their story combined with Snape's could have been how Fudge surmised what happened.


Vulture - Sep 22, 2006 1:53 pm (#252 of 2959)
Well, basically, I took Fudge's two comments (first, about the Dementors' "extarordinary behaviour" _ the retreat _ and second, about attempting to Kiss an innocent person) and the timing of them, and made various deductions. I did this originally as part of a general debate about the whole Shrieking Shack night in Book 3.

I don't want to re-start the whole debate again (I think Wynnleaf agrees that we two, at least, have done it to death !!) so, for anyone who's interested in it, it started around post #207, and ended around #248. (Or maybe is still going _ whichever ye prefer !!)

My posts on the specific points about Fudge's comments were 207, 210, 223, 230, 237, 239, 241, and 243. Wynnleaf's corresponding posts were 208, 211, 224, 236, 238, 240, and 242. Of course there were many interesting comments from other people mixed in between. From 245 to 248 the impact of the Time-Turner on the Fudge comments debate has been considered.

If someone has just arrived on this thread, they're probably wondering what on earth a lot of this has to do with Snape. Well, in posts #207 (the "Here's what I think happened ..." paragraph) and #237 (the "Well, I don't think she does..." paragraph), I give my general overview of how I personally think Snape behaved on Shrieking Shack Night. I should stress that my view is very much a "case for the prosecution", which is fiercely, and very effectively, contested by, among others, Wynnleaf and _ I think _ Saracene (though I get the impression that Saracene agrees with me on a few specific points).

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

P.S. By the way, Wynnleaf _ have you seen my results from the (Pirate Monkeys Inc.) Harry Potter Personality Quiz ? Click on my name (snigger, snigger) ....


Anna L. Black- Sep 24, 2006 3:14 am (#253 of 2959)
I've always thought that the dementors told Fudge about kissing Harry (otherwise, as wynnleaf pointed out - nobody could know it happened). As I was reading the last ~50 posts, I've became confused, so decided to look at the exact quotes from the book. And actually, everything fits - just look at the timeline:

Harry first wakes up in the Hospital room, and hears the following:
"What amazes me most is the behavior of the dementors... you've really no idea what made them retreat, Snape?"
"No, Minister... by the time I had come 'round they were heading back to their positions at the entrances...."
"Extraordinary. And yet Black, and Harry, and the girl --"
"All unconscious by the time I reached them. [...]"
At this point, Fudge only knows the dementors retreated, leaving the unconcious Sirius, Harry & Hermione behind, and not kissing any of them - not even Sirius, whom they were perfectly authorised to kiss! He knows it because that is what Snape saw when he woke up. (And now that I've said that, my post is connected to the topic, hooray Smile)

Later, in the same time-frame, Fudge is leaving:
"The dementors should have arrived by now," he said. "I'll go and meet them. Dumbledore, I'll see you upstairs."
So, Fudge leaves (along with Snape) to see the Dementors. Dumbledore, in the meanwhile, is having a hurried conversation with Harry & Hermione, and is instructing them to use the time-turner. They leave, and Dumbledore exits the room.
At the same time, H&H who have already saved Sirius are making their way to the Hospital room, and at the same time Fudge and Snape are on their way to Flitwick's office:
"Harry!"
Hermione was tugging at his sleeve, staring at her watch. "We've got exactly ten minutes to get back down to the hospital wing without anybody seeing us -- before Dumbledore locks the door --"
"Okay," said Harry, wrenching his gaze from the sky, "let's go...."
They slipped through the doorway behind them and down a tightly spiraling stone staircase. As they reached the bottom of it, they heard voices. They flattened themselves against the wall and listened. It sounded like Fudge and Snape. They were walking quickly along the corridor at the foot of the staircase.
"... only hope Dumbledore's not going to make difficulties," Snape was saying. "The Kiss will be performed immediately?"
"As soon as Macnair returns with the dementors. [...]"

So, H&H are back in the hospital room, and DD locks the door - and a little while later, Fudge & co. discover Sirius is missing:
"But Harry could hardly swallow. He and Hermione were waiting, listening, their nerves jangling.... And then, as they both took a fourth piece of chocolate from Madam Pomfrey, they heard a distant roar of fury echoing from somewhere above them...."
Fudge, at this point, is together with the dementor(s) that Macnair brought to the castle, and it is then, I believe, that he learns about their attempt to kiss Harry.

So, when all of them come back to the hospital room, we see the following:
"And the dementors?" said Dumbledore. "They'll be removed from the school, I trust?"
"Oh yes, they'll have to go," said Fudge, running his fingers distractedly through his hair. "Never dreamed they'd attempt to administer the Kiss on an innocent boy... Completely out of control... no, I'll have them packed off back to Azkaban tonight.... Perhaps we should think about dragons at the school entrance...."


And that's it, timeline-wise


Mezzanine - Sep 24, 2006 3:18 am (#254 of 2959)
Anna, good post.It finally makes sense.


Ann - Sep 24, 2006 4:14 am (#255 of 2959)
Thanks, Anna. It seems quite clear from your timeline that, when Macnair brought a dementor to the castle to Kiss Sirius, Fudge learned about both why the dementors left (a huge patronus, they don't know from where) and that one of them tried to Kiss Harry. ("Minister, it was [dementor name]--he tried to kiss that kid with the lightning bolt scar!") Somehow, I'm inclined to think dementors would be tattle-tales.

Vulture is right about this: It showed tremendous courage that Snape carefully put them on stretchers and moved them all back to the castle, knowing werewolf/Lupin was nearby looking for victims. Snape was trying to protect the students (and particularly Harry--he knows the essential part of the prophecy). And it took tremendous courage to go to the Shack in the first place, given that the experience must have seemed a bit of a repetition of his own sixth-year werewolf adventure.


haymoni - Sep 24, 2006 7:12 am (#256 of 2959)
Snape may have also been a bit groggy when he woke up. It may have taken him a bit to remember what had happened.

I'm sure those extra bonks and scrapes on the head, courtesy of Sirius allowing him to hit the ceiling every once in awhile, didn't help!


Soul Search - Sep 24, 2006 3:10 pm (#257 of 2959)
It hasn't been pointed out in canon, but when Harry saved himself, Sirius, and Hermione with his patronus, he also saved Snape. If the Dementors were ready to kiss Harry, they wouldn't have stopped with he and Sirius.


wynnleaf - Sep 24, 2006 3:33 pm (#258 of 2959)
It hasn't been pointed out in canon, but when Harry saved himself, Sirius, and Hermione with his patronus, he also saved Snape. If the Dementors were ready to kiss Harry, they wouldn't have stopped with he and Sirius.

Possibly. Snape and Ron were still over at the Whomping Willow, right? I'm not sure how far away that was. Also, I always wondered if the dementors didn't actually want Harry even more than Sirius. After all, he's the one they went after on the train. I never thought it was coincidence that they ended up at Harry's train compartment.


Choices - Sep 24, 2006 3:35 pm (#259 of 2959)
I thought Snape said that by the time he found Harry, Hermione and Sirius, the dementors were already leaving. Sounds like he was in no danger. Plus, I would bet he can do a Patronus Charm that would drive them away.


journeymom - Sep 25, 2006 9:44 am (#260 of 2959)
Yes, as an Order member he's required to know how to do a patronus charm, in order to communicate with Dumbledore.


haymoni - Sep 25, 2006 9:47 am (#261 of 2959)
Perhaps he can do the charm but not to the degree that Harry did.


Ludicrous Patents Office- Sep 25, 2006 4:09 pm (#262 of 2959)
I would love to know Snape's Happy Memory/Thought for a patronus charm. I have no doubt he can produce one. Probably a bat. LPO


Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 25, 2006 4:51 pm (#263 of 2959)
While, I agree it is possible that Snape's Patronus is a bat. I believe that the scorpion provides a likely alternative.

In heraldic terms the scorpion severes a dual purpose as a symbol for wisdom, constancy, rebirth and rejuvenation while also being representative of self destruction.

SCORPION: The Scorpion is the symbol of both wisdom and self-destruction. The Scorpion's sting could also be directed at enemies and so amulets in the form of Scorpions were worn in many cultures as a protection against evil. It was thought that the Scorpion produced both venom and anti-venom. In some areas this made it an emblem of resurrection and constancy. Selket, the Egyptian goddess and protectress of the dead had the head of a scorpion. [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

In terms of the series I would argue that the scoropion could be a metaphor for Severus Snape in PS he protected Harry from Quirellmort and the Stone all the while exhibiting an extreme hatred for Harry.

Additionally Severus also could be seen as scorpion because even as he loathes and despises Harry (symbolic of the scorpion's venom) Harry, he attempts to teach Harry throughout the series most especially in HBP, (demonstrative of the anti-venom supposedly possessed by the scorpion.)

Based on this I would argue that a scorpion Patronus is equally as likely because, ir would reflect the dual nature of his xharacter.


wynnleaf - Sep 25, 2006 6:43 pm (#264 of 2959)
Ernie: I wonder if you can let us know what form will Professor Snape's Boggart and Patronus take? I am very curious.

JK Rowling replies -> Well, I'm not going to tell you Ernie, but that's because it would give so much away.

Since we know Snape's not a vampire, a bat patronus seems highly unlikely, as it doesn't seem to "give so much away."

My guess is that his patronus gives away his true loyalty,


Thom Matheson - Sep 25, 2006 7:41 pm (#265 of 2959)
How about a camelion.


wynnleaf - Sep 25, 2006 8:03 pm (#266 of 2959)
Not too revealing, don't you think? I mean, don't we already know he's a double agent?

My guess is that his patronus signifies something about "protection" and therefore who he considers his "patron" to be -- LV, DD, or someone else. Just a guess of course. But if JKR wouldn't tell what it was because it was too revealing, that means that if we knew what it was, something would be revealed to us.


Midori - Sep 25, 2006 8:20 pm (#267 of 2959)
This had been discussing a lot before- the question about Snape's patronus...But considering JKR's quote above, and taking into account the fact his patronus is telling I would bet it is:
1. a phoenix- as a demonstration of his loyalty to DD.
2. a stag- as a demonstration of unconscious gratitude to James who "saved" his life.
Both variants are revealing and show Snape's true colours. But the second one...would be very cruel of Jo to use it on Snape...to live with patronus in appearance of the person he hates so and not being able to change it somehow....poor Severus...


Vulture - Sep 26, 2006 4:16 am (#268 of 2959)
Hi, Anna L. Black _ Good post, #253 _ cleared up a lot of time issues for me. Incidentally, congratulations on demolishing the "Fudge-observer" part of my case against Snape in a single post !!

(Though I still say that Lupin prowling around as a werewolf means we can't be sure of Snape's original intentions in the Shack, based on what he did when he woke up. Not that I want to re-start the whole debate _ anyone who's interested in all the details, see my post #252 for a list of the posts for and against.)

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

On the issue of Snape's Patronus: If he does have one, I've a feeling it won't be a copy of someone else's, like Dumbledore's or James's, or Lily's. It could be one we haven't seen, yet be revealing. For example, if it's a dove (which I think hasn't been used yet), the odds against him being on Voldemort's side have to be pretty high !!

But there's another angle on this _ do Voldemort and the true Death Eaters have Patronuses ? Do they have thoughts which we could exactly call "happy" ? (I suppose Narcissa would, towards her son _ but I get the impression (not least from Bellatrix) that such feelings aren't exactly Grade A in Voldemort's book.)

So perhaps what JKR meant was that, if she revealed that Snape even has a Patronus, that would put him on the anti-Voldemort side. Perhaps Voldemort and the Death Eaters have a different way of controlling their "natural allies", as Lord V calls them. Remember how, in Book 6, Harry disagreed with Snape in an essay about the best way of repelling Dementors ? That might be part of Snape's image as a Death Eater (a false image, of course, if he's on the good side.)


LinaSep 26, 2006 4:26 am (#269 of 2959)
Nathan, I'd agree with you, but the reasons you mentioned are exactly the reasons why I expected Snape to be horoscopicaly Scorpio which he isn't. That leads me to the conclusion that JKR is not considering scorpions at all. Which doesn't mean that my conclusion is correct...

There is a slight, very slight possibility that Snape is going to help Harry by means of his Patronus in the beginning of the last book. So there we would have Harry, having no idea who is helping him, and we would be supposed not to have any idea either. JM2K

I can't see any animal, appart from phoenix and stag (which I don't find probable, but then again, I might be wrong), that would be so revealing about Snape. That's why I think that his Patronus will be used while it will be unknown who sent it.

It might be indicative, the way that Snape thinks is the best to deal with Dementors. We don't know what that way is, just that it is not a Patronus. Maybe it will become important?


mooncalf - Sep 26, 2006 4:43 pm (#270 of 2959)
Vulture, we know that Snape has a patronus because he is a member of the OoP, and all members use their Patronuses (Patroni?) to communicate.

Personally I have always pictured him as a bird of prey - a hawk or even a vulture. But Nathan makes a very interesting argument for a scorpion. Hmm . . .
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 271 to 300

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:36 am

Magic Words - Sep 26, 2006 5:03 pm (#271 of 2959)
Phoenix.

As for what it was before the phoenix became available as a unique Patronus in book 6, I'll let you all figure that out. I have no idea.


wynnleaf - Sep 26, 2006 5:22 pm (#272 of 2959)
I'd guess the same, Magic Words. After all, Dumbledore has been in a very real sense, Snape's "patron." He has been (to use words that actually define patron), one who "supports, protects, or champions" Snape. He has been his "supporter or benefactor." After all, DD forgave Snape's turning to LV, he gave him a way to sort of redeem himself, he gave him a job, he protected him from going to Azkaban, supported him as a teacher -- and in HBP, he may have given his life, in part, for Snape. Yes, he has definitely been Snape's patron. I would almost be surprised if Snape's patronus does not become a phoenix.


Thom Matheson - Sep 26, 2006 7:38 pm (#273 of 2959)
If all that were the case for a patronus, where did Hermione come up with an otter? I think otter and I think about the playful animal that always wants to have fun and playfully skip about. That is not my picture of Hermione. Beaver maybe. Hardworking, industrious, business before pleasure type.

It can't always work that way, unless someone can explain to me the meaning of an "otter".


Meoshimo - Sep 26, 2006 7:52 pm (#274 of 2959)
Here's a web page with some interesting information about otters in folklore: [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]


Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 26, 2006 9:01 pm (#275 of 2959)
Thom, J.K. Rowling asserted that she assigned Hermione, the patronus of an otter because it is her favorite animal.

class 14: If you were a animagus which animal would you be? and why?JK Rowling replies -> I gave Hermione my idea animagus, because it's my favourite animal. World Book Day Chat March 4, 2004

In terms of Severus I was merely postulating the scorpion as an alternative to a bat patronus.


wynnleaf - Sep 27, 2006 3:19 am (#276 of 2959)
Thing is, from what we've seen of the patronus, it tends to represent what the person views as a protector, not some representative form of that person's own character. Harry's patronus isn't a stag because he looks like his father, or because he's like his father, but because his father is a sort of patron. Similarly, Tonks' patronus is a werewolf, not because a werewolf has anything to do with her own character, but because she sees in Lupin someone she'd view or perhaps want to view, as a supporter of hers. The otter, at least in the above website, seems to be a benefactor, too.

I would think Snape's patronus would represent what for him would be a supporter or benefactor -- not some indication of his own character.


Vulture - Sep 27, 2006 3:39 am (#277 of 2959)
Vulture, we know that Snape has a patronus because he is a member of the OoP, and all members use their Patronuses (Patroni?) to communicate. (mooncalf - Sep 26, 2006 5:43 pm (#270))

I know that Dumbledore refers (in Book 5) to the Order having "other methods" of communication than fireplaces, and that we see various Order members sending off what look like Patronuses, but what's the exact canon on this ? Has it been specifically said _ in so many words _ that Order members use Patronuses to communicate ?

Also, I know that Snape can receive the (Patronus) message Tonks sends, but have we seen him actually send one ? (Maybe we have _ I'm not near any books, and am a bit fuzzy as to whether he fired one off after collecting Harry in Book 6.) Yes, I know I'm being nit-picky here, but it occurs to me that Tonks's surprise in Book 6 at Snape's appearance may not simply be due to her expecting Hagrid.


Mezzanine - Sep 27, 2006 8:01 am (#278 of 2959)
Edited by Sep 27, 2006 9:02 am

I know that Dumbledore refers (in Book 5) to the Order having "other methods" of communication than fireplaces, and that we see various Order members sending off what look like Patronuses, but what's the exact canon on this ? Has it been specifically said _ in so many words _ that Order members use Patronuses to communicate ?

Vulture, here's what JKR says about Order communication (her site, FAQ section, About the books):

Question: So how DO the members of the Order of the Phoenix communicate with each other?

Her answer: "I was surprised that this particular question won the poll, because the answer (as I've already said) can be found in an already-published book (Goblet of Fire), whereas the other two questions related to book six. But perhaps I was influenced by the fact that I knew the other two questions had interesting answers – and, of course, you will shortly know the answers to those questions anyway!

Members of the Order use their Patronuses to communicate with each other. They are the only wizards who know how to use their spirit guardians in this way and they have been taught to do so by Dumbledore (he invented this method of communication). The Patronus is an immensely efficient messenger for several reasons: it is an anti-Dark Arts device, which makes it highly resilient to interference from Dark wizards; it is not hindered by physical barriers; each Patronus is unique and distinctive, so that there is never any doubt which Order member has sent it; nobody else can conjure another person's Patronus, so there is no danger of false messages being passed between Order members; nothing conspicuous needs to be carried by the Order member to create a Patronus.

And, as many of you have deduced, Dumbledore's Patronus is indeed a phoenix."

Whether this is exact canon (as you put it) or not, the choice is yours. However I think she didn't mess up this question (as opposed to the Flitwick thing).

Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 27, 2006 8:24 am (#279 of 2959)
Edited Sep 27, 2006 9:57 am

Lina, I would argue that Severus Snape's birthday being in January lends to the idea that his Patronus may in fact be a scorpion because, the ancient Greeks believe Scorpions capable of producing venom and anti venom. This ancient belief that scorpion had the ability to produce both reminded me of the duality seen in Janus symbolism I had spoken of before. as well as duality seen in the constellation Scorpius

The month of January is named after the Roman god Janus. Janus, is the ancient Roman god of doors, gates and beginnings and endings. He is often depicted as having two heads one looking forward and one backward.

Snape actions are also in accord with a Janus like figure because of his role a double agent and spy during the first war with Voldemort. He is akin to a Janus like figure other ways as well because, he treats Harry horridly in general and yet he saved Harry's life at least twice and prevented Umbridge from achieving her objectives in OotP while, presenting himself to Voldemort, Bellatrix, and Narcissa as loyal Death Eater.

Additionally, J.K. Rowling illustrates that Snape and Harry are a Janus like figure

"Do you remember me telling you we are practicing nonverbal spells, Potter?" "Yes," said Harry stiffly. "Yes sir," "There is no need to call me `sir,' Professor." The word had escaped him before he knew what he was saying. Several people including Hermione gasped. Behind Snape, however, Ron, Dean, and Seamus grinned appreciatively. "Detention, Saturday night, my office," said Snape. "I do not take cheek from anyone, Potter . . . `the Chosen One'" (HBP Large Print Edition pages 235-236).

Harry's response to Professor Snape's query is the same sort of sarcastic and incisive comment that Professor Snape would make. Indeed as Hermione points out later.

What's Dumbledore playing at, anyway, letting him teach Defense? Did you hear him talking about the Dark Arts? He Loves them! All that unfixed, indestructible-" "Well," said Hermione, I thought he sounded a bit like you." "Like me?" "Yes, when you were telling us what it's like to face Voldemort. You said it wasn't just memorizing a bunch of spells, you said it was you and your brains and your guts- well, wasn't that what Snape was saying? That it really comedown to being brave and quick-thinking?" (HBP Large Print Edition pages 236-237).

In effect Hermione tells Harry that in some ways Harry and Snape are merely the opposite sides of the same coin or to use mythology Harry and Snape in this instance are like the double headed representation of Janus with one head facing forward(venom) and one backward (anti venom)

The duality seen in the heart and character of Severus Snape, reminds me also of the binary nature of the star Antares

Antares (Alpha Scorpii), the binary star that is called the Heart of the Scorpion

History of the star: Antares is a red binary star, fiery red and emerald green, near the center of the constellation Scorpius and was sometimes called "the Heart of the Scorpion".

It is often more visible than the planet Mars and is sometimes confused with it when the positions are close. One of Antares' translations is Anti-Ares, meaning "Rival of Mars". [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

To sum up I would argue that Severus Snape melds traits of a Slytherin as symbolized by the colors green and silver, and to a degree the courage and valour of Gryffindor as symbolized by the colors red and gold.

Wynnleaf, having put forth my argument for the scorpion as an alternative to a bat, phoenix, or stag. I do concede that it may be possible that Snape cannot produce one? Hoewever, I tend to think that any wizard with any minuscule traces of goodness is capable of doing so.


journeymom - Sep 27, 2006 8:27 am (#280 of 2959)
"it is an anti-Dark Arts device, which makes it highly resilient to interference from Dark wizards"

This is interesting, especially if you think it reflects on Snape's character. That Snape would be able to conjure a patronus at all would be significant in light of this statement. Doesn't this statement of JKR's imply that a truly evil wizard would have a difficult time intercepting a patronus message?

Can Voldemort conjure a patronus?


wynnleaf - Sep 27, 2006 10:51 am (#281 of 2959)
Nathan,

Perhaps you misunderstood me. I meant that the creature (or whatever) that is represented by a person's patronus is not an indicator of their personality or character, but is instead an indicator of what or who is for them a representation of support, protection, and so on. For Harry, his patronus represents his father. For Tonks, it represents Remus. For Hermione, we don't know who or what it represents, but otters apparently are symbolic of benefactors. Dumbledore has a phoenix who is apparently devoted to him and supports and encourages him, so his phoenix patronus is representative of what for him is the essence of support, protection, etc.

Based on those examples, I would expect Snape's patronus to be representative of what Snape would deam symbolic of support, protection, or a benefactor.

The notion of a scorpion, based on Snape's birthday and Janus, would only work if the specific manefestation of the patronus was symbolic of the individual's personality traits, or character. But the examples JKR gives us do not really indicate that. Nor does the word itself: patron us.


Vulture - Sep 27, 2006 4:46 pm (#282 of 2959)
Hi, Mezzanine: Thanks for your info in #278. (Yes, I believe she didn't mess this one up as she did on the Flitwick/Slughorn/Lily thing.) See also what I say below.

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

Behind Snape, however, Ron, Dean, and Seamus grinned appreciatively. "Detention, Saturday night, my office," said Snape. "I do not take cheek from anyone, Potter . . . `the Chosen One'" (HBP Large Print Edition pages 235-236)

For me, for some reason, what stands out for me from that passage is how Harry's room-mates _ divided in many ways, have this moment of Gryffindor solidarity (well, it recalls Seamus's wink in their first class in Book 1).

But another thing that stands out is how Snape reacts _ he chooses to emphasise, in public, that Harry is "the Chosen One" _ "I do not take cheek from anyone, Potter, not even `the Chosen One'". That "not even" is very far from being an insult. I'm not sure where I'm going with this, but that choice of words is almost as if Snape, though perfectly prepared to insult Harry, won't insult The Chosen One as such.

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

Hi, Journeymom: I agree with your post #280 _ that's what I was getting at in #268.

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

Thing is, from what we've seen of the patronus, it tends to represent what the person views as a protector, not some representative form of that person's own character. Harry's patronus isn't a stag because he looks like his father, or because he's like his father, but because his father is a sort of patron. Similarly, Tonks' patronus is a werewolf, not because a werewolf has anything to do with her own character, but because she sees in Lupin someone she'd view or perhaps want to view, as a supporter of hers. The otter, at least in the above website, seems to be a benefactor, too. (wynnleaf - Sep 27, 2006 4:19 am (#276))

Can we be sure of this ? For Harry, trying to be like his father is a very big deal, and after he first uses "Prongs" to drive off the Dementors, it means a lot to him when Dumbledore says "Prongs rode again last night". For Tonks, Lupin is a very big deal and part of her character, too.

I don't think Snape's Patronus will turn out to be a phoenix, simply because it's too obvious, and because I think Snape's Patronus would have some quality unique to him.

Also, if a Patronus is an "anti-Dark device", that would make Snape's ownership of one a clinching argument _ which is why I tend to notice that we haven't actually seen Snape using it.

I'm not sure of the exact Latin translation of "patronus", but I suspect that'll have a lot to do with what JKR means by it.


wynnleaf - Sep 27, 2006 5:30 pm (#283 of 2959)
The word "patron" is:

from the Middle English, from Old French, from Medieval Latin patronus, from Latin, from pater, patr-, father.

So the word "patron" is derived from the Medieval Latin "patronus" which comes for the word for father. So what's "father" got to do with patron?

The primary definition for "patron" is

One that supports, protects, or champions someone or something, such as an institution, event, or cause; a sponsor or benefactor

The Latin word "patronus" was used to mean the following:

1. A noble or wealthy person in ancient Rome who granted favor and protection to someone in exchange for certain services. 2. A slave owner in ancient Rome who freed a slave without relinquishing all legal claim to him.

Patron and Patronus. These are not two different words. They are varying forms of the same word with somewhat different definitions. But all of the definitions have to do with someone being a benefactor, protector, etc -- whether we're talking about a father, a slave owner who gives his slave freedom, a noble granting protection, or simply someone who in general supports, champions or protects.

JKR doesn't generally just pull actual words out of the sky and assign arbitrary meanings to them. A lot of people seem to assume that a particular patronus is an indicator of the person's own personality or characteristics. But that's not what the word means -- the person is conjuring a patron and it takes the form of something that speaks to them of what a patron is -- something that symbolizes, for that individual, a supporter, a champion, or a protector.


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 27, 2006 8:14 pm (#284 of 2959)
I can understand wanting to make a big leap with Hary's patronus, but we've got Jo saying that she gave Hemrione an otter because she likes otters, and then she said in an interview that Ron's was a Jack Russell terrier, because she had one. That doesn't sound like they are all thought out that carefully to me.

Cho got a swan, and a lot of people thought that would mean something, but she didn't do much of anything in book six and now she's left school.

I hate to say it, but I suspect Patronuses may well be one of those things that we like to talk about that Jo will never do anything serious with.

Nathan Zimmermann - Sep 27, 2006 9:30 pm (#285 of 2959)
During the World Book Day chat in 2004 the following questiion was rasied:

Ernie: I wonder if you can let us know what form will Professor Snape's Boggart and Patronus take? I am very curious. JK Rowling replies -> Well, I'm not going to tell you Ernie, but that's because it would give so much away. I wonder whether Ernie is your real name? (It was my grandfather's).

Since, Snape's boggart and patronus would reveal too much information. This leads me to believe that both of these items are intimatelu connected with the question of Snape's true loyalties lie.

If Snape can in dire circumstances produce a patronus a Phoenix, or a Scorpion seems more likely to me because, the mutal loathing that existed between James and Severus would seem to exclude a stag. Also, I do not see how having a bat patronus would reveal too much information.

The majority of members of the Order communicate using Patronuses. Thi implies one of three things:

1. Snape is capable of producing a Patronus amd using it to communicate.


2. Snape is incapable of producing a Patronus, but, understands and can decipher messages that are sent via this method.


3. Snape and Dumbledore use an alternative but equally safe means of communication that is used only between themselves.


Choices - Sep 28, 2006 10:18 am (#286 of 2959)
A Jack Russell Terrier is so unlike anything about Ron. Jack Russell's are small, yappy, tenacious, high energy dogs - not one of those characteristics describes Ron. I have to agree with Die Z. I think some patronuses may be significant, but others are not.


Mrs Brisbee - Sep 28, 2006 10:22 am (#287 of 2959)
A Jack Russell Terrier is so unlike anything about Ron. Jack Russell's are small, yappy, tenacious, high energy dogs - not one of those characteristics describes Ron.

Patronuses represent a protector for the wizard, not the wizard himself. Maybe Ron's protector is his mom.

Although I am inclined to agree that Rowling just threw that one out there for no better reason than because she likes Jack Russells.


Choices - Sep 28, 2006 10:38 am (#288 of 2959)
Well, we know Dumbledore has a phoenix as his Patronus and Fawkes is so closely associated with Dumbledore. We know Tonks's Patronus reflects her love for Lupin. I just tried to figure how Ron is associated with a Jack Russell Terrier......and I couldn't. LOL


painting sheila - Sep 28, 2006 11:04 am (#289 of 2959)
Mrs Brisbee - I agree! The Jack Russell does sound like his mom!


Mrs Brisbee - Sep 28, 2006 11:06 am (#290 of 2959)
I think some patronuses may be significant, but others are not. --Choices

I think you hit the nail on the head with that comment.

If Ron's Patronus was important, I think Rowling should have mentioned it in OotP.

Of course, she hasn't told us yet what Snape's Patonus is, or even if he can conjure one. I thought the subject would show up in one of Snape's DADA classes in HBP, but nothing. Snape's classes actually seemed pretty dull.


Mrs Brisbee - I agree! The Jack Russell does sound like his mom!-- painting sheila

I was very amused by Choices's description. Mrs. Weasley just popped into my head!


wynnleaf - Sep 28, 2006 11:25 am (#291 of 2959)
Mrs Brisbee said: Patronuses represent a protector for the wizard, not the wizard himself. Maybe Ron's protector is his mom.

Exactly!!!

Well, not that Ron's patronus necessarily represents his mom, but it could. Jack Russell terriers are supposed to be highly loyal dogs. They are considered very trustworthy with children. No, no, no, it doesn't mean Ron is like that (although he could be, I guess). It means that is what Ron needs in a patron -- a protector that is like a Jack Russell terrier, loyal and trustworthy.

It's NOT that the characteristics of the patronus form equate to the characteristics of the person. Instead, the characteristics of the patronus equate to what would be a protector, a patron, for that person.

I thought the subject would show up in one of Snape's DADA classes in HBP, but nothing. Snape's classes actually seemed pretty dull.

Well, Snape did teach his classes alternative means of dealing with dementors, which is good considering that it would probably be hard for most students to conjure a patronus. And the DA, while successfully doing the patronus spell, was actually only doing it in the safety of the Room of Requirement and most of those students have had no opportunity to see if they can really produce a patronus when faced with a real dementor.

Further, I wouldn't think all that practice at non-verbal spells -- basically dueling in class -- would be boring.

But it was disappointing that JKR didn't show us much of Snape's DADA classes. Given how much build-up we had to his wanting to teach the class, I wish she'd given us more scenes inside his classroom.


rambkowalczyk - Sep 28, 2006 2:21 pm (#292 of 2959)
Nathan Zimmerman made an interesting point about the the scorpian, how it seems to show that Snape has both qualities of Gryffindor and Slytherin.

Peter Pettigrew who was sorted into Gryffindor has yet to show any kind of bravery (the noble kind) and yet is devious and cunning.

Severus Snape who was sorted into Slytherin could very well be brave as well as having his usual Slytherin traits. There's a number of places where he bristles at being thought a coward. Maybe it's because it can't be known what brave things he has done because Voldemort isn't fully defeated.


journeymom - Sep 28, 2006 10:32 pm (#293 of 2959)
"But it was disappointing that JKR didn't show us much of Snape's DADA classes. Given how much build-up we had to his wanting to teach the class, I wish she'd given us more scenes inside his classroom."

Amen to that!


Mrs Brisbee - Sep 29, 2006 5:29 am (#294 of 2959)
Wynnleaf: Snape did teach his classes alternative means of dealing with dementors, which is good considering that it would probably be hard for most students to conjure a patronus.

That's true, though Rowling doesn't let us know what those alternative methods are, so we can't judge whether the class was interesting, effective, or useful.

Learning non-verbal spells was a standard requirement in all classes for all sixth years, so there's no reason to suppose Snape's class more or less interesting than any of the others based on that. In OotP, Harry's DA lessons where he had everyone pair up and practice jinxes was fun to read and interesting for his students, but Snape and Harry have a distictly different style. Harry picks a basic spell-- Expelliarmus-- for his first class, and proceeds to teach everyone proper technique before moving on to anything more difficult. Snape picks the Shield Charm for the students to attempt non-verbally-- a spell he shouldn't expect most of them to know(Harry comments that the only reason at least half the class knows it is because he taught it to them the previous year)!

I guess there's really no reason to expect Snape to be any better a teacher at DADA than he was at Potions. Maybe that was Rowling's point in not dwelling there: nothing to see, just move along to the next plot point, folks.... Still, I wanted to see inside the classroom.


shadzar - Sep 29, 2006 7:12 am (#295 of 2959)
Well we know Snape wasn't under the cloak the night James died now thanks to the new JKR site update.


Vulture - Sep 29, 2006 7:21 am (#296 of 2959)
Which part of the website is that in ? I've just been up there and couldn't find anything like that. (Admittedly, I'm not the greatest when navigating around her website _ got held up for hours trying to figure out a hidden meaning behind the horseshoe, candle and opening/closing books behind her door !!)


Meoshimo - Sep 29, 2006 7:25 am (#297 of 2959)
Well, we saw how he taught Defense Against the Dark Arts in Prizoner of Azkaban; maybe that's some notion of how his classes are (though he was acting especially awful with a motive in mind).

Yes, I know he's a horrible person, but Snape does seem like a capable teacher. I doubt that he would give bad information or teach something that wasn't useful.


Anna L. Black- Sep 29, 2006 7:34 am (#298 of 2959)
It's in the Rumours section, Vulture.


wynnleaf - Sep 29, 2006 8:48 am (#299 of 2959)
I got such a laugh out of that answer! You know JKR is reading all these theories and watching us try to put together something that works with the Never Asked Question, and just having a world of fun at our expense. It was so cool to see her put that in Rumours and know that it not only shot down a theory, but also signaled us that she was reading the theories. I mean, I know she does that, but this I guess had an immediacy to it -- what with her posting the NAQ and then a short while later debunking one of the resulting theories.


Vulture - Sep 29, 2006 11:17 am (#300 of 2959)
Hi, Anna L. Black _ thanks, yes, I had stumbled across it since my last post.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 301 to 330

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:43 am

Vulture - Sep 30, 2006 6:13 am (#301 of 2959)
[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

JKR says: "She was talking to her husband, Neil, recently, after she had just written the death of one particular character. "He shuddered. 'Oh don't do that,' he said to me, but of course I did."

And with one swirl of her pen, millions of children will weep or rejoice." ( Diagon Nilly, "+ Who will die in books 6/7?" #680, 10 Jan 2006 5:11 pm )

The only character whose death about which "millions of children will weep or rejoice" is our beloved former Potions professor, Severus Snape. About the only character for whom there are large numbers of people hating and loving. ( Steve Newton, "+ Who will die in books 6/7?" #684, 11 Jan 2006 7:18 am )

I thought Snape initially too,Steve.Another could possibly be Draco ... ( Madame Pomfrey, "+ Who will die in books 6/7?" #685, 11 Jan 2006 8:53 am )

I just spotted this. Has this been discussed in here at the time ? The "weep or rejoice" does seem to be a giveaway, doesn't it ? Has to be Draco or Snape, in my opinion.

Ah _ just occurs to me _ the sentence "And with one swirl of her pen ...", etc., was written by a journalist, and I doubt if JKR confided who the dying character was. So maybe Draco and Snape are off the hook. But someone isn't !!


Ann - Sep 30, 2006 7:59 am (#302 of 2959)
Vulture, that interview was January 10th, so it's not, probably, dealing with what she's been writing lately. I can't imagine she would kill Snape at the beginning of Book 7. And if she does kill him off, I would expect that it would have been well established by the moment of his death whether we are supposed to weep or rejoice. The interviewer's line about children weeping or rejoicing at the swirl of her pen seems to me to go back to her earlier remark that Rowling will kill off both goodies and baddies in Book 7. I think the interviewer means that children will weep at the former and rejoice at the latter.

It does sound as if there is a fairly important death near the beginning of Book 7, but probably not Snape, I would think. As I said, the interview is dated January 10th, and she said she really only started writing again at the New Year--I can't imagine she would say "recently" when talking about writing the death of Dumbledore by that time. And t's got to be someone on the good side (or her husband wouldn't have shuddered and said "don't do that"). Perhaps someone being killed at the Weasley-Delacour wedding?


shadzar - Sep 30, 2006 8:46 am (#303 of 2959)
The wedding? Possibly Fenrir coming to finish what he started?

The sides wil became drawn in the sand and known to all who stands on which side of this war.

But IF that were to happen would Snapes loyalties be shown so soon?


wynnleaf - Sep 30, 2006 10:46 am (#304 of 2959)
Ann, I think you're assuming she writes the book chapter by chapter in a linear manner. Many authors don't write that way, especially if they are working from extensive notes, outlines, etc. Do we know how JKR writes? Just curious.

Whatever she was writing at the time, I wouldn't be surprised if there's some sort of crisis around the wedding.


Die Zimtzicke - Sep 30, 2006 4:43 pm (#305 of 2959)
There are fans and detractors of almost EVERY character. Draco, Snape, Hagrid, Ginny, Luna and Hagrid all have rabid defenders and detractors, just for a start.

I too, expect an attack or some kind of trouble at the wedding. To me it has a huge target painted on it.


painting sheila - Sep 30, 2006 9:20 pm (#306 of 2959)
I agree with the attack at the wedding scenerio. Just like the Quidditch Worls cup. It brought everyone together and was a great venue to swipe at everyone.


S.E. Jones - - Sep 30, 2006 10:00 pm (#307 of 2959)
You can start a new discussion up about what might transpire during the wedding ceremony and the time leading up to it.

And now, back to Snape.......


essie125 - - Oct 1, 2006 4:28 am (#308 of 2959)
Everybody is wondering about why DD trusted Snape, even our main man Harry. DD said, "That is between me and Professor Snape".

There is of course also a lot of debate whether or not Snape is good. There are two scenario's possible.

1. Snape has remained bad.

2. Snape had really gone over to the 'good' side.

In the case of scenario 1. there is overwhelming evidence. Snape has never come across as a particularly nice, pleasant or friendly person. He has always had a bad streak about him. He has remained good contact with many of LV's deatheaters through the years. He tries to catch Sirius, and he of course killed DD.

In the case of scenario 2. there is no overwhelming evidence, but there are a great series oh subtle hints that Snape is really a good, ambitious, but non-social guy.

Personally, I am a member of the 'Professor Snape is a very annoying, and unsociable, but besides that good person' camp.

The reasons I think this are all based on my interpretation of texts. A lot of the texts in the books, concerning Snape, are very ambiguous.

Snape killing DD is a fact, but the reasons behind it are ambiguous.

1. Snape truely wanted to kill DD, because of the unbreakable vow, and DD did not know about the unbreakable vow

2. Snape told DD that he had made the unbreakable vow and both agreed that Snape had to help Draco, because Snape's position as a double spy was in danger.

Snape making an unbreakable vow is a fact, but the reasons behind this are ambiguous as was Draco's task at the beginning of HBP.

1. Snape made the unbreakable vow so that LV would know once and for all that he was a true servant.

2. Snape made the unbreakable vow after having informed DD about Draco's task. Both agreed that Snape taking the unbreakable vow would be the best course of action.

DD pleading with Snape before his death is a fact, but what he was pleading for is ambiguous.

1. DD was surprised by the fact that Snape was going to kill him and was pleading for his life.

2. DD was pleading Snape to go on and kill him to stop Draco from becoming a killer and to make sure that Snape could remain a double spy.

One of the reasons I choose scenario 2. Snape was twitching while he was making the unbreakable vow. He knew that taking the unbreakable vow meant that DD would be killed either by him or by Draco.

Secondly, Snape's role as a double spy is to critical for the whole war, to give up. The fact that Harry saw Snape killing DD was not part of the plan. Harry was underneath his invisibility cloak. Snape did not know this. So maybe DD was pleading for his live, not because he did not want to be killed, but because he wanted to make clear to Snape that Harry was there without letting the other deatheaters know. By Harry knowing that Snape killed DD, Snape could no longer operate as a double spy, because all the order members now know that Snape killed DD. Maybe DD was trying to make Snape read his thoughts.

So to me the question is not why did DD trust Snape, but why did Snape trust DD?

I believe that Snape had a soft spot for Lily, but they did not have a relationship. Snape hung around with a lot of future deatheaters, while at hogwarts. His friends would not have stood for him having a relationship with a muggleborn. That is the reason why Snape called Lily names when she was trying to help him when James was attacking him. He did not want his friends to find out he loved her.

Now I believe that Snape became potionsmaster before LV's attack on Harry, so he had LV's permission to go and teach at Hogwarts. So Snape became spy for LV between him overhearing the prophecy and LV attacking Harry. From DD we also know that Snape was very upset about learning that LV killed Lily. His remorse was what made him go over to the good side. But I think this can not be the only thing.

I also believe that DD may have given Snape the same lesson about LV that he gave Hary in HBP (apart from all the horcrux memories).


Vulture - Oct 1, 2006 4:48 am (#309 of 2959)
Hi, Essie: Click on my post, Vulture, 1 Sep 2005 2:28 pm, 3rd Severus Snape thread, #2649 , for my sketch of the possible loyalties of Severus Snape. There was a lot of debate, both before and after that post, on the topics you raise. See #2600 on that thread also.

Mind you, I myself haven't seen "why did Snape trust Dumbledore ?" before !!


essie125 - - Oct 1, 2006 9:50 am (#310 of 2959)
VULTURE,

Me neither, but if Snape has really gone over to the good side, he must have had a lot of trust in DD's abilities to keep him safe. And knowing Snape, his arrogant little self that is, I doubt he would have been able to do it if he did not have a lot of self confidence.

I really feel for Snape if my thoughts are correctly.

POOR SNAPE, and poor DD obviously. That I'm glad he's gone was just a joke. As you said. I'm a griffindor afterall.


Choices - Oct 1, 2006 10:19 am (#311 of 2959)
Take a look at Dumbledore - what's not to trust?

Now take alook at Snape - Dumbledore surely took a huge leap of faith in trusting him, but then Dumbledore obviously knows something we don't. It's as simple as that.


essie125 - - Oct 1, 2006 10:51 am (#312 of 2959)
However trustworthy DD may come across, he could not prevent the Potters from being, killed nor the Longbottom's from being tortured into insanity.

Obviously DD is only human, but Snape still has a reason to fear for his life. So what was it that DD told Snape that made him risk his life and go over to the good side?

Personally I believe that DD told Snape a thing or two about LV, to educate him about LV. Just like he showed Harry.


wynnleaf - Oct 1, 2006 11:17 am (#313 of 2959)
I think that Snape returned to DD just as DD said, because he so regreted it that LV was targeting the Potters. Now to me, that most likely means that Snape didn't want Lily, in particular, targeted. In any case, whether it was because of liking Lily, or life-debt to James, Snape had to go to someone who actually had a chance of protecting the Potters.

Snape could have gone to the MOM, but we all know how much good that would have done - none. So really the only hope for correcting the mess he'd started was to go to DD.

I don't necessarily think he trusted DD for his own (Snape's) sake, but he trusted DD to help the Potters and keep them safe even though LV was targeting them.

In going to DD, he would certainly be risking DD deciding to turn him over to aurors as a DE. Just confessing his crimes wouldn't get him off of going to Azkaban, after all. In going to DD, he might have possibly hoped on a "second chance," but my guess is that it was primarily to get help for the Potters. The "second chance" that DD ultimately offered took the form of working as a spy and that may have originated with DD or Snape, we don't know whose idea it was. But there must have been reasons for why DD decided he could trust Snape as a spy.

In any case, I really don't think Snape had many alternatives. If he wanted to try and get help for the Potters (maybe primarily Lily), he had to go to Dumbledore and risk DD calling in the aurors after he'd confessed. However, DD decided to use Snape as a spy. But once DD offered that option, I don't think Snape had many real alternatives. If he wanted to turn away from LV, he couldn't do that openly -- LV would have had him killed the same as Regulas. He couldn't just run away - LV would kill him like he did Karkarov later. So really the only viable option other than getting sent to Azkaban was to turn spy on LV, so that LV never knew that Snape had turned.

How much does Snape trust DD by Harry's time? I don't think we know. But I think DD has done a lot to show that he's willing to support Snape through all sorts of unpleasantness. DD vouched for Snape before the MOM, he kept him out of Azkaban, he gave him a teaching position, he made him a Head of House, and he places a lot of trust in Snape. Snape has reason to trust DD.

I've read a number of fan fic stories where the writers think that DD uses Snape as a pawn and really doesn't care anything about how it affects Snape personally -- sending him off to LV at a great risk of death at the close of GOF, for instance. But my guess is that Snape is not a pawn of DD's, but more a lieutenant (as in deputy kind of definition, not military officer). My feeling is that DD wouldn't have sent Snape back to LV at the end of GOF unless Snape had truly been willing to go. So I think that there is a trust relationship going both ways.


Meoshimo - Oct 1, 2006 6:24 pm (#314 of 2959)
And now for something completely different.

In Prizoner of Azkaban, Dumbledore tells Harry, "Pettigrew owes his life to you. You have sent Voldemort a deputy who is in your debt. When one wizard saves another wizard's life, it creates a certain bond between them."

Now, does anyone think this has any relevence to the fact that James saved Snape's life when they were in school together?


shadzar - Oct 1, 2006 7:51 pm (#315 of 2959)
How could Snape repay the debt after James' death?


wynnleaf - Oct 1, 2006 7:57 pm (#316 of 2959)
Presumably, from DD's comment in PS/SS, by protecting Harry and saving his life. What I never understood was why would Snape have to save Harry's life more than once (during the Quidditch game in PS/SS), in order to satisfy the debt?

It's not like James did a huge amount in saving Snape. James was in no danger (he "ran" with the werewolf every month in his animagus form which he could have changed into if need be). Basically, James had to go warn Snape and convince him to leave the tunnel. We're told Snape got a glimpse of the werewolf. We don't know how close. But I imagine after that Snape was quite willing to exit the scene.

So just how much would Snape need to do to repay that? Well, of course, since he was quite instrumental in LV deciding to target the Potters, maybe he somehow intensified what he owed James, by being a part of the chain of events that led to his death.

Still, he's now been instrumental in saving Harry's life several times. It's hard for me to believe he's particularly bound by a life-debt any more than compels him to protect Harry. After all, the life debt that Peter presumably owes Harry hasn't forced him to do anything yet.


Saracene - Oct 2, 2006 3:33 am (#317 of 2959)
I agree with wynnleaf in that I also believe that Snape went to DD primarily to warn him about the danger to Harry's parents. As to what Snape's expectations were where his own fate was concerned, it's hard to say. But my own gut feeling is that he didn't expect to be given a second chance at all. After all, only a short time before DD was, for Snape, the enemy and the head of the enemy organisation fighting Snape's master; DD lost Order members to Snape's "colleagues" and he also knew James and Lily who Snape put in a mortal danger. There'd be a lot of personal feelings involved for DD apart from the general aghast reaction that most people would feel about Death Eaters. And I just find it hard to imagine Snape asking or begging DD for a second chance or saying I'm sorry or anything along these lines.

Regarding Snape's debt to James, I find it rather notable that DD, in the first book, never really talks about it in terms of *magical* arrangement or bond. His comment is, "funny how people's minds work", and he talks about the obligation existing primarily in Snape's own mind. As opposed to some outside magical force that compels Snape to act.

I also think that, while life debt will undoubtedly play a huge role in the Pettigrew storyline, it's unlikely that JKR will make it important in another storyline, Snape's or anyone else's.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 6:38 am (#318 of 2959)
Hi, everyone.

I'm new here, obviously, and joined because I've been dying to present a little theory of mine about Snape's patronus.

You may consider me in the camp of Snape supporters, for I'm convinced he's fully in the service of the Order, heart and mind and sneer.

As to my theory: When, in the course of attempting to decide in which house to put Harry in PS, the Sorting Hat, as we all remember quite well, suggested he might do well in Slytherin. When Harry summarily rejected that revolting idea, the Hat directed him instead to Gryffindor.

I think that may have been an important clue concerning the actual loyalties of Snape.

I've always been a bit perplexed by the Sorting Hat's suggestion that Harry would do well in Slytherin. The stated characteristic of members of Slytherin House is their "cunning," and I have never seen much evidence that Harry fits that description. Nor is it ever explained to us precisely why the Sorting Hat makes that suggestion.

I submit that it is altogether possible that Rowling presents that scene so early in the storyline to cement in our minds the notion that people are more complex than they may seem and that designations like "courageous" or "cunning" or "intelligent" are insufficient to tell us all we need to know about a person. I submit, as well, that she has a plot-related, as well as a thematic, purpose for making that observation early in the books.

Rowling has also said in an interview that to reveal Snape's patronus would give too much away.

It has occurred to me that Harry is perhaps not the only person who initially rejected an offer of placement made by the Sorting Hat. If, as I strongly suspect, Snape is on the side of Good, his tasks on behalf of the order reveal a greater level of courage than is demonstrated by anyone in the story except, perhaps, for Dumbledore. I have become suspicious that Snape may have been offered a place in Gryffindor by the Sorting Hat and, like Harry, rejected the initial offer -- and placed, therefore, in Slytherin. But the qualities which would have prompted the Hat to offer Gryffindor first are the qualities we see in Snape's great courage in spying for the Order.

I think it's possible that Rowling was very serious about how much the revelation of Snape's patronus would be, as I suspect that Snape's patronus may very well be a lion.


journeymom - Oct 2, 2006 8:27 am (#319 of 2959)
Good one, Sandylee. I like it.

I was going to suggest maybe his patronus is a bumblebee. But as they're generally considered kind of sweet, benign and well, bumbling, maybe that doesn't fit Snape. Kind of like Snape would never wear a turban.


Soul Search - Oct 2, 2006 1:12 pm (#320 of 2959)
Sandylee,

Good theory and well presented. I don't think I have seen it suggested before. I like it.

Hermione expressed a preference for Gryffindor on the train in SS. Later, in OotP, she mentions that the hat had wanted to put her in Ravenclaw. I think this supports your idea that the hat takes a student's desires into consideration, perhaps to resolve a close call.


wynnleaf - Oct 2, 2006 1:45 pm (#321 of 2959)
Sandylee,

I've often wondered if Snape did the reverse of Harry. As well as hearing (falsely) that all Dark wizards came from Slytherin, Harry had met Draco who really wanted to be in Slytherin -- so Harry was really turned off from Slytherin. I've often thought it would be a neat balance if Snape had met James and Sirius on the train and heard them hoping to be in Gryffindor and therefore wanted above all things to not be in Gryffindor. But Snape clearly has a lot of courage, and it wouldn't be particularly surprising if the Sorting Hat had tried to put him in Gryffindor, but he begged "anywhere but Gryffindor!" and ended up in Slytherin due to his cunning and the desire of a kid from a working class, half-blood background to "prove himself."

So your idea about Snape's patronus being a lion would be pretty revealing. What I'm not sure of is whether or not the lion (or Griffin) could be seen in the light of a protector. I really do believe that the patronus form reflects the idea of "patron" or "protector," not a reflection of the person's inner character.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 1:47 pm (#322 of 2959)
Hermione expressed a preference for Gryffindor on the train in SS. Later, in OotP, she mentions that the hat had wanted to put her in Ravenclaw. I think this supports your idea that the hat takes a student's desires into consideration, perhaps to resolve a close call

Ooooo! I had forgotten about that, yes.

I wanted to mention, as well, that I also subscribe to the view that the patronus of a witch or wizard reflects, not his or her own personality, but the representation of something which gives comfort, protection, security.

I think it's possible that Snape has become a Gryffindor at heart -- a heart which he is careful to tell Harry he doesn't wear on his sleeve -- and that the symbol of the House which was Dumbledore's would provide him with the ideal patronus. It would be "revealing" in all the ways Rowling suggests as a certain sign that he regards Gryffindor as his "true home," having moved beyond the stage of experimentation in dark ways which Slytherin represents. Yet he must, of course, conceal the change of heart he has undergone since leaving the service of Voldemort and, so, retains his position as Head of Slytherin as added "cover" for his role as spy.

I think the lion fits nicely -- better than the chimera, in that I really think Snape's ultimate character cannot be ambiguous by the end. If he has, indeed, changed from Death Eater to loyal member of the Order of the Phoenix, that change must be seen to be real if Harry is to learn from it, as I think Rowling intends him to.

And I can't think of any other animal which would reveal about Snape that he is on the side of Truth, Justice and the Hogwarts way.

She's hardly going to make Snape's patronus a bunny rabbit, after all.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 1:55 pm (#323 of 2959)
I've often wondered if Snape did the reverse of Harry. As well as hearing (falsely) that all Dark wizards came from Slytherin, Harry had met Draco who really wanted to be in Slytherin -- so Harry was really turned off from Slytherin. I've often thought it would be a neat balance if Snape had met James and Sirius on the train and heard them hoping to be in Gryffindor and therefore wanted above all things to not be in Gryffindor. But Snape clearly has a lot of courage, and it wouldn't be particularly surprising if the Sorting Hat had tried to put him in Gryffindor, but he begged "anywhere but Gryffindor!" and ended up in Slytherin due to his cunning and the desire of a kid from a working class, half-blood background to "prove himself."

Yes, that's pretty much the parallel I thought of, as well. One of the reasons it occurred to me was that I've puzzled so much over why Rowling had the Sorting Hat offer Slytherin to Harry. We've never been given a satisfactory explanation, and I have trouble finding "cunning" as a key component of Harry's character. But if Rowling's purpose was to introduce early on the fact that sometimes the House to which a student belongs might not be the most revealing of his or her true character, as well as the possibility that the Hat's decision is malleable and can be influenced by the student -- all in order to justify later the discovery that Snape is a late-blooming Gryffindor and not a Slytherin at all, it would make more sense.

So your idea about Snape's patronus being a lion would be pretty revealing. What I'm not sure of is whether or not the lion (or Griffin) could be seen in the light of a protector. I really do believe that the patronus form reflects the idea of "patron" or "protector," not a reflection of the person's inner character.

My idea is that, to Snape, the lion would represent Gryffindor itself -- Dumbledore's House -- and that Dumbledore has provided the only true patronage and protection in Snape's life. The representation is entirely symbollic, in the same way that the stag symbollizes to Harry his father and the werewolf Lupin to Tonks. Since no two wizards can share the same patronus -- thus the phoenix is unavailable to Snape -- what better symbol to represent to Snape Dumbledore's protective spirit than the Gryffindor lion?

Because, if Snape is good, then his true "patron" has been Dumbledore for nearly twenty years.


wynnleaf - Oct 2, 2006 3:18 pm (#324 of 2959)
Dumbledore has provided the only true patronage and protection in Snape's life. The representation is entirely symbollic, in the same way that the stag symbollizes to Harry his father and the werewolf Lupin to Tonks. Since no two wizards can share the same patronus -- thus the phoenix is unavailable to Snape -- what better symbol to represent to Snape Dumbledore's protective spirit than the Gryffindor lion?

Because, if Snape is good, then his true "patron" has been Dumbledore for nearly twenty years.

Sandylee, good defence of your idea! There is another possibility that someone thought of once (can't recall who). The augurey is the Irish phoenix. It is green and black (think Slytherin and Snape) and resembles a vulture. The cool thing about this as a patronus for Snape is that it would reveal his loyalties (the phoenix), but could be used by JKR to have Harry mistake it for a vulture until somebody else, like maybe Hermione, tells him something like, "no Harry, that's an augurey, a kind of phoenix."


Vulture - Oct 2, 2006 3:30 pm (#325 of 2959)
The main problem I have with Snape being a "Gryffindor at heart" is the attitude he has always shown to Gryffindor at Hogwarts. I've never bought the line pushed by many of his fans that everything Harry says about him is biased _ a few bits are, but much isn't.

In any case, Snape's attitude to the Houses is shown, not just by his treatment of Harry or of non-Slytherin students, but by a lot of other things. Before Harry becomes Seeker, Slytherin has won the House Cup and Quidditch Cup for several years _ and McGonagall keeps grinding her teeth about how Snape likes reminding her about it. In the "Quidditch Final" chapter of Book 3, he is very firmly in the Slytherin camp (as we'd expect), their leading supporter. What's more, Snape is popular with his House, as we see in Book 2 when they cheer him on in the duel with Lockhart and hope that he'll replace Dumbledore as Head, and in all the books when they chuckle at his jokes against Harry.

Whatever about Snape being good or bad, as will be seen in Book 7, I don't feel any doubt that, in terms of school Houses, Snape is 100% Slytherin and proud to be so. When Slytherin lose the House Cup at the end of Book 1, he is extremely frustrated and shakes hands with McGonagall "with a horrible forced smile" (I suppose Harry will be accused of bias on this one ?). I don't believe he ever wanted the Hat to put him elsewhere, and if the Hat considered doing so, it was probably because, as a Half-Blood, he might get some hassle from pure-blood Slytherins.

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

By the way, folks, I posted something about JKR's City Hall interview on Vulture, 2 Oct 2006 3:35 pm, "Was the Major Death in the HBP real?" thread, #1605 that has a lot of relevance to Snape.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 3:56 pm (#326 of 2959)
There is another possibility that someone thought of once (can't recall who). The augurey is the Irish phoenix. It is green and black (think Slytherin and Snape) and resembles a vulture

Ah, but the reason I don't particularly like this idea is that it implies that Snape still derives a sense of comfort and security from his Slytherin associations. I think his current status as Head of Slytherin House is part of his cover and intended to placate people like Lucius. He needs to retain his "bad boy" image in order to retain the trust of Voldemort and his supporters, to keep close to the kids of people like Goyle and Lucius with an ear to discovering any tidbits of information which might come his way through such sources and to keep us readers confused about his loyalties, as well.

I think that, at the end, he must be wholly Gryffindor -- with Harry's and our full understanding that he has concealed the innermost part of himself, with great care and considerable sacrifice, for the better part of two decades. We and Harry must be convinced that there is nothing left of Slytherin in him, that he truly loathes his past -- and a patronus which symbollizes, even in part, his Slytherin connections would leave everyone, especially Harry, unconvinced that he had ever really changed at all.

I think that the patronus is produced by a memory of pure joy because it reflects an inner truth about the witch or wizard producing it -- and about that witch or wizard's subconscious needs and desires. Much like the Mirror of Erised, in fact. So that any hint of Slytherin in his patronus would imply a longing -- at least in part -- for the old life he has left behind. I just don't think it would work if Rowling wants Harry and us to accept Snape as fully redeemed -- and I think she does.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 4:06 pm (#327 of 2959)
The main problem I have with Snape being a "Gryffindor at heart" is the attitude he has always shown to Gryffindor at Hogwarts. I've never bought the line pushed by many of his fans that everything Harry says about him is biased _ a few bits are, but much isn't.

Cover, sir. Cover. He plays his part well -- on Dumbledore's careful instructions, no doubt -- and hides his heart, just as he tells Harry he does when attempting to teach him Occlumency. I always thought that passage said more about Snape himself than it was meant to convey information to Harry -- and even, perhaps, to hint to Harry in the only way permitted to him that his feelings shouldn't be taken at face value. I think his anger in the expression of that injunction against wearing one's heart on one's sleeve reveals something of the anguish -- something of the cost to Snape -- of having to live a life of deception in order to make recompense for his past mistakes through service to the Order. "Dammit, Harry, this is what I have to do! And so do you, if we are to defeat Voldemort! And, yes, it's hard!! He can't say this directly, of course, but his frustration, I think, is compounded by his intense pain when confronted by this boy whose heart is always on his sleeve and who is naive enough to feel free to wear it there.

Thus, all of Snape's actions towards Gryffindors and Slytherins alike are to regarded, in my opinion, in the context of a man under cover, and aware that the slightest slip might destroy everything he's worked so long for and get a whole lot of people killed in the process.

This is a guy under deep stress, but also a guy of vast internal resources, if I've read him correctly.

My impressions only, of course. But I just don't think that Rowling can allow Snape to have become exactly what Harry has always believed him to be and have the thematic elements of the story work out satisfactorily.

On the other hand, I could be barking up the wrong sequoia entirely.


Vulture - Oct 2, 2006 4:14 pm (#328 of 2959)
Well, I can't help feeling an unholy glee at how all those Snape fans and websites will react if you turn out to be right and Snape turns out to be a secret Gryffindor. I mean, most of those websites are dripping in Slytherin imagery and pro-Slytherin messages !!


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 4:20 pm (#329 of 2959)
Well, I can't help feeling an unholy glee at how all those Snape fans and websites will react if you turn out to be right and Snape turns out to be a secret Gryffindor. I mean, most of those websites are dripping in Slytherin imagery and pro-Slytherin messages !!

Rolling On Floor, Laughing My Patootie Off.

Yes, there would be considerable consternation in Snapeville should my suspicions prove correct.

They may all love him for the entirely wrong reasons.

Heh.


Vulture - Oct 2, 2006 4:34 pm (#330 of 2959)
Where are you from, Sandylee ? Sequoia tree _ would I be right in guessing Canada ?

Anyway, have you tried the Harry Potter Personality Quiz on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ? You can paste it into your profile.

(Just to stay relevant _ I ended up with Snape as mine !!)
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 331 to 360

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:53 am

Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 4:46 pm (#331 of 2959)
Where are you from, Sandylee ? Sequoia tree _ would I be right in guessing Canada ?

No, Los Angeles, as it happens. "Sequoia" was just the first tree that popped into my tiny mind, right after "oak," which didn't scan.

Anyway, have you tried the Harry Potter Personality Quiz on [You must be registered and logged in to see this link.] ? You can paste it into your profile.

Oh, dear. I'm Sirius Black. Whom I consider basically a seriously stunted soul. But, then, some of the questions were almost impossible to answer. Which do I like better -- established facts or new theories? -- indeed. The only possible sane answer to that is "yes." I like established facts upon which one may build new theories. Would I rather hang out with friends or read/surf the net? Depends on my mood, silly test writer. I hate these quizzes. I'm no Sirius Black, I tell you! I would NEVER have fallen for that transparent ploy to get me to the MOM. I'd be dead by now if I were Sirius Black.

(Just to stay relevant _ I ended up with Snape as mine !!)

You become more attractive by the minute. If you look like Alan Rickman and sport a deep baritone English accent, I'll consider trading in my husband's English accent which hasn't quite the perfect timber Rickman offers, for you.

Profile? Profile? I should bare my darkest secrets for the world to see? Only somone like Sirius Black would fall for such a stunt.

Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 2, 2006 5:17 pm (#332 of 2959)
Snadylee, an excellent theory. It would also go far in explaining much of the mythological symbolism that have been attached to the figure of Severus Snape, in the past.

Additionally your theory also provides an the recent discussions concerning Antares that has been ongoing in the Literary Symbolism thread.


Vulture - Oct 2, 2006 5:45 pm (#333 of 2959)
I'd be dead by now if I were Sirius Black. (Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 5:46 pm (#331))

Well _ so far, so Sirius Black. Actually, I'd much rather be Sirius, though Snape is preferable to Wormtail. As for my voice, I've a deep Irish accent, not English, I'm afraid. Alan Rickman I'm not sure about, but I (and my relatives) do bear a certain facial resemblance to De Valera, whom Alan Rickman played in the film "Michael Collins", so you never know :-)


Choices - Oct 2, 2006 5:47 pm (#334 of 2959)
Sandylee, welcome to the forum. I have enjoyed reading your ideas and find that I pretty much agree with them all. I look forward to reading more of your comments. It is nice to have someone else who appreciates the delights of Severus Snape, so enchantingly portrayed by Alan Rickman. **sigh** LOL


Soul Search - Oct 2, 2006 6:01 pm (#335 of 2959)
I seem to recall JKR saying that someone would change Hogwarts houses. In all the resulting ideas, I don't think anyone suggested Snape.

Sandylee has come up with a good arguement for Snape changing from Slytherin to Gryffindor.


shadzar - Oct 2, 2006 6:17 pm (#336 of 2959)
OH no I am Snape!!!!! Does that mean I am good or bad? O.o

Pirate Monkey's Harry Potter Personality Quiz

What if Snape switched from G -> S? Tired of dealing with James and all, so he had himself moved to another house, and then came his downward spiral.


Sandylee - Oct 2, 2006 6:28 pm (#337 of 2959)
Nathan:

Snadylee, an excellent theory. It would also go far in explaining much of the mythological symbolism that have been attached to the figure of Severus Snape, in the past.

Additionally your theory also provides an the recent discussions concerning Antares that has been ongoing in the Literary Symbolism thread.

I’ll have to check it out. Thanks

Vulture:

Alan Rickman I'm not sure about, but I (and my relatives) do bear a certain facial resemblance to De Valera, whom Alan Rickman played in the film "Michael Collins", so you never know :-)

I’ll have to check you out. ;-)

Choices:

Sandylee, welcome to the forum. I have enjoyed reading your ideas and find that I pretty much agree with them all. I look forward to reading more of your comments. It is nice to have someone else who appreciates the delights of Severus Snape, so enchantingly portrayed by Alan Rickman. **sigh** LOL

Thanks for the welcome. A kindred spirit. Or possible rival. I’ll have to keep an eye on you.

Soul Search:

I seem to recall JKR saying that someone would change Hogwarts houses. In all the resulting ideas, I don't think anyone suggested Snape.

Sandylee has come up with a good arguement for Snape changing from Slytherin to Gryffindor.

Thanks. I had never actually thought about this in the context of actual students switching houses, but it makes sense to me that they could, if circumstances were right. I imagine, however, that the emotional identification with one’s house develops quite rapidly and it would take pretty extreme circumstances for any student to wish to make such a change. That’s another reason to think that it would be a powerful testament to Snape’s redemption were he to have developed an emotional attachment to Slytherin’s rival house. Hence, again, the lion patronus.

I’m going to be really disappointed when it turns out to be the bunny rabbit, after all.

Thanks, all, for the nice reception – from a group of people who have obviously spent a good deal more time than I have in exploring Rowling’s landscape. I’ve been enjoying lurking around here for quite awhile – and have learned a great deal. And for that, thank you, too.


journeymom - Oct 2, 2006 9:50 pm (#338 of 2959)
I wonder if both Sandylee and Vulture can be correct here. Because I like Sandylee's lion patronus idea very much. But I think Vulture made a valid point about Snape's Slytherin loyalties. They don't strike me as an act to cover his true loyalties. I believe Snape is a proud Slytherin.

Here's my unifying idea, and it centers on real unity. The sorting hat warned the students that they have to come together in order to have strength.

"Oh, know the perils, read the signs,

the warning history shows,

for our Hogwarts is in danger

from external, deadly foes

and we must unite inside her

or we'll crumble from within

I have told you, I have warned you...

let the Sorting now begin."

Could it be said that Dumbledore embodies aspects of all four houses? It would be appropriate, because as headmaster he acts on behalf of all his students, not just his Gryffindor home.

In light of this I think it's entirely possible for Snape to be a loyal Slytherin and yet be loyal to Albus Dumbledore, as well. The house isn't supposed to be entirely without merit, though sadly JKR hasn't shown us a truly noble Slytherin yet. It could be that Snape became that ultimate Slytherin who is cunning but also daring (Gryffindor), loyal (Hufflepuff) and full of wit and learning (Ravenclaw).

Or maybe his patronus is a bunny. ;-)


Saracene - Oct 3, 2006 1:07 am (#339 of 2959)
According to that test, I'm Hermione, Smile

Regarding the theory about Snape really being a Gryffindor: I actually don't like that idea, to be honest. For one thing, I don't like the idea of courage being treated as if it was some exclusive Gryffindor characteristic. And Snape I think is pretty much the only real chance for JKR to show a brave, non-self-serving Slytherin fighting on the good side. Yeah, there's Regulus Black - but he's a footnote who has been dead for the last sixteen years. And though I think Draco will end up doing something admirable I don't think he'll undergo a change that would lead him to actively fight on the Order's side. So if the books show Snape in some sort of heroic light and then go and add, "oh but he's really a late-blooming Gryffindor y'know", that IMO would be basically saying that no Slytherin could have done what Snape did and when they do it's because they really belong to another "good" house.


wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:27 am (#340 of 2959)
I took the test. I was Minerva McGonagall! Not really a big shock.

On Snape and Gryffindor. Saracene has a point. According to the Sorting Hatt all of the Houses are important and should work together to defeat evil. But that's not possible if a loyal, courageous person can't come out of Slytherin.

Harry truly is a Gryffindor, even though the Sorting Hat originally wanted to put him in Slytherin. I think we see some of his Slytherin qualities in when he got Slughorn to tell him about the horcruxes.

Snape can have the Gryffindor qualities of bravery, and yet still be a Slytherin, with the qualities of cunning and ambition (ambition is not a fault). Even if we were to find out that the Sorting Hat wanted to put Snape in Gryffindor originally, that doesn't mean he's not a true Slytherin, any more than it means that Harry isn't a true Gryffindor.

What I'd love to see (not sure that we will, of course), is JKR showing us a character, perhaps Snape, who embodies the attributes of all of the Houses. Like journeymom said, Snape (if he's loyal) has some of the best of all houses, loyalty, courage, intellectual ability, and cunning. Dumbledore definitely has all of those characteristics. He is so cunning I tend to think he's more Slytherin than anything!

So could his patronus be a lion? Well, yes, that could work in that it could point out that Snape has qualities typically considered those of other houses. But that would not make Snape's loyalty to Gryffindor as a house.

I agree with Vulture, that Snape is quite clear about his House loyalty, in the good sense. Both as a Slytherin and as Head of House, he's obviously fully supportive of the House in terms of supporting the Quidditch team, wanting them to win the House cup, etc. Certainly, it appears that McGonagall is the same about Gryffindor.

If the story reaches a point where JKR is saying that to be loyal to Dumbledore, Snape has to inwardly reject Slytherin, then that would be inconsistent with her other focus on the need for House unity, and that all Houses are needed to battle LV.

Oh, hi Vulture. Thanks for pointing out the test.


Vulture - Oct 3, 2006 7:29 am (#341 of 2959)
Edited Oct 3, 2006 9:24 am

I wonder if both Sandylee and Vulture can be correct here. Because I like Sandylee's lion patronus idea very much. But I think Vulture made a valid point about Snape's Slytherin loyalties. They don't strike me as an act to cover his true loyalties. I believe Snape is a proud Slytherin. (journeymom - Oct 2, 2006 10:50 pm (#338))

I think he is, yes. But I think Sandylee may have a point insofar as _ if he's on the good side _ the stuff that makes Snape unpopular with non-Slytherins would be good for his cover. (I'm not just saying it 'cos Sandylee likes my De Valera-like looks !!)

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

OH no I am Snape!!!!! Does that mean I am good or bad? O.o (shadzar - Oct 2, 2006 7:17 pm (#336))

Me too. You should put it on your Introduction page (click your Forum name and edit) !!

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

Oh, hi Vulture. Thanks for pointing out the test. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 8:27 am (#340))

Hi to you too !! I'm still reeling in shock that you're anything but Snape !! :-D

What I'd love to see (not sure that we will, of course), is JKR showing us a character, perhaps Snape, who embodies the attributes of all of the Houses. Like journeymom said, Snape (if he's loyal) has some of the best of all houses, loyalty, courage, intellectual ability, and cunning. Dumbledore definitely has all of those characteristics. He is so cunning I tend to think he's more Slytherin than anything! (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 8:27 am (#340))

Well, in reality, of course, there's no such thing as a person being just brave and nothing else, or just loyal and nothing else. Cedric, who was in Hufflepuff, wasn't just loyal, but brave as well, and very generous and selflessly sporting _ I'm not too clear which House, if any, is supposed to be the "generosity" House _ though I think it's probably between Gryffindor and Hufflepuff.

Despite the Hat's Book 1 song (and it sings a different one each year, remember), I reckon that a more accurate way of seeing the Houses is that they reflect their Founders' personalities. That seems to work, because Salazar Slytherin, the "twisted old loony", the Parseltongue, the one who broke away from the rest, and the one with the pure-blood notions, is reflected in a House that subscribes to all that, and which is at odds with the other three. We don't have as much detail on Godric Gryffindor, but the sword and various other hints give us something of a 'brave warrior' image. But he must have had a brain too, to turn his hat into The Sorting Hat, whose spell has lasted a thousand years.

Anyway, reflecting a Founder's personality is a more multi-faceted notion than just focussing on one personal quality _ though one quality may be more conspicuous. I've never felt that "cunning" adequately described Slytherin House, though cunning is involved. I think the "pure-blood" thing is more central to their identity, but in Book 6, especially, we're shown that you don't have to be a "pure-blood" to be a Slytherin. There is no doubt, too, that many of them are _ at the very least _ more interested in the Dark Arts than the average student of other Houses. But Slughorn, who was Slytherin Head for ages, isn't that keen on the Dark Arts. You get the idea _ multifaceted.

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

Anyway, what struck me about the two being rather similar is that in canon, my guess is that Snape and McGonagall get along fairly well, with a rather collegial rivalry. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 8:37 am (#342))

Hmm. Well, not any more !! I've always felt aggrieved at how McGonagall has been pushed more and more to the margins _ though she was given some good moments in Book 5.

As regards the test, I usually get Snape, but it can vary with one's mood. I'm shattered that my next most frequent result is _ wait for it _ Percy. I even got Madame Maxine once _ what is that about ?!

And it took me ages _ and blatant lying _ to make the damn thing give me Sirius !! (Snarl !!)


wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:37 am (#342 of 2959)
By the way, on the test that Vulture pointed us toward... I was Minerva McGonagall which is ENTJ. Snape is INTJ. I thought that was interesting, because the main difference between the two is that one is more extraverted and the other more introverted.

Who knows how it would turn out if JKR took the test multiple times for all of her various characters -- whether they'd really turn out as the test shows. But I've taken the full-battery of that test before and I really am ENTJ, and I also do think there's a lot of similarities between the McGonagall character and me. Also, I know an INTJ very well who I've often considered rather Snapish...

Anyway, what struck me about the two being rather similar is that in canon, my guess is that Snape and McGonagall get along fairly well, with a rather collegial rivalry.


Choices - Oct 3, 2006 9:04 am (#343 of 2959)
I took the test and I am Albus Dumbledore. I trust Severus Snape and I'm not telling you why. LOL


journeymom - Oct 3, 2006 10:51 am (#344 of 2959)
Wow, I took it again and I'm Madam Hooch! I've taken it repeatedly before and come up with Remus Lupin each time.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 3, 2006 11:00 am (#345 of 2959)
For discussion about the HP personality quiz, please go to the Chat thread. Thank you!


Sandylee - Oct 3, 2006 2:44 pm (#346 of 2959)
Edited by S.E. Jones Oct 3, 2006 3:55 pm

I wonder if both Sandylee and Vulture can be correct here. Because I like Sandylee's lion patronus idea very much.

Thanks. I like it, too.

But I think Vulture made a valid point about Snape's Slytherin loyalties. They don't strike me as an act to cover his true loyalties. I believe Snape is a proud Slytherin.

I'm not convinced of this. I'll explain why in a minute.

Here's my unifying idea, and it centers on real unity. The sorting hat warned the students that they have to come together in order to have strength.

Could it be said that Dumbledore embodies aspects of all four houses? It would be appropriate, because as headmaster he acts on behalf of all his students, not just his Gryffindor home.

This I like -- except that I believe that Slytherin House has become corrupted -- first, by Slytherin himself, and later by Voldemort and his supporters. I think that the original dynamic, in which the founders worked together to create something new and exciting, was destroyed early on by Slytherin's "racism" and his petulant exit from the school. He broke a bond which has yet to mend, and I've only just -- from reading your post -- gotten the idea that perhaps part of the resolution of this story ought to take that into consideration.

More than once, one of the Trio has commented that cooperation with Slytherin doesn't seem reasonable. I don't think this is mere prejudice on their parts. I think it bespeaks something truly fractured in Slytherin House and, therefore, in the community of Hogwarts and the Wizarding World at large -- represented, in part, by Voldemort's rise, defeat, and reappearance. It is represented, as well, by the corruption apparent in the Ministry, by people like Percy and Fudge and Umbridge and Scrimgeour, none of whom have the best interests of their community at heart, but really all seek -- as does Voldemort -- power for its own sake and recognition as "superior."

The theme of racism is strong in Rowling's story and within the world of magic -- from wizards' prejudices against giants, to their exploitation of elves (and the sub-plot of Hermione's efforts to bring awareness to both perpetrators of prejudice and its victims and to the institutionalized system such prejudices have created), to the attitudes of the centaurs, to the seemingly closed society of goblins. And to, of course, the pure-blood longings of Voldemort and his supporters -- and of Slytherin himself.

I don't think it's a coincidence that the reason for rift caused by Slytherin was, essentially, racism -- for I believe that Rowling intends us to understand that this wicked idea has infected Slytherin house and that until the disease can be cured, no harmony -- either within Hogwarts or in the Wizarding World itself -- is truly possible. To merely accept Slytherin's prejudices as "just another idea" -- of equal value to the principles held by Gryffindor, Hufflepuff and Ravenclaw -- that is, to include such ideas as of equal moral validity in the framework of a society -- is to embrace Voldemort himself. There can really be no "cooperation" with evil, and Slytherin's ideas were evil.

While we are encouraged to long for the uniting of the houses, the Trio understands that, while Slytherin House embraces the idea that some people are superior to others, no such union is really possible. Only Hermione has fully grasped the extent to which such ideas can create an unsustainable society -- as evinced in her S.P.E.W. project -- but they all seem to agree that Slytherin isn't really representative of the Hogwarts' spirit, and isn't really entitled to equal moral status to the other houses.

I think that the problem of Slytherin House's moral inheritance from Slytherin's racist ideas must be resolved as part of the resolution of the book, if there is to be real unity within Hogwarts. And this bears, as well, in my opinion, on whether or not anyone on the side of "good" can be a true Slytherin at heart -- as "Slytherin" is presently constituted.

In light of this I think it's entirely possible for Snape to be a loyal Slytherin and yet be loyal to Albus Dumbledore, as well. The house isn't supposed to be entirely without merit, though sadly JKR hasn't shown us a truly noble Slytherin yet. It could be that Snape became that ultimate Slytherin who is cunning but also daring (Gryffindor), loyal (Hufflepuff) and full of wit and learning (Ravenclaw).

This intrigues me -- as it may prove to be Snape who manages to, in some symbollic fashion, at least -- eradicate the corruption of racism from Slytherin House and serve to reunite the Wizarding World. He's a half-blood member of a House, the founder of which would have rejected him out of hand, and an erstwhile follower of another half-blood for whom Slytherin would have shown no greater consideration. He embodies everything Slytherin himself would have detested and, if I'm right about him, he has recognized this and moved beyond the "childishness" inherent in ideas of racism and supreme power and blood purity.

I don't think that Snape can be a loyal Slytherin as long as Slytherin House represents the ideas of its founder -- and as long as it represents to Snape those who led him into acts he now profoundly regrets. I wonder, though, if he might not understand that a "reformed" Slytherin House would have much to offer a united Hogwarts, and that he might not long for that.

If that's the case, then a patronus which combines elements of both Gryffindor and Slytherin would not be thematically out of place.

The only problem I have with that possibility is Rowling's claim that, if we know what Snape's patronus is, something important has been revealed. I somehow don't think she expects the greater number of her readers to be so expert in ancient myths, legends, and literary allusions that an obscure mythical beast would serve. I think that Snape's patronus must be an animal with which all are familiar, which telegraphs to us -- and all readers -- immediately which side he's on, and which will need no explanation to be understood.

Or maybe his patronus is a bunny. ;-)

Bwahahahaaaaaaa!

-I just edited a mistake in the italics on this post so that people could see what you were quoting.- SE Jones


Sandylee - Oct 3, 2006 2:55 pm (#347 of 2959)
Regarding the theory about Snape really being a Gryffindor: I actually don't like that idea, to be honest. For one thing, I don't like the idea of courage being treated as if it was some exclusive Gryffindor characteristic. And Snape I think is pretty much the only real chance for JKR to show a brave, non-self-serving Slytherin fighting on the good side. Yeah, there's Regulus Black - but he's a footnote who has been dead for the last sixteen years. And though I think Draco will end up doing something admirable I don't think he'll undergo a change that would lead him to actively fight on the Order's side. So if the books show Snape in some sort of heroic light and then go and add, "oh but he's really a late-blooming Gryffindor y'know", that IMO would be basically saying that no Slytherin could have done what Snape did and when they do it's because they really belong to another "good" house.

Yeah, I rather agree, in a sense, with some of this.

But I do think that Slyytherin House, as presently constituted, is corrupt -- diseased, if you will. It's not that no Slytherin could perform a noble act -- it's rather, in my view, that the environment of the House invites a kind of moral complacency, a kind of moral expediency which makes it possible for Slytherin students to justify behavior which is obviously unjust, unfair, and -- if not immoral -- at least amoral.

The attempt by Slytherins to freak out Harry with the Dementor disguise is an example of such behavior. Draco's stomping of Harry's face is another. The greed of Crabbe and Goyle -- their "gluttony" as exemplified by the drugged cupcakes in SS -- yet another. The "win-at-all-costs" mentality which seems so evident in the Slytherin camp behavior, displayed by cheating in Quiddich, for example, another. Sucking up to teachers. Even, in a sense, Slughorn's propensity to "collect" people for his own purposes, using them to provide him with comfort and a sense of self-importance.

We are given myriad examples of the -- at least -- amoral behavior which characterizes Slytherins. Their arrogance. Their heartlessness. Their sense of superiority. Draco is the embodiment of the Slytherin ethic, and he's willing to kill and revels in the thought of recognition and praise for such a deed.

No, Slytherin House is not what it was ever meant to be, has been corrupted from the moment Slytherin himself broke off from the others. The Trio are right -- the present moral agency represented by Slytherin House is neither amenable to cooperation nor a proper subject of it. It must undergo a change of heart itself, in order for the school to be truly united -- and, symbollically, for the Wizarding World to be so.

In my opinion.


wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 6:32 pm (#348 of 2959)
I am not so sure that we're meant to think that all of Slytherin is corrupt.

In addition, there's a problem with the notion that Slytherin House is more racist due to their focus on racism regarding wizard blood purity.

Is racisim in the WW somehow "worse" when it's directed at human beings? Yes, the Slytherins seem to be more racist than other Houses (actually we don't know for sure, but certainly Draco and Friends are worse), as regards the pure-blood/muggleborn racism. But, you might note that -- sincerely or not -- LV offers more freedoms and the appearance of lack of "bias" toward other magical creatures, than the rest of the WW.

The rest of the Wizarding World might not be as prejudiced against muggleborns and half-bloods, but they might be more prejudiced against giants, werewolves, and goblins.

Personally, I think we are lead to believe that the Slytherins are the "bad guys" while the other houses are the "good guys," yet all the while, corruption, bias, and just general meaness are quite apparent in other Houses, were just not encouraged to think of them as "bad guys" because of it.

Yes, there is clearly more interest in Voldemort in Slytherin House, and also in blood purity. But that does not mean that all of that House, or even the majority, are traveling down that path. What I think we see is that Gryffindors have a general stereotype of Slytherin as all Dark, racist, etc. Thus, Gryffindor Hagrid was able to say that all Dark wizards came from Slytherin and probably not even notice that he wasn't being truthful. He knew that there had been dark wizards in other houses, but tended to forget it in his conversation with Harry.

Yes, there are more dark wizards from Slytherin. But that doesn't mean even the majority of Slytherin is corrupt, nor does it mean that the other houses don't have very unpleasant attitudes going on, too.


Saracene - Oct 4, 2006 3:31 am (#349 of 2959)
Sandylee:

---The Trio are right -- the present moral agency represented by Slytherin House is neither amenable to cooperation nor a proper subject of it. It must undergo a change of heart itself, in order for the school to be truly united -- and, symbollically, for the Wizarding World to be so.---

The thing is, though, I don't see how that change of heart is going to occur in the space of one last remaining book. People's attitudes don't change overnight, social progress is a long painful process that can take up decades. I don't see the "bad" Slytherins we've seen so far suddenly giving up their pureblood prejudices, arrogance, superiority, etc., and the Slytherin House in general being cleansed of the whole pureblood mentality.

As to what we're meant to think about the Slytherins, I'm not sure, to be honest. Personally I find it hard to believe that *every single* Slytherin student - and a whole quarter of the Hogwarts population - is racist and self-serving. JKR insisted in one of her interviews that Slytherins are not "all bad" and that we always see the House from the perspective of the DE children who constitute a small fraction of the Slytherin population. Yet the fact remains that she -never- showed us any decent Slytherin students. Plus, in the same interview, JKR also refers to Slytherins as "the quarter of the school that does not encapsulate the most generous and noble qualities". So I get a rather mixed message that while JKR tried, in a way, to exonerate Slytherins and point out that they're not all bad, she also seems to regard them as "the flaw" of the school's body.


Vulture - Oct 4, 2006 6:03 am (#350 of 2959)
Well said, Sandylee: I agree 100% with what you say about Slytherin in #346 and #347 , though I don't agree about Snape not being genuine in his loyalty to Slytherin.

But, you might note that -- sincerely or not -- LV offers more freedoms and the appearance of lack of "bias" toward other magical creatures, than the rest of the WW. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

Hitler backed the cause of Slovak "independence" to help him dismember Czechoslovakia _ I doubt if the Slovaks liked the results any more than the Czechs did. When Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in the name of fighting Stalinist tyranny, enough were taken in by this that his army didn't just include Germans: it had troops from every nationality in Europe _ some idiots even went from Britain, and were given their own uniform with the Union Jack on it !! When his forces marched into the Ukraine, they were met by crowds cheering them as liberators, and so many Ukrainians joined the SS that, later in the war, the crushing of the Warsaw Rising was left almost completely to the Ukrainian SS.

My point is that every side in a war, or in politics, has its attractions _ if it didn't, bad causes would attract far fewer followers. It's hard for us in this day and age to realise how attractive Fascism was to many, before the revelations of the Holocaust.

Yes, there is clearly more interest in Voldemort in Slytherin House, and also in blood purity. But that does not mean that all of that House, or even the majority, are traveling down that path. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

I'm afraid I don't agree. It may be true (actually, we don't know) that the majority aren't actively in support of Voldemort, but they're certainly not out there actively working or even speaking, against him. If you replace the word "Voldemort" by "Hitler", and the phrase "Slytherin House" by "1930s Germany" in the above sentence, you get exactly the mantra by which people inside and outside Germany comforted themselves during Hitler's rise to power _ until it was too late.

Personally, I think we are lead to believe that the Slytherins are the "bad guys" while the other houses are the "good guys," yet all the while, corruption, bias, and just general meaness are quite apparent in other Houses, were just not encouraged to think of them as "bad guys" because of it. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

Again, I disagree, and again, World War 2 provides a good analogy. The anti-Nazi side were far from being angels, but they were still the right side. Although the world should never forget that Red Army troops took down about 80% of Hitler's forces, there's no doubt that their leaders, and their leaders' secret police agencies, committed appalling atrocities, not least against their own. The American and British Empire forces were not perfect angels, either _ though we don't always realise that from what we see in films, etc.

But none of that alters the fact that Hitler's side (which included many decent people, by the way) was still the wrong one.

Thus, Gryffindor Hagrid was able to say that all Dark wizards came from Slytherin and probably not even notice that he wasn't being truthful. He knew that there had been dark wizards in other houses, but tended to forget it in his conversation with Harry. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

Which "dark wizards in other houses" are these ? He didn't know Wormtail was even alive when he made that remark to Harry. Yes, at the time, he thought that Sirius was a "lousy, stinking turncoat" _ I suppose it may seem prejudiced to pro-Slytherins, but it wouldn't surprise me if Sirius's family origins would have struck Hagrid as a likely explanation. Slughorn himself, after all, was surprised that Sirius had been Sorted into Gryffindor.

So we've got one exception. Big deal. What other non-Slytherin Dark wizards were around _ in Book 1, remember _ to prove Hagrid's statement wrong ? We all know that, as a personality, Hagrid isn't one for precise, nit-picky, sophisticated analysis (no offence, but the Lexicon would drive the poor guy nuts !!) _ though he does have his own kind of down-to-earth wisdom, which shows up at (unacknowledged) moments of parenting to the Trio, and particularly to Harry. For Hagrid to make a statement, with one exception that we know of, is pretty precise for him.

Incidentally, before getting too keen on how prejudiced Hagrid is, let's remember that every single thing he's ever said about Snape has been to defend him _ he didn't even believe that Snape had killed Dumbledore after hearing it from a witness.

The rest of the Wizarding World might not be as prejudiced against muggleborns and half-bloods, but they might be more prejudiced against giants, werewolves, and goblins. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

No. I'm sorry, I just disagree.

The rest of the Wizarding World are not as prejudiced against muggleborns and half-bloods, and there is no evidence that they are more prejudiced than Slytherins against giants, werewolves, and goblins.

In addition, there's a problem with the notion that Slytherin House is more racist due to their focus on racism regarding wizard blood purity. (wynnleaf - Oct 3, 2006 7:32 pm (#348))

No, I disagree. I have no problem with it at all !!

The wizarding world in general (including Slytherins) has comfortable prejudices which have become part of daily life, so that it takes a Dumbledore (his final words in Book 5) or a Hermione (from Book 4 on) to point them out. In other words, wizard society has second-class citizens, including those (i.e. house-elves) who do a lot of the menial work.

Now this is not a set-up which anyone making right moral choices should be satisfied with. But it is very far from being as bad as what Voldemort, or even just those who don't support Voldemort but believe in the whole pure-blood ideology, want to set up. No-one can dispute that house-elves have the worst of it in wizarding society. Yet, in Book 2, Dobby is absolutely right when he says that all house-elves see Harry as a hero for having brought about Voldemort's fall, even though Harry himself knows nothing about them before he meets Dobby. This is not just a case of house-elves parroting the opinions of their masters _ though, no doubt, that often happens. In this case, however, I believe we're meant to see that they instinctively realise that Voldemort would be worse for them.

As to what we're meant to think about the Slytherins, I'm not sure, to be honest. Personally I find it hard to believe that *every single* Slytherin student - and a whole quarter of the Hogwarts population - is racist and self-serving. (Saracene - Oct 4, 2006 4:31 am (#349))

It's not such a weird thing, really. To use an analogy, when ordinary, decent, Allied squaddies marched into Nazi death camps, they were sick to their stomachs that anyone could commit such crimes. Yet the death camps were part and parcel of an ideology which simply took existing and well-respected contemporary European and North American attitudes about race and white "superiority" and pushed them to a conclusion. Many of those decent squaddies were serving the largest empire the world had ever seen, where, in the colonies, it was regarded as "normal" for privileged whites to order around non-whites.

The reality of Nazism led many to question their own attitudes. Voldemort poses a similar question for the wizard world, and particularly for the Slytherins. (By the way, in case anyone is worried by me dragging in WW2 all over the place, I think JKR is very conscious of the analogy in her HP books.)


wynnleaf - Oct 4, 2006 6:05 am (#351 of 2959)
Like Saracene, I feel that JKR's messages about Slytherin are not consistent.

In an interview after HBP, she mentioned how the four houses represent the four "elements" of earth, wind, fire, and water. In that sense, all of the elements are equal, just different. All necessary in varying ways. And the Sorting Hat has emphasized the need for all of the houses to join together to fight LV.

The characteristics of Slytherins are supposed to include things like cunning and ambition, which I've seen some readers comment on as though those are negative characteristics. But being cunning or ambitious is not bad, it just depends on the direction it takes. Dumbledore, for instance, is very cunning, but most readers don't think of that as negative at all.

The other thing that is inconsistent is that JKR has students from other houses exhibit characteristics that, in my opinion, look like they belong in Slytherin -- yet these are "good" students, so they end up in other houses. For instance, Fred and George are very cunning, secretive, and quite ambitious. We are not shown any strong indications of bravery from them. They actually seem like the ideal Slytherins, yet they are in Gryffindor. I tend to suspect she really likes Fred and George's personalities (which are more Slytherin), but put them in Gryffindor because that's Harry's house and the brave, and good house.

Crabb and Goyle practically never talk, but I haven't seen anything in them that's presented as crafty, cunning, or even ambitious. They just seem like idiots who will do whatever Draco tells them.

As Saracene said, JKR tells us that not all Slytherins are bad, but she doesn't show us any good Slytherins. Instead she focuses on the DE's children, or students that are friends with Draco.

But if she's going to bring about the unity of the houses with only one book, she's going to have to show the good side of Slytherin -- and as Saracene says, she really doesn't have time to either change the hearts of all those students, or get rid of all of them and start over. So in my opinion, she's going to have to show how some in Slytherin are on the side of Light, loyal, etc. while still being Slytherins. I'd like to see some of those being students, not just their teachers, Snape and Slughorn.


Vulture - Oct 4, 2006 6:26 am (#352 of 2959)
Hi, Wynnleaf: Well, remember what I said in #341 about how, rather than seeing a House just representing bravery, or loyalty, "that a more accurate way of seeing the Houses is that they reflect their Founders' personalities".

Like Sracene, I feel that JKR's messages about Slytherin are not consistent. (wynnleaf - Oct 4, 2006 7:05 am (#351)

I agree that she has not been consistent _ and not just about Slytherin. I think she may have a clear enough idea on where she wants to go with, say, Harry, or Snape _ but to some extent, I feel that she lost her way after Book 5. It's no good people telling me that she has had it all planned from the beginning. In fact, that self-evidently can't be true _ even when I'm writing posts, I change my mind several times after beginning them. So there's just no way she can have planned everything from when she originally brought out Book 1 in 1997. But I'd better stop this, because it risks getting into "Was Anyone Disappointed In Book 6" territory !!


Saracene - Oct 5, 2006 1:44 am (#353 of 2959)
Vulture:

---The rest of the Wizarding World are not as prejudiced against muggleborns and half-bloods, and there is no evidence that they are more prejudiced than Slytherins against giants, werewolves, and goblins.---

According to the Lexicon, Durmstrang Institute does not admit Muggle-born students. That's the entire school, not just one separate house, too. Naturally, as we've seen with Victor Krum, just because one visits such school it doesn't mean that they're Dark Arts-loving racists, but I think it says something about the larger society that sees the no-muggleborns policy as acceptable.

I think we should keep in mind that when we talk about Slytherins we're talking, first and most, about one House in one of the many wizarding schools in the world. The world is not divided into Slytherins and everyone else.

---(By the way, in case anyone is worried by me dragging in WW2 all over the place, I think JKR is very conscious of the analogy in her HP books.)---

Well, in the interviews I've read JKR mostly mentioned the analogy between Voldemort and Hitler and especially where their blood superiority ideologies were concerned. However, I don't think that she ever compared the conflict in her wizarding world to the WWII. Personally, I'm rather wary of making such real-life comparisons or analogies, if only because I generally distrust comparisons based on broad similarities that overlook the uniqueness and complexities of each individual society/conflict.

wynnleaf:

---So in my opinion, she's going to have to show how some in Slytherin are on the side of Light, loyal, etc. while still being Slytherins. I'd like to see some of those being students, not just their teachers, Snape and Slughorn.---

I'd like to see that too, but again, I wonder if it's a bit too late for JKR to do that and whether bringing in those "good" Slytherin students in the very last book would basically look like a last-minute tack-on.

I feel that, in a way, JKR might have painted herself into the corner where Slytherin students are concerned.


Vulture - Oct 5, 2006 4:52 am (#354 of 2959)
Hi, Saracene: In #353, you're quite right about Durmstrang _ I had forgotten it.

I'm afraid, though, that in my opinion, Durmstrang is the 'exception that proves the rule', as the saying goes. I don't think it's any coincidence that, in Book 4, Durmstrang is the visiting school the Slytherins like best, it sits with them, and it's the place Malfoy wishes he had gone to. (I know that pro-Slytherins are now fond of saying that Malfoy is 'untypical' and a 'Death Eater's child', but I think it's significant that this 'untypical' Slytherin wishes he had gone to Durmstrang !!)

I wasn't careful enough in my previous analysis (and thanks for pointing it out) _ I should have made clear that, as far as Slytherin itself is concerned, I was talking about wizarding society in Britain.

Other than that, however, I think my analysis of Slytherin _ and its reflection in wider society _ largely stands up. I imagine that other parts of the wizarding world have a certain amount of people with the Slytherin mentality. Not only that, it appears to affect readers !! It's noticeable, for example, that on many Slytherin websites, and to some extent even in this Lexicon, the defence of Slytherin often involves attempts to undermine and attack non-Slytherin characters.

It's no surprise, of course, that Snape has many defenders, as his ultimate loyalty is the Six Million Dollar Question. What is perhaps more worrying is that his defenders appear to have absorbed his attitudes (or, depending on your opinion, his apparent, public, attitudes) to Harry, Ron, Hermione, even Hagrid, and to most non-Slytherins. They noticeably avoid attacking Dumbledore _ well, of course, without his trust of Snape, my opinion is that Snape's defence would certainly be sinking, if not dead in the water. Woe betide old Albus if a definite anti-Snape verdict from him turns up !!

Pro-Slytherin websites don't just confine themselves to the reasonable enough defence of Snape, however. Draco Malfoy is a hero to many, and some of his worst actions are glossed over, while his enemies (mainly Harry, of course) are subjected to constant attack. I've seen some of this creeping into the Lexicon, but it's more prevalent outside.

Of course, I'm not saying that this sort of opinion should be censored _ far from it. But I'm not going to pretend it's not there.

A related point: While I can't quote exact canon for this, what I've read in the HP books so far leads me to feel that, especially after Voldemort's fall, wizarding society (both in Britain and outside) was organised around a sort of unwritten, un-stated compromise _ in which cracks began to show from the moment The Boy Who Lived began his studies. The compromise went something like this: if Slytherins, pure-blood-fans, and ex-Voldemortians didn't openly pursue the Dark Arts and didn't stop the authorities locking up the most obvious Death Eaters, the wider society wouldn't ask too many questions about the rest and would make them comfortable. This policy meant that Lucius Malfoy was able to rise high in society and even in power over Hogwarts, it meant comfortable jobs for Snape and Macnair, and it meant life in Azkaban for 'obvious' Voldemortians like Bellatrix and Sirius Black. (Errrm ...)

In Book 1, Harry arrives into a school where Slytherin have won Cups all around them for about 6 years, where Dumbledore insists on all the courtesies to them, where an ex-Death Eater is a Head Of House, and where Godric Gryffindor's Hat has no doubt that "Slytherin will help you on the road to greatness". In Book 4, Dumbledore sharply reproves (fake) Moody for bringing up Karkaroff's Death Eater past. In Book 3, an ex-Death Eater is now such a pillar of society that his evidence carries more weight than that of the boy who defeated Voldemort.

I feel that Harry is a catalyst who undermines this un-stated compromise _ though you may feel it would have fallen apart anyway. In Book 1, Harry's actions lead to Slytherin losing the House Cup. As Seeker, he undermines their dominance of Quidditch, and they finally lose the Cup in Book 3. On the more serious side, in Book 2, his actions bring up 'undiplomatic' stuff about Slytherin's heritage, and cast Gryffindor's heritage as the corresponding 'good guy'. In Book 3, he aids the escape of the man whose imprisonment, and portrayal as Voldemort's No. 2, was a major plank in the compromise. In Book 5, his actions lead to that man being declared innocent and the Ministry's credibility blown sky-high.

Harry's adventures have the side-effect of constantly forcing people to choose _ and the whole point of a compromise is not forcing people to choose. I agree with Dumbledore's words about choosing what is right over what is easy _ but we should remember that, nevertheless, he accepted the wizard world's decision to live by compromise, by "what is easy" after Voldemort's fall. Of course, the reasons were understandable _ but it was still a compromise.


Laura W - Oct 5, 2006 11:58 pm (#355 of 2959)
You might use the word "compromise" - and having read so many of your other posts, I can see why *you* see it that way, Vulture -, but how about pondering another term which might apply : Amnesty.

There is no doubt that some of the DEs and their human and non-human followers conveniently denied their involvement in the atrocities which took place (ie - Lucius Malfoy among others) during the First War, but it is also true that some of those who supported Voldemort for a time *genuinely* saw the error of their ways during his rule and changed sides. Regulus Black is the most notable example of this, and Snape(maybe). Should these people - and I have a feeling there are a lot of them in the WW - not be acknowledged as having changed sides of their own thoughtful volition and be allowed to integrate into law-abiding society? Dumbledore obviously thinks so.

Also, it was mentioned more than once in the books that a number of those who followed V did so while under the Imperius Curse, or under a serious threat to themselves or their family. Apparently very few people are able to successfully fight the Imperious Curse - Harry being an exception. How can you blame someone for what they did while under it? When DD would observe that, upon the curse being lifted, these former "bad guys" reverted back to non-Dark-wizard behavior and thought, *of course* he would not hold their previous beyond-their-control actions or loyalties against them.

Again, I am not talking about those witches and wizards who consciously and unrepentently followed Voldemort and assisted him in carrying out the thousands of murders and other horrendous crimes against innocent wizards and Muggles.

A lot of people in the Muggle world join up with VERY undesirable organizations or causes when they are young; and for a variety of reasons. We can only hope that they eventually understand the harm these organizations - and they themselves - are causing, and publicly renounce them. It happens (although not nearly as often as I would like). Dumbledore would appreciate the turn-around and would, I believe, forgive these people. You can call that "compromise" if you wish.

Laura


Saracene - Oct 7, 2006 2:12 am (#356 of 2959)
Vulture:

---The compromise went something like this: if Slytherins, pure-blood-fans, and ex-Voldemortians didn't openly pursue the Dark Arts and didn't stop the authorities locking up the most obvious Death Eaters, the wider society wouldn't ask too many questions about the rest and would make them comfortable.---

This kinda led me to another, vaguely related, question: is "Slytherin" (and the rest of the House names for that matter) actually a term that's used a lot outside of Hogwarts?

I mean, because as the readers we spend almost all of our time immersed in the world of Hogwarts, the whole House system and the different factions it creates is naturally hugely important. But is it as important in the "adult" world outside of Hogwarts and do people keep on defining themselves and others as "Gryffindor", "Slytherin", "Ravenclaw" etc., throughout their adult lives? Someone like Phineas Nigellus would since, as a Headmaster, he'd remain strongly linked with Hogwarts. And naturally parents would care about which House their children got sorted into. But if, say, you look at the articles about Death Eaters that Harry reads, they're never referred to as "Slytherins". And there're many HP characters - especially those like Tonks who are not closely associated with Hogwarts - whose House is never specified.


journeymom - Oct 7, 2006 11:10 am (#357 of 2959)
"This kinda led me to another, vaguely related, question: is "Slytherin" (and the rest of the House names for that matter) actually a term that's used a lot outside of Hogwarts? "

Great point! House loyalty is something that's waay over used in HP fan fiction. I think it's a misunderstanding of the HP wizarding world. There's nothing in the texts to indicate that the wizarding population in general aligns and separates itself by Hogwarts house.

However, Hogwarts itself, and symbolism in general, is pretty important to Lord Voldemort. And the alchemy thread is built on the significance of the four elements associated with the four houses, and I do think JKR has used alchemy to build the structure of her plot to some extent. And the Sorting Hat does have to look into a person's personality and decide which House to put him/her.


Vulture - Oct 7, 2006 12:43 pm (#358 of 2959)
There is no doubt that some of the DEs and their human and non-human followers conveniently denied their involvement in the atrocities which took place (ie - Lucius Malfoy among others) during the First War, but it is also true that some of those who supported Voldemort for a time *genuinely* saw the error of their ways during his rule and changed sides. (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

Apart from Snape, whose nature is The Big Debate, I can't think of any "genuine" cases who were named. I don't include Regulus.

Regulus Black is the most notable example of this, and Snape(maybe). (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

No, Regulus isn't, in my opinion. Sirius never says that Regulus saw the error of his ways. What he says (from rough memory) is that Regulus joined the Death Eaters but tried to back out when he saw what he was being asked to do. That's not going quite as far as seeing the error of his ways. That's the next step, as it were, and perhaps he did indeed make it, but we don't know. (I'm not one of the "Regulus is the R.A.B. Hero" brigade, as you can tell !!)

Should these people - and I have a feeling there are a lot of them in the WW - not be acknowledged as having changed sides of their own thoughtful volition and be allowed to integrate into law-abiding society? Dumbledore obviously thinks so. (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

No, I'm not sure that he does. My feeling is that his attitude was something like the attitude he tells us he took to Tom Riddle when the latter started school _ he tells Harry that he chose to take the chance that Tom regretted his past misdeeds. But in answer to Harry's memory of notebook-Riddle, Dumbledore also adds that he did not take it for granted that Riddle was trustworthy.

Also, it was mentioned more than once in the books that a number of those who followed V did so while under the Imperius Curse, or under a serious threat to themselves or their family. Apparently very few people are able to successfully fight the Imperious Curse - Harry being an exception. How can you blame someone for what they did while under it? When DD would observe that, upon the curse being lifted, these former "bad guys" reverted back to non-Dark-wizard behavior and thought, *of course* he would not hold their previous beyond-their-control actions or loyalties against them. (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

Unfortunately, the people in this group include Lucius Malfoy and his family, and that's the whole point _ the picture is much more murky than the impression of it I get from your post. The problem is that there were a lot of completely unrepentant Death Eaters who, when Voldemort fell, gave no clue from their behaviour of their real inner feelings. Now, of course, I don't think that Dumbledore or even the Ministry were naive enough to buy this line in every case. Therefore, when we see, in Books 1 to 4, before Voldemort's return, the likes of Lucius, Macnair, and Karkaroff being accepted in society just as much as Dumbledore, Fudge, McGonagall and the Weasleys, what we're looking at is a compromise. Snape _ whichever side he's on _ was one of its main beneficiaries, as he himself effectively says in "Spinner's End".

You might use the word "compromise" - and having read so many of your other posts, I can see why *you* see it that way, Vulture -, but how about pondering another term which might apply : Amnesty. (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

Oh, quite: I've no problem with the term "amnesty". None of that alters what I've just said. The thing about an amnesty following a war, especially when people like Lucius get amnesty and some like Sirius don't, is that you're always going to have growls (like Ron's on the train in Book 1) about some people not getting what they deserve. Post-war Germany, post-apartheid South Africa, and post-ceasefire Northern Ireland have all had real-life examples of that.

An irony of the wizard world amnesty (or more accurately, amnesty for some, jail for others) was that some felt that Barty Crouch Jr. was a sad case who perhaps shouldn't have been sent to Azkaban, but nearly everyone agreed that in the case of that fiendish fanatic Sirius Black, the key should be thrown away. The joys of compromise ....

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

This kinda led me to another, vaguely related, question: is "Slytherin" (and the rest of the House names for that matter) actually a term that's used a lot outside of Hogwarts? (
Saracene - Oct 7, 2006 3:12 am (#356))

Hmm. Good question. (Actually, you should put it on the "What Would You Ask JKR" thread !!)

The only thing I can think of, off the top of my head, is that I think that Slughorn, when listing favourite (past-pupil) contacts, mentions their Houses in a couple of cases, as if this is part of their identity. But (a) I'm not sure I've remembered correctly, and (b) of course, Slughorn is a Hogwarts teacher.


Laura W - Oct 7, 2006 11:22 pm (#359 of 2959)
Edited Oct 8, 2006 1:09 am
Lucius *says* he was put under the Imperius Curse - he says it to stay out of Azkaban - but we all know he wasn't. He sure continued to espouse racist (Voldemort) ideas and horde Dark Magic objects in his house during the 13 years after V's disappearance. And he took part in the DE shenanigans at the Quidditch Tournament. I already said that Malfoy was NOT one of the people I was including in my comment about those put under an Imperious Curse. ("There is no doubt that some of the DEs and their human and non-human followers conveniently denied their involvement in the atrocities which took place (ie - Lucius Malfoy among others) during the First War ..." Laura W) That doesn't mean others weren't. As a matter of fact, canon shows others were.

OoP, Chapter Five, p.88 (Raincoast); Sirius says re V --

"In the old days he had huge numbers at his command: witches and wizards he'd bullied or bewitched into following him ..."

and p.89 (Raincoast); Lupin says ---

"... so most of the wizarding community are completely unaware anything's happened, and that makes them easy targets for the Death Eaters if they are using the Imperious Curse."

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Oh, quite: I've no problem with the term "amnesty"." (Vulture)

Sure you do. You hate it.

I could get *very* political here, but we're not allowed to on the Forum - a rule which I agree with -, so I'll not elaborate any further on this point in terms of real-world situation.

(Repeating Mantra while taking deep breaths: "Stay in the Potterverse, Laura; stay in the Potterverse.")


Laura W - Oct 8, 2006 3:07 am (#360 of 2959)
One more quote to add to the first part (ie - above the line) of my last post and then I'll leave it. OoP Chapter Five, p.90 (Harry has asked about V recruiting more DEs) --

"Voldemort doesn't march up to people's houses and bang on their front doors, Harry," said Sirius. "He tricks, jinxes and blackmails them. ..."

LW
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 361 to 400

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 7:58 am

Vulture - Oct 8, 2006 8:18 am (#361 of 2959)
"Oh, quite: I've no problem with the term "amnesty"." (Vulture)

Sure you do. You hate it.

I could get *very* political here, but we're not allowed to on the Forum ....

((Repeating Mantra while taking deep breaths: "Stay in the Potterverse, Laura; stay in the Potterverse.") (Laura W - Oct 8, 2006 4:07 am (#360))

I seem to have missed something here. At least, your "deep breaths" comment seems to indicate that you've got upset about something I said in #358, but I'm not aware of having said anything upsetting. True, we have different opinions.

But anyway, I don't feel that your comment "Sure you do. You hate it" is acceptable _ unless you meant it as a joke ? (I don't get that impression from the rest of your post.)

I don't feel it's acceptable because it's an assumption about what I "hate" _ well, (a) what I feel about something is for me to decide, and (b) in this particular case, I had already stated the opposite _ that I've no problem with the term "amnesty".

I'm completely confused as to why that comment should provoke what you said about getting "very political". I wonder if you're making assumptions about my politics ? _ if so, I should make clear that I've deliberately stayed away from real-life political issues or from any indication of my political opinions.

For the sake of clarity, I'm reproducing the relevant paragraphs from ##358, below the line. I'm wondering if what caused a problem was my mention of amnesties after real-life wars, or my phrase "The joys of compromise" ? If so, may I make clear that, in this discussion, I'm not taking a position on whether the compromise, amnesty, whatever you want to call it, after the first Voldemort war, should not have been done, any more than I've stated what side I'm on with regard to the real-world examples (which I'm starting to regret mentioning). All I'm doing is observing what happened, and how it led to certain effects instead of others.

Incidentally, I'm quite clear that you don't include Lucius among those who genuinely changed _ but my point is that it was difficult for the anti-Voldemort side to make distinctions which are clear to readers. Dumbledore is able to distinguish, but the general wizard society treats Lucius no differently to those who genuinely changed _ in fact, wizard society has no idea (or perhaps, doesn't want to have any idea) that he is different. In the case of Snape, we still don't know (despite readers' strong opinions) which side he's on _ but the way the post-war compromise/amnesty worked, he would have benefited from Dumbledore's protection in either case, as he himself makes clear in "Spinner's End".

My basic point is that the wizard career of The Boy Who Lived has been a catalyst which has re-opened quarrels which wizard authorities had hoped to leave in the deep freeze after the first Voldemort war. Anyway, please read my points below the line, from my previous post.

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

You might use the word "compromise" - and having read so many of your other posts, I can see why *you* see it that way, Vulture -, but how about pondering another term which might apply : Amnesty. (Laura W - Oct 6, 2006 12:58 am (#355))

Oh, quite: I've no problem with the term "amnesty". None of that alters what I've just said. The thing about an amnesty following a war, especially when people like Lucius get amnesty and some like Sirius don't, is that you're always going to have growls (like Ron's on the train in Book 1) about some people not getting what they deserve. Post-war Germany, post-apartheid South Africa, and post-ceasefire Northern Ireland have all had real-life examples of that.

An irony of the wizard world amnesty (or more accurately, amnesty for some, jail for others) was that some felt that Barty Crouch Jr. was a sad case who perhaps shouldn't have been sent to Azkaban, but nearly everyone agreed that in the case of that fiendish fanatic Sirius Black, the key should be thrown away. The joys of compromise .... (Vulture - Oct 7, 2006 1:43 pm (#358))


wynnleaf - Oct 8, 2006 8:46 am (#362 of 2959)
Vulture,

When I read your comments the first time you posted them, it made me think that JKR has caught some of the realities of wars and post-wars. One would wish that in an ideal world, all of those who deserve amnesty would be granted it, while those truly deserve punitive measures would get them. But after wars, it is generally simply too difficult to consider each case with individual attention. The few cases which are scrutinized under legal proceedings may or may not get "justice," some get punitive actions that never deserved them (like Sirius), some get punitive actions who did deserve them (Bellatrix and others), some deserve punishment who get amnesty (Lucius), and some others who deserve amnesty actually get it.

But I think that the WW is like real governments in that they feel they have to grant broad amnesty because so many do deserve it, but there are not the resources to investigate each case. They do investigate some cases, some to deal with leaders of the opposing side, and some as "token" cases.

But I think this is reality. Not ideal by any means. It doesn't make amnesty a bad idea, by any means, but it does mean that there can be a lot of injustice in the way various people are dealt with.

I think that Snape would be one of those who was investigated closely -- not necessarily by the Ministry of Magic, but at least by Dumbledore. Not that DD was necessarily correct in his assessment (obviously I think he was), but at least Snape was more likely to have received whatever amnesty he got fairly.


Vulture - Oct 8, 2006 8:51 am (#363 of 2959)
Hi, Wynnleaf: I agree with everything you've just said. Cheers.


Laura W - Oct 8, 2006 11:07 pm (#364 of 2959)
"I seem to have missed something here. At least, your "deep breaths" comment seems to indicate that you've got upset about something I said in #358, but I'm not aware of having said anything upsetting. True, we have different opinions."

Not at all. I wasn't upset by anything *you* said. I was just reigning *myself* in re *my* making political comments in the course of our discussion (ie - re Truth and Reconciliation Commissions, etc.). It would be so easy for *me* to have done so, although it is not allowed. I was not saying that *you* were doing so. And I did think my comment about staying in the Potterverse was humourous, as well as being a warning to myself. And if I had it to do over again, I would have written "(wink)" after my comment about you not being fond of the word "amnesty."

Obviously a big communication gap here. Such is often the nature of e-mail.

I still like my previous post and the arguments contained within. I still think they are well thought out as possible justifications - from DDs point of view - of how DD thought of and dealt with former DEs and Voldemort followers. And that was my whole purpose; to try to give an answer on the other side to what I saw as your (legitimate) criticism of DD on this point.

"Ok," I said to myself, "Vulture thinks that DD is too lenient with Voldemort's followers. I know that DD is the wisest wizard in the world and the greatest enemy of Lord Voldemort (ie - that is why he started the Order of the Phoenix to defeat him in the first place). If Vulture is right, why would DD act that way?" And the answer I came up with - backed with canon evidence - was what you read in my last post. Period.

Apparently you didn't get what I was trying to do, and you did not see what I wrote as adding in an intelligent way to the debate on the point *you* brought up - to which I was affording honour (in my mind, at least) by giving considered thought to, looking up canon about and answering on this Forum (as opposed to just ignoring), regardless of whether I agreed with your position or not. So be it.

Laura


S.E. Jones - - Oct 8, 2006 11:48 pm (#365 of 2959)
I'm afraid we've strayed a little too far from the subject of Severus Snape. Let's try to steer the topic back in the right direction a little....

Erm, sssssooooooo... Snape... will he ever wash his hair?


haymoni - Oct 9, 2006 3:34 am (#366 of 2959)
If Gina hasn't gotten him to use Head & Shoulders by now, it ain't happenin'!

I wonder if Snape is at Spinners End with Wormtail and now Draco?


journeymom - Oct 9, 2006 9:51 am (#367 of 2959)
Wouldn't that be a miserable situation! Three miserable people in a cramped, run-down house. Draco would be insufferable.

Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 9, 2006 10:29 am (#368 of 2959)
Perhaps, Severus would put a full body bind on Draco.


journeymom - Oct 9, 2006 10:47 am (#369 of 2959)
Or at least use a tongue sticking charm on him.


Vulture - Oct 9, 2006 1:12 pm (#370 of 2959)
Edited by S.E. Jones Oct 9, 2006 2:21 pm

-I edited this part of the post to put a stop to a particular line of discussion.- SE Jones ===============================================================================

Vulture thinks that DD is too lenient with Voldemort's followers. (Laura W - Oct 9, 2006 12:07 am (#364 ))

I don't think I said that, precisely. What I feel is that Dumbledore went along with how wizard society coped after the first Voldemort war. How they coped led to what amounted, in my opinion, to a compromise. I think that Wynnleaf's post #362 sketched the situation very well. I'm not saying that Dumbledore was wrong to go along with it _ after all, the alternative would have been continuing war.

I think Dumbledore was clearly an influential voice in the various trials, etc., whereby the Ministry mopped up after the war. I daresay that his was a more forgiving voice than, for example, Barty Crouch Sr.'s, or even, perhaps, Moody's. But he obviously wasn't the only one making the decisions.

On the school front, we know that Dumbledore made the choice to protect Severus Snape, and allow him not only to teach but become Head Of Slytherin. I'm not (just now) getting into whether he was wrong or right to do so. I'm simply pointing out that it happened _ and we know that there were growls from some of the "good side" about it (and I don't just mean Harry).

We also know that Dumbledore was prepared to live with the fact of Lucius Malfoy being on the board of governors. Now, there is no canon that I can recall to tell us that Dumbledore himself could have done much about it _ until Book 2, that is. All I'm saying is that wizard society not only did not penalise Lucius for his past, but allowed him to acquire influential positions. Maybe Dumbledore didn't like this, but until Book 2 at least, he put up with it.

As I've said before, I feel that Harry's arrival in Hogwarts began a process whereby the compromise unravelled. Maybe it would have unravelled without him anyway _ I don't know. Also, it's important to remember that the compromise wasn't something that was ever formally agreed _ it just evolved from the way things were after Voldemort's fall.

Sorry to all that I haven't mentioned Snape much _ but on the other hand, I think ye can all see how these matters affected him fairly directly. As I've said before, he would have benefited from the compromise situation regardless of which side he's really on _ Lucius wasn't protected (as far as we know) by Dumbledore, and was far more obvious about his Dark Arts leanings than Snape, and he managed to stay out of jail.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 9, 2006 1:26 pm (#371 of 2959)
I'm going to ask once more that this thread return to the topic of Severus Snape. If you want to start a thread on how the wizarding world evolved after the first Voldemort war, go ahead, but lets return to topic here. Thank you.


Laura W - Oct 9, 2006 3:03 pm (#372 of 2959)
Firstly, thank you for your post #365, Sarah. Not only were you absolutely right about the point you made, the way you worded it was at once incredibly funny and also non-offensive to all parties. Ten points to your House.

Snape ...

haymoni wrote, "I wonder if Snape is at Spinners End with Wormtail and now Draco?"

You probably threw that in to get us back on track, haymoni, but it is actually an interesting serious point to speculate about. At the end of HBP Harry almost sort-of a tiny bit feels sorry for Draco. ("Where, Harry wondered, was Malfoy now, and what was Voldemort making him do under threat of killing him and his parents?") That is all the hint Jo will give us. (grin)

Of course I think we might all agree that Snape would be taking care of Draco after the whole Tower incident. Or does anybody think young Malfoy ran back to his mother in their mansion? But, as far as Snape actually hiding Draco at Spinner's End, I have a feeling that wouldn't really be hiding him. For one thing, Peter would know where Draco is (and Peter still is working at ingratiating himself with the Dark Lord); and besides, it's not like anybody can really "hide" from Voldemort if he is bent on finding them. (*cough* the Potters *cough*)

If Voldemort is really displeased with Draco for not carrying out his task. I don't think there is anything Severus can do to protect him. On the other hand, the DEs *did* get into Hogwarts and DD *was* killed, so maybe Harry is wrong about V "making him do" anything. Maybe V is perfectly happy with his Death Nibbler, and Snape doesn't have to protect him or defend him after all. (I've just argued myself over to the other side, which I find to be quite funny.) Maybe both Snape and his little friend are now Number One in Tom's book, instead of in trouble as I originally believed when I read HBP.

Any other thoughts?

Laura


Magic Words - Oct 9, 2006 3:12 pm (#373 of 2959)
I wouldn't be surprised if Voldemort gave them both some token punishment for failing to follow his express orders (i.e. Malfoy is the one to kill Dumbledore), but I have a hard time believing he would feel anything other than triumphant.


wynnleaf - Oct 9, 2006 3:49 pm (#374 of 2959)
I don't think Snape would be in trouble with LV for completing the task of AKing DD. But I think Draco would be in trouble. Other DE's actually saw that Draco couldn't do it. Now of course, that might not have been his original task. Still, while he probably earned points with LV for getting the vanishing cabinet set up, he showed his (in LV's view) weakness when he couldn't actually kill an unarmed person.

About Spinners End, I've wondered about this one. Who knows about Spinners End?

In the Spinners End chapter, it doesn't appear to be under a Fidelius Charm, since Bella got in, but by the end of HBP, it could be. If Narcissa had been there enough times to know the way quite well, was it a location that many people knew of? Would it be on staff records at Hogwarts?

What I'm getting at, of course, is whether or not Snape can keep using Spinners End in Book 7, or if it would be the first place aurors would search for him.

It seems to me that if he had it under the Fidelius Charm (who would be the secret keeper?) he could keep using it.

It partly depends, I think, on the purpose JKR had in showing Spinners End in the first place. If she only put Spinners End in the books in order to give us (the readers) a glimpse of Snape's home, then we might not see it again. If she wants to use Spinners End to reveal some things to other characters, we might see it again.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 9, 2006 3:58 pm (#375 of 2959)
Well, if Spinners End is where Snape grew up, the other teachers at Hogwarts probably at least know of it as those who were teachers when he was young probably sent owls to his mum. I think JKR may have shown us Spinners End for the sheer purpose of showing us what sort of life Snape had as a youngster. What I find odd is that Snape is still living there, assuming that is where his parents brought him up. Could he really not afford someplace a little less dreary? Or maybe he likes being the only person in town....


Choices - Oct 9, 2006 6:37 pm (#376 of 2959)
It's not like Snape lives there year round. He probably uses it only during the summer. We have even seen Snape staying at Hogwarts over Christmas, so the Spinner's End place maybe gets lived in only three months or so out of the year. Not really worth doing much fixing up. Plus, Snape being a man, he probably isn't into decorating or cleaning much.....even with a wand.


juliebug - Oct 9, 2006 6:41 pm (#377 of 2959)
What? I imagined Snape going all June Cleaver on his summer vay-cay. Can't you just see it, the dress, the heels, the pearls?


Thom Matheson - Oct 9, 2006 6:49 pm (#378 of 2959)
Clean house, clean undies. And then there is the Beaver(or Rat). Snape's house reflects the man. Dark, dingy, and more books then the Hogwarts library.


Meoshimo - Oct 9, 2006 7:56 pm (#379 of 2959)
Who's to say Snape isn't the secret keeper for spinner's end?


S.E. Jones - - Oct 9, 2006 8:03 pm (#380 of 2959)
Meoshimo --Who's to say Snape isn't the secret keeper for spinner's end?--

You mean now or at the beginning of HBP? I don't think there was any kind of Fidelius Charm on Spinners End originally because Bella had obviously never been there and I really don't see Snape telling her about it.


Meoshimo - Oct 9, 2006 8:07 pm (#381 of 2959)
I meant now, post-Half-Blood Prince. This is assuming that there was a Fidelius Charm put on the house at all.


Laura W - Oct 9, 2006 11:02 pm (#382 of 2959)
SE Jones wrote, "What I find odd is that Snape is still living there, assuming that is where his parents brought him up. Could he really not afford someplace a little less dreary?"

In fact, it seems to fit when you consider the description of his Potions classroom down in the dungeons of Hogwarts. With all the rooms in that castle, surely he could have picked a less-dreary one had he desired. And even his office is always without a cheery fire.; McGonagall had to conjure one when she went into his office. This seems to be the atmosphere Severus prefers. (Kind of sad, actually.)

Laura


wynnleaf - Oct 10, 2006 5:56 am (#383 of 2959)
As regards Spinners End, there were several indications in the chapter that Snape did not generally live there, even in the summers.

Although Pettigrew speaks of the house as Snape's, it also appears that Pettigrew was doing some cleaning of the house which was described as having an air of neglect. That sounds like the house was very rarely used. If anyone has, or knows someone who has a summer cottage or cabin, you know that while dust may gather over months of disuse, an overall "air of neglect" isn't going to come from simply being the summer getaway.

Yet it does seem to be a location that has been in Snape's possession a long while, given the library.

Based on that, I tend to think the house was the one he grew up in. The books most likely belonged to his mother, since he must rarely go there and doesn't spend holidays and most likely not summers at the house, yet the books remain.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 10, 2006 8:30 am (#384 of 2959)
I agree that it was probably Snape's childhood home. But if it was common knowledge that he owned it, and lived part of the year there, would it not have been a red flag to those who did not already know it, that he was not a pureblood?


Vulture - Oct 10, 2006 8:36 am (#385 of 2959)
I don't think Snape would be in trouble with LV for completing the task of AKing DD. But I think Draco would be in trouble. Other DE's actually saw that Draco couldn't do it. Now of course, that might not have been his original task. Still, while he probably earned points with LV for getting the vanishing cabinet set up, he showed his (in LV's view) weakness when he couldn't actually kill an unarmed person. (wynnleaf - Oct 9, 2006 4:49 pm (#374))

I imagine Snape ought to get Lord V's equivalent of a gold medal _ I've even made up a whole movie scene in my mind's eye about it. (Or then again ... I can't help recalling that, after all Voldemort's blather about honouring the Lestranges "when Azkaban is broken open", he gave Bellatrix fairly short shrift in Book 5.)

I don't think that Draco's 'weakness' will be huge news to Voldemort, given that he had to threaten him with a massacre of Malfoys to make him even get as far as he did.

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

At present, I'm re-reading Book 6, and would welcome opinions on whether this snippet is significant: in "The Lightning-Struck Tower", during Malfoy's exchanges with Dumbledore, he (Malfoy), referring to Snape, says "But I haven't told him what I've been doing in the Room Of Requirement, he's going to wake up tomorrow and it'll all be over and he won't be the Dark Lord's favourite any more, he'll be nothing compared to me, nothing !!" (my italics and underlining).

Clearly, Malfoy has the idea that Snape is "the Dark Lord's favourite" at the time of the Tower scene. Is this significant ? Is this just his own half-baked idea, is it a false notion of which Snape (or someone else ?) has convinced him, or is it true ? Narcissa also calls Snape "the Dark Lord's favourite" in the "Spinner's End" chapter _ should we believe her ? Incidentally, Narcissa's remark is the only time where I can recall one Death Eater referring to anyone but themselves as "the Dark Lord's favourite".

(I myself haven't made my mind up as to whether this has much significance, as Malfoy's words only just occurred to me. Also _ in case it's not clear _ this doesn't indicate, either way, whether Snape is truly on Voldemort's side.)

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

In that light, both Bellatrix and Severus are kidding themselves if they think of themselves as LV's 'favorite'. (journeymom - Oct 10, 2006 9:46 am (#386))

I don't think Snape has ever made exaggerated boasts about this (like Bellatrix or Barty Crouch Jr.), has he ? The nearest he comes to it is "therein lies my great value to the Dark Lord" in "Spinner's End" _ "therein" refers to his earlier statement that Dumbledore "has never stopped trusting Severus Snape".

When I first read those words, they made quite an impact on me. (I believe I discussed this in a long-ago post.) They are a very restrained, detached way of talking _ even the way he refers to himself in the third person. I said before that it was how one might imagine a talking chess-pawn referring to its player. That very restraint _ such a contrast to the bombastic words of Bellatrix, Barty Crouch Jr., and Draco Malfoy on the Tower _ has a ring of calculated factual assessment about it. Well, that's how it seems to me.

But yes, Dumbledore is quite right about Voldemort neither having, nor wanting, friends. I think that Snape knows this better than any other Death Eater, and that those detached, calculating words in "Spinner's End" reflect that.


journeymom - Oct 10, 2006 8:46 am (#386 of 2959)
I think it's true, yes, Snape is (at that time) Voldemort's favorite, in so much as LV is capable of having a favorite. Dumbledore's comments about LV not needing or having any friends always colors anything said about his Death Eaters. In that light, both Bellatrix and Severus are kidding themselves if they think themselves LV's 'favorite'.


Choices - Oct 10, 2006 12:19 pm (#387 of 2959)
Die Z - "....would it not have been a red flag to those who did not already know it, that he was not a pureblood?"

Maybe they would just think he was a pure-blood down on his luck. The Weasleys are pure-bloods and they don't exactly live in a mansion. I think you can be poor and be a pure-blood.


legolas returns - Oct 10, 2006 12:26 pm (#388 of 2959)
I would have thought that Snape might be into books-the place could be furnised to his taste. They could be dark arts or potion books.


Colette - Oct 10, 2006 2:07 pm (#389 of 2959)
I have often wondered what happened to both of Snape's parents. From his worst memory, we know his father was overbearing and possibly abusive and that his mother cowered in his presence. But no other mention of them is ever made until the end of HBP.


journeymom - Oct 10, 2006 3:20 pm (#390 of 2959)
Colette, not everybody agrees that the man in Snape's memory is Tobias Snape. Some have speculated that perhaps he was an uncle. Some have asked how a witch could be intimidated by a muggle.

But we have the example of Merope Riddle who put herself in an inferior position to her muggle husband.

Then there's the Madam Pince is Eileen Prince theory, which I like very much. Lots of room for backstory there!

I agree, I'd like to know more about Snape's parents.


Meoshimo - Oct 10, 2006 4:03 pm (#391 of 2959)
Some have asked how a witch could be intimidated by a muggle. -journeymom - Oct 10, 2006 4:20 pm (#390 of 390)

I think that, as in many abusive relationships (whether the man is Tobias or someone else), emotions have a way of tricking people into thinking that the abuse is their fault, and in addition, they can be scared. I don't think that having magical powers would change these emotions. Not everyone would be good at 'fighting' spells. Maybe she was more of a housewife and didn't really know how to hurt someone else with magic.


Choices - Oct 10, 2006 5:32 pm (#392 of 2959)
Then again, lots of people think Snape may have learned much of the dark magic that he came to Hogwarts knowing, from his Mom.


Meoshimo - Oct 10, 2006 5:40 pm (#393 of 2959)
Does Snape have any extended family in the Wizarding World? Knowing about his family would be very important to this discussion.


journeymom - Oct 10, 2006 5:41 pm (#394 of 2959)
Exactly, Choices, and if that's so, then I have a hard time justifying those two theories together.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 10, 2006 7:08 pm (#395 of 2959)
Well, speaking of Merope, we know how her brother and father responded to her hanging out a window at a Muggle, so it isn't unbelievable that Snape's mom found herself in a similar situation with a brother or other male family member.


Laura W - Oct 10, 2006 11:19 pm (#396 of 2959)
jouneymom, I absolutely agree with what you wrote in post 386. I don't think Tom actually has a favourite in the normal sense of the word. I do, however, believe he makes a point of letting various DEs *think* that he favours them above all others at different times because that works to his advantage in terms of what they will do for him. And Snape returning to V after the rebirth when V thought Snape had left him forever - as he says in the graveyard scene in GoF - puts Snape in the "current favourite" spot (for the time being at least). Something that just eats away at Bellatrix.

Laura


S.E. Jones - - Oct 10, 2006 11:26 pm (#397 of 2959)
Oh, just think of the animosity that must be brewing in the DE ranks now among those who, like Bella, thought Snape was just a coward who didn't deserve Voldemort's favor. If Snape really is on the side of good, he's in a perfect position to start using Voldemort's own tactics against him (i.e. causing chaos and disorder).


journeymom - Oct 11, 2006 8:45 am (#398 of 2959)
Thanks, Laura W.

Meoshimo, I can't think of any mention of Snape's extended family. We're only aware of Eileen and Tobias Snape. I think it's notable that there are no Princes on the Black Family Tree.


Meoshimo - Oct 11, 2006 4:34 pm (#399 of 2959)
Indeed. I didn't think there was any mention of them, but it would be cool to know.


Potter Ace - Oct 12, 2006 9:09 am (#400 of 2959)
I think that if JRK's future writings falls short of her Harry Potter series, she could always fall back on writing a book about Snape and his rise or fall, as it were. Sort of like, Lucas did with Stars Wars, there is a ton of back story here.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 401 to 440

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 8:13 am

wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 3:58 am (#401 of 2959)
Edited by S.E. Jones Oct 13, 2006 11:15 am

Vulture, I'm answering your comments about Snape from the Sirius thread.

It may be that everything JKR shows us that appears to be about Snape's background is just a massive red herring. But assuming that it's not, and that by the sixth book JKR actually decided to be giving us some real hints, here's how some of the evidence stacks up and why many fans come to conclusions they do.

Poor or working class background - comes mostly from the house at Spinners End. If this is Snape's boyhood home (and yes there's a lot of evidence that it well could be even though yes, yes, I know, there's no proof), then that house tells us something. People who know that area of England say that it sounds much like a two-up-two-down row house. Many people who know northern England say that it looks like some of the old mill towns around there, particularly outside of Manchester, or others think near Halifax, but in particular a place where in the 1990's the neighborhood still wouldn't have been renovated into an upscale area. So that seems to support working class background from Northern England mill town. Maybe everyone who has described this as likely indicating a strongish accent is utterly wrong. Dunderhead, by the way, is heard more in Northern England than elsewhere (although we used it a lot when I was growing up!) Add to that the used potions book that sounds like how the Weasley kids were using used books. That also points to less money. We have seen no sign of siblings, so if Snape is an only child and still has to have used textbooks, then it really does sound like his family didn't have much money.

By the way, if you want an excellent article and since I don't think I'm supposed to put the link in here, google the words borolin where is spinner's end and read the first article that comes up. The writer knows Scotland and Northern England and is a fairly analytical person. The article also has photos of an artist's work who JKR particularly likes who has done depictions of these old mill towns. The description of a typical unmodernized two-up-two-down row house doesn't sound like where someone would live who's very far up at all on the economic scale. And I've seen a couple of people now who comment that they grew up in houses like that.

Snape's silky voice. Snape has got to be a decent actor to be such a successful spy - he says so himself in HBP. My guess is that, he perfected his voice and accent early on at Hogwarts.

Snape as loner. Despite Sirius saying that Snape "ran with"? a gang of Slytherins, we certainly didn't see any of them attempting any sort of defense for Snape during the Snape's Worst Memory scene, did we? Yet that was apparently most of the class of that year, as they left their OWL exams and relaxed at the lake. Not one person even showed any interest in supporting Snape other than Lily. While Snape's assertion that the Marauders always attacked him 4-1 could be biased, we have no indication in his comments, or any comments of Lupin or Sirius that there were any Slytherin friends who were with Snape during these attacks. So, yeah, it does sound like he was something of a loner.

Now we may indeed find that Snape comes from a nice upper class family in London and Spinners End is just a place he bought as a safe house, while the look of once upon a time being very lived in, but now in longterm disuse is something he cultivates. But JKR had some sort of reason for showing us that house. And the most likely reason right now is that it was to reveal something about Snape.

We might find out that Snape had loads of friends and is really an extravert. All his friends in the Snapes Worst Memory scene were just on the other side of the lake, or went back to their dormitory rooms. And at Hogwarts, he's really outgoing and has lots of good friends among the staff. And he's really friendly with the DE's, too, and a real team player. Right.

But I tend to think that while what JKR has shown us isn't everything about Snape - there's still a lot hidden - what she has shown isn't just totally red herrings. And as you know, I'm much more interested in what she has shown us than the evaluations of characters who were some of the worst troublemakers in the school and hated Snape.


wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 5:52 am (#402 of 2959)
I want to apologize for the messy post above. I had gone back and edited it and tried to fix it, but for some strange reason, it is right back to the glitches that it had originally. And now I can't edit it.


T Vrana - Oct 13, 2006 8:36 am (#403 of 2959)
wynnleaf- Don't forget the teenage boy Harry sees during occlumency lessons, alone, shooting flies off the ceiling. I think your very detailed assement is correct. Snape as a loner, coming from a poor background, but rising in power through skill and determination. Just wish he'd wash his hair...


S.E. Jones - - Oct 13, 2006 10:05 am (#404 of 2959)
There's also the "greying undies" that we see in the pensieve memory. If material is greying, it's usually because it's old, which indicates that he didn't have much money to be buying new pairs. A person doesn't buy used undies unless they're buying used other things.

I also thought immediately of the abandoned mining towns of Northern England when I read the Spinners End chapter (and I'm from Oklahoma) so it isn't something unique to a given person and their own personal experience.

I think the "group of Slytherins" Snape ran with were probably all older, hence why he doesn't have anyone running to his aid in the pensieve memory, which also would have meant that he spent most of his time in classes and between classes alone as his friends would've all had different schedules, and only really had time to hand around with them after classes had finished and in the Great Hall during meals.

wynnleaf, I can go in and fix the glitches in your post. My guess would be that you wrote the thing in some text program and pasted into the dialogue box on your browser. When you do this, you often see the quotation problems that show in your post. Let me know if I change anything incorrectly.


wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 10:46 am (#405 of 2959)
By the way, on the thing of not washing hair and growing up in an unmodernized row house in a mill town...

I remember hearing from someone over the past year who said that either their own family or maybe a grandparent lived in such a two-up-two-down house. They said that the lavoratories were often out back and sometimes shared with other houses, so that washing of hair usually was done in the sink in cold water -- hence washed rarely.


Gemini 13 - Oct 13, 2006 10:59 am (#406 of 2959)
I just had a thought. Someone mentioned that its possible some of the back story we know about Snape might be a red herring. Well, it got me thinking about this quote... MA: Oh, here’s one [from our forums] that I’ve really got to ask you. Has Snape ever been loved by anyone?

JKR: Yes, he has, which in some ways makes him more culpable even than Voldemort, who never has. Okay, one more each!

You know JKR likes to answer questions in ways that she can give us information and confuse us at the same time? Well what if the person she is speaking of is Snapes mother? That right there is something that seperates him from Voldemort considering Voldemort never knew his mother. I think this could be a strong possibility.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 13, 2006 3:40 pm (#407 of 2959)
I occasionally think too much is made of Snape's greasy hair. He hangs over a steaming cauldron most of the time. Everyone got sweaty doing that. Doesn't anyone think it's even remotely possible it's an occupational hazard to have greasy hair?

Just curious...


Thom Matheson - Oct 13, 2006 5:09 pm (#408 of 2959)
That's why we have daily showers and such. Also as potions master he could come up with something I'm sure that would have done the trick. Even a hat would have been better then nothing.


T Vrana - Oct 13, 2006 8:02 pm (#409 of 2959)
Does he really hang over a steaming cauldron? Harry notes that under Slughorn there are bubbling cauldrons. Under Snape there are notes on the board. There is something here that I am too tired to go into now. But, bottom line, we have never seen Snape brew anything.


Vulture - Oct 13, 2006 8:56 pm (#410 of 2959)
Poor or working class background - comes mostly from the house at Spinners End. (wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 4:58 am (#401))

I feel that what this whole sketch about location, two-up-two-down, mill town, etc., overlooks is the secrecy angle. Have we seen any private houses in the wizard world which are prosperous-looking ? They certainly all seem to be in neighbourhoods which _ to Muggle eyes _ are either poor or remote. Given Snape's spy act, the need for secrecy is (at least) doubled, if not multiplied many times _ secrecy not just from Muggle eyes, but from wizard ones as well. Remember Bellatrix's reaction to finding out that Snape lives there ?

I don't see any evidence that this is his childhood home _ there are no family photos or pictures mentioned. What we can deduce from what we're told is that it's an inconspicuous house in an area unnoticed by (a) the kind of Muggles who could be a problem, and (b) any wizards at all. Right up Snape's street, in fact (excuse the pun). Even in Hogwarts, he didn't want to move out of his dungeon even after getting the Defence job.

Snape as loner. Despite Sirius saying that Snape "ran with"? a gang of Slytherins, we certainly didn't see any of them attempting any sort of defense for Snape during the Snape's Worst Memory scene, did we? Yet that was apparently most of the class of that year, as they left their OWL exams and relaxed at the lake. (wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 4:58 am (#401))

We weren't told in detail how the students distributed themselves around the grounds after the exam. In fact, all that what we're really told amounts to is that James kept the group of "laughing girls" in sight on his way out of the exam, and that Snape (intentionally or not) followed James & Co. at a distance. Where everyone else was isn't gone into. We do know that, after McGonagall awards points to Harry and his friends near the end of Book 5, he walks from the school steps to a part of the lake where he can be alone _ and it takes him some time to get away from all the different scattered groups of people whose eyes he wants to avoid.

Besides, if the Slytherins of Harry's day are anything to go by, they don't seem to be big fans of sunlight and seem to gravitate towards their dungeon in their free time. So possibly, Snape's mates had simply gone off for an end-of-exam feed in the dungeon, whereas Snape, engrossed in his favourite subject, wandered around with no real idea where he was until he walked into an attack.

We might find out that Snape had loads of friends and is really an extravert. All his friends in the Snapes Worst Memory scene were just on the other side of the lake, or went back to their dormitory rooms. And at Hogwarts, he's really outgoing and has lots of good friends among the staff. And he's really friendly with the DE's, too, and a real team player. Right. (wynnleaf - Oct 13, 2006 4:58 am (#401))

All very amusing, but I'm not saying those things, which are an extreme opposite to what I'm disproving. All I'm saying is that the vision of him being poor, a loner, working class and constantly bullied has not been proven. On the Death Eater isssue, we in fact know that Snape did hang around with people who became Death Eaters _ it's listed on the Lexicon timelines. (How friendly he was, or is, with them is not known to me or you, and frankly, I don't care either way.) There was an idea around in several posts for a while that what Sirius said about this could not be true, because of time calculations. I went and checked and proved that it could be, and most probably was, and my results are in #183 (please click) on this thread. No-one afterwards contested my findings on the time thing, as far as I know.

I have no information on how many friends Snape had at Hogwarts, and neither have you nor anyone else. What we do know (from what we see in Harry's day) is that it's extremely unlikely that Slytherins would watch an attack on one of their House without intervening _ unless they felt outnumbered or outgunned, or both. We know that, in the Pensieve scene, there were numbers of people laughing approvingly at what James was up to, so it's quite likely that Gryffindors, or at least anti-Slytherins, were there in numbers. We also know that James and Sirius were the best wizards in the school (when Lily pulls out her wand, there's a hint that, if it came to a duel with James, she'd lose), so any nearby Slytherins would be outgunned, too. The most practical (and likely) thing for any Slytherin to do would be to get a teacher _ and, as we don't know how that scene ended, we don't know that a teacher didn't, in fact, intervene.

(I'll check out that Borolin article, thanks.)


S.E. Jones - - Oct 13, 2006 9:29 pm (#411 of 2959)
Vulture --Given Snape's spy act, the need for secrecy is (at least) doubled, if not multiplied many times _ secrecy not just from Muggle eyes, but from wizard ones as well.--

I don't really think Snape needs (prior to HBP, that is) a lot of secrecy, especially where the Order and DEs come in. Regardless of whether Voldemort knows about Snape's interaction with the Order of the Phoenix, each side thinks he's spying for them by interacting with the other. So, Order members wouldn't go visit him at his house because they'd know he has interactions with the DEs and they wouldn't want their spy given away (that's probably why Snape usually went to Order HQ in OP to relay updates). Similarly, the DEs wouldn't go visit him at his house because they'd know he has interactions with the Order members and they wouldn't want their spy given away (that's probably why Snape looked out the window like he was watching for someone when Narcissa came). Voldemort wouldn't go visit him, because he's the type you go to, not who comes to you (unless he's going to AK you, of course). Dumbledore might visit, but I doubt it for the reasons I've already given. He's pretty much assured that no one will come calling, unless it's urgent.

Bella doesn't seem to like Snape and I kinda got the feeling she never did, which might explain why she didn't know where he lived. Narcissa seems to know because Snape is such a good friend of Lucius's.


Saracene - Oct 13, 2006 10:28 pm (#412 of 2959)
Edited Oct 14, 2006 12:17 am
Vulture:

---There was an idea around in several posts for a while that what Sirius said about this could not be true, because of time calculations. I went and checked and proved that it could be, and most probably was, and my results are in #183 (please click) on this thread.---

Well, you do say in that post that Bellatrix wouldn't have been in school together with Snape - whereas Sirius clearly made a reference to her - "a married couple, they're in Azkaban now". So there's obviously an inconsistency in regards to at least one character mentioned by Sirius.

Mind you, I think that the likeliest explanation for this is JKR making a mistake with the date of Bellatrix's birth.

Regarding the Pensieve scene, I do tend to see it as an indication of Snape being a loner, one reason being that JKR is going to devote only that much space to the backgrounds of her secondary characters. So every flashback scene that she does give us is therefore hugely important because it's our only chance to get a glimpse of those characters' pasts. When I read a scene in which a character goes off to sit alone without saying a word to anyone and has no friends coming forward to stand up for him when he's attacked, that to me seems a pretty good indication of what that character's time at school was like.

Sure, *theoretically* it's possible that Snape simply chose that particular day to go and sit alone while his mates went somewhere else. As Vulture noted, we see Harry wander off to be alone at the end of OotP. But the important difference IMO is that we also see Harry hang out with his friends on numerous occasions, and we are explicitly given a reason for why, in this particular scene, he wished to be alone. The reason you couldn't take that scene as any sort of indication of Harry's lack of friends is that it's vastly outnumbered by the scenes which show the contrary. As opposed to one single scene of teenage Snape we get in the entire series so far.

Besides, Snape being an unpopular loner at school to me seems fitting naturally with what we've seen of his adult personality: unpleasant, prickly, closed-off emotionally, etc.


wynnleaf - Oct 14, 2006 4:34 am (#413 of 2959)
Regarding the Pensieve scene, I do tend to see it as an indication of Snape being a loner, one reason being that JKR is going to devote only that much space to the backgrounds of her secondary characters. So every flashback scene that she does give us is therefore hugely important because it's our only chance to get a glimpse of those characters' pasts. When I read a scene in which a character goes off to sit alone without saying a word to anyone and has no friends coming forward to stand up for him when he's attacked, that to me seems a pretty good indication of what that character's time at school was like.

I think Saracene's points are not only important to the "loner" question, but also whether or not Snape is from a poorer family. In general, I think it's fair to assume that when JKR writes a scene about a major character, but not the central character of the book, especially when that person is written to keep the reader guessing about his real character, we are meant to be able to gain clues from these scenes. In other words, the writer -- a good writer -- wouldn't write these few scenes as all anomalies to the character. Just the opposite, in fact. I think the various scenes and memories that she's put together for us about Snape are meant to tell us something, not show us a lot of atypical information that tells us nothing.

So I think that the few indications we have of Snape being from a poorer background are in fact indicative of just that. Graying underpants and used textbooks are indicators of someone who can't purchase clothing very often and who can't afford new books -- similarly to the Weasley kids who often use hand-me-downs, only with them it's partly because they've got so many kids. In a single child family (and that's only a guess because we saw no memories of a Snape sibling, or mention of one by anyone else), those clothing and textbook indicators would reflect a family with possibly even fewer resources than the Weasleys.

Spinners End being Snapes childhood home. No proof, but then we're not expecting proof of much of anything about Snape yet. What we've got are indicators. Peter calls the house Snape's house. The very worn furniture and books suggests that someone actually lived there for a long while. But the air of neglect and the cleaning the Peter is having to do suggest that no one has lived there for years. Anyone who has ever owned, or known someone who owns a summer cabin or cottage knows that an "air of neglect" doesn't just happen because you're only there during holidays and summer months.

So this house has been lived in a lot, but has not been lived in for a long time. Snape has been at Hogwarts since around the time of the Potter's deaths. He hasn't lived at Spinners End since then, although he certainly may have visited occasionally, but not enough to avoid the "air of neglect" and the need for Pettigrew to clean (apparently it needed more than a few quick cleaning spells or Peter wouldn't be complaining).

All of those books. Some people suggest that this is the overflow of Snape's personal library and whatever he either can't fit into his quarters at Hogwarts, or maybe Dark books that he doesn't want to keep at Hogwarts. Here's the problem I have with that. If these are Snape's books, then books are clearly very important to him. Yet he's keeping them in a house that is neglected and not clean, and which he must visited too rarely to keep the house up. Most people I know who care about books enough to have a lot of them, tend to like to keep their libraries near where they regularly live. Since Snape spends most of his time at Hogwarts, it would make sense that he'd keep his books there. Space shouldn't be a problem for wizards who can magically enlarge rooms. If those are Dark Magic books that he doesn't feel like he can keep at Hogwarts, why is he keeping them in a run-down little house in Northern England, that needs a good cleaning? And if Dark Magic is so very important to him and his big interest, why would he want those books, in particular, in such a place? (He seems to like the potions room kept quite clean. One would expect him to want his own books in a clean space, too.)

Spinners End looks more like a place that Snape once lived in quite a lot, but that would have to be before he went to work at Hogwarts. The library could be his, but sounds more like books that had been in the house for years. If the furniture became very worn from much use, but Snape hasn't lived there (other than visits) since starting to work at Hogwarts about age 21, then the wear on the furniture would have occurred prior to that time. That would mean that the furniture got it's wear and tear while Snape was growing up.

Most likely scenario -- Snape grew up in that house.

Loner.... First, I agree with Saracene.

Also, "loner" doesn't mean "no friends at all," but simply a person who tends to be much to themselves and not gather a lot of friends. Not a real "team player" type either. Certainly Snape must have some friends. Narcissa seems to think highly of him and considers him a friend of Lucius (5-6 years older than Snape). He seems to get along with Minerva in a collegial rivalry sort of way. And DD has clearly come to trust him.

The pensieve scene shows us Snape by himself. As I said, Lupin and Sirius, as well as Snape, always talk about the Marauder/Snape problems as though it was just the Marauders and Snape -- no mention of any involvement with a group of Snape's friends. If one was describing Harry and Malfoy's relationship, you'd have to include not only Ron and Hermione, but Crabb and Goyle as well, because both boy's friends become part of the story of their interactions. But with the Marauders and Snape, we don't get any mention of friends of Snape being any part of their interactions. There's no "Snape and his cronies" following the Marauders around trying to see what they're up to. There's no "Snape and his friend" going down to the Whomping Willow. There's no friends around helping Snape out or even mentioned in the pensieve scene.

Plus, the loner type really fits the personality that JKR has given this character. And, by the way, it fits the personality of someone who can be a successful spy.

Conclusion: Snape is from a northern England mill town, a family with few financial resources, and is a loner. If he grew up in a northern mill town row house, he likely did have the speech patterns of the area, but (with his acting skills) adopted a more cultured accent in his years in school.

Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 16, 2006 7:52 pm (#414 of 2959)
A series of thoughts occurred to me concerning Severus Snape, Eileen Prince and Albus Dumbledore.

During the Pensieve scene in OotP when Severus is hanging upside down and thus underclothes are revealed they are described as graying Often graying is seen clothes that have seen too much wear and such could be interpreted as a sign that Snape's parents have limited financial resources.

This possibility led me to the following train of thought is possible that Severus received his copy of Advanced Potion Making from his mother Eileen.

I wonder whether Eileen also received the textbook as a hand me down from someone like Dumbledore.

The thought occurred to me me because of the description of the Muffiato spell and its effect.

. . . and perhaps most useful of all, Muffiato, a spell that filled the ears of anyone nearby with an unidentifiable buzzing, so that lengthy conversation could be held in class without being overheard.

# The buzzing noise caused by the Muffiato spell and its resulting effect seem to be like to the concept of white noise

White noise is a random signal (or process) with a flat power spectral density. In other words, the signal's power spectral density has equal power in any band, at any centre frequency, having a given bandwidth. White noise is considered analogous to white light which contains all frequencies.

An infinite-bandwidth white noise signal is purely a theoretical construct. By having power at all frequencies, the total power of such a signal is infinite. In practice, a signal can be "white" with a flat spectrum over a defined frequency band. . . .

Applications One use for white noise is in the field of architectural acoustics. In order to mask distracting, undesirable noises in interior spaces, a constant low level of white noise is generated.

It is used by some emergency vehicle sirens due to its ability to cut through background noise and its lack of echo, which makes it easier to locate.

White noise has also been used in electronic music, where it is used either directly or as an input for a filter to create other types of noise signal. It is used extensively in audio synthesis, typically to recreate percussive instruments such as cymbals which have high noise content in their frequency domain.

It is also used to generate impulse responses. To set up the equalizor for a concert or other performance in a venue, a short burst of white or pink noise is sent through the Public Announcement system and monitored from various points in the venue so that the engineer can tell if the acoustics of the building naturally boost or cut any frequencies. He or she can then adjust the overall equalization to ensure a balanced mix.

White noise can be used for frequency response testing of amplifiers and electronic filters. It is sometimes used with a flat response microphone and an automatic equalizer. The idea is that the system will generate white noise and the microphone will pick up the white noise produced by the speakers. It will then automatically equalize each frequency band to get a flat response. That system is used in professional level equipment, some high-end home stereo and some high-end car radios.

White noise is used as the basis of some random number generators.

White noise can be used to disorient individuals prior to interrogation and may be used as part of sensory deprivation techniques. White noise machines are sold as privacy enhancers and sleep aids and to mask tinnitus. White noise CDs, when used with headphones, can aid concentration by blocking out irritating or distracting noises in a person's environment

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Noise#Strong_Examples_of_White_Noise

The fact that resulting effect is a buzzing effect brings to mind the the fact that the combination the names Albus meaning white in Latin and Dumbledore, meaning bumblebee in Old and Middle English, leads me to wonder whether the textbook is in fact older than the readers are led to believe. Is it possible that Albus Dumbledore invented at least the Muffiato spell and that the textbook was passed down from Dumbledore to Eileen Prince, to Severus and then ultimately to Harry?


legolas returns - Oct 18, 2006 11:01 am (#415 of 2959)
Lupin tells Harry to look for the publish date in the front of the book. I think it was published in the 1950s-this suggests that it was only handed from mother to son.

You get grey clothes if they are old and also if you wash with a lot of black garments.


rambkowalczyk - Oct 19, 2006 3:51 am (#416 of 2959)
and you get pink underwear if washed with red items. Smile


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 19, 2006 7:53 am (#417 of 2959)
And if you put a new white shirt in with a load of jeans, you can get a surprisingly lovely sky blue. But I digress.

Anyway, I do think it was Snape's mother's book. If it had been given to her to use by someone else, I don't think she would have thought of it as properly being her property.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 19, 2006 1:25 pm (#418 of 2959)
--I think it was published in the 1950s-this suggests that it was only handed from mother to son.--

They don't give an exact date, but say the book was nearly fifty-years-old. I have to agree that it was probably handed from mother to son.


Vulture - Oct 23, 2006 7:41 am (#419 of 2959)
Hi, Folks: A bit rushed, this, 'cos I've only got ten minutes library time. Amn't able to get on much at present because I haven't got a home link any more.

I'm afraid I still don't buy into the picture of Snape being poor, from Northern England, and a loner, and being bullied because of that.

Northern England: Well, my impression is that the main source for this is the house. I've lived in Swansea (Wales) and Reading (South East England), and seen similar houses there. Also in Dublin and Belfast (Ireland).

Poor: I gather the underpants are the main source for this. But laundry, etc., shouldn't be a problem for someone who can do magic. While I'm not suggesting that Snape is rich, I feel that the undies are really about someone who doesn't take care of themselves _ low self-esteem, perhaps. (I know his fans won't like this, but I feel there was at least a TINY grain of truth in the line about James being everything Snape WANTED to be.)

Loner: Well, I know he's prickly and probably doesn't get close to people _ and we know he sneers to Harry about "fools who wear their hearts on their sleeves". But we know that Slytherins, even when they snap at each other, gang together when it's a question of Gryffindor.

Being lgged out !!


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 8:13 am (#420 of 2959)
Hi Vulture!

You forgot one. The used potions textbook. We don't know if it was Eileen's or just one he bought used. But having used or pre-owned textbooks is a pretty good indicator of not having a lot of financial resources.

Sure, it could be that the book was his mom's, and for whatever reason he just really wanted to use her books. But since it appears that the notes in the book were his and not her's, I can't think of any reason why having her book would be more appealing than buying a new one.

Also, it seems highly improbable that the book Harry happened to acquire should be the only used text book that Snape owned.

So that means that, like the Weasley kids, he probably couldn't afford new textbooks.

With the Weasleys having 7 children, it makes sense that even with Arthur having a fairly good job at the Ministry of Magic, they still need to be very careful what they spend.

Snape is possibly an only child (lots of them in the HP world, aren't there?) -- as we see no indication of other siblings mentioned by the Marauders, in any memories, etc. If he's an only child, or at least far fewer in his family than the Weasley's, yet still the family can't afford to buy new texts for him, then it's a strong indicator that the family didn't have as much money as the Weasley's.

Last on the book... Snape obviously cared a lot about potions and it was one of his best subjects. Yet even in 6th year he had a 30 year old text (did I do that math right?). You'd think he'd have chosen a new text if he could get one.

Add that to the graying underpants and the little, shabby house that could be Snape's family home, and it's far more likely that it adds up to Snape's being from a poor family, than that the family had average or better financial resources. I can't think of any indicators we have that contradict Snape's coming from a poorer family.


Soul Search - Oct 23, 2006 9:25 am (#421 of 2959)
Hermione tells Harry "Tobias Snape was a Muggle, from what it said in the Prophet."

I think we have to consider that Tobias Snape may have had a negative attitude for spending hard-earned money on magic schooling. We saw this attitude with Vernon Dursley, as well.


rambkowalczyk - Oct 23, 2006 9:43 am (#422 of 2959)
Someone mentioned this a while back. It happend in OOP when Snape is at Grimmauld Place to tell Harry he has Occlumency lessons.

"Sit down, Potter."

"You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

An ugly flush suffused Snape's pallid face.

When this was brought up before, it was thought that Snape was embarrassed because he was not a wealthy landowner,that this may have been a dig by Sirius to Snape's lack of money. Although it may not prove that Snape was poor, it does prove that Sirius comment really hit him where it hurt.

I'm afraid I still don't buy into the picture of Snape being poor, from Northern England, and a loner, and being bullied because of that. Vulture

Surely you aren't saying that Snape as a Hogwart's student was well to do, popular, and living in London. Smile

Frankly as clues go, it is not unreasonble to assume that Spinner's End was his childhood home. If it isn't why does he have it and why does Narcissa know where it is. As to where Spinner's End is, ultimately it doesn't matter. Some people have suggested that his use of the term dunderhead reflects the region he grew up in. Also in book 1 after the second Quidditch match when Harry gets the Snitch very quickly, Snape spits on the ground in anger. Again this could suggest he grew up in a region where this type of behavior is normal.

As far as Snape being poor, I have to go with Wynnleaf's arguments above. There are no indications that he was well to do or even average.

Likewise there is more evidence that Snape was a loner, than a popular guy. Zapping flies alone in his bedroom, crying in the corner as someone yells at a cowering woman, being laughed at while mounting a bucking broomstick. Note these are all depressing memories. When Snape looked at Harry's there were humiliating ones but there were also happy ones as well. Snape's worst memory shows no one except Lily coming to his defense and it seems as though she is merely doing it because it is the right thing or because she is angry at James not that she is his friend.

Where I might agree with Vulture is that I don't think James bullied Snape because he was poor, lonely and from Northern England. He did it because he could and for the most part there were no negative consequences.

I also agree that Snape probably wanted to be everything that James was or at the very least was jealous of him. James was rich, popular, proficient in magic (perhaps without even trying to hard), good at Quidditch. I wonder if James wasn't jealous of Snape. James may have made a big show of being against the Dark Arts but maybe he was jealous that Snape knew something that he didn't.


LinaOct 23, 2006 10:31 am (#423 of 2959)
Honestly, if there is no difference between the book that has to be used now and the book that was used 30 or 50 years ago, I don't see the reason to buy a new book. Especially if the old one is well kept.

But I do think that there is a lot to ponder about Snape's childhood.

# Muggle father - did he know that he married a witch? We don't know that. But if he knew that she was a witch before they got married, then it is hard to accept that he resented magic. If he didn't know, maybe the most logical action would be that he left her and Snape when he discovered that he lived in the magical family. There is a possibility that that's why we don't know anything about Snape's siblings, because he left before any of them came to the world. If his father left, than Snape maybe never really got to know him.

# Slytherin mother - that's interesting. We know that being a pure blood is important to Slytherins. Why did she marry a Muggle? Is it because she had broad views? Or maybe he was too charming for her to resist him? Where did they meet? Was he a worker in the factory near her house? Did she marry him because she wanted to run away from her family (like Voldemort's mum) or because she really fell in love with his personality?

# The man yelling at a woman - the first assumption that comes in mind is the father yelling at the mother. That's the biggest reason why it is probably not like that. Now, correct me if I'm wrong, isn't Snape described like a hook-nosed? Isn't the picture of his mum in the news paper described as a hook-nosed? And the yelling man is hook-nosed too. That is suggesting a family. Very possible mum's brother or father. Why is he yelling? I'd like to know the answer to this question. Maybe because she married a Muggle, maybe after that Muggle left saying something like "I told you so", maybe because they sent Severus to the regular school first?

# He was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts - forgive me if you came to the conclusion who taught him the Dark Arts in the posts that I didn't read, but I do wonder who taught him that? If it was his mother, why did she marry a Muggle? I suspect that it was the same man that was yelling at the woman in Snape's memory.

# Where they rich or poor? - well, my opinion is that it is irrelevant. Snape has many books. We just don't know if it was his mother or someone else from the family who started collecting them or it was Snape? I agree that the gray underwear and greasy hair suggest the lack of care for the physical condition. I don't know if it means the low self-esteem, but it combined with the books shows that Snape gives knowledge much bigger priority than he gives it to hygiene. Looks more like a scientist that doesn't care for anything else but science.

I'd have few more ideas, but I think this is enough for one post.


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 10:41 am (#424 of 2959)
I don't think we know what house Eileen was from.

As regards where Spinners End is, the chimney and the name, Spinners End, seem to indicate a textile mill town -- most likely that would indicate northern England, although I imagine there could be other textile mills somewhere else in Great Britain. It's just that northern England is sort of known for it.

We don't know for sure what kind of home Snape was from, his economic background, where he grew up, etc. But either JKR is going to give us a lot of information in Book 7 that will tell us about him coming from a different area of the country, that his economic situation was average or better, that he had a group of friends, etc. OR we have to assume that what she has shown us so far that appear to be hints about his real background are true hints.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 23, 2006 11:30 am (#425 of 2959)
The graying underpants have gone way too far, if you'll all forgive me for having the audacity to be tired of hearing about Snape's underpants! LOL! When have we ever heard about any of the kids doing their own laundry? If he was at Hogwarts, the house elves probably did it, so it's their fault if they were not clean. Whether it's because the pants were old, or because the elves were not inclined to do a good job for this particular student, or whatever, is a different story.

I agree that we have no proof that the man Harry saw yelling is Snape's dad. If the mother didn't tell the husband she was a witch at first, and we have precedent for this with Merope and Seamus, then we could have had some kind of scene between him and her that drove her back to her own family and left Snape siblingless. The house could possibly be the dad's though, if he never remarried. It would have definitely been able come back to his only legal child after he finally died, and that would explain it being so run-down.

Jo told us a LOT about Snape without telling us much of ANYTHING, which is what she is best at. There's a lot more to discover about Snape in the last book, I would think.


journeymom - Oct 23, 2006 12:34 pm (#426 of 2959)
""Sit down, Potter."

"You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

An ugly flush suffused Snape's pallid face.

When this was brought up before, it was thought that Snape was embarrassed because he was not a wealthy landowner,that this may have been a dig by Sirius to Snape's lack of money. Although it may not prove that Snape was poor, it does prove that Sirius comment really hit him where it hurt. "

I didn't read it this way. I think Snape is angry because Sirius challenged Snape's authority right in front of Harry. Not only is he embarrassed but now he has the added work of re-establishing his authority as a teacher with Harry as well as the odious job of attempting to teach him occlumency.


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 1:01 pm (#427 of 2959)
I agree journeymom. I never thought about ownership of a house or property in those lines. Further, in OOTP we really don't have any hints as to what Snape's house may have been like.

I also agree that the graying pants is not necessarily a major indicator of economic status.

The used textbook is another story. People that really care about books, and who are acquiring books about one of their favorite subjects, would normally like those books to be new, not 30 years old. Further, it does appear from Harry's experience that most students buy their own books. Of course, it could be that Snape's father was against magic in general and didn't like money spent on it. That, by the way, would imply that Snape was living in the same home as his father.

I think part of the question is whether JKR is trying to show us things about Snape through all of these little things.

Back before HBP, almost no one expected Snape to be anything, but pureblood. There was such a strong idea that Snape had to be pureblood, practically no one considered him as the Half Blood Prince (some, but few). Surely as head of Slytherin he must be pureblood. Surely if he was friends with the Malfoy's he must be pureblood. But then, it turned out that he wasn't.

Simarly, before HBP, many Snape-lovers thought he came from some Dark aristocratic wizarding family -- perhaps still wealthy, perhaps fallen on bad times. The assumption was that he came from a family similar to the Blacks or Malfoys. Maybe that wasn't so much a theory on the Lexicon, but many fans did think that was the most likely Snape backstory.

Then with HBP, and Snape being a half-blood, it was obvious that his mother must have been willing to marry a muggle. So while we didn't know for sure, we at least at hints that maybe Snape wasn't raised to hate muggles, with a pureblood elitist attitude.

We had thought Snape really wanted to be the DADA teacher, but was refused the position because it might tempt him too much. But in HBP we learn the position is cursed and Snape, however much he might wish to teach DADA, probably was quite accepting of not being given a cursed position. And DD probably didn't want him to have it more because it was cursed than anything else, as DD was quite willing to lean on Snape's knowledge of Dark Arts when necessity arose.

JKR seemed to be using HBP to overturn several fan ideas about Snape.

Therefore I tend to lean more toward other hints in HBP also overturning fan myths. Snape isn't from a wealthy, elite background, but a lower economic background. Snape wasn't raised in a Dark Magic family, but by a muggle father and a witch willing to marry a muggle.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 23, 2006 1:10 pm (#428 of 2959)
That's the way I read it too, journeymom. Look at how Dumbledore keep reinforcing the "Professor" concept on Harry in regards Snape, and then you have Sirius telling him "hey, you don't have any authority here" which is a bit of a slap to the face, in my opinion.

I'm sorry you're sick of hearing about Snape's unmentionables, Die, but being one of the few clues we have about his background, I'll have to mention them again. Greying cloth could be a sign that the elves decided to wash them with school robes, but I think it more likely that they are just old and the cloth is starting to deteriorate. This alone isn't much, but adding it with the used text book, the old house in a poor area of an old milling town, and you suddenly have a picture. I too thought Northern England right away on my first read, and I'm from Oklahoma, USA, so it's not that I was using my own personal experience or getting the idea from someone on the forum because I was reading by myself, which tells me that there's just something in that chapter that leads to the idea. As for being a loner, the only friends we absolutely know of were a few years ahead of him, so even if he hung around with them between classes (the OWL exams would be an exception because they don't revolve around the normal class schedules), during meal times and in the common room, he may not have had any friends in his own year and thus spent a good deal of time alone. Concluding that Snape was poor, from an old milling town, and a loner (most of the time) are logical conclusions. They may not be right conclusions, but they are logical and thus probable. I really don't see where the debate comes from in this respect. Why can this not be possible? Where in canon are we given hints that contradict the clues given that make up these conclusions?

EDIT: Wynnleaf posted while I was typing. Some interesting thoughts there. If he was raised by a Muggle father, that makes his "Mudblood" comment to Lily even worse, though, doesn't it. I think much of HBP was to show why Snape joined the DEs. Barty, Jr. gave this big explanation of how he was like the Dark Lord (both having a father they hated, etc) but, as it turns out, Snape may have had a background that parallelled Voldemort's far more closely. Muggle father who he seemed to resent, poor upbringing, talented, witch mother who he may have resented for marrying a Muggle and who he may have seen as weak (if she were being bullied by his father). I have to wonder if that has anything to do with Snape being the Dark Lord's "favorite".


The Artful Dodger - Oct 23, 2006 3:22 pm (#429 of 2959)
JKR seemed to be using HBP to overturn several fan ideas about Snape. -- wynnleaf

That may be true, but I guess it is wrong in case of the curse on the DADA job. First, it wasn't a fan idea that Dumbledore wouldn't let Snape teach this particular subject because it might bring out the worst in him. JKR told us, so there's good reason to accept this explanation. Secondly, it's as good as fact that Snape wanted to teach DADA despite the curse. We're told in OoP, ch.17, that he regularly applied for the job since he's been at Hogwarts. You might say he had no idea the job is jinxed, but that's unlikely. At least he must have heard about the rumours, as those rumours were know even to the Hogwarts students.


Soul Search - Oct 23, 2006 3:42 pm (#430 of 2959)
All suggestion of Snape wanting the DADA job came from the likes of Percy. No doubt Snape would have liked to teach DADA, but "accepted wisdom" blew it all out of proportion.

Snape using "half-blood Prince" suggests he looked up to his mother, and, perhaps, did not respect his father.


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 3:59 pm (#431 of 2959)
Here's the JKR quotes about Snape teaching DADA.

Jackson: “Professor Snape has always wanted to be Defence Against Dark Arts teacher. In book 5 he still hasn’t got the job. Why does Prof Dumbedore not allow him to be Defence Against The Dark Arts teacher?”

JK Rowling: That is an excellent question and the reason is that I have to be careful what I say here. To answer it fully would give a lot away about the remaining two books.

When Prof Dumbledore took Prof Snape onto the staff and Prof Snape said “I’d like to be Prof of Defence Against the Dark Arts please” and Prof Dumbledore felt it might bring out the worst in Snape so said “I think we’ll get you to teach Potions and see how you get along there”.

This really only answered why DD first had Snape teach potions instead of DADA. In fact, it doesn't answer why DD had never let Snape teach DADA after his first few years, but only actually tells us what DD told Snape at the time. We can guess that as the years went by Snape came to understand that the position was cursed, so DD would not have wanted him teaching it, regardless of what DD may have thought about how the position might affect Snape. Obviously, when DD finally chose to let Snape teach it, he trusted him quite a bit, and as I said before, relied on Snape's advanced knowledge of DADA to help in several emergency situations.

Soul Search said: Snape using "half-blood Prince" suggests he looked up to his mother, and, perhaps, did not respect his father.

This could be the case. On the other hand, it could just as easily be that he thought the name "Prince" was sort of cool and "Half Blood Prince" even cooler. "Half Blood Jones" wouldn't have been nearly so effective, no matter what he thought of either side of the family.

As I have several times pointed out, the "wynn" in wynnleaf is a family name on my mother's side which I really, really like -- in part because I just think it's sort of cool. My use of it has absolutely nothing to do with a rejection of my dad's family of which I'm also quite fond.


Saracene - Oct 23, 2006 4:12 pm (#432 of 2959)
Lina:

---The man yelling at a woman - the first assumption that comes in mind is the father yelling at the mother. That's the biggest reason why it is probably not like that.---

Actually, I tend to believe the opposite. I'm repeating myself, I know, but I just really doubt that, in the very last book, JKR is going to go back to these flashbacks and explain that it was really Snape's uncle/cousin/relative yelling at his mother. So I think that the most obvious answer - that it was Snape's father yelling at Snape's mother - is the likeliest. I also think it's an indication of an unhappy relationship: sure, theoretically it could have been a one-off fight in an otherwise happy marriage. But IMO an image of a man screaming at a crouching woman is a hugely loaded one and suggests all sorts of sinister undercurrents. Same thing with the flashback of Snape trying clumsily to mount the broomstick - I think of it as a general indication of Snape being hopeless at sports, even though theoretically it could have been that Snape was just feeling uncoordinated on that particular day for whatever reason.

And BTW, Eilieen Prince was never described as hook-nosed; she's described as "simultaneously cross and sullen, with heavy brows and a long, pallid face." I also don't think that her school House has actually been mentioned; at least the wikipedia page that I looked up indicates her house as "unknown, possibly Slytherin".


S.E. Jones - - Oct 23, 2006 4:44 pm (#433 of 2959)
Soul Search --Snape using "half-blood Prince" suggests he looked up to his mother, and, perhaps, did not respect his father.--

That doesn't necessarily indicate he looked up to his mother so much as it indicates he looked down on his father. If he hated the Muggle half of him, then he would embrace the magical half of him, which is half Prince, even if he hated his mom (I'm not saying he did, although I think he resented her allowing herself to be bullied). It also leads into the whole thing Voldemort did where he tried to improve his standing with a grand title. You have Lord Voldemort, and now the Half-Blood Prince.

Saracene, you went to Wikipedia over the Lexicon? Tsk, tsk....


Mediwitch - Oct 23, 2006 5:25 pm (#434 of 2959)
Soul Search, Percy was not the only source for the information about Snape's desire for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post. I believe Umbridge also asks Snape about applying for the Defense Against the Dark Arts post each year, and why Dumbledore refuses him. He confirms his annual request, and tells her to ask the Headmaster why he's always refused, or something like that.


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 5:25 pm (#435 of 2959)
Saracene said: I'm repeating myself, I know, but I just really doubt that, in the very last book, JKR is going to go back to these flashbacks and explain that it was really Snape's uncle/cousin/relative yelling at his mother.

This is what I keeping trying to say (not nearly so well) about many of the clues or hints that JKR has appeared to give us. Are we really going to see in book 7 her going through all those scenes that appear to give hints about Snape and tell us how actually the opposite was true? He had plenty of money and used textbooks were for a different reason. The house at Spinners End was purchased as a safe house and is made to look shabby as a cover. His underpants are gray because the houseelves washed them wrong. He really had a group of friends that just happened to be somewhere else that day at the lake. His father was a muggle, but really the dad died young and Snape was brought up by his super elitist, Dark Magic, pureblood family on his mother's side.

No, I think that we have to take JKR's hints as truly trying to give us bits of information. We might get it wrong here and there, but they aren't red herrings.

If he hated the Muggle half of him, then he would embrace the magical half of him, which is half Prince,

S.E.Jones, the problem I have with this is that the Half Blood Prince name embraces both sides of his family. He didn't call himself "The Prince." He called himself the "Half-Blood Prince." He created a name that embraced both his father and mother's heritage.

Oh, and S.E.Jones, I'm sorry about the Half Blood Jones comment -- I honestly wasn't thinking of you when I said it -- it was just a John Doe kind of comment.


T Vrana - Oct 23, 2006 5:28 pm (#436 of 2959)
Snape using the 'mudblood' term never really bothered me. I think he just used the worst thing he could think to say at that moment. On top of the obvious rage and humiliation he's feeling, remember what he said to Harry at the end of HBP. He accuses James of using his spells against him. The only one we see is levicorpus, which is nonverbal. So, if this was Snape's, and Harry did notice it looked as though it had taken some time to work out, how did James learn Snape's non-verbal spell?

Someone had access to Snape's book. I think it quite possible, as others have theorized, that there was some kind of friendship (perhaps obsessive love on Snape's part) between Snape and Lily. Petunia's "...that awful boy.." Lily and Snape both being good at potions, Harry befriending kids from other houses (perhaps, just like his mother).

If Snape felt betrayed, if he thought Lily had told James about Levicorpus, the mudblood comment might have been a reaction to that. Lily certainly seems surprised by Snape's comment. If he was a mudblood hating typical Slytherin, why the surprise?


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 5:35 pm (#437 of 2959)
One thing interesting about the mudblood comment is that regardless how much continues to be said and done in the rest of that scene, Snape doesn't say or do one thing more after the mudblood comment.

I used to not think the "mudblood" comment was what made it Snape's Worst Memory, but I've revised my opinion about that since noticing that Snape said nothing more afterward. Why not? He was certainly still being threatened. I think he was focused on his own remark, not on what James and Sirius were saying.

All that talking between Lily, James and Sirius after Snape's mudblood comment and Snape never took the opportunity to use their distracted attention to his advantage. He just stood there and wasn't even ready to defend himself when James and Sirius turned back to him.

I think what he'd just said had taken his entire attention.


T Vrana - Oct 23, 2006 5:40 pm (#438 of 2959)
Wynnleaf- I never noticed that before!

I think it is his worst memory because he felt betrayed by Lily and then said something he may never have been able to take back.

Remember what Hermione did to Ron when she felt betrayed!!!!

Love and hate are so very close sometimes...

Obsessive love and hate, even closer.


Soul Search - Oct 23, 2006 6:03 pm (#439 of 2959)
Wynnleaf,

"Half Blood Prince name embraces both sides of his family."

Good observation. I can buy into that about 75%. I could also see it as acknowledging his fathers's side, perhaps with regret, while calling attention to his mother's side.

Far as we know, Snape only used "Half-Blood Prince" for himself. He didn't promote it as a nickname, or anything. So, it is how he thought of himself.

We could probably read a lot into it, if we had the tendency to beat it to death. Which we do.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 23, 2006 6:29 pm (#440 of 2959)
Edited Oct 23, 2006 8:04 pm
wynnleaf --S.E.Jones, the problem I have with this is that the Half Blood Prince name embraces both sides of his family. He didn't call himself "The Prince." He called himself the "Half-Blood Prince." He created a name that embraced both his father and mother's heritage.--

I don't see it as embracing both sides. I think that he's pointing out the "half-blood" part is because he's focusing on the half-Prince side, he's focusing on the half-wizard side. He wouldn't have called himself "the Prince" because he was only half-Prince. Just my take on it, of course. And, I kinda figured the Half-Blood Jones thing was just pulling a random, common name out of the hat.

I figured it was Snape's Worst Memory because of what we didn't get to see. The last we heard, James said something about depantsing Snape, and then we go back to the present. If he really did have a crush on Lily, getting his undies exposed was bad enough, but then.... Think how that would affect a 16-year-old. Not to mention he is seen as being completely the victim in that scene. What 16-year-old would want to be seen that way in front of his so-called peers, or worse, a girl he likes? Even in the present, Snape seems to hate being ridiculed (think of how badly he took to Neville's boggart Snape in drag) which may come from an upbringing in which he watched his mother constantly put down. Also, we don't see the other two memories in the pensieve. This incident in the yard could've somehow led to the incident with the Willow where Snape nearly got killed and James saved his life, I could definitely see any kind of tie-in like that making this his worst memory as, if the first incident hadn't happened the second wouldn't have either....

T Vrana --So, if this was Snape's, and Harry did notice it looked as though it had taken some time to work out, how did James learn Snape's non-verbal spell?--

Well, there are two ways to consider this. 1) Lupin says that in his school days you couldn't turn a corner without someone trying to lift you up by your ankle, so it could've been a situation where Snape told another Slytherin, who told someone else, who told someone else, and eventually the whole school knew. 2) Or, it could speak to James and Siruis's skills in magic. We know that Pettigrew was never considered to be in their class magic-wise, and yet was able to blow up a street and kill 12 Muggles with just one curse. If Lupin's coment "[James] and Sirius were the best in the school at whatever they did" and McGonagall's comment about how they were both "exceptionally bright" (how often does she say this about students?) are any indication, James and Sirius may simply have been bright and skilled enough to see the spell and figure it out without having to steal a book or have anyone tell them. They could've then told others how to do it (I could kinda see two trouble-makers spreading the word to help other would-be trouble-makers out).

About Snape's background, I found this comment while looking for Lupin's comment above: "I think James was everything Snape wanted to be - he was popular, he was good at Quidditch, good at pretty much everything. And Snape was just this little oddball who was up to his eyes in the Dark Arts and James - whatever else he may have appeared to you, Harry - always hated the Dark Arts." (OP29, p607, US - underline mine). If Sirius had been the one to call Snape a "little oddball" I wouldn't think much of it, but coming from Lupin, I think it points to him possibly being 1) a loner or 2) odd in wizarding terms because he grew up in a Muggle neighborhood with a Muggle-like background.

EDIT: By the way, I ran across a wonderful quote by Alan Rickman on his view of Snape which I thought really fit in well with this current line of discussion. It's from an interview he did for Unreel, which is, I think, a UK-based magazine:

"I think at heart Snape is basically quite an insecure person, he's always longing to be something else that people will really respect like a black magician not just a school master. That's why he envies the more popular and successful boys like Harry. He does have his positive side though even though Harry's a thorn in his side he doesn't let it worry him too much."

You can read the rest of the interview here. He was referring, I think, specifically to Harry, but given what we know of James's popularity and their mutual dislike, I think it very fitting.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 441 to 470

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 8:24 am

T Vrana - Oct 23, 2006 7:04 pm (#441 of 2959)
SE- Regarding Levicorpus, all true, but Snape thought James got it from him. Whether he was right or not, feeling betrayed still works.

On Snape's Worst Memory- Sure, on the surface this could easily be his worst memory for the obvious, being dangled upside down and humiliated in front of a large group of clearly unsympathetic voyeurs. But I think Jo left a clue here . If Snape really thought Lily just a disgusting Mudblood, why has he never brought her up in all the tirades to Harry about his dad?

On Half Blood Prince- I think Snape took pride in the fact that despite his background (I agree poor, perhaps broken home)and half-blood status, he worked hard and was quite good at Dark Arts and Potions, and got to hang out with the pureblood types in Slytherin.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 23, 2006 7:12 pm (#442 of 2959)
I certainly wasn't disagreeing about Snape feeling "betrayed" by having his own spells used against him, just offerring some suggestions of how James could've learned it.

I also think that his calling Lily a Mudblood had more to do with his own embarrassment at the moment than his view of Muggle-borns. That's sort of what I meant about it making his comment even worse, because he's almost sort of insulting a piece of himself. I also agree that there's clue there, but what that clue may be leading to could be more than just one possibility. It could be that he really did like Lily and thus hated himself for calling her names (maybe he's hanging there thinking, "great I just blew my chances with her"), we know from JKR's TLC/Mugglenet interview that Lily was very popular and that that's somehow important. Or, it could be that it's a clue that he was half-blooded, as he never insults her at any other point in time because, as I said, it would kinda be like insulting a part of himself too. We had other clues to his parentage before, like the potions puzzle in PS where Hermione pointed out that wizards weren't very good with logic and yet Snape set up a logic-based test.


rambkowalczyk - Oct 23, 2006 7:15 pm (#443 of 2959)
I didn't read it this way. I think Snape is angry because Sirius challenged Snape's authority right in front of Harry. Not only is he embarrassed but now he has the added work of re-establishing his authority as a teacher with Harry as well as the odious job of attempting to teach him occlumency. journeymom

I agree that this is a possible interpretation. But way back in 2004, (I went and looked this up) it was suggested that maybe Snape and Sirius Black may have been related and that Snape may have been a descendant of someone burned off the family tree. So when Sirius says it's my house it was a reminder of wealth he didn't have. Just a pointless tidbit.


wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 7:18 pm (#444 of 2959)
Since S.E. Jones has now posted a Rickman quote about Snape, I thought I'd post some from an interview that Rickman did with the French magazine "Total Star" in Ap/May 2005. These quotes are of course Rickman. They are in no way indicative of canon. The only reason that they may be of interest is because we know that Rickman has had some private conversation with JKR on Snape's character and we've been told that Rickman knows a few things about Snape from what JKR told him.

Here's some of the quotes -- if you want to know where to find the whole interview, email me.

Interviewer: -We gradually discover what Snape went through in the past. It seems he didn't have it easy as a teenager...

-[Alan] He wasn't very sociable either. Snape never had friends. Lily Potter really tried to be nice with him, but Snape couldn't support her pity. And with James Potter, his best mate Sirius Black and their partner in crime Lupin spending their time ridiculing him, he shut himself in even more.

Snape's life is much more complex than it seems. He was a member of the Death Eaters and then became a turncoat to join Dumbledore' side. But his past keeps clinging onto him, so coupled with his demeanor few trust him.

Interviewer: -He appears to know Igor Karkaroff well when he comes to Hogwarts for the Triwizard Tournament.

-[Alan] It's true that these two know each other well. But I cannot talk too much about their relationship to those who have not read the book. We shouldn't kill the suspense. And then Snape has so many secrets because he knows a lot a people. And not only nice people of course.

JK Rowling has not yet unveiled all of Snape's secrets. It's also this that is remarkable, that in the end we know so little about him.

I'll repeat. These are just Alan Rickman's comments in a French magazine over a year ago. We have no idea what he had learned from JKR and what are just his own opinions. However, as one of the few people who we know has gotten some inside information from JKR, it is interesting to read his comments on Snape.


Nathan Zimmermann - Oct 23, 2006 7:20 pm (#445 of 2959)
If Severus believed James had learned the Levicorpous and Libercorpus spells from him. This raises three questions:

# First, since both spells are non verbal is it possible that James was a Legilimens?


# Second, given James Potter's habit of filching food from the kitchens is it plausible that James stole Severus Snape's copy of Advanced Potion Making and learned the spells contained therein.


# Third, did the incident in Snape's Worst Memory inspire Severus to become a highly skilled Occulmens?


S.E. Jones - - Oct 23, 2006 7:59 pm (#446 of 2959)
Something interesting... my sister and I were just discussing child psychology and how different things in childhood would affect a person as an adult and we got on the topic of someone, such as a little boy, growing up in a household where the mother is bullied by the father and what that would do to him. The boy would most likely grow up seeking roles where he is empowered (Snape became a teacher, became a DE) so as not to become the subject of bullying himself (think of how Snape bullies his students). He would also hate anyone who forced him into the submissive role he was trying to avoid (think of how Snape appeared as a victim in the OP pensieve scene and how he hates being referred to as a coward, which suggests submission and weakness), he would see this person as being in the same role as his father (so Snape may have hated James because he represented his father to him, just as Sirius may have hated Kreacher because he represented Sirius's parents). This boy may also view gender roles in a skewed way, where he either seeks out a woman who he sees as being submissive, as his mother was, or a woman he sees as being empowered (Lily?), everything his mother was not, just depending on how he is identifying with his parents and his conscious thought process (if he's consciously trying to have an equal relationship because he resented his mother bieng bullied, then he'd seek out a strong-willed woman who would be more of an equal). Just thought that was something interesting.

Nathan --First, since both spells are non verbal is it possible that James was a Legilimens?--

I think this is an interesting idea. I can't see James stealing the book just to learn the spell. Given what we've heard about his abilities, I don't think it would've been necessary. Remember, he and Sirius were able to learn the animagus transformation at fifteen and taught it to another student, so they were obviously capable magic-wise.


journeymom - Oct 23, 2006 8:07 pm (#447 of 2959)
Nathan,

Eh, maybe to the first one. Seems reasonable to the second one. I like the third one.

It's notable that Snape the master Occlumens who is so disdaneful of wearing one's heart on one's sleeve has had some spectacular blow-ups.

Perhaps he didn't want to be like the man in his memory. Perhaps this inspired him to get his emotions under control.


Laura W - Oct 23, 2006 11:52 pm (#448 of 2959)
"We had thought Snape really wanted to be the DADA teacher, but was refused the position because it might tempt him too much. But in HBP we learn the position is cursed and Snape, however much he might wish to teach DADA, probably was quite accepting of not being given a cursed position." (wynnleaf)

Accepting of not being given the DADA position? Huh??

From OoP. Chapter 17 --

(Umbridge): "Now ... how long have you been teaching at Hogwarts?"

(Snape): "Fourteen years."

(Umbridge): "You applied first for the Defence Against the Dark Arts post, I believe?"

(Snape): "Yes." ...

(Umbridge): "And you have applied regularly for the Defence Against the Dark Arts post since you first joined the school, I believe?"

(Snape): "Yes."

Somebody who applies for a specific job for 14 consecutive years does not sound accepting of not receiving it, to me.

Laura

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited to add ---

Oops, just read a few more posts and notice that The Artful Dodger and Mediwitch also made this point. Ok then, I'm agreeing with them. (grin)


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 3:42 am (#449 of 2959)
So you're assuming that when Snape tells Umbridge (in the hearing of DE children, no less) that he re-applied every year he was 1. telling the truth and 2. seriously wanting the position if in fact he did re-apply each year?

First, I don't necessarily think he really applied each year. And if he did re-apply, I don't think it was because he actually wanted the position. Snape, after all, is not stupid.

As I recall (may be remembering incorrectly), Snape was originally told by LV to apply for the DADA position. DD didn't give it to him.

But there would have been an excellent reason to continue to apply. By re-applying each year, Snape gave the appearance of continuing to try to fulfill LV's wishes, rather than appearing to settle contentedly into the potions position. DD knew that LV would probably come back eventually, and Snape probably knew the same thing.

So, no, I don't think that Snape actually wanted the DADA position. Well, he might wish he could teach it, but given his knowledge of the Dark Arts, he would have realized that taking up a cursed position would only have lasted 1 year, and would likely have ended in his having to leave Hogwarts or dying.

The only evidence we have that Snape actually wanted DD to give him that position is rumour among the students, and Snape's comment to Umbridge. Given that LV was already alive and well by OOTP, it would have been important that Snape tell Umbridge he'd re-applied each year. Draco and other DE children were, after all, right there in the room.


Thom Matheson - Oct 24, 2006 7:24 am (#450 of 2959)
If Voldemort set the curse, why did he want Snape to apply for the job in the first place, knowing that it would only last one year?


Vulture - Oct 24, 2006 7:34 am (#451 of 2959)
Hi Vulture! You forgot one. The used potions textbook. We don't know i if it was Eileen's or just one he bought used. But having used or i pre-owned textbooks is a pretty good indicator of not having a lot of i financial resources. (wynnleaf - Oct 23, 2006 9:13 am (#420))

Hi, Wynnleaf !!

My bet is it was Eileen Prince's. I agree about "not having a lot of financial resources" but I'm not convinced he was actually poor. (I know it sounds nit-picky.) I myself, being unemployed, don't have a lot of financial resources, but I certainly amn't poor. I suppose it's a question of the different meanings we give to words _ for example, I wouldn't agree with Ron that he's "poor".

Surely you aren't saying that Snape as a Hogwart's student was well to do, popular, and living in London. Smile (rambkowalczyk - Oct 23, 2006 10:43 am (#422))

No, not at all. See above for my take on the wealth part. As regards where he's from, I agree that nothing specifically indicates a London origin, but I think it's more variable than Northern England _ see my last post. I agree he wasn't popular, but my feeling on that is that (a) he didn't take care of his appearance (even by Harry's time in school, Snape's hair is still greasy); (b) he had a reputation (which I won't debate here) for being up to his neck in the Dark Arts; and (c) he had a fore-runner of the personality we've come to know and love in the adult Snape.

I'm running out of time again, and only have got to Lina's post #423, which (on a rushed look !!) I think I agree with. More soon.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 24, 2006 8:22 am (#452 of 2959)
Good job, Wynnleaf! If Voldemort wanted Snape in the DADA job, of course he would have to appear to apply for it every year. But as the person who cast the spell, Voldemort could have certainly removed the curse at the end of the year, for Snape. So, why didn't he? I think he would have done, except he either didn't do it in time, or his objective, the end of Dumbledore's reign at Hogwarts was achieved, so it was unnecessary in his mind to keep Snape there.

Most of the time, the curse kicked in NEAR the end of the year, after all. I don't think it got Quirrell at all when he first started teaching there, because he planned ahead of time to leave the school after one year and get more hands-on experience. The curse MIGHT only kick in when you agree to be reappointed.


T Vrana - Oct 24, 2006 8:42 am (#453 of 2959)
Or the curse might only apply to those LV doesn't want to have the position. That is, Snape as a DE would have been safe becasue LV wanted him there.

journeymom-

Note that Snape only blows up when the discussion involves James...


journeymom - Oct 24, 2006 9:01 am (#454 of 2959)
"Note that Snape only blows up when the discussion involves James... "

Or Sirius. His most spectacular blow-up was when Sirius escaped and he lost the Order of Merlin.


T Vrana - Oct 24, 2006 9:11 am (#455 of 2959)
Good point, should have said Marauders...but I thought his most over the top was in the Shrieking Shack.


Thom Matheson - Oct 24, 2006 10:18 am (#456 of 2959)
Or, Voldemort, wanted Severus out of the way as well when the task was done. Leave no witnesses.


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 10:20 am (#457 of 2959)
Snape does blow up at the end of POA and over Harry getting into his pensieve.

But I don't think those are big exceptions to the rule and Snape is by nature actually very reserved. Think of the name "snivellus" which sounds like he cried around other children in school. He gets angry and snarls, rants, etc. He argues with Dumbledore more than any other staff member that we see. He spits in disgust when the Slytherins loose a Quidditch match. We see him blanch over various things, clinch his hands, flush. He grabs Harry and shoves him across the room and throws something at him. As a teenager, he cursed at James and Sirius while they were attacking him.

Actually, I can't imagine McGonagall, Sprout, or Flitwick showing the amount of emotion Snape does as regularly as he does.

He allowed his fear of Lupin to show in the scene where he takes Lupin his Wolfsbane -- keeping his eyes only on Lupin, backing out of the room.

Actually, I think that Snape probably shows more of his emotions than most of the adults with the exception of characters like Sirius, Trelawney, and Hagrid.

So how does he make it as a spy? I think he was telling the truth when he said he has to be a good actor. That doesn't mean he'd be pretending to be emotionless.

He does seem to see wearing emotions on your sleeve as a weakness. But he would know, wouldn't he? Remember in GOF during his confrontation with Barty, Jr.? Barty was able to say just the right thing to get Snape on the defensive and he allowed Barty (who he thought was Moody), to see how much DD's trust meant to him.


T Vrana - Oct 24, 2006 10:31 am (#458 of 2959)
Wynnleaf-

I can only remember 4 times he really lost it:

1) Shrieking Shack (talking about James)

2) POA, Sirius escaping (Marauders)

3) OOTP- Harry in the Pensieve (Harry sees memory about James/Marauders/Lily)

4) HBP- Flight of the Prince- (Talking about James/Coward Comment)

The rest, spitting on the ground etc., not big deal. McGonogall gets pretty wrapped up in Quidditch, as well. And McGonogall even laid into poor Neville not to embarass the whole school in GoF. McGonogall is very emotional!

I can't count the pensieve scene. In his shoes, two against one with a bunch of less than sympathetic onlookers, I'd have a few nasty thoughts myself.

While he does disagree with DD, he is usually under control.


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 11:43 am (#459 of 2959)
Sorry, I didn't mean to imply that he lost control often. Generally, that's only over things for which it really sounds fairly normal to loose control.

I just meant that Snape is not necessarily the reserved person that many fans seem to assume. He may not loose control a great deal, but neither does he conceal his emotions all the time. He may certainly conceal his emotions when necessary, but it's not like that's his general temperament.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 24, 2006 11:57 am (#460 of 2959)
--So, no, I don't think that Snape actually wanted the DADA position. Well, he might wish he could teach it, but given his knowledge of the Dark Arts, he would have realized that taking up a cursed position would only have lasted 1 year, and would likely have ended in his having to leave Hogwarts or dying.--

I definitely agree that he wanted to teach it. In OP's pensieve scene we see a young Snape working very hard at his DADA OWL (he's trying to write down everything he knows about whatever the question referred to). He could've been like this over all his subjects (which might explain why he seems to have some problems with Hermione) or it could've been because it was his favorite subject.

Is my dusty mind deceiving me or is there a quote by someone (Hagrid maybe?) about Snape applying for the DADA job again? If so, that would indicate that he actually did re-apply each year, whether to keep up appearances or because he actually wanted the job.

I find it very interesting that Dumbledore actually gave him the cursed position in HBP. I've seen this used as evidence elsewhere that Dd didn't plan on Snape sticking around next year, which might point to the idea of Dd intending Snape to AK him. I don't know if I agree with that or not, but I definitely see it as Dd openly showing his trust in Snape, which would dispell any suspicions Voldemort might have that Snape isn't as far into Dd's graces as he claims.

wynnleaf, I wouldn't exactly call him reserved either. In comparison to characters like Dumbledore or Lupin, he does show a great deal of emotion.


Meoshimo - Oct 24, 2006 1:09 pm (#461 of 2959)
If this has been said, my apologies.

On the topic of James learning the Levicorpus spell, it was said that there was a time when the Marauders were at school where you couldn't walk anywhere without being hoisted up into the air by your ankle. Obviously, lots of people knew the spell. Now, it is a nonverbal spell, but does that mean that it has to not be said aloud? If not, then I'm guessing that James heard Snape or someone else say it verbally, and learned it that way.


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 1:34 pm (#462 of 2959)
Meoshimo,

Interesting to consider. Snape and James could do nonverbal spells in 5th year. But at some point, the actual name of the spell "levicorpus" had to be spoken and passed around. Lupin, after all, recognized the name.

There are several possibilities. We already know, since James was using it in 5th year, that Snape must have created the spell well before his 6th year (when he used the 6th year potions book where Harry found the spell). It could be that Snape created the spell before he could do nonverbal magic, and so other students would hear the words. No one would necessarily guess that he was the creator of the spell, simply that he knew the spell.

By the way, that may also be why Snape knew spells, hexes, etc. as a younger student that others didn't know. When someone first heard him say "levicorpus" they would probably think it evidence that he knew a lot of advanced spells that they hadn't learned yet.


Laura W - Oct 24, 2006 1:58 pm (#463 of 2959)
"Somebody who applies for a specific job for 14 consecutive years does not sound accepting of not receiving it, to me." (Laura)

"So you're assuming that when Snape tells Umbridge (in the hearing of DE children, no less) that he re-applied every year he was 1. telling the truth and 2. seriously wanting the position if in fact he did re-apply each year?" (wynnleaf)

Yep, guess I am. He said it. It makes perfect sense that Snape would want it. I believe what he told Umbridge. For one thing, in telling her this, he is certainly not saying something (ie - lying) to make himself look good. In fact, it makes him look quite the opposite; like someone Dumbledore does not trust with the DADA job or someone Dumbledore does not think is qualified to take it on. I am not saying that DD feels that way, but it sure makes Snape look like a 14-time loser here. Which is one reason why I don't think he was making it up.

And it makes perfect sense to me that Snape, as a one-time Dark Arts user (expert?) - with the DEs, under the tutalige of the master (Tom) -, would feel himself far more qualified to teach the subject than such as Quirrell or Lockhart or a werewolf, all of whom Dumbledore picked over him! Not to mention that he was smart enough, even as a fifth-year student, to make up dark spells such as Sectumsempra. I can see him feeling very bitter and hard-done-by by that, and continuing to apply for that which he felt was his due.

"As I recall (may be remembering incorrectly), Snape was originally told by LV to apply for the DADA position. DD didn't give it to him." (wynnleaf)

Canon, please? I don't recall anywhere where it says Voldemort wanted Severus to apply specifically for the DADA position. He wanted him at Hogwarts to spy on Dumbledore ("...the Dark Lord is pleased that I never deserted my post; I had sixteen years of information on Dumbledore to give him when he returned ..."), but it was *Snape's* decision regarding what he wanted to teach. (Unless you or someone can give me direct canon otherwise.)

Laura


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 2:37 pm (#464 of 2959)
Laura,

It seems like it would be practically a certainty that Snape would know the job was cursed. Given that, he must also know that one of the big reasons why DD wouldn't give him the job wasn't because DD didn't trust him (he gave it to him eventually), but because if he gave the job to Snape, Snape would most likely be gone or dead by the end of the year.

If Snape knew that, while he might wish he could teach the course for all of the reasons you mention, why would he continue to apply for it? It doesn't make sense for him to continuously apply for a job which he'd know that DD would not give him -- completely aside from trust issues. The only thing that makes sense for why he'd repeatedly apply for a job that he must have known DD wouldn't give him, is for appearances.

Why do you think he continuously reapplied if he knew the job was cursed, and knew that DD wouldn't give him the job, even aside from trust issues or "bringing out the worst?"

Do you think Snape thought he could break the curse or get around it? Do you think he thought he could convince DD of that? Or perhaps that he had no idea the job was cursed even after decades of 1 year appointments?

Even if we suppose that Snape only wanted the job for 1 year, and then back to potions, that wouldn't exactly work as it would force DD to hire a temporary potions teacher solely so that Snape could get a chance to teach his favorite subject for a year.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 24, 2006 3:08 pm (#465 of 2959)
Do we know exactly when Voldemort came to ask about the DADA position and cursed it? It wasn't cursed after his first attempt with Dippet, it was after his second/last attempt with Dd. I'm just thinking, people in PS were thinking that Snape had cursed the position, but if it had been going on, say, when Snape was still at school, then why would they think Professor Snape jinxed it, wouldn't they think it was some older teacher? The reason I ask this is, if it had gone on while Snape and the Marauders were still in school, but no one had thought the position cursed then, then that might indicate that Dd was able to rotate people through the position without them being killed or leaving Hogwarts at the end of the year. There may be a way around the curse if say, for example, you could have Snape teach it one year and then Flitwick teach it the next and then McGonagall teach it the next and then Snape again. I'm just saying that, if that were the case, Snape may have actually applied for the job and actually wanted to get it. Lot of speculation, but I thought I'd throw that out there.


Meoshimo - Oct 24, 2006 3:12 pm (#466 of 2959)
I may be inventing this, but I thought I read/heard somewhere that it was about ten years after his first request. I really don't know where that's comming from.


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 3:23 pm (#467 of 2959)
S.E.Jones,

I tend to think the student gossip on the DADA position is just that -- gossip. They don't really have facts. Even that the position never kept a person more than a year for many years previously wouldn't prevent gossip among teens from deciding that Snape was jinxing it.

Now on what position LV wanted Snape to get. I haven't looked, so I don't know for sure if it says anywhere in canon.

However, we know that there seems to be very little turnover among the other positions. Someone comes to teach at Hogwarts and generally stays for years. So if LV wanted Snape to apply for a position the year that Snape got caught eavesdropping, and then Snape went back another year to apply, it was highly likely that the job both times was the DADA position.

It may or may not have mattered to LV, but I'm starting to wonder if that is part of the reason that he cursed the position. That way, regardless how long most professors stayed at Hogwarts, there would always be a position open every year. So LV could attempt whenever he liked to have one of his own people placed in that position.

It may have only been that LV had Snape try for the DADA position because it was always open. But we also have to wonder why LV wanted the DADA position for himself. There may be something specific about it.

A supposedly loyal DE might not be privy to LV's thoughts about why he said to apply for the DADA position, and so would perhaps continue to re-apply as a way of appearing to continue to follow LV's orders.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 24, 2006 3:24 pm (#468 of 2959)
Okay, I found it, his meeting with Dd is 10 years after Hokey's memory (HBP20, 440, US). I don't think we know how many years passes between his leaving school and Hokey's memory, though. Okay, so even if it was, say, 15-20 years ago, that would still mean that there's like 30 years worth of curse affecting the DADA position. So, people should have known the position was cursed before Snape even came to school, in fact the students' parents would have known this, but since kids are speaking as though he's the one who cursed the position, I'm going to guess that people didn't die or leave every year while Snape was in school.

EDIT: wynnleaf, as far as what's so important about the actual position, well, you can be caught looking into Dark objects and spells and just say it's research for your Defense classes. That, in and of itself, provides the professor of that particular subject a sort of built in alibi.

Yes, the gossip is probably just gossip, but it would still be influenced by their parents' teen gossip (as I'm sure they would have been gossiping in their schooldays if they were constantly losing teachers). Someone would've eventually said, "My mum says Dd hasn't been able to keep a DADA teacher for the last 20 years", which would get around the school as well. It could be that there was much less reason to gossip over the position whne the kids' parents were in school (i.e. no one died or left under unusual circumstances). If Dd had figured out that a curse was there after only a few years, he may have made adjustments (like asking Moody to come out of retirement for only that one year, or my previous suggestion of swapping teachers). We don't know how long other teachers have been teaching their respective subjects, do we? We know how long they've been teaching, but specific to their subjects? We know that Flitwick watched over the students during the DADA OWL in the OP pensieve memory and was supposedly an excellent dueler, so maybe he taught one year?


Laura W - Oct 24, 2006 3:30 pm (#469 of 2959)
"It seems like it would be practically a certainty that Snape would know the job was cursed." (wynnleaf)

That the pivotal point, isn't it? If one is of the mind that Snape knew the position was cursed and knew exactly what the curse was, then everything Percy, Snape and anyone else said in canon about Snape applying for the job for 14 years - or even applying at all - was an obvious lie. There is no way that it would benefit either Severus or Voldemort (if Snape was his spy) or Dumbledore (if Snape was his spy) for the Potions Master to have to leave Hogwarts after his one year as DADA teacher.

On the other hand, I am not convinced that Snape knows anything about the DADA curse. I come from the position that he doesn't. I am quite convinced that he doesn't; no canon or logical non-canon evidence has convinced me that he does know about it. Unlike some of you, I don't think anybody else but DD - be it teachers, students or parents - would come up with that answer as to why so many DADA professors seem to come and go.

Why in Merlin's name would Tom tell his DEs or *anybody* what he did that day when he applied unsuccessfully for the job? I don't think he even let DD in on it but, being Dumbledore after all, DD figured it out himself by what happened subsequent to that ("Oh he definitely wanted the Defence Against the Dark Arts job. The aftermath of our little meeting proved that. You see, we have never been able to keep a Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher for longer than a year since I refused the post to Lord Voldemort.").

Now I see why we differ on whether Snape did or did not apply for the job. Now I see why we differ on believing what he told Umbridge. It boils down, I think, to the fact that you believe both Snape and V knew he would only be teaching at Hogwarts for the one year if he applied for and got the DADA job (because of the curse), and I strongly don't believe Severus was *at all* aware of that. (Which gives, by the way, all the more weight to what I wrote in the last paragraph in my previous post re no canon about V specifically asking his spy(?) to apply to be the DADA teacher. Tom wouldn't ask his spy to do anything to jeopardize his continued physical presence at Hogwarts.)


wynnleaf - Oct 24, 2006 6:28 pm (#470 of 2959)
S.E.Jones, (Sarah?) thanks's for that info about how long the curse must have been in place.

One would think anyone qualified to teach DADA would be bound to figure out after 30 years of no one staying in the position for more than a year, that the position had to be cursed. I mean, how did DD figure it out? Unless one assumes that the curse was so incredibly subtle that 30 years worth of Dark Arts experts couldn't see it was cursed, but DD could --- well... You know, I wouldn't even think it would take anyone well versed in Dark Arts to guess it was cursed. After 30 years, I'd think it just stands to reason... So, yeah, Snape must have known it was cursed.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 471 to 510

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 8:36 am

Thom Matheson - Oct 24, 2006 7:13 pm (#471 of 2959)
Are we saying that there have been 30 DADA professors? After, oh say, the first, 15 or 20 years it didn't dawn on the governors to do something. If nothing else eliminate the class. I can't believe that Dumbledore didn't do something about it besides saying oh well.

Actually we have to revise that as Professor Potter also only lasted 1 year as well.


T Vrana - Oct 24, 2006 7:17 pm (#472 of 2959)
Well, eliminating the class would play right into LVs hands! Umbridge just about eliminated it as a useful class.

No, they were right to plow on and continue teaching DADA. So teachers changed every year. Not ideal, but better than not teaching at all. Those who died in the position that we know of were no big loss...

Those who were decent, did ok after the fact.


Thom Matheson - Oct 24, 2006 8:14 pm (#473 of 2959)
I don't disagree but you have to admit, if there really was a curse, wouldn't Dumbledore have attempted to do something? I cannot believe that Rowling would have us believe that one of the most prestigous schools in all the wizarding world has this sticky little problem of cursed class programs for 30 years.

It is one thing for DD to say that it is cursed, but when you examine the time line it is just not believeable. It had to be just an off comment made to Harry with no real truth behind it. Even Rowling wouldn't have us believe that.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 24, 2006 10:44 pm (#474 of 2959)
Why wouldn't she, Thom? You mean because it means that Dumbledore hadn't broken it? What if the curse had some particular time-frame, like that it would last until Voldemort or one of his supporters filled the position, or that it would last until Voldemort died.... I really don't think it was just a joke on Dumbledore's part.


Laura W - Oct 25, 2006 3:30 am (#475 of 2959)
Edited Oct 25, 2006 5:38 am

Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, wynnleaf. (Like that'll be a first - wide grin)

As no one has yet provided me with any canon that LV specifically requested Snape apply for the DADA job (unless someone has and I missed it) - and knowing it was cursed such that his spy would only be in such close physical proximity to DD for one year, telling Snape to go for that position is the last thing Tom would do ("...the Dark Lord is pleased that I never deserted my post; I had sixteen years of information on Dumbledore to give him when he returned ...") -, I see no reason that the conversation between Snape and Umbridge which I recreated in my post #448 would be Severus putting anything on for the children of the DE's or for anyone else. My reasons for believing he was telling the truth in what he told her, as outlined in my post #463 still stand.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edited to add -

And I *still* believe that,as of the end of Book Six, the *only* people who know that there is a curse on the Defence Against the Dark Arts teaching position which does not allow anyone to hold it for more than one year are Tom Riddle, Albus Dumbledore, Harry Potter ... and us.

Laura


Ann - Oct 25, 2006 4:14 am (#476 of 2959)
Minerva McGonagall joined the Hogwarts staff in December 1956, presumably to take over the Transfiguration position when Dumbledore became Headmaster. Riddle/Voldemort's visit to apply for the Defense position was just after that.

It's interesting that Rowling said in an early interview that Dumbledore thought the position would "bring out the worst" in Snape, and Snape himself said exactly the same thing in Chapter 2 of HBP. When she uses word-for-word phrases, it's usually because there's something she wants to hide and she's worked out a way that's not exactly lying, but.... (For example, she had Dumbledore say twice that James' Invisibility Cloak was "left in my possession," and we now know that that's important.) Maybe he didn't mean it in the sense (as we all assumed at the time) that working with Dark Magic might tempt him into it again. Maybe he meant that, given the curse on the position, Snape would do something that would forefit the position. I think Voldemort wanted him in that position, in part because he'd only be there a short time, and not be "corrupted" by Dumbledore. And I think Snape knew that, since he used the same careful formulation when explaining to Bellatrix. (However, I also think he knew he was going to get it, since I think the first three chapters all took place on the same night--the timing is ambiguous and somewhat internally contradictory, but I think it had already been decided.)

On a completely different topic, I wonder whether anyone has ever suggested this: There's a whole thread largely devoted to the idea that Irma Pince is Eileen Prince ("I'm a Prince" anagram). I wonder if Argus Filch could possibly be Tobias Snape, masquerading as a Squib? After all, Snape goes to him in PS/SS to patch up Fluffy's damage, and there are hints of a Pince-Filch liaison in HBP....


Mrs Brisbee - Oct 25, 2006 4:33 am (#477 of 2959)
Maybe he didn't mean it in the sense (as we all assumed at the time) that working with Dark Magic might tempt him into it again. Maybe he meant that, given the curse on the position, Snape would do something that would forefit the position.-- Ann

I've been wondering the same. The DADA position does seem to bring out the worst in its professors, so maybe that's the nature of the curse. The professors do seem to torpedo themselves.


haymoni - Oct 25, 2006 5:29 am (#478 of 2959)
So why wouldn't Dumbledore just hire 2 DADA teachers - 1 teaches 1 year, the other teaches the next?

Perhaps that is what he did with Quirrel, but things kind of backfired.


LinaOct 25, 2006 5:39 am (#479 of 2959)
I'm sure that this is not the right thread, but since the subject raised here, I'd like to add my two knuts:
I have the feeling that Jo hasn't elaborated the curse on the DADA position properly. It seems to me that she hasn't planned it from the beginning (that's why there is no word about Quirrell being the new or returned DADA teacher at the beginning feast of PS/SS) but she got that idea and liked it later in the series and tried to make it fit.

LV might have given Snape an assignment that he could have done only as a DADA teacher and might have not needed more than one year to accomplish that, so LV might have not needed to care about the curse on the position. Maybe the curse could be removed only by killing DD? When or where did LV ever care of the destiny of his men?

Ann, I don't think I ever posted that, but it did occur to me that Filch might be Tobias Snape in disguise.


Thom Matheson - Oct 25, 2006 9:06 am (#480 of 2959)
Sarah, Why wouldn't she, Thom? You mean because it means that Dumbledore hadn't broken it? What if the curse had some particular time-frame, like that it would last until Voldemort or one of his supporters filled the position, or that it would last until Voldemort died.... I really don't think it was just a joke on Dumbledore's part

We can only trace the job back roughly 7 years, assuming that Quirril was 2 years. He died, a Voldemort supporter. Then Lockhart, but not for his own greed could have still been around (though not likely). Then came Lupin, but not for Snape may have still been around. Moody was a Voldemort supporter, then Umbridge and Snape. Lots of opportunity for the dismissal of the Voldemort supporter thought. Remis could still have been around were it not for Snape and his own problems. Are we saying that Moody in a trunk was caused by the curse? Remus being exposed by Snape being the curse? These are all examples of luck, or lack of luck, on the individuals I think rather then curses. And then, to do it 30+ times? I'm just can't see it. Dumbledore's remark to me reads more like "it seems" that the job is cursed. I know that he says to Harry that they haven't kept anyone but I don't see it as cursed.


haymoni - Oct 25, 2006 9:27 am (#481 of 2959)
I would guess that if Snape actually got the job, Voldy would lift the curse.

I'm sure there was a reason why JKR wrote the bit about Harry seeing Voldemort's hand twitch. She could have left that out and Dumbledore still could have stated his opinion.


Ann - Oct 25, 2006 9:32 am (#482 of 2959)
If you don't know it's a curse, it looks like bad luck. That's how curses work. But if it were not true, I can't imagine Dumbledore saying, as he does in HBP (last line of chapter 20), "We have never been able to keep a Defence Against the Dark Arts teacher for longer than a year since I refused the post to Lord Voldemort."

That was in 1956 or '57, so that makes (as of the end of Harry's sixth year) forty years in which there has always been a new Defense Against the Dark Arts teacher every fall. I can't imagine that the curse is not pretty obvious to everyone. Quirrell is presumably only in his first year teaching. I'd assume that he wasn't introduced because he'd been a student until he left to get his "practical experience," and hence was already well-known to most of the students. Or perhaps Harry was simply distracted during that part of his speech and missed it.

Lina, I'm glad you think the Tobias Snape = Argus Filch equation isn't completely unlikely. (I'm still playing with anagrams there.)


journeymom - Oct 25, 2006 9:41 am (#483 of 2959)
I like it, Ann. It makes sense of the implied romantic relationship between Madam Pince and Filch. And it would answer what happened to Tobias Snape. He's been at Hogwarts the whole time.

But, in Eileen and Tobias' wedding announcement he is described as a muggle. Filch is described as a squib. When Harry's in detention in Filch's office he comes across the Kwikspell correspondence course.

Perhaps Tobias learned he has latent magic after he and Eileen married. Perhaps Filch has a legilimens connection to Mrs Norris, and that's where Severus gets his talent for occlumency. Madam Pince's appearance -could- be similar to Severus'. Filch's appearance in the films -could- be described as similar to Severus'.

One problem with this is that David Bradley is only four years older than Alan Rickman. This wouldn't have happened if they'd cast Tim Roth as Snape, instead. (Please don't take my Alan Rickman fan club card away!)


haymoni - Oct 25, 2006 10:08 am (#484 of 2959)
Or...perhaps Tobias/Argus thought that he could teach himself how to be magical.


juliebug - Oct 25, 2006 10:24 am (#485 of 2959)
If a muggle were to hide in the magical world, I'd think a squib would be the perfect choice: low profile and unexpected to perform magic.


wynnleaf - Oct 25, 2006 10:51 am (#486 of 2959)
The biggest difficulty I see with Tobias being Argus is the way Snape acts toward Filch. He acts very much like he is an authority over Filch -- which makes sense if we're just talking about caretaker versus professor and Head of House, but no sense if Filch is Snape's father.

Notice the scene in GOF where Harry has dropped the egg and Filch finds it. Sorry, I don't have my book here, but Filch addresses Snape more as someone in authority and Snape speaks and responds to Filch as though he has authority over him.

They may get along, and Filch might like Snape and help him out occasionally, but I don't think there's anything in the way they interact that hints at a father/son relationship.

However, what I could see is Eileen being Irma Pince. And Eileen tending to have a thing for non-magical men. So Eileen/Irma could be in a relationship with Filch which somewhat mirrors her previous relationship with Tobias.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 25, 2006 10:56 am (#487 of 2959)
If Pince is Prince, then maybe Filch is simply a new romance. If Tobias were dead, she could move on.


journeymom - Oct 25, 2006 12:08 pm (#488 of 2959)
Wynnleaf, good point about the way Snape treats Filch. I'd forgotten about that. I like the idea that Eileen has a thing for non-magical men!

Merope Gaunt was thoroughly abused by her magical father and brother. Perhaps she was drawn to Tom Riddle not only because he was good-looking and wealthy (the best prospect in town), but also because he wasn't magical, and she'd feel safer with him. Not that he didn't hurt her dreadfully when he abandoned her. But she wasn't anticipating that.

Perhaps the hook nosed man in Snape's memory was Eileen's father. I'm still not sure what would make him yell at her to the point of her cowering before him. I can imagine Tobias leaving Eileen and little Severus, and her father coming over to give her a harsh, "I told you so!". But cowering doesn't seem like the appropriate response to that.

I think I'll post this on Eileen Prince's own thread.


juliebug - Oct 25, 2006 12:57 pm (#489 of 2959)
The biggest difficulty I see with Tobias being Argus is the way Snape acts toward Filch. He acts very much like he is an authority over Filch -- which makes sense if we're just talking about caretaker versus professor and Head of House, but no sense if Filch is Snape's father.

What if there are very poor family dynamics at work? If that little snip of a memory Harry saw was of Snape's father, then I could easily see Snape growing up to be very resentful of his father. If Flich is Snape's father, Snape could be taking out years of frustration and mistreatment that he suffered at the hands of a father who now is rather powerless to stop it. Snape seems to me like the kind of person who would relish having the tables turned like that on a person who wronged him in the past. I'm not actually sure if I really buy this one myself, but it is an interesting theory, and I think it could work.


LinaOct 25, 2006 1:57 pm (#490 of 2959)
All the students knew Hagrid very well, yet DD introduced him as a teacher. But I can accept Harry's distraction as explanation. I still think that the curse on the DADA position is an idea that came to her only later in the series.

I don't have the feeling that Snape addresses Filch as he has an authority over him, I only have the feeling that Filch addresses Snape with a great respect. And if Filch is really Tobias in disguise, then I wouldn't expect him to approach Snape in any different way. But who is the first person that Snape runs to when he gets injured by the three headed dog? Filch. Interesting, isn't it? Does it say that Snape respects more Muggle medicine than the Magic one? I just find it pretty intriguing. And they both like to wander through the corridors at night...


S.E. Jones - - Oct 25, 2006 2:20 pm (#491 of 2959)
I think Dumbledore's introduction of Hagrid as a teacher was more to 1) establish that Hagrid now has the full authority that comes with being a professor versus staff and 2) to give Hagrid some much needed applause.

I really don't think Filch is Tobias Snape. Now, he could still be Eileen's new beau, though. Maybe Snape likes the new guy better than he did his dad....


journeymom - Oct 26, 2006 10:56 am (#492 of 2959)
Maybe Filch was kind to young Severus Snape. Or perhaps Snape identifies with Filch's desire to flog the students and hang them by their thumbs.


Choices - Oct 26, 2006 11:10 am (#493 of 2959)
Your first sentence is a joke, right? Filch being nice to a student? LOL Your second sentence I can agree with. LOL


wynnleaf - Oct 26, 2006 11:49 am (#494 of 2959)
Was Filch even there at Hogwarts when Snape and the Marauders were in school?

It's hard to see how anyone who had been a student while Filch was there, would come to trust him enough to have him bandage up a wound. I can't see teenage Snape liking Filch any more than the other students did.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 26, 2006 12:38 pm (#495 of 2959)
--Or perhaps Snape identifies with Filch's desire to flog the students and hang them by their thumbs.--

It's nice to know they have something they can bond over.

--Was Filch even there at Hogwarts when Snape and the Marauders were in school?--

Yes, Filch was there then. Lupin pointed out in PoA that Filch was the one who "confiscated" the map from the Marauders many years ago. (I say "confiscated" because I always wondered if they happened to leave the map on purpose so that it could find its way to another trouble-maker.)

Maybe he asked Filch to bandage the wound because he knew he could order him not to tell the other staff members? If any member of the staff were to mention it, I'm sure it would've gotten back to Quirrell.


wynnleaf - Oct 26, 2006 1:15 pm (#496 of 2959)
Yes, Filch was there then. Lupin pointed out in PoA that Filch was the one who "confiscated" the map from the Marauders many years ago. (I say "confiscated" because I always wondered if they happened to leave the map on purpose so that it could find its way to another trouble-maker.)

I'm without my books, so I don't really know. But as I recall, Fred and George said that they took the Marauder's Map out of a drawer in Filch's office. But I don't recall any specific information that Filch confiscated it from the Marauders. Unless there's some more info, there are a couple of other possibilities: 1. a previous caretaker confiscated it from the Marauders and it simply stayed in the caretaker's office, so it was still there when Fred and George got to Hogwarts. or 2. the Marauders had passed the map on to other younger friends when they left Hogwarts and Filch at some later date confiscated it either from those students, or more further down a line of students who passed down the map.

Do we have any definite info that Filch was there when Snape was there?


S.E. Jones - - Oct 26, 2006 1:43 pm (#497 of 2959)
Yes, we have proof. It's Lupin, not Fred and George, who tell us Filch confiscated it:

"I happen to know that this map was confiscated by Mr. Filch many years ago." (PoA14, p289, US)

So, it does sound like Filch took it directly from the Marauders. I still think they may have let him take it, though, knowing that only trouble-makers would end up in his office, as Fred and George Weasley did.


Soul Search - Oct 26, 2006 2:32 pm (#498 of 2959)
Filch being at Hogwarts when Snape was a student sort of rules out him being Tobias Snape in witness protection. The need for witness protection would have not occurred until Snape was a death eater.


wynnleaf - Oct 26, 2006 3:02 pm (#499 of 2959)
Well, I agree with Soul Search, although I didn't think he was Tobias anyway.

S.E.Jones, thanks for the info about Filch. Like I said, I was going purely on memory and the oddness of any student getting along with Filch. It's interesting that Snape has some sort of trust in Filch. I would think that he must have had a different relationship with Filch than most students. We don't see Slytherins liking Filch in Harry's time. He seems to be indiscriminantly nasty to all.


Choices - Oct 26, 2006 4:42 pm (#500 of 2959)
S.E. Jones - "Maybe he asked Filch to bandage the wound because he knew he could order him not to tell the other staff members? If any member of the staff were to mention it, I'm sure it would've gotten back to Quirrell."

It's odd though that Snape would have him do this bandaging in the Staff Lounge if he didn't want the other professors to know. Anyone could walk in on them at any moment. If he wanted to keep it secret he should have had Filch come to his private office to do the wound dressing.


Soul Search - Oct 26, 2006 5:30 pm (#501 of 2959)
Snape and Filch seem to have a common interest in catching students in misdeeds. Especially Harry. When Harry is using his cloak to explore the library, Filch hears the screaming book and tells Snape something like Snape asked Filch to tell him if any students were roaming around.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 26, 2006 8:25 pm (#502 of 2959)
I never thought Filch was Tobias Snape, but I agree that him being there when Snape was in school there kind of rules it out.


LinaOct 27, 2006 2:09 am (#503 of 2959)
Soul Search: Filch being at Hogwarts when Snape was a student sort of rules out him being Tobias Snape in witness protection. The need for witness protection would have not occurred until Snape was a death eater.

I'm sorry, but I don't see the reasoning that leads to this conclusion. I'm not saying that Filch is definitely Tobias, I just don't see how the fact that he was at Hogwarts at that time rules this possibility out. Voldemort didn't start raising to power only after Snape graduated Hogwarts. Tom Riddle changed his name to Voldemort and changed his appearance before Snape started to go to Hogwarts. Maybe the man yelling at the woman was a DE and was threatening to kill Tobias and Tobias needed quick hiding. Maybe that's the reason why Snape spends Christmas at Hogwarts, because there he is with his family? Maybe exactly Tobias/Filch is the classified spouse?

Again, I can't say that I'm persuaded of this theory, I just think that it can't be ruled out so simply and that more that I think of it, more I like it.


Soul Search - Oct 27, 2006 6:05 am (#504 of 2959)
Lina,

Filch being Tobias Snape was a spin-off of the Irma Prince/Madam Pince discussion and JKR's mention of an important "spouse" among Hogwart's staff.

The idea was that Snape was a death eater but some threat to his mother caused Dumbledore to place her in "witness protection" at Hogwarts and Snape to become Dumbledore's spy. It would be the real reason Dumbledore trusted Snape. If Filch was Tobia Snape, then he would have joined Hogwarts staff at the same time.

Now, the sugestion that Tibias Snape/Filch (and also Irma Prince/Madam Pince) were at Hogwarts when Snape was a student would put a very different spin on the whole storyline. Since they are not using there own names, they must be under some sort of witness protection. Then, it would mean, for instance, that Snape became a Voldemort death eater while his parents were in witness protection at Hogwarts, under Dumbldore's protection. Even Snape wouldn't do something like that!

While anything is possible, I think any witness protection for Tobias Snape would have to have been when Snape was a death eater.


Vulture - Oct 27, 2006 7:03 am (#505 of 2959)
""Sit down, Potter."

"You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

An ugly flush suffused Snape's pallid face.

When this was brought up before, it was thought that Snape was embarrassed because he was not a wealthy landowner,that this may have been a dig by Sirius to Snape's lack of money. Although it may not prove that Snape was poor, it does prove that Sirius comment really hit him where it hurt."

I didn't read it this way. I think Snape is angry because Sirius challenged Snape's authority right in front of Harry. Not only is he embarrassed but now he has the added work of re-establishing his authority as a teacher with Harry as well as the odious job of attempting to teach him occlumency. (journeymom - Oct 23, 2006 1:34 pm (#426))

_ I don't exactly disagree, but the way I took the scene was as follows: When Harry walked in, Snape and Sirius were in their usual daggers-drawn attitude to each other, but Snape was also there to do a job. In doing the latter, he went into his usual teacher mode with his "Sit down, Potter" _ but of course, as he wasn't in school, he got 'caught out' on a point of etiquette, manners, whatever you want to call it, by Sirius: strictly speaking, it was for Sirius, in his own house, in the "parental" role, to start the ball rolling. Snape flushed, in my view, in irritation _ he knew, of course, that Sirius was just using Snape's blunder to score points _ and of course he wanted to retaliate _ but he also knew that, strictly speaking, Sirius was correct on that 'point of order'.

Snape, of course, does find a way to hit back immediately, with his crack about "by all means stay, Black, I know you like to feel ... involved", and then the follow-up about doing "nothing useful for the Order". And this time it's Sirius's turn to flush and Snape's to triumph on a point scored.

I don't think one needs to read stuff about establishing authority, or sensitivity about wealth, into the whole thing. (After all, if Snape feels vulnerable about his supposed lack of money, Sirius must feel vulnerable about having been in jail for years, innocence notwithstanding.) I think these guys would find a reason to wrangle no matter what.

Being logged out ...


Steve Newton - Oct 27, 2006 8:28 am (#506 of 2959)
Vulture, you say "he got 'caught out' on a point of etiquette, manners." The manners issue was made explicit in HBP from the first chapter. When Cissy and Trixie come avisiting they do not apparate directly into Snapes' house. Dumbledore later explains why this might be to Harry. (HMMM, he also tells Harry that it gives the person the chance to not receive the visitors. I wish I remembered this better because it would hint that Snape wanted the sisters to see him.) Anyway, I think that in some small way the books are books of manners. Isn't that what the Bronte novels were called?


wynnleaf - Oct 27, 2006 8:43 am (#507 of 2959)
I mostly agree with Vulture's assessment of the comments in OOTP between Sirius and Snape. Although I think that Snape's initial "Sit down, Potter," spoken in the imperative, rather than as a request, "Please sit down, Potter," or something similar, is much more mild in its degree of rudeness when compared to Sirius' "You know," said Sirius loudly, leaning back on his rear chair legs and speaking to the ceiling, "I think I'd prefer it if you didn't give orders here, Snape. It's my house, you see."

Sirius' comment was really very rude, and did have the added component of trying to undermine Snape's authority with a student. Of course, technically Snape didn't have any authority over a student in a private home, but the discussion was to be about a future teacher/student endeavor, ordered by the headmaster, so (although Sirius didn't yet know it), that teacher authority could be called for in the discussion.

But my main point was that Sirius took a somewhat rude "sit down, Potter," comment of Snape's -- really just typical Snape to any student when you think about it -- and answered it with a very rude comment that would be practically impossible for Snape to just let go by.

But I agree, these two can't resist the urge to score points off of each other and would probably do it at any opportunity. I only note that Sirius was the first to try to score the points in this encounter, as he was also the first to draw his wand.


Choices - Oct 27, 2006 9:18 am (#508 of 2959)
I tend to believe that Tobias Snape is dead - either he died or was killed by Voldemort. If it is the latter, that may be the reason Eileen Prince/Madam Pince was taken to Hogwarts to prevent the same thing happening to her. Thus I think that Filch is just Filch, not Snape's father.


LinaOct 27, 2006 11:39 am (#509 of 2959)
Soul Search, I've noticed that discussion only after I posted my last post, but I don't think that there can be only one explanation, I like to search for different explanations that, like Chemyst noticed at the Eileen Prince thread, are not proved impossible with canon.

While I can understand Choice's belief, I offer another version:
The Snapes could have needed the protection for some reason much earlier than Snape became a DE. They could have forged their death and have given the jobs in Hogwarts. Since they walk around Hogwarts without any masks, they could have had their looking altered so that nobody would recognize them. Since it is more difficult to make a kid lie in the way that is necessary in the protection program, it is possible that Snape didn't know that the deaths are forged and that someone from Eileen's family took care of him. Someone that taught him the Dark Arts and made him more willing to join the DEs. It is possible that DD told him the truth about his parents only after he told LV about the prophecy, the next time that he came to apply for the job and that this is what makes DD so sure that Snape is on the side of good.

Now, please, excuse me for my bad english and lack of the better words, but I hope that you got the idea of what I think might have happened. I'm not saying that it is the only way it could have happened, I just say that it is a possibility that is not contradictory to the facts that we know.


Soul Search - Oct 27, 2006 11:45 am (#510 of 2959)
Lina,

I agree. Your scenario is possible and I can't think of any canon that contradicts it.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 511 to 550

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 8:53 am

Lina - Oct 27, 2006 12:01 pm (#511 of 2959)
Thanks, Soul Search. I feel much better now.


Soul Search - Oct 27, 2006 12:33 pm (#512 of 2959)
Lina,

Just as an aside, what is the little girl leaning on in your icon? I can't figure it out. I assume it is a rather old picture.


wynnleaf - Oct 27, 2006 12:46 pm (#513 of 2959)
I hope I won't upset anyone for branching off into a new topic, but I recently read a new theory on why Snape got into the unbreakable vow and found it very interesting.

I have always thought that the 1st and 2nd chapters of HBP took place on the same night. The weather is described in the same way, and the transition sentences at the beginning of the 2nd chapter sound as though the literary "eye" is moving from 10 Downing Street to Spinners End, but on the same night. Based on a lot analysis of the timelines, it seemed that the 3rd chapter must also have taken place at very close to the same time. I tended to put it at within 2-3 days, because I thought it more likely that DD sent out the letter to Harry, in which he mentions his intended visit to Slughorn, after the Vow was made rather than before.

However, here is a different theory.

All three chapters take place on the same night.

DD had already made the decision to ask Slughorn to come teach potions, knowing that he would put Snape in the DADA position. Snape, as per usual, had already made his annual application for the DADA position (for whatever reasons). Either DD planned on Snape leaving at the end of the year, or perhaps he only intended for Slughorn to stay one year, and put Snape back in the potions position. Or perhaps he thought LV would lift the curse for Snape.

In any case, the DADA curse was not to be denied.

Narcissa and Bella come to visit Snape the same night that DD gets Harry from the Dursley's.

When Snape agreed to enter into a Vow with Cissy, her entire focus had been on Draco's danger and protecting him. She had not seemed particularly interested in LV's goals and the importance of Draco's mission -- simply on how to protect Draco. She had repeatedly asked Snape to help and protect Draco. When she asked for the Vow, it was reasonable to assume that she would continue in the vein and ask a vow for Snape to help and protect Draco. His agreeing to the Vow would not seem a big risk.

Her last request for Snape to actually complete the task was a surprise. It seemed to surprise Snape and certainly was not what she had just spent all that time begging him to do (protect).

In this theory, all three chapters happened the same night. While Snape was talking to Cissy and Bella, DD was meeting with Harry and later with Slughorn. According to this theory, the moment Slughorn accepted the position of the potions teacher, Snape became the DADA teacher. The curse kicked in at that instant. And Cissy made her final surprise question in the Vow, thereby sealing Snape's fate to only make it through 1 year as DADA teacher.

Any timeline, or other objections to this theory? I found it very interesting.


S.E. Jones - - Oct 27, 2006 12:54 pm (#514 of 2959)
Wynnleaf, I can't think of any contradicting canon off the top of my head, but I don't see why, according to the theory, the first three chapters all had to happen on the same night. If Snape had been given the DADA job and Dd and Harry met with Slughorn the next night, or even three days later, the curse would still have been kicking in, just not in any way so obvious that you could tell the curse had got you.


wynnleaf - Oct 27, 2006 12:59 pm (#515 of 2959)
Well, I think the main point of the theory was that Cissy's third question in the Vow, which seemed so different from the focus that she'd been following throughout the discussion, actually entered her thinking due to the DADA curse.

So as long as the Slughorn talk came before the Spinner End Vow, this would work.


Lina - Oct 27, 2006 1:33 pm (#516 of 2959)
Wynnleaf, I find your observation interesting and possible, although am not being sure that it will be confirmed or denied or mentioned at all in the last book. But makes sense.

BTW, Soul Search, that's me on the picture, when I was 2 (40 years ago ). If you had, under your preferences, the "Show second line of author information in messages" box checked, then you'd see that I have perm on this picture. (Has something to do with the subject on the chat thread some time ago. )


S.E. Jones - Oct 27, 2006 1:48 pm (#517 of 2959)
It would still work if it came after. As long as Dumbledore gave Snape the DADA position before the Vow, it still works. Even if it were three days before, the curse still could've kicked in and made her think of it.


Ann - Oct 27, 2006 5:54 pm (#518 of 2959)
There cannot be just a few days between the Vow and the hiring of Slughorn. It must be a week or on time at all.

Both the Downing Street chapter (1) and Dumbledore's fetching Harry (3) occur on a Friday, so they can't be a few days apart. I played around with the timeline a lot at one point, and came to the conclusion that there is no consistent answer that doesn't result in June having 42 or so days. However, I think she means them to be the same night. In Chapter 1, Fudge tells the Prime Minister that he was sacked three days ago (preceding Tuesday), and that the wizarding world had been screaming for his head for a fortnight. Since the newspaper announcing Voldemort's return came out on a Sunday, it seems likely that it has been roughly three weeks since the events at the DoM. Since there was a week (and a bit) at Hogwarts after the DoM before the Hogwarts Express brought the students home (usually on 1 July), that seems to add up to 3 weeks or so as well.

I think Chapter 2 has to be the same night as chapter 1, since she says "the chilly mist that had pressed against the Prime Minister's windows drifted over a dirty river..." Same mist implies the same night.

We know that chapter 3 occurs on the Friday before July 15, when O.W.L. results arrive. If you assume that students had a week of review for O.W.L.s in June before the exam, and then two weeks of O.W.L.s (both of which facts seem clear from OotP), it's hard to fit in everything that Fudge describes by July 8th, the latest possible date if chapters 1 & 2 and chapter 3 were a week apart. That would only be two weeks.

I think that, after Dumbldore was injured, he'd already got the idea of having Snape seem to kill him, since he knew he was going to die of the curse. It wasn't the Vow that made the difference. Snape mentions the injury in Chapter 2, and while his expedition might have taken place immediately after the students left, I suspect Dumbledore had several other things to take care of (he's been gone for months, remember), and it seems likely that he went on his expedition to the Gaunt house around the 8th. That gives him a week to recover.


wynnleaf - Oct 27, 2006 7:00 pm (#519 of 2959)
Ann,

I had thought previous to the theory of all 3 chapters being on one day, that the first 2 happened on a Friday, then the following Tuesday DD sent his letter to Harry, and he went to get Harry and met Slughorn the following Friday. The biggest problem I had with this is that DD told Harry that his injury happened "a few days" before he came to meet him on Privet Dr. But we knew it had to have occurred before Spinners End because of Snape's comment about DD being weaker and sustaining an injury. And that would mean more than "a few days" and instead be more than a week.

So really, all on the same Friday makes the most sense.

Thanks for the timeline overview.


The Artful Dodger - Oct 28, 2006 4:10 am (#520 of 2959)
Her last request for Snape to actually complete the task was a surprise. It seemed to surprise Snape and certainly was not what she had just spent all that time begging him to do (protect).-- wynnleaf

Snape knew before the vow that Narcissa wanted him to fulfill Draco's task. Here's the quote (p.39):

"You could do it. You could do it instead of Draco."

Admittedly, this is not a direct request, and the moment Narcissa asks for the vow it's all about protection again; her wish for Snape to execute Voldemort's order is repeated only at the end of the vow. So perhaps Snape was surprised by the third bit, but it didn't come completely unexpected.


Mrs Brisbee - Oct 28, 2006 5:19 am (#521 of 2959)
I don't think the DADA curse would effect Narcissa, and cause her to throw in that last clause. I think she planned that all along.

If the DADA curse was effecting anyone, it think it would be Snape. Perhaps that's why he agreed to that Unbreakable Vow in the first place, which has always struck me as a stupid thing to do.

I think the curse causes the DADA professor to make really bad judgment calls. Umbridge wanders into the Forbidden Forest without backup and starts mouthing off to the centaurs, Lupin doesn't tell anyone about Black being an Animagi and then forgets his potion, the ultra-paranoid Moody is successful captured at his home before he even teaches his first day! Lockhart's bragging is so over the top the entire staff can't stand him. I wonder if Quirrell was hired as DADA professor before he met Voldemort ("There is no good or evil, only power. Join me." "Yeah, sure, what a great idea!")


T Vrana - Oct 28, 2006 5:38 am (#522 of 2959)
Or is is that after 40 years of losing teachers, DD is really having to scrape the bottom of the barrel to get anyone? Except Lupin, of course.


Laura W - Oct 28, 2006 11:11 pm (#523 of 2959)
"I think the curse causes the DADA professor to make really bad judgment calls."

What an interesting angle, Mrs. Brisbee! Tom Riddle, being a brilliant wizard, would certainly be capable of putting a curse on the job which would cause anyone who took it to make "really bad judgement calls"; thereby assuring they would not last. I never saw it exactly that way, but I like it!

Laura


T Vrana - Oct 29, 2006 3:58 am (#524 of 2959)
While it is an interesting idea, I think Umbridge and Lockhart made their decisions based on their nasty personalties, calls they would have made with or without a curse.


T Vrana - Oct 29, 2006 5:50 am (#525 of 2959)
A quick journey back to the question of Snape's undergarments.

I know why they are grey! It's not his poverty, or the house elves, or his scholarly lack of interest in personal hygiene....it's his HAT!

The good guy always wears a white hat, the bad guys wear black, Snape, as neither good or bad, wears GREY!

OK, sorry for that brief (pun completely intended) interruption, back to the regularly scheduled discussion....


wynnleaf - Oct 29, 2006 8:16 am (#526 of 2959)
What is it with Snape and the word "coward?"

Snape uses the "coward" insult on Sirius.

He makes a big deal out of what he considers the cowardly acts of the Marauders.

And although he doesn't react to Harry's saying, "fight back, you coward" in The Flight of the Prince in HBP, he shortly afterwards explodes when Harry says, "kill me like you killed him, you coward."

Many times people focus a lot of their criticisms of others on those things which they worry over within themselves. Snape has probably done this in his comments in OOTP to Harry about fools who wear their hearts on their sleeve. He may be doing this when he calls ridicules Hermione for being a know-it-all or quoting the book.

So what is it with Snape and "coward?"

(This picks up an OT discussion in the Dumbledore's Death - What Really Happened? thread.)


T Vrana - Oct 29, 2006 8:48 am (#527 of 2959)
My pet theory is that Snape did warn James, at great risk to himself, and James ignored the warning. Snape took a risk doing this, so not a coward. But, owing James a life debt, he had the chance to go a step further and actually physically protect James, but being afraid of LV, didn't, hence he is a coward. So, he feels he isn't a coward because he tried to warn James, but feels like a coward for owing the life debt and not doing more.

Very conflicted guy...

Just a theory...


HungarianHorntail11 - Oct 29, 2006 3:06 pm (#528 of 2959)
I am wondering if there will be any growth with regard to Snape. I mean, there has not been any change in him since Book 1 and now I find myself wondering if it is possible with such a character. Either he is going to be one way or the other. Neither would show growth of any kind - just him being exposed - since most interpretations are through Harry's eyes.


wynnleaf - Oct 29, 2006 4:38 pm (#529 of 2959)
I mean, there has not been any change in him since Book 1 and now I find myself wondering if it is possible with such a character.

HH11,

I think the primary reason we haven't seen much character development of Snape is because JKR has been trying to keep so much of him secret. So we get only the tiniest glimpses of anything beyond the sarcastic, insulting teacher who throws occasional temper fits over James or Sirius, etc.

How can JKR do development on his character when she doesn't want to show us for sure who Snape really is?

We're obviously going to find out more about Snape in Book 7. I hope that at that point there will finally be some character development.

As regards the "coward" thing, I do think we're going to find that there's something in Snape's past that could be construed as cowardice and he really regrets it. Maybe part of what he's been doing as a spy is not just trying to make up for past wrongs, but maybe also trying to prove his own bravery to himself by doing a really dangerous job.


Ann - Oct 29, 2006 6:24 pm (#530 of 2959)
I think it's possible that Snape is simply furious that Harry, whom he's been protecting at great risk to himself, has twice called him a coward.

That noted, I should point out, again, that in that second exchange, when Snape looses it, there's a gap that could be a temporal gap in his speech as well. The text reads:

'DON'T--' screamed Snape, and his face was suddenly demented, inhuman, as though he was in as much pain as the yelping, howling dog stuck in the burning house behind them, '--CALL ME COWARD!'

I've always thought that the bit about cowardice was not what he meant to say initially. We've clearly got a pause, and I think he rephrases his objection in that pause. After all, he's just been reminded of his murder of Dumbledore, and for those of us who think he did this under Dumbledore's orders, not Voldemort's, it should be obvious that he's about to bring up the extenuating circumstances. And then he realizes that he can't.


T Vrana - Oct 29, 2006 6:37 pm (#531 of 2959)
But in that pause Snape is demented, inhuman..I don't think it is a thinking moment. Snape has lost it, completely.

I have noted on another thread (DD-what really happened) that this type of description of Snape, completely losing it, (mad, demented, inhuman, howling, bearing his teeth), is always tied to James.

Just before this moment, Snape was talking about James. I don't think he was thinking about DD at this time. I don't think it is a coincidence that for 5 books Snape is only described this way when James is the issue (he does lose it this way when Sirius escapes, but he thought Sirius was James' secret keeper, and I think, thought he could make up for telling LV about the prophesy, by getting the traitorous secret keeper).


journeymom - Oct 29, 2006 7:42 pm (#532 of 2959)
"I've always thought that the bit about cowardice was not what he meant to say initially."

But would JKR really refer back to this in Book 7? How would she demonstrate that that's what Snape really meant? Because is seems clear that he's saying, DON'T CALL ME COWARD! as if there is no break. With the break JKR describes just how upset Snape is.


S.E. Jones - Oct 29, 2006 10:59 pm (#533 of 2959)
That's the way I read it, journeymom.

Several posts back I mentioned a discussion I had with my sister about kids who witness abuse and how that affects them over time. If Snape saw his mother cowering and saw her beaten or something, or just emotionally and mentally abused, he might internalize a need for personal control, a need to be in a position of power (so as not to be bullied as his mother was), and a tendency to lash out at anything or anyone who would make him feel that he was losing control and that implied weakness or fear being present in him (such as the word "coward"). James brought out both of these bad qualities in Snape. That may be why he loses control of being called a coward and why that so often somehow involves James.


T Vrana - Oct 30, 2006 5:38 am (#534 of 2959)
SE- While that may be psychologically true, with all that Jo has to accomplish in Book 7, I think there has to be more here than a reaction to abuse sustained or witnessed in childhood.

Jo has established a pattern with Snape over at least 3 of the 6 books. Snape completely loses control, looking mad, inhuman, etc., when James is mentioned. More specifically, when it relates to Snape 'saving' Harry from Black, POA (we learn Snape knew James was warned, and can assume it was Snape's info), when Harry sees Snape's Worst Memory, and when Snape accuses James of stealing and using his inventions against him, and Harry says (paraphrased), 'kill me like you killed him, coward'.

With all that will be going on in Book 7, and this pattern established, I think we will find these outbursts tie in with the main theme of choices, and it will be Snape's adult choices.

Why he feels the coward title is unfair:

1) He risked coming back to DD to try to save James and/or Lily. Not cowardly.

2) He has continued to spy for DD, also not cowardly

Why he does feel like a coward (more important because we are usually more stung by the criticisms we fear are true):

1) He had a chance to do more to save James and/or Lily, and he didn't. He may have had the chance to physically stop LV, or at least try, and didn't. Not only did he fail to pay his debt to James, but Lily, the one person who stood up for him in his worst memory, (and perhaps there is more to their relationship)also died.

Just MHO..


wynnleaf - Oct 30, 2006 6:15 am (#535 of 2959)
I don't think we can say with confidence that Snape's fury over Sirius' escape was directly related to James. As part of his tirade in the Shrieking Shack, Snape does yell at Harry about being just like his father, too arrogant to believe one of his friends would be betraying him.

But that doesn't mean all of that anger centers around James. Up in the hospital wing, later that evening, Snape doesn't mention James at all. What he brings up to DD, in the midst of some of his comments, is Sirius trying to kill him in the past. Granted, he thinks that James had something to do with it, but he brought it up because of Sirius, as a way of proving that Sirius really did have the heart of a murderer.

So I think it's a matter of opinion as to whether Snape's primary anger in POA is directed at James or not. Personally, I don't think it is. It is part of his anger, especially when he thinks Harry is being like James in believing the evil, murderous Sirius.

In the Snape's Worst Memory scene, Snape find's Harry looking into the pensieve and his anger is directed at Harry for looking at the memories. Yes, his comments focus on James. But is that because he is more angry at James than Sirius or the other Marauders? Or does he primarily mention James because he's talking to James' son? I think the later is more likely.

In the second instance, the anger seems to be directed at Harry for (in Snape's mind), following in James' footsteps. But frankly, I imagine Snape would be just as angry if Harry had stumbled across a non-Marauder, but still embarrassing memory OR if it had been another kid in the pensieve rather than Harry.

Besides that, I don't think we can take these two events and extrapolate from that an idea that Snape only gets really angry over James. My take on Snape's character is that he could potentially get furious over any number of things. It's just that Harry, looking like James, tends to get him responding in extremely tense moments as though it's James in front of him.

T Vrana, I agree with you over the "coward" issue.


T Vrana - Oct 30, 2006 6:33 am (#536 of 2959)
Don't have the book handy. When Snape mentions Sirius in the hospital wing, is he demented, mad, inhuman...

There is a possible pattern:

1) POA- Shack- I tried to save James/Lily, James wouldn't listen

2) POA- Sirius escape- I tried to capture/punish the traitorous secret keeper (who got James/Lily killed, because James wouldn't listen)

3) OOTP- Pensieve- James the coward, I shouldn't have said that to Lily

4) HBP- Flight- I'm not a coward, I tried to save them, I told James, what more could I do? HE would have killed me!

Do we have any examples of Snape losing it, to the extent we are discussing, not angry, not really angry, DEMENTED and INHUMAN that does not involve James and Lily?

Remember, writing, not reporting...

EDIT: There is no doubt Snape loathes Sirius, but there is a deeper, sub-human reaction Snape is having to James. Whether it be life debt, Lily, or both, I think there is something here other than Snape has a temper.


Vulture - Oct 30, 2006 10:23 am (#537 of 2959)
But I agree, these two can't resist the urge to score points off of each other and would probably do it at any opportunity. I only note that Sirius was the first to try to score the points in this encounter, as he was also the first to draw his wand. (wynnleaf - Oct 27, 2006 9:43 am (#507))

Well ... I think it might be more accurate to say that Sirius was the first whom Harry (and we) see trying to score points. Harry walked in on an on-going process, not something which started when he walked in. The way the whole set-up was described, when Harry walked in to see the two of them sitting stiffly and glaring in opposite directions, I got the distinct feeling of a quarrel waiting to happen _ if, in fact, taunts hadn't been exchanged already. I don't think there's anything significant in Sirius being the first whom we see doing anything. (Of course, Harry and his lessons became issues in the hostilities which followed _ but I think almost anything would have.)

My approach to this pair's mutual hostility is to largely take Dumbledore's attitude during the Book 4 hospital scene _ he came closer to exasperation than at any time in the books before Book 6. (Mind you, my approach might get revised after Book 7.)

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

Sorry, this is a bit of a side-track:

The more one thinks about human motives for even the simplest words or actions, the more complex it gets _ it just occurred to me, having written the above: during Book 5, as we know, Sirius has been dealing with various frustrations, and these included an argument with Molly Weasley about 'parental' care for Harry which must, to some extent, have hurt him. I know that his main motive in snapping at Snape was simply their mutual detestation, but I think that another, smaller, factor, may have been a niggling feeling of not being able to be all that a guardian should be.

We _ and the adult characters _ are all so used to how Snape routinely treats Harry that we _ and they _ have come to accept it: wrongly. Of course, Sirius's motives in slapping down Snape's "orders" are not simply selfless or simply about Harry _ as I've indicated. What's more, seen simply as an attack on bullying or unfair treatment, this would be a very clumsy choice of moment _ "Sit down, Potter" hardly ranks as World No. 1 Bullying Moment.

Nevertheless, I think Sirius does something useful here on the issue of Snape's treatment of Harry. The fact is that, over five years, Snape has grown used to pushing Harry around, unchallenged by any adult _ which makes it more likely for him to say "Sit down, Potter" in a guardian's house without thinking. The useful thing Sirius does here is to _ in effect _ put up a 'Stop' sign about Snape's attitude.

Now, please be clear that I'm not saying this to un-say anything I've said before. Both Sirius and Snape, in this scene, are primarily acting for themselves and for their quarrel _ and everyone and everything else gets used. (In this case, this mainly means Harry and his schooling.) But as with so much of Book 5 (which is what I love about it), there are so many different elements one can detect in any scene, and I think this business of Sirius as a combative parent is a subconscious theme.


journeymom - Oct 30, 2006 12:02 pm (#538 of 2959)
" The useful thing Sirius does here is to _ in effect _ put up a 'Stop' sign about Snape's attitude. "

Good point. It's not the only thing, but one of the things going on.


wynnleaf - Oct 30, 2006 12:24 pm (#539 of 2959)
This is a good point Vulture. It's not the Sirius thread, still, if we see the encounter in a more broad context, it's not surprising that Sirius would be feeling -- hm, resentful perhaps, or frustrated, in any efforts of his own to "parent" Harry.

The Order over runs his house (they're welcome to its use, but still). Molly (and I'm not Molly-bashing) is in his own house telling him how to deal with Harry and acting to his face as though he doesn't know what's best for Harry. And Dumbledore has made plans to have Harry taught occlumency and never even bothered to tell Sirius about it. Now here's Snape come to discuss something with Harry and it almost seems like it's private and Sirius doesn't even have to be included. Snape certainly perpetuates that, but Dumbledore started it by not including Sirius in the first place.

Anyway, it's no shock to see Sirius wanting to take whatever control he can of the situation. Yes, he's rude in his manner, but I do understand his motivations -- in addition to all the general hatred of Snape he's got built up.

journeymom,

I wanted to agree with your post earlier. I feel like it should be a rule of thumb when trying to figure out what's going on in a portion of text that if we're going to assume that what is really going on, or what is really meant is something different from what it appears on the surface, then this has got to be something that JKR will either directly reveal in the next book, or Book 7 revelations will make the different meaning crystal clear.

If, however, it's something that will probably never be clarified in future books, then I think we have to stick with the more obvious or direct meaning or interpretation.

I think that I think that. Maybe I'll change my mind later.


journeymom - Oct 30, 2006 1:10 pm (#540 of 2959)
I think I followed that! I'm pretty sure I did.


Laura W - Oct 30, 2006 1:51 pm (#541 of 2959)
"What is it with Snape and the word "coward?" "

I had a much simpler response to this than many of you.

If DD had asked Snape to kill him and if Snape genuinely liked and respected DD, it would have taken great resolve (ie - courage) for Severus to carry out a task that so repelled him; and equal courage to allow Harry et al to believe he AK'd an unarmed, ill, elderly wizard in cold blood (which would have been a cowardly act) if that was not, in fact, the case.

Not to mention the courage Snape has had to exhibit by pretending to spy for Voldemort while actually spying for DD all these years - assuming, for the time being, that that is what has been going on. He would require physical courage to face every day what would undoubtedly happen to him if V or any of the other DEs (read, Bellatrix) ever found out the truth, and emotional courage to live every day with being mistrusted - hated, even - by both sides.

This being the case, it is understandable how strongly he would react to being called a coward - by anyone.

(But I'm sure this has been said before.)

Laura


Thom Matheson - Oct 30, 2006 3:42 pm (#542 of 2959)
Laura, Does Snape even know that Harry was on the tower? He was under the cloak and only came undone after the group left the tower. Harry was the last to leave pretty much. How would Snape know that Harry wasn't just at the the fight in the hall and then started chasing he and Draco.


Laura W - Oct 30, 2006 4:06 pm (#543 of 2959)
Hi Thom.

Right. Harry was invisible on the Tower when Snape did the deed. Canon does say that Severus had left the Tower when Harry took off the Cloak. So far, you are correct that Snape would have no idea Harry would know what happened up there. Unless ... Severus somehow knew that Dumbledore was taking Harry with him when he left the castle that night or Severus saw the second broom on the Tower and figured out it would be Potter with DD. (Of course there is no canon for this, so even I am ruling it out.)

Where I *did* take the information for Snape knowing was Harry's comment, "Kill me like you killed him, you coward -". I always assumed Harry was referring to Snape killing Dumbledore in cold blood, and I still do. But, as you say, Snape would not know that. Ten points to your House, Thom.

Nonetheless, Harry did tell Hagrid, McGonagall, Lupin, the Weasley's, Madam Pomfrey and everyone that Snape AK'd Dumbledore. Within hours many in the WW would have that information. So Snape *now* has to live with what I wrote ("and equal courage to allow Harry et al to believe he AK'd an unarmed, ill, elderly wizard in cold blood (which would have been a cowardly act) if that was not, in fact, the case.").

Let me, however, rewrite that paragraph to read: "If DD had asked Snape to kill him and if Snape genuinely liked and respected DD, it would have taken great resolve (ie - courage) for Severus to carry out a task that so repelled him; and equal courage to allow everybody at Hogwarts to be convinced of his still being a DE and loyal follower of Voldemort's (as demonstrated by his not fighting with the Order, his actively allowing other DEs to escape and his own flight from the castle)."

Better? (smile)

Laura


Soul Search - Oct 30, 2006 4:12 pm (#544 of 2959)
Thom Matheson,

"Does Snape even know that Harry was on the tower?"

Rather good question. He does seem to know, or at least is not surprised that Harry seems to know that he AKed Dumbledore.

I think Snape and Draco had left the fight area before Harry came down. Harry delayed enough there so Snape shouldn't have assumed Harry came down off the tower.

My conclusion is that Snape knew Harry was there, probably because Dumbledore told him about his and Harry's excursion that night. (When Harry conveniently "went for his cloak.") The two brooms on the tower would have confirmed Harry's presense. Even Draco noticed. Snape could also have sensed Harry via "legitimens."

It is certainly significant that Snape didn't give Harry away to Draco or the death eaters. Snape also didn't worry about Harry interfering, suggesting Dumbledore had told him he might imobilize Harry.


T Vrana - Oct 30, 2006 4:25 pm (#545 of 2959)
or at least is not surprised that Harry seems to know that he AKed Dumbledore.

I think this is further evidence that Snape was talking about James, (who he and Harry were just talking about) whom he feels guilty for "killing" by telling LV the prophesy.

Where I *did* take the information for Snape knowing was Harry's comment, "Kill me like you killed him, you coward -".

Snape had just been ranting about James stealing and using his inventions. I think he was still on James when Harry said this, and it shows Snape does indeed feel responsible for James' death.


Thom Matheson - Oct 30, 2006 4:25 pm (#546 of 2959)
From the night of the murder to the funeral is what, just a matter of a couple days. Don't have the right time frame here. But, if I am Snape, other then Draco and a handful of Death Eaters, there were no witnesses that he is aware of.

We must assume that shortly as the story continues in book 7 the rest of the world and Voldemort will find out what really happened. If Voldemort currently thinks that Draco did the killing and finds out that it was Severus, what happens to Severus and the Malfoy family. I would be willing to bet that Voldemort is not fully aware of the Vow between Cissy and Severus. Would Voldemort be upset that Severus jumped into the middle of this?


rambkowalczyk - Oct 30, 2006 4:28 pm (#547 of 2959)
During Voldemort's graveyard speech he talked about 3 Death Eaters, the coward, the one who left me forever and his most loyal servant. When you think about it, all three could equally apply to him. If you look at book 3, the chapter- The Servant of Lord Voldemort starts with Snape right after he takes off the Invisibility Cloak. It's obviously a false clue but on a reread I was struck by how that chapter started with Snape.

And previously there has been enough debate to say that Snape could be either the coward or the one who left him forever. I think its deliberate that there is reason to associate the word coward with Snape.

Suppose when Snape first confronted Lupin as a werewolf, Snape froze with fear or did something embarrassing like wet himself. Then he gets saved by his own worst enemy. The last thing he wanted James to see is how scared he was. So although he expresses anger that if James did nothing he would have been expelled he is more angry at himself for being afraid.

Or suppose after Snape heard the prophecy he didn't run directly to Voldemort but did nothing. Suppose then that he botched one of Voldemort's directives and he was about to be Crucioed or even killed. Maybe this was why he told Voldemort about the prophecy--to save himself. I think Snape does have a coward moment he has to live with.


T Vrana - Oct 30, 2006 4:37 pm (#548 of 2959)
rambko-

I think Snape does have a coward moment he has to live with.

I think you are right, but I think it is going to be bigger than wetting himself, and less complicated than explaining that Snape goofed and then told the prophesy to save himself. I think it is possible that Snape actually had a chance to stop LV, physically, from going after the Potters, AK or what have you, but he was too afraid. He owed James the life debt (compounded by sending LV his way via the prophesy), and perhaps had a respect/friendhsip/obsessive love, for Lily.

Good reason for coward to set him off.


Laura W - Oct 30, 2006 5:34 pm (#549 of 2959)
"I think this is further evidence that Snape was talking about James, (who he and Harry were just talking about) whom he feels guilty for "killing" by telling LV the prophesy." (T. Vrana)

Funny kind of guilt. (not laughing)

Seems to me if you feel responsible for the death of two innocent (good? - pick a word) people, you do not treat their poor orphaned son who is not only parentless but has had to live with a family that does not love him - and worse - in a despicable fashion from the time you have contact with the 11-year-old. A person who feels guilty about what he did to James and Lily would try to atone (even for the sake of his own conscious, let alone because it is the right thing to do) for this by showing the boy extra compassion and encouragement. Especially if this person is his teacher, and therefore in a position to greatly influence the orphan either positively or negatively.

I know that it is possible Snape is atoning for telling V about the prophecy by working for the Order as a spy (maybe), but how he could really make it up to James and Lily is by taking on the role of someone who cares about Harry. And Severus knows this.

Yet, from the first Potions class in first year, Snape humiliates Harry ("Ah yes. Harry Potter. Our new - *celebrity.") and continues to do so from then on. Instead of announcing loudly whenever Harry messes up his potions and giving him zeros, Snape could help Harry do better and encourage him.

Oh sure, we all know about the times - like at the Quidditch match in CoS - when Snape prevents Harry from being killed, but that is only Severus paying off (grudgingly) his life debt to James. It has nothing to do with his guilt about what passing the information on to V did to Harry's family.

I would believe Severus was genuinely guilty in an actions-speak-louder-than-feelings way and wanted to spend the rest of his life paying back if he had not spent the last six years being absolutely horrid to the real victim of his error in judgement (or whatever one wants to call it; Dumbledore calls it "a terrible mistake" in HBP) 17 years ago.

(waiting for the dungbombs to start flying)

Laura


T Vrana - Oct 30, 2006 6:22 pm (#550 of 2959)
Laura- This is Snape we are talking about. He loathed James (with some justification) and loathes Harry for looking just like James. When Snape owed James the life debt, he didn't become his best pal, he was just indebted. When I say Snape feels guilty, it is related entirely to the life debt, IMO, not out of any regret that James the person is dead, but James the guy he owed a life debt to.

but that is only Severus paying off (grudgingly) his life debt

Exactly!!

So along comes Harry who looks like James. Same reaction, loathing, but, keeps him from mortal peril. Snape is still trying to pay off the life debt, which he feels he shouldn't owe to begin with, because James was only saving his own neck. Then, with the Prophesy, Snape makes it worse, now he's put the guy he owes the debt to in mortal peril! So he tries to warn him, but James doesn't listen, he thinks, and gets himself and Lily killed!

So,that's what I meant about guilt. Not feeling at all bad for James, but feeling responsible for his death (life debt squared), and sorry for himself.

EDIT- I guess I should have said responsible to begin with. But I do think Snape feels a type of guilt, the type he is able to feel given how much he and James hated each other. He has life debt guilt, not poor James guilt, if that helps......
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Posts 551 to 580

Post  Mona Tue May 31, 2011 8:59 am

Laura W - Oct 31, 2006 1:34 am (#551 of 2959)
Got it, T Vrana! Guess I was thinking normal decent human being guilt and not Snape guilt.

"He has life debt guilt, not poor James guilt, if that helps......"

It does. But I still wouldn't use the word "guilt" or "guilty" in describing Snape's feelings - judging by his actions re Harry. It's more like, "Every time I try to pay off my debt, that stinking James Potter goes and does something to compound it! Like dying because of a single mistake I made, and - as if that wasn't enough - leaving me with that brat of his in my face every day to remind me of what happened."

That is recognizing his part in causing the deaths of James and Lily and the orphaning of their child (along with Peter's part and Tom's part, of course). Yes, I believe he recognizes his part but does not feel guilty in the sense that he caused a terrible thing to happen -- terrible for the Potters, that is. If he did, he would do as I wrote in my previous post.

Which is what I think you were saying above, T.

Another point. All of this presupposes that Severus actually is now on the good side. Does *nobody* think that Snape is evil anymore? Maybe even a DE spying on the Order and Dumbledore? (I'm not saying that I do.)

Laura


T Vrana - Oct 31, 2006 10:02 am (#552 of 2959)
Think we are on the same page regarding Snape's 'guilt'.

As for Snape being an evil DE. I don't think so. I was quite serious above when I pointed out Snape's grey undergarments as a clue to his character. DD is all white, with the flowing beard etc., LV, black. Snape appears black on the outside (swooping around like a giant bat in Quirrel's words, being horrible to Harry), but when you look underneath, he's not black or white, but grey.

Different genre, but I am reminded of The Great Gatsby, no book handy, but there were several color references that revealed the true character of places and people, East Egg, West Egg, Daisy... all white on the outside, but yellow (corrupt) on the inside.

Also, Harry assumes it is Snape who Crucio'd him in Flight of the Prince, just as Harry now thinks Snape is evil. I think this was a bit of foreshadowing that Harry will come to realize that Snape is not evil. Nor is he good. He's grey, and therefore, redeemable.


Die Zimtzicke - Oct 31, 2006 4:14 pm (#553 of 2959)
Does Snape know Harry was on the tower? If, as we discussed earlier, he assumes Harry is talking about Dumbledore, when he makes the comment about kill me like you did him, then it all makes more sense to me personally.


shadzar - Oct 31, 2006 4:51 pm (#554 of 2959)
Maybe he does know Harry is there. Does the body have to be visible for the mind to be read? Could DDs mind have been open enough to let out on accident or purpose that Harry was there?


Laura W - Nov 1, 2006 1:20 am (#555 of 2959)
Just out of interest, shadzar, why do you think DD would want Snape to know that Harry would be a witness to what was to occur between him and Snape on the Tower? Something like ... maybe when Harry got the word out about Severus AK'ing Dumbledore, it would eliminate any doubts people like Bellatrix have about Snape's loyalty to V (and therefore allow Severus greater latitude to spy for the Order - assuming he is - for the duration of the war)? Were you thinking of something like that? Or perhaps you had another reason in mind (no pun intended).

Also, I definitely would rule out the "accident" part of your statement - Dumbledore is too much in control of his mind to ever allow that.


shadzar - Nov 1, 2006 1:31 am (#556 of 2959)
Well DD was sending Harry to fetch Snape when Draco burst in (out) the door. Maybe letting Snape know that Harry was there was a way to hurry things along so the DE didn't linger and find Harry. DD didn't have to tell or allow to know Harry wa there however. The more I think about it Snape wasn't always looking at Harry during the chase and quickly turned to cancel Harry's curses telling him he needs to learn to do two things:

1. wordless magic
2. close his mind

Seems more than likely Snape would have known Harry was there without any help from DD.

I wasn't thinking of Snape morality and good Snape vs evil Snape just the powers he has and or the weakness those on the tower may or may not have had to be able to close their minds from him at the time.


S.E. Jones - Nov 1, 2006 2:35 am (#557 of 2959)
Isn't it said that eye contact is needed for Legilimency? If so, that would exclude Snape from knowing Harry was there (as he'd need to see Harry's eyes) unless Dumbledore told him.


Laura W - Nov 1, 2006 2:40 am (#558 of 2959)
"I wasn't thinking of Snape morality and good Snape vs evil Snape just the powers he has and or the weakness those on the tower may or may not have had to be able to close their minds from him at the time."

Snape might be a very clever man and a talented wizard - I think he is -, but I *seriously* doubt if he would be able to use Legilimency on such as Dumbledore (the most powerful wizard in the world) if Dumbledore did not expressly permit it. JM2K

Laura


T Vrana - Nov 1, 2006 5:06 am (#559 of 2959)
Even without eye contact, Snape seemed to read Harry's desire to pop his invisibilty cloak on at the start of term, when entering the Great Hall, late, without his robes.


wynnleaf - Nov 1, 2006 7:33 am (#560 of 2959)
In The Flight of the Prince, Snape is able to somehow know whatever spell Harry is planning to use and respond to it before Harry can do anything. Snape himself acknowledges this by saying that Harry will be blocked again and again until he learns to keep his mouth shut and his mind closed. Harry didn't have to speak spells out loud for Snape to know exactly what he was about to use. Yet these two were rather far apart much of the time.

If Harry "telegraphs" his thoughts that much, it seems fairly certain that Snape would know he was there on the tower.

Dumbledore can "feel" the traces of LV's magic. He's a hugely powerful wizard feeling traces of magic left years previously. Snape is a powerful younger wizard. If he can read Harry's mental commands in the middle of a fight, my guess is that he could sense Harry being up on the tower, and the fact that a wizard was invisible there. Snape has in the past sensed when Harry was nearby under the cloak, but of course couldn't see him and couldn't prove it. Besides, Snape must be at least as observant as Draco, and even Draco noticed the two brooms. And not many people have Harry's type of broom. Between seeing Harry's broom, and probably sensing him nearby, Snape wouldn't need DD to give him that information through legilimens.


K Michaelis - Nov 1, 2006 8:09 am (#561 of 2959)
And not many people have Harry's type of broom. Between seeing Harry's broom, and probably sensing him nearby

Except it wasn't Harry's broom, was it? It was Mdme. Rosmerta's. Harry Accio'd them out of the bar, didn't he?


wynnleaf - Nov 1, 2006 8:13 am (#562 of 2959)
Except it wasn't Harry's broom, was it? It was Mdme. Rosmerta's. Harry Accio'd them out of the bar, didn't he?

Quite correct. I wasn't thinking.

Still, Snape looks around and sees two brooms. This is Snape. He always thinks Harry's involved. Even if DD hadn't told him to be waiting in his rooms and that he and Harry were going to be away, but would likely be needing him when they returned, I think Snape would have guessed it was Harry on the tower. 2 brooms, but just Dumbledore (other than Draco and DEs). Snape knows Harry uses an invisibility cloak. He'd assume it was Harry who was there.


Soul Search - Nov 1, 2006 12:13 pm (#563 of 2959)
I am fairly certain that Snape knew Harry was on the tower. I do wonder that Snape didn't seem concerned that Harry might do something to reveal himself. That is, even knowing Harry was there, did Snape know Harry had been frozen and couldn't take any action? I suppose legitimens could have not only told him Harry was there, but also incapacitated.

After Snape cast his AK, he seemed to clear Draco and the death eaters off the tower rather quickly. Why the haste? There was a fight going on below. No one was going to attack them on the tower; the entrance was protected. No one else knew what was going on on the tower anyway. All I can think of is that Snape wanted to get the death eaters out of the way before Harry recovered and revealed himself.

While the death eaters had been instructed to leave Harry alone, they would have had to respond if Harry attacked them.

Snape was protecting Harry.


haymoni - Nov 1, 2006 1:04 pm (#564 of 2959)
I do believe Snape was protecting Harry. That is the only reason why he would have left Harry behind. He could have hit Harry with a Full-Body Bind and delivered him to Voldy on a silver platter. But he didn't. He left him behind. Behind for what? Book 7?

Snape had to know that Harry was up on the Tower, or at the very least, that Harry knew Snape was the one that killed Dumbledore. No other student persued Snape. No teacher, nobody from the Order. Why else would this kid be chasing him?

And then that Potter brat had the nerve to call him a coward???

Harry's lucky he came away with only a slash to the face.


T Vrana - Nov 1, 2006 1:18 pm (#565 of 2959)
I'm not even sure it was a slash, more like a magical slap in the face...


journeymom - Nov 1, 2006 1:32 pm (#566 of 2959)
HBP, Flight of the Prince, p. 564 UK:

"'DON'T...CALL ME COWARD!'

And he slashed at the air: Harry felt a white-hot, whip-like something hit him across the face and was slammed backwards into the ground. Spots of light burst in front of eyes and from a moment all the breath seemed to have gone from his body, then he heard a rush of wings above him and something enormous obscured the stars: Buckbeak had flown at Snape, who staggered backwards as the razor-sharp claws slashed at him."

I remembered Snape giving Harry a slash on the face (like he gave James). But he doesn't appear to have done, so I think it's Buckbeak slashing at him that gave me that impression. You really have to read JKR's words carefully!

Love the sound of wings rushing. Isn't that how the AK is described?

If we had previously seen some evidence of casting a nonverbal spell while verbalizing a different spell, I'd suggest that what Snape just used on Harry here is the same thing he used on Dd on top of the tower. Except that still makes Snape ultimately responsible for Dd's death, which I'm avoiding...


Thom Matheson - Nov 1, 2006 1:42 pm (#567 of 2959)
For that matter, Snape could have Confunded Harry, IE: Pulled a Voldemort, and had Harry do the deed, covering his tracks and making his position look very good.


Soul Search - Nov 1, 2006 3:12 pm (#568 of 2959)
You know, I haven't paid a lot of attention to: "Buckbeak had flown at Snape, who staggered backwards as the razor-sharp claws slashed at him." Snape could be really messed up; Buckbeak is a formidable creature, capable of inflicting serious damage. Snape is going to need some medical attention.


journeymom - Nov 1, 2006 4:24 pm (#569 of 2959)
Yes, but I bet Snape doesn't regret thwacking Harry!


wynnleaf - Nov 1, 2006 6:01 pm (#570 of 2959)
Soul Search,

You're right. It's not something we've said much of anything about, but I think you're right. Hippogriffs can inflict a lot of damage, so I wouldn't be surprised if Snape was injured fairly badly. After all, what's the point in JKR having it happen if it doesn't cause some damage?


Nathan Zimmermann - Nov 2, 2006 9:22 am (#571 of 2959)
There has been an ongoing discussion on the Dumbledore's Death thread about Snape being good or evil and having a redemptive quality.

The reason I use the terms redeemed and redemptive in reference to Severus Snape is because J.K. Rowling has herself used those terms.

Unknown (2): You said in a recent interview that Snape --

J.K. Rowling: Snape!

Unknown (2): Uh huh (crowd applauds and screams) -- had a sort of redemptive quality about him, and I was wondering if there was any chance that Draco Malfoy might redeem himself?

J.K. Rowling: All you girls and Draco Malfoy (crowd applauds). You've got to get past this.

Unknown (2): And if any other characters might redeem themselves?

J.K. Rowling: Well, I believe that almost anyone can redeem themselves. However, in some cases, as we know from reality -- if a psychologist were ever able to get Voldemort in a room, tape him down, take his wand away, I think he would be classified as a psychopath (crowd laughs). So there are people for whom redemption is not possible.

So I'd say for my main characters, yes, there's the possibility for redemption for all of them. Draco I think -- Harry's view is that even given unlimited time would not have killed -- I'm assuming you all have read book 6 by now (crowd laughs), because I don't want to here a child cry that he was five pages away from the end -- let's just say that Draco would not have murdered the person in question. What that means for Draco's future, you will have to wait for. (Radio City Music Hall event part 1)


S.E. Jones - Nov 2, 2006 4:09 pm (#572 of 2959)
S.E. Jones --Several posts back I mentioned a discussion I had with my sister about kids who witness abuse and how that affects them over time. If Snape saw his mother cowering and saw her beaten or something, or just emotionally and mentally abused, he might internalize a need for personal control, a need to be in a position of power (so as not to be bullied as his mother was), and a tendency to lash out at anything or anyone who would make him feel that he was losing control and that implied weakness or fear being present in him (such as the word "coward"). James brought out both of these bad qualities in Snape. That may be why he loses control of being called a coward and why that so often somehow involves James.--

T Vrana -- While that may be psychologically true, with all that Jo has to accomplish in Book 7, I think there has to be more here than a reaction to abuse sustained or witnessed in childhood.
Jo has established a pattern with Snape over at least 3 of the 6 books. Snape completely loses control, looking mad, inhuman, etc., when James is mentioned.--

T Vrana, I don't really see how what you're saying contradicts or undermines what I said above. During the discussion I refer to with my sister, she said something I found very interesting, that the boy who had witness this family abuse would absolutely hate anyone who forced him into a submissive role and would see that bullying person as a representation of the person he saw bullying his mother. So, to Snape, James would've represented everything he hated about his father (or other male relative, whoever bullied his mother) just as Sirius hated Kreacher because he represented everything the Blacks stood for. He therefore goes on to hate anything that reminds him of James, who reminded him of his father. That's why I think he loses it everytime James is mentioned and why he dispises Harry so much for looking like James. What I say here (and what I said previously) doesn't take anything away from what you're saying about Snape losing control over mentions of James, but it does provide a possible explanation for just why he hated James so much and helps us to imagine just what emotions are brought to the surface everytime the man's mentioned in front of him.


Die Zimtzicke - Nov 2, 2006 5:49 pm (#573 of 2959)
Was Buckbeak slashing at Severus Snape to drive him away from Harry part of what Jo was surprised to see foreshadowed in the third film? In that film Buckbeak slashes at the werewolf to drive it away. maybe Buckbeak makes a habit of this in book seven. Harry could even ride him off horcrux hunting! And it's going to take a lot to convince Buckbeak not to go after Sirius again, if he runs into him again. He'd probably be as hard to convince as Harry when it comes to Snape's motives.


Choices - Nov 2, 2006 6:20 pm (#574 of 2959)
I still think what surprised her has to do with Snape - him protecting the kids after the Shrieking Shack scene, putting himself between them and danger.


T Vrana - Nov 2, 2006 6:23 pm (#575 of 2959)
SE- It doesn't. What you have presented is a perfect explanation as to why Snape would hate James and react to Harry and James the way he does.

What I was trying to say is that I think Jo is trying to give us more than a sound psychological picture of an abused Snape. Snape gets angry on a number of occasions, but we only see him totally out of control on a couple of very specific occasions, and it isn't just when he is thinking or talking about James. He taunts Harry in HBP in detention with his father's misdeeds, and in Flight of the Prince, with James' cowardice. No big explosion.

But Jo has established a pattern of Snape being demented, mad, scary, inhuman, snarling, howling and compared to Fang trapped in a burning house, at specific times.

1) In POA, he rants about James being too stubborn to believe he might be wrong about Black. I think it was Snape who told of the spy close to the Potters, in an effort to save James and Lily, and, he thinks, James ignored it. Snape owes a life debt to James, and may have some level of respect or fondness for Lily. Bottom line, James and Lily end up dead, and Snape fails to pay the life debt. Plus, it was he who put them in danger. Now he sees a chance to make good by capturing, killing the traitorous secret keeper (he thinks).

2) Black escapes. Snape's chance to make good on the life debt is gone.

3) Snape's Worst Memory. James abusive, but perhaps more importantly, Lily stood up for Snape, and he repaid her with the Mudblood comment.

4) Flight of the Prince, Snape gets angry when Harry tries to use his spells, just like his father, but he goes completely nuts when Harry says "Kill me like you killed him, coward". Snape was just talking about James, and we have previous examples of Snape losing it over the issues surrounding James and Lily's deaths. I think Snape feels trapped by the unpaid life debt, and whatever he did or did not do to save the Potters. That he responds so vehemently to this second use of coward (Harry said it once before this, moments earlier) when it seems that Snape is dwelling on James, tells me that Snape feels he could have done more to save the Potters, but was afraid to. So despite the fact that he risked a great deal to warn the Potters, and has been working with DD at his peril, he is still stung by this accusation that he's a coward. A small part of him must believe there was more he could have done, especially for a wizard he owed a life debt to (grudgingly) and a witch who was the only one to step out of the crowd and say "Stop!"


wynnleaf - Nov 2, 2006 8:17 pm (#576 of 2959)
In the Flight of the Prince, Snape called James "your filthy father." That word "filthy" is a very strong word. When not used to mean physically dirty, it generally means "vile." Vile? James? Why did Snape see him that way?

I was thinking about the timing of things that James did in his last years at Hogwarts.

At the end of his 5th year, he was still publicly attacking and bullying Snape. Yes, Snape may have been doing things to him, but since I'm thinking of what Snape feels about James, I don't think that would make much difference to Snape.

Then the Shrieking Shack incident occurred. There's a slight possibility it occurred between OWLs and everyone going home at the end of the 5th year, but more likely it occurred the next year -- that is, in James' 6th year.

James learned that Sirius was playing this terrible and life threatening trick on Snape and went to stop Snape. At that point, Snape ended up owing James a life-debt.

However, Snape believed that James was actually in on the trick, and simply got cold feet at the last minute. Apparently, the entire group ended up before Dumbledore for this incident. We don't know who got punished and how. We know that Sirius did not get expelled, nor anyone else. And we know that Snape never told (until POA) that Lupin was a werewolf. It would be fascinating to know why Snape didn't tell anyone about Lupin. Did he have to be threatened to not tell? Was he offered an incentive not to tell? Why didn't he?

Between 6th and 7th years, James was appointed Head Boy. Presumably it was because he had appeared to have changed a great deal. Sirius said that he had become a lot better in his behavior.

At some point, he appeared to have quit hexing people and Lily and he started dating.

However, completely unbeknownst to Dumbledore, who approved his becoming Head Boy, James was planning and leading his Marauders in monthly excursions endangering the countryside.

Unbeknownst to most -- including Lily -- James continued the hexing war with Snape.

So even as he was being considered by DD and the staff for Head Boy, James was continuing to secretly engage in behavior highly dangerous to the general populace, flagrantly breaking rules and bullying at least one other student.

Throughout his last two years in school, Snape saw James elevated to the position of Head Boy. Yet Snape thought he had been part of the plot to kill him. Whatever suspicions that Snape had that the Marauders were engaging in monthly activities worthy of expulsion were in fact completely correct -- they were secretly planning and engaging in very wrong and dangerous activities. Further, Snape knew that James and the Marauders continued the war, only now secretly, to hex him and attack him.

It must have been incredibly galling to see James given the position of Head Boy, knowing that James was definitely not the model boy that the Head Boy position suggested. Snape must have known that James did not deserve that position.

And Snape didn't even know the entire truth of it -- not knowing for sure what the Marauders were doing each full moon, nor knowing about their map and James' cloak that enabled them to flout rules.

In any case, it interests me that at a time when Snape was being viewed as the "dark arts" guy at school, James was being lauded as the responsible Head Boy -- a model for all. And Snape knew it was a false image. And even if he didn't have all the facts, he was right nevertheless.

Still, I think there must have been some specific post-Hogwarts reasons for Snape's hatred to reach such levels. It may relate to the life-debt, but I don't think directly.

Besides that, what are the "wounds too deep for healing" that Dumbledore speaks of? What wounds run so deep in Snape? They must relate to James if they were affecting Snape's ability to work with Harry, because Harry has not personally been responsible for wounding Snape.


Laura W - Nov 3, 2006 2:14 am (#577 of 2959)
"we know that Snape never told (until POA) that Lupin was a werewolf. It would be fascinating to know why Snape didn't tell anyone about Lupin. Did he have to be threatened to not tell? Was he offered an incentive not to tell? Why didn't he?"

I'm a bit confused, wynnleaf. Are you talking about not telling anyone after the two of them graduated from Hogwarts? Who would he tell and why? I doubt if Remus and Severus had anything to do with each other between the end of their seventh year and the day Lupin turned up as the DADA teacher. Or have I misunderstood you?

We do know that Snape told DD "just before the start of term" of Harry's third year that he thought it was a bad idea to hire that werewolf to teach at Hogwarts. And DD not only disagreed with Snape, but had him make Lupin Wolfsbane Potion throughout the year. (Talk about rubbing salt into the wound!)

If, on the other hand, you mean that Snape didn't tell anyone about Lupin during the year he was teaching there, I'm sure Dumbledore told Snape *in no uncertain terms* not to mention it to *anybody*.

PoA, Chapter 18, p.261 (Cdn. Ed.) -- (lupin): "Snape glimpsed me, though, at the end of the tunnel. He was forbidden to tell anybody by Dumbledore, but from that time on he knew what I was ..."


S.E. Jones - - Nov 3, 2006 3:25 am (#578 of 2959)
Laura, I think wynnleaf meant that she was wondering why Snape didn't let it slip "accidentally" while they were still in school. Personally, I'm betting Dumbledore's forbiddance was enough, it would be for me.

--Then the Shrieking Shack incident occurred. There's a slight possibility it occurred between OWLs and everyone going home at the end of the 5th year, but more likely it occurred the next year -- that is, in James' 6th year.--

I'm curious, why is it more likely to have occurred the next year? The only real timing we have for the "prank" is the fact that Sirius was 16 and it was a full moon. That's it. We have the knowledge from OP that the "greying undies" incident was close to a full moon as well and that it was the end of their 5th year (it seems most of the 5th years would've been 16 by the end of the year, like Ron and Hermione, unless their birthday was in the summer like Harry's) so they would've been the right age. Why do you think it was more likely during the next year?


wynnleaf - Nov 3, 2006 4:37 am (#579 of 2959)
Why do you think it was more likely during the next year?

Simply because of all the full moons between the pensieve scene memory and Sirius' next birthday, there's only the possibility that one fell between the pensieve scene and when they went home for that summer . We don't even know for sure if the moon came full before they went home, and if it did, it's only 1 full moon. It's just a matter of statistical probability, since we don't have anything else to go on.

A certain number of possible moons between the pensieve scene memory and Sirius' next birthday. Only the possibility of one between OWLs and the closing feast, versus a number of other moons in 6th year. Also, this was Sirius' prank. He'd just had the opportunity to humiliate Snape in a big way. Why immediately devise this other plan?

Sirius said that at the time he planned the prank he did it because Snape was following them around trying to find out what they were doing to get them expelled. But neither Sirius nor James mention any such motivation at the time of the Snape's Worst Memory scene -- no, "let's attack Snape, he's trying to get us expelled," sort of comments. So I don't think that was on Sirius' mind the day of the OWLs, and the closing feast must have been about a week or so later.

As regards Snape telling anyone that Lupin was a werewolf -- I meant during his final two years at Hogwarts, nor during his time as a loyal deatheater, when Lupin was an Order member. Sure, Dumbledore must have told Snape not to tell, but given that Snape must have been furious about the prank, and more furious probably that no one got expelled over it, why did he obey this order from Dumbledore?


T Vrana - Nov 3, 2006 9:16 am (#580 of 2959)
wynnleaf-

Still, I think there must have been some specific post-Hogwarts reasons for Snape's hatred to reach such levels.

Not necessarily. I had a friend in college, a year behind me, who arrived at college much shorter than most, and, well, with a personality that did encourage some to pick on him (kinda like 'the fact that he exists' line from James). There were issues and incidents, and I was really surprised to find that some of the people I liked and considered friends, were part of the problem. Like James and Sirius they were popular and well liked etc. I could not and can not fathom why such people feel the need to bully the different kid. When I once confronted a pretty close male friend about it, he couldn't believe I was sticking up for the nerdy kid and thought it was a big joke. That friendship did not last. Nothing truly awful ever happened, but I do know 'the nerdy kid' felt at times that he was in serious physical danger and it affected him.

Flash forward many years and this friend came for a visit. In the course of the visit the subject of bullying came up (something in the news sparked it), and I was shocked to find myself with a 30+ year old man sobbing hysterically as he recounted being bullied in High School. He is deeply troubled to this day. The bigger surprise was what really bothered him most was the isolation. No one stepped up to stop the bullies as they pummeled this poor kid. He repeated over and over that no one stopped them, no one helped, and these were his peers, he knew them. They just watched.

I think Snape must have felt a similar, horrible isolation, and must deeply regret calling the one person who stepped out of the crowd "mudblood". And I think those wounds of being bullied and alone run very deep, and are enough to explain Snape's loathing of James, Sirius and Harry.

why did he obey this order from Dumbledore?

DD can be pretty intimidating.
Mona
Mona
Hufflepuff Prefect
Hufflepuff Prefect

Posts : 3114
Join date : 2011-02-21
Age : 61
Location : India

Back to top Go down

Severus Snape  - Page 9 Empty Re: Severus Snape

Post  Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

Page 9 of 19 Previous  1 ... 6 ... 8, 9, 10 ... 14 ... 19  Next

Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum